Introduction: “A Tale of Your Own”
A story has always been dependent on who’s telling it. From the beginning of time with the oral tradition, to the present and the Hollywood focus on remakes and reboots, stories grow and change as if they were living, breathing beings. They shift based on the mores of the time, the fascinations of the teller. Even if the major arc remains the same (how many reinterpretations of Romeo and Juliet, for example, have we seen?) the details are filled in differently. Some storytellers cut. Some reimagine. And others expand.
One of the most controversial adaptations of modern filmdom has been Peter Jackson’s expanded version of The Hobbit. Criticized at once for being too beholden to a book, and taking too much liberty, by making an epic out of a children’s adventure book, there can sometimes be a tone of “how dare he?” self-righteousness to these arguments (which, unfortunately, can often overshadow some very real critiques of the films that can be made). Jackson is famous as a filmmaker for being fascinated by filling in the details of the worlds he creates – either timewasting filler or giving his films scope and breadth. And based on Part 1, it was at times difficult to see which would be correct, even if the filler was entertaining or not.
Now that Part 2: The Desolation of Smaug is being released, the fuller scope of what Jackson is attempting is coming into focus. And what’s clear is that Jackson does not lack ambition, nor does he lack understanding of the material he’s working with. For while one often thinks of adaptation as trimming back and cutting down, Jackson instead has chosen to develop, to expand themes and create a fuller world. The Hobbit is a deeply challenging book to tackle – more so than the comparatively straightforward Lord of the Rings, its surface simplicity underlying deep structural and character challenges that almost demand expansion. What’s more, especially in The Desolation of Smaug, Jackson is ruthlessly working to bring out Tolkien’s original themes in The Hobbit. He has tapped into the material, and found what resonated for him in the original work. And isn’t that what adapters are supposed to do?
Part One: The Quest for Erebor – Breaking Down Tolkien’s Hobbit
One day a peace-loving hobbit is gang-pressed by a vagabond wizard and a bunch of dwarves to steal gold for them from a dragon. They have some wacky, deus ex machina-powered random adventures along the way, he proves his worth, and the good guys win, if in a bittersweet fashion. There, I just described The Hobbit for you (or, at least, the very basic conception of The Hobbit which most seem to have) and saved you from reading 300 pages and watching three films. Sounds simple, doesn’t it? Hardly.
First, what’s The Hobbit actually about? When you break it down, the answer to that question is a little trickier than one would imagine. The most basic answer is that it’s about a naïve individual learning to open his door to the outside world, proving his own worth, and learning some bitter lessons. Not a bad spine. The problem is, in the actual narrative, this naïve individual is rendered a rather passive observer for at least half the book – both at the beginning and at the end. It’s really only in the midsection that Bilbo Baggins does something – and his last critical-to-the-plot act in the book is not one that can be viewed entirely positively, and happens before the climax. So one has to beef up other elements of the narrative to carry the action onscreen while the Bilbo plot plays out in the background.