On the Subject of Hobbits

               I'm a big fan of the fantasy genre. I suppose given my own choice of subject matter for my first book that should be apparent. But where I prefer to write dark modernist twists on classic fantasy and folklore archetypes, I like to read any variety of the genre, depending on the quality. I guess that's what I want to talk about here as well, the subjective nature of quality.
              I should give a bit of background here. I recently started taking part in a movie night that one of my coworkers invited me too. It's something that he and some of his closest buddies have been doing since High School and they take it very seriously. Essentially once a week they all get together and everyone chooses two films (the guy who hosts the viewing each week has a massive DVD collection) and through a series of group voting and ritual narrow those choices down to one film. I should reiterate that they take this very seriously.
             At first I didn't quite know what to make of the whole thing. I've got what I think is a pretty wide and varied taste in film myself but they're of course all films that I sought out. As an example there's a large selection of Bruce Willis actioners mixed in with more studied dark comedies such as Kiss Kiss Bang Bang or 80's cult classics like Big Trouble in Little China. It was actually referencing some of these films with my friend from work that got me invited to the weekly hang out. But these guys casually discuss Japanese cinema from the fifties and sixties, look forward to a new film from a documentary director, and feel the need for me to experience films from the 30's I mention I haven't seen. I don't like to bring up that there's a reason I haven't seen the majority of the films they mention. I guess I can divulge the dirty little secret here... I don't want to.

           All of the guys in the group, or the majority, like myself have at least one child so there's no alcohol or serious partying. Just movie nerds hanging out, eating junk food, and watching films that they may not have seen otherwise. I should point out that so far I've made it three viewings, due to work and other constraints and have not thoroughly enjoyed any of the films I saw.
            The three films, a documentary, a Chinese comedy/drama, and a true classic (the one I enjoyed the most), were all interesting but not necessarily something that I wanted to invest the four to five hours out my one night off a week to see. But I appreciated being invited and being included by such an obviously close knit group of guys. This inclusion also extended to their email group and this is, I suppose, where the true point of this post comes in.
          The guy who hosts the group, lets call him Stan, he recently viewed the new Peter Jackson film The Hobbit. Well Stan, who can be a bit let's say... judgmental of films, didn't care for the it. I opened one of the group emails and saw a massive four paragraph dissertation on why the film was lacking and promptly closed the email without reading it further once I got the gist of it. This wasn't done out of shock or irritation, I just hadn't seen the film and didn't want to go in with a predisposed view of it.
           I should point out here that I read the original Lord of the Rings Trilogy in Junior High, The Hobbit quickly thereafter and the extended legendariams of the Lost Tales and the Silmarilian after that. I watched each film of the Trilogy every December as they came out turning it into my yearly ritual. I would take my last final of the semester and then go see the new film in the trilogy. Then I would go home and watch the ones I had on DVD. I own the extended editions and am one of the people who has watched every single hour of the supplemental material, more than once. So, to say that I was looking forward to The Hobbit would be a bit of an understatement.
            I saw the film with my wife and I enjoyed it. Was I predisposed to enjoy it? Maybe. I can't say for sure. I know that there were issues with the film. I have issues and little gripes with all three of the films from the previous trilogy. The way they portrayed Frodo (winy and self -centered in the books, yes, but not the overly emotional and self important ponce they turned him into in the films), the casting of Eowyn, the rushed way some of the scenes play out, Peter Jackson's sometimes irritating habit of falling back on his camp sensibilities and numerous other small details I saw differently in my head. They're not perfect and honestly never could be. But I still loved them.
            The Hobbit I found to be a lesser film, but enjoyable in a completely different way. In essence it was always a light adventure tale with elements of deeper darkness lurking behind it. This is where as a film The Hobbit finds its best stride. When the film focuses on the things from the original story, things from Bildo's reference point, I loved it. It had a different tone, more whimsical, more comedic, and even lyrical with songs mixed into the narrative. The possibly exaggerated nature of the creatures or situations (the mountains coming to life and battling for example) was something that I could enjoy because it's all being told from Old Bilbo's perspective and memory.
           They actually have a very nice scene early in the film that addresses this when Gandalf (the always excellent Ian Mckellan) tells Bilbo (an equally excellent Martin Freeman) that tales get bigger in the telling. So, the frame work is set up. It's only when they deviate form this that the film lagged for me. The Council of Elrond, the Radaghast Scenes, and the need to make Thorin into an epic hero, all undercut the quaint adventure tale. Did I enjoy those scenes? Absolutely. They're gorgeously shot and appeal to the fantasy nerd in me. That appetite is always hungry for more.
             But the part of me that recognizes story technique and narrative flow took issue with them. They cut away and shift the tone of the story which can never be the Lord of the Rings. Those films are not told from one characters perspective, they are supposed to be happening as you watch it. It's more of a documentary of events than the tall tale Bilbo is spinning as an older man.
            This brings me back to the film group and the emails. Basically Stan can't stop tearing down The Hobbit. Every time I open an email from the group, there's a new multi-page argument for why The Hobbit is the great example of Hollywood over-indulgence. He derides its plot, pacing, and acting claiming that there is not one truly great scene in the film. He has even started targeting the original trilogy of the films claiming that only the Fellowship of the Ring can be counted as a good movie and the rest are just so much fluff.
             I originally took issue with this whole line of argument and got my dander up as you would say. But I didn't reply. I thought about flying into a passionate and detailed argument for the films but stopped myself. I thought about what was really bothering me about his assertions, long-winded and overblown though they may be. I realized that what was getting to me was that if I really argued my case he would stop me at the point where I said that I was a fan to begin with and say that I was predisposed to like them and therefore my arguments for them invalid. I can say this with certainty because another person in the group argued for the films in much the same why I would and was told this exact thing. I think I actually got a little angry when I read something saying that the other guy who defended the films was wrong to like them and only did so because he was going into it convinced he would like them.

           That is what really bothers me. I can take that someone doesn't share my opinion of a film, but to discount my entire viewpoint because I was a fan of the source material is insulting. I love comic books but think that a huge group of the films based on the sources are horrible no matter the budget or special effects (I'm looking at you X-men 3, Spider-man 3, Superman 3-4 and Returns, any Fantastic Four film, Daredevil, and anything with Nicholas Cage turning into a flaming biker). I like to think that even with love in my eyes for fantasy and Tolkien's work in particular, I can recognize and enjoy a film on its own merits.

            I watched The Hobbit with my wife and enjoyed the film as I watched it. I didn't leave bored out of my mind and convince myself on the drive home that the spectacle was worth the price of admission, like a cheating husband convincing himself that what he did was justified. I enjoyed the world that was presented to me as it unfolded on the screen. I was not as drawn in as I was with previous films in the trilogy, there was not the same level excitement. But I enjoyed it. This actually very much mirrors my experience reading the books.
             I recognized the issues, evaluated them and decided that they were not enough to detract from the things being done right on screen. I did also find one truly excellent scene in the film. The Riddles in the Dark segment of the film, much like the original book, was incredible. Andy Serkis I would say possibly did a better job in this film than in either The Two Towers or Return of the King. And Gollum who is sad and pathetic in much of the Trilogy was truly frightening here. He was creepy and pitiful but seeing him drag away a stunned Goblin and casually bash the poor creature into lifelessness elevated the film to a level of menace that it required.

             The interplay, the tone, all of it was amazing. My only minor gripe was the level of lighting available in a cave but again it was Bilbo's memory of it, not the actual event and I let that go. It was a great scene. I guess what all of this is about is me trying to say that I don't want to get into a pedantic argument over why I liked a movie, although I have done a bit of that here, with a guy I barely know. That's not what I want to argue. I think that if you enjoy a film while you're watching it and can point to scenes that drew you in and got a reaction from you, an honest one, then you shouldn't have to defend it.
              If there's someone who had a deeply moving experience watching Transformers 2 (hey it could happen I guess) then so be it. It's not up to me or anyone else to convince you that what you experienced was only retroactive affection for a source material. I take issue with that entire frame of reference. We go to films to be shown something out of the realm of possibility and to enjoy something we couldn't have seen otherwise. Sometimes those films can miss the mark or leave us with a bad taste in our mouth. But it isn't for someone else to convince us that we were wrong to enjoy it.
              Some people think of film as a place where only elemental truths and deep statements need be found and those things should and do exist in film but sometimes I just want a fun ride. Call me pedestrian or a philistine in my tastes, so be it. Maybe I'm a bit like a Hobbit myself in that way. Give me a Second Breakfast, some good Ale, and a decent movie and I'm in Heaven.