The Hobbit and why it should not be compared to the Lord of the Rings (Even Though you Want to)

By now most heavy Middle Earth fans have already seen Peter Jackson’s latest installment to Tolkien’s massive Universe. Most have probably watched the film more than once (I know I have) but with every big movie that seems to have come out within the last decade or so people have found it their sworn duty to bash the film, to the point of doing it ignorantly and biased, as is the way of the internet and the world. Although the Hobbit has broken records already and is the highest December film opening of all time ( $84.8mil) it still is being seen as a financial disappointment.

The root to all this, and of course this is my own opinion, lies within the original trilogy. Perhaps the Trilogy that shouldn't have been filmed first, I am talking of course of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. Of course the first series was a groundbreaking cinematic feat, becoming possibly the greatest trilogy and movie series of all time. But lets take a few steps back and look at the larger picture here. To do this I am requiring ( if anyone is actually reading this) to throw any biased opinions out of you're head.

In the course of the books The Hobbit was written first, it was first published in 1937 and was a very successful children's book. Even looking at the Hobbit and The Lord of the Ring’s  format you can see the vast differences. The Hobbit’s writing style is far more simple than the complexities of the Lord of the Rings and the rest of the Middle Earth series. In fact the style of writing only gets more complex and even for most readers gets harder to grasp, as the novels slowly transform into a text that resembles the likeness of a great myth, or a biblical passage. Even the gaps from the publication dates of the Hobbit to the Lord of the Rings is a vast 20 years. Within that time span most of the target audience from when the Hobbit was first published had now entered adulthood and could read and grasp the different writing styles.



But this article is not about the books, we are looking at the movies. Now the Lord of the Rings was filmed first, I am not going to talk about the animated features since most people have only seen Jackson’s work. The Lord of the Ring’s as a film is a much more complex story than the Hobbit, one could just watch/read the trilogy and notice the heavy symbolism and references to current events (in Tolkien’s time) The Hobbit is allot more strait forward, practically following the outline

Bilbo went here

Then Bilbo did this

But Bildo found that

And Bilbo fought a troll

you get the picture, even most of Thorin’s Party do not have the back story nor the characterization of the Fellowship. All accept Thorin (for Plot reasons) do we get a back story. This seems to be a bigger gripe with critics, but whereas in the Lord of the Rings you get a Fellowship of nine companions that span a collective work that is over one thousand pages. Instead we have a company of thirteen Dwarves in a children s book that has about 200 pages. And since the story is about Bilbo, we are going to primarily focus on Bilbo, not characters like Nori, Ori of Bofer.

And yes the overuse of CGI in todays films is annoying, CGI should be used as an enhancer, to help further the vision. The original trilogy is a very good example of this, using mostly practical effects to create creatures like Orcs, but lets face it, why criticize the Hobbit for overuse of CG when the Lord of the Rings really had it’s fair share of CGI shots, such as

this




and this







basically most of Pelinor Fields was CGI, the trick here is lighting, the Lord of the Rings has a more serious and darker tone than the Hobbit, so some CGI characters are going to blend in nicely. The Hobbit is for children, and the movie is more light hearted so you are clearly going to see more bright CGI characters like the Goblin King, kids can really tell the difference between whats real and fake. Honestly I would not show a child the Lord of the Rings, heck I would even be very cautious about taking one to see the Hobbit on the accounts that Goblins are nightmare fuel for kids (princess and the Goblin anyone?)

If the Hobbit came first we would have seen a different approach from critics, it is hard I know to not compare the Hobbit to the Lord of the Rings, but in all honesty it really isn't hard to not compare them once you actually put your mind to it. The hobbit can easily be a standalone feature, of course there is the added scenes to connect the Hobbit to the Lord of the Rings, but most kids wont get the references anyway if they haven't seen the first trilogy.

Now if the Hobbit came out ten years ago as a two part series, film goers would easily accept the more serious darker trilogy. Time has shown that audiences want everything grittier and darker lately. And yes we don't know anything about the Dwarves… well you don't know anything in the book either. The only Dwarves that get even the glimmer of character development is Thorin as I have said above, and Balin who plays a more prominent role in the Lord of the Rings.

I am going to see the Hobbit probably two more times this week, it was a fantastic film, if you are going to compare it to the grand epic that is Lord of the Rings you have already sabotaged your experience with an Unexpected Journey even before you enter the theater. Do your self a favor and go in to see a brand new movie, sure it helps add to the experience of the Lord of the Rings, but in all honesty I think the Hobbit Trilogy should be viewed as a standalone piece, sure we see Frodo and Saruman and we hear names like the Witch King of Agmar, but we really just need to remember that movies are an escape, lets not be critical on something thats supposed to help us escape our boring lives and take a well deserved trip back into Middle Earth. Jackson is doing a great job so far, and the Hobbit will eventually live the test of time and be shown to many other generations before watching the Lord of the Rings, the way it was meant to be seen.

Don't compare the first of a series to the greater sequels, it would be like if the Dark Knight came out first and then we got Batman Begins why would you compare something that is on a lesser scale than something bigger. The Lord of the Rings has ultimately been the Hobbit’s downfall and that is a true shame, even though the film did well, and fans like myself see it as a huge success, the tight collard critics think otherwise.

This is just my opinion, and I hope others do feel the same, in the end the Hobbit will be viewed as the great film that it should be. Until then we just wait.