'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey': Is it really necessary? (+trailer)

( PG-13 ) ( Monitor Movie Guide )

'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' has everything 'Lord of the Rings' had, but all the dwarves and wizards are getting old.

Warner Bros./AP
'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' will be followed by two planned sequels.

My first thought in watching “The Hobbit” was: Do we really need this movie? It was my last thought, too. Having powered his way through the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, which had its occasional majesties, director Peter Jackson now feels compelled to give us this prequel, based on the Tolkien novel that spawned the cult I never joined.

Whether this makes me the best or the worst judge of this movie I leave to others to decide. But I must confess that by the time the last of the “Rings” movies wrapped, I had had quite enough of orcs and dwarves and rings and Gandalf and Middle-earth. I even had my fill of Gollum. And so, wouldn’t you know, all of that and more – though with less effect – is present and accounted for in “The Hobbit,” which tells of the troll-infested exploits of hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) in Middle-earth.

As a further lure, Jackson has even fashioned this CG-heavy film in 3-D and shot it digitally at 48 frames per second instead of the usual 24 f.p.s. (A 2-D, 24-f.p.s. version is also being screened.) Among other things, this supposedly enhances the clarity of the imagery, although why expend all that energy on imagery that isn’t inherently awesome to begin with? And did I mention that Tolkien’s novel is going to spawn two sequels? I suppose we should be thankful that Hollywood is trilogy-crazy these days and not quartet- or quintet-mad. Grade: C+ (Rated PG-13 for extended sequences of intense fantasy action violence, and frightening images.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.