I trust that watching the newly released extended trailer for The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug has already been part of your NaNoWriMo procrastination routine, right? Go on, watch it. I’ll wait.
Now. Let me just say that I’m not planning to review the movie before it comes out (you can read my review of the first one here). That would be silly. I have no more information about the full shape of the film than you do (and probably less if you’re gone all fanboy about this on the forums), and I shall, as always, maintain hope that Jackson has done justice to the task entrusted to his Kiwi hands. However, I have issues. I have lots of issues that need airing, and that’s what I plan to do right now.
Radagast is back
This, it goes without saying, is a horrible thing. If you don’t think it’s a horrible thing, then I can’t help you. I simply can’t. You can leave now.
Lots of random Elves are back
On the surface, this is not a horrible thing. The history of the dwarves has always been intimately tied in with the Elves, and exploring it can in the film can help non-Tolkienites understand the reasons behind what goes down in Mirkwood, etc. Do I have a problem with Legolas being there? Not really. If my memory serves, he wasn’t mentioned by name in The Hobbit, but it’s not stretching artistic license too far to give him a role – although how big of a role he gets remains to be seen. But then there’s the girl.
Oh, yes. The girl. The girl is symptomatic of the disease that we all knew would plague this unnecessary trilogy from day one: story bloat. It appears that Jackson has confused widening a story with deepening it, which is an amateur mistake he should be ashamed of.
There is more than enough backstory he could have drawn on to bring color and richness and drama to his tale without inserting a random elf chick, and that offends me both as a book-to-movie purist and a story teller. It also offends me as a female, because it means that Jackson has once again fallen into trap number two…
The token woman is back
Jackson really likes his Elvish women. From Arwen’s weird and drawn out quasi-death scene to Galadriel’s party crashing in An Unexpected Journey to Tauriel’s strange nearly-word-for-word repetition of what Merry said to Treebeard at Entmoot, the token female Elf is alive and well in Middle Earth.
In The Lord of the Rings, the Silmarillion, the Lays of Beleriand, and more of Tolkien’s works, women play a very strong and vital role in shaping events. In The Hobbit? Not so much. Why? It’s very simple. The Hobbit is not a story about women. It’s a story written by a father for a little boy about adventure and dwarves and dragon slaying, and women simply don’t enter into it. It’s not misogynistic. It’s not maliciously exclusive. It’s just not a story where females fit into the narrative of events.
So why add them? For me, and many others, I find it much more offensive that a filmmaker would add a token to pat on the head and wave around then it is to acknowledge that some things just don’t need our presence. It irks me deeply on many levels to see that Jackson is continuing this disappointing pattern, even with ten years of comment and criticism under his belt.
Also back? Armitage, Freeman, McKellen, and their little dragon pal, too
There is nothing wrong with any of this. I will happily watch Richard Armitage glower his way through anything, even if he is three feet tall. I am not disappointed about seeing Aidan Turner again. Sir Ian McKellan has always been flawless, and I remain pleased with Martin Freeman’s continuing cross-universe inability to control the behavior of Benedict Cumberbatch. Carry on.
What do you think? Are you in agreement? Are there other things that bother you? Is Jackson a cinematic god that can do no wrong?