Review: The Hobbit, by JRR Tolkien

Tiny bit late to the party, but I was glad to finally get around to reading this classic, decades after checking out Lord of the Rings and The Silmarillion. Didn’t go into entirely blind as info is not only revealed through the Lord of the Rings but I also saw this at the theatre (although that was probably over 20 years ago. My main memory was of Bard having a powerful voice).

I’ve got to say I rather enjoyed it. The slightly old-fashioned adventure, allowing for moments of fear and trepidation without wallowing in grimdark woe, and some clever twists and turns combine with a charming storytelling style and rapid pace to make it quite the page-turner.

The story, you may be shocked to learn, involves a hobbit, which is a chap or lady even smaller than a dwarf (which you likely know already). Also known as halflings, they tend to keep to themselves, but one, Bilbo Baggins, finds himself whisked away by Gandalf the Grey and a dozen or so dwarves intent on reclaiming a huge mound of treasure.

There’s just one or two problems. The treasure is miles away and a perilous journey is required. And the treasure is guarded by a dragon called Smaug, who prefers murder by the bucketload to equitable distribution of wealth.

And so we follow Bilbo, a kind-hearted fellow and altogether a fish out of water, as he travels with Gandalf and the dwarves far from his comfortable home, facing numerous woes I shan’t spoil here. It’s a good read and faster paced, as you would expect, than its famous (and perhaps slightly fat) cousin, The Lord of the Rings.

I’d recommend it to fantasy fans, and suspect it’s more accessible than either the large LOTR, or The Silmarillion (which I like a lot but know the style isn’t to everyone’s taste).

Thaddeus

Review: The Silmarillion, by JRR Tolkien

I first read the Silmarillion over a decade ago, and just finished it for the second time. Unlike The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (which are set in the Third Age), The Silmarillion is mostly set in the First Age, and is more about elves than men. The version I had also includes (as well as the precursor bits) the Akabelleth [a 30 page or so summary of the Second Age] and a similarly concise retelling of the Rings of Power.

It’s the highest of high fantasy, telling the creation of the world from before its birth, through to its early days when the gods were fiddling with it by themselves, and then (the lion’s share of the text) telling the tale of the elves. To be honest, I like it a lot more than The Lord of the Rings. Although the span of time it covers is enormous, there isn’t much wasted space. Instead of endless detail, time is devoted to interesting escapades (Beren’s adventures, for example) without the excessive padding that, for me at least, makes The Lord of the Rings a little too fat.

The Silmarillion is a great book of world-building (in both the literal and story-telling sense), covering Arda from before its creation to the final events that are described in greater detail in The Lord of the Rings. A potential downside is that, after the initial part, it can be damned tricky remembering just who certain elves (and, later, men) are, and how they’re related to one another. Elves being immortal makes this more difficult than it would otherwise be.

Because the author doesn’t dwell needlessly on less interesting events, the pace is good despite the enormous scale of time involved. It is not essential reading for The Lord of the Rings, or The Hobbit, but it does help fill in some background knowledge and is interesting in its own right.

I’d strongly advocate checking a sample, however. The writing is substantially different to other works, and I suspect some people would loathe it.

Thaddeus

Review: The Lord of the Rings extended edition DVD

As A Game of Thrones finally gets its DVD release in a few weeks I thought I’d get myself in the mood for epic fantasy by buying LoTR.

It’s been quite a while since I last saw it, and whilst certain extra scenes were obviously new (the one with Denethor, Boromir and Faramir standing out) others were not.

I enjoyed the films a lot, although I had forgotten how irritatingly cheerful the hobbits could be. Although the first film was released over a decade ago the special effects stand up very well, and even when things are clearly CGI (Gollum, for example) it’s close enough to reality not to jar.

Eowyn seemed to have more airtime, and be the better for it. The portrayals of Frodo, Gandalf and Aragorn were especially good, and the acting generally was well done.

I’m not especially into DVD extras, but I did have a quick look through some of them. For some reason the third DVD (each film has 4, 2 for the film itself and 2 for extras) always seemed of little interest whereas the fourth of each film had better offerings. I especially enjoyed watching one documentary about the stuntmen, and some of the cast documentaries.

Due to the time it would’ve taken I didn’t listen to any of the commentaries fully. However, I did see that there were a lot available, with four sets for each film, and I might go back and try them out.

£16 for around 11-12 hours of the extended film itself, plus four sets of commentary per film, with umpteen extras is pretty good value. The blu-ray is more than twice the price, but might be worth it if you’ve got a big telly.

Now, just over a month to go before I finally get to watch A Game of Thrones.

Thaddeus