"The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies" Review

Title: The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Directed by: Peter Jackson

Screenplay by: Fran Walsh, Phillippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, and Guillermo del Toro

Year: 2014


The final installment in the Hobbit trilogy, or the Middle Earth saga for that matter, is here. Being a fan of Tolkien's original novels and Peter Jackson's films, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies was easily my most anticipated film of the year. The wait was long, and the trailers didn't help much. One viewing later, I can say that The Battle of the Five Armies is a satisfying end to the Hobbit trilogy and a good lead-in to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, if a bit flawed.

After Smaug's defeat, the dwarves of Erebor rejoice in the Lonely Mountain with all their gold. However, there are others that believe they have a right to the gold and march on the mountain with their armies, ready to fight for the treasure. Meanwhile, a dark power is growing in Middle Earth, and is finally making its move.

For the longest time, this film's title was "There and Back Again", but the new title does seem more fitting given what happens in the movie. The film picks up exactly where the last one left off, with Smaug descending upon Laketown, ready to burn it to the ground. The way the story concludes is very good. It's very satisfying, but along the way, many sub-plots get shafted. Many of them have no resolution or fall flat all together. The romance between Tauriel and Kili for example. I thought this was a nice inclusion in The Desolation of Smaug. I saw what Jackson was going for and I hoped it would pay off in The Battle of the Five Armies. Sadly, it didn't. There was no real resolution to it and thus there was a lack of dramatic impact. In concordance, the Sauron sub-plot was also left hanging. Saruman says "Leave Sauron to me" but we never hear mention of him again. This is the last we hear of this sub-plot for the rest of film.

The story moves at a quick pace, but this is partially due to some rushed segments. The opening scene with Smaug for instance, is very good and probably the best in the entire film, but is just way too short. What we are given is great but it could have been so much more. The brevity of the sequence takes away from its overall impact, especially in regards to Smaug's death. Another example is the scene at Dol Guldur. Once again, another great moment and very theatrical, but just too rushed. The movie is in such a hurry to get to its titular event that it detracts a bit from other scenes.

Though the story has its flaws, the rest of the film delivers strongly. The performances are incredible. Martin Freeman was perfect casting for the role of Bilbo Baggins and it's such a shame that he has yet to receive an Oscar nod for his incredible work. Freeman is such an underrated actor and it's great to see him land such large role. He is a revelation as Bilbo Baggins and in the words of Mark Gatiss, "Martin finds a sort of poetry in the ordinary man." Sir Ian McKellan has cemented himself as the definitive Gandalf. It's hard to imagine anyone else in the role because McKellan is just so good and enjoyable to watch. Richard Armitage kills it as Thorin. The Hobbit trilogy is as much about Thorin as it is about Bilbo, and had the wrong actor been chosen for either, all three films would have fallen apart. The remaining dwarves are not featured as much as before, but the time they have on screen is great, particularly Ken Stott, James Nesbitt, and Aidan Turner. The elves - Lee Pace, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, and Evangeline Lilly - also play their parts very well and Luke Evans as Bard really impresses. The cast is very, very strong and not a single actor falters.

Peter Jackson has made his mark on film history with his Middle Earth movies. This film is directed amazingly and has Jackson's fingerprints all over it. Peter Jackson is without a doubt one of the greatest directors and any film with his name on it is certain to be of quality, especially if it has to do with Tolkien's works. It's quite obvious that each of these films is crammed with love and affection for the source material. On a similar note, the cinematography is outstanding. Andrew Lesnie demonstrates great scope and scale. His swooping, panning shots are a marvel. The environment and setting of the film is breathtaking. The people behind the cameras have effortlessly created a world that immediately sucks you in. The Battle of the Five Armies also impressed me with its shot composition. Every single frame tells a story of its own and is an example of visual storytelling at its peak.

The visual effects are dazzling. Without a doubt some of the best this past year. Smaug is a visual realization of sheer beauty (and the best dragon ever put to screen), the armies are vast, and the orcs look almost as realistic as the apes in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Almost. The set design is also something to behold. I fell in love with the sets and atmosphere. The sound design is also a very understated department. The sound effects are extraordinary and the musical score is an absolute treat. I particularly like the three re-orchestrations of "Thrice Welcome" from the previous film and their use. Each one becomes progressively louder and more complete and helps tell the story as it progresses. Howard Shore has proven his worth in the musical realm.

Given the title, it's reasonable to presume that there is plenty of action in this movie, and rightly so. The action is dynamic and heart pumping, with plenty of scenes giving me goosebumps. The scope of the action is immense and perhaps unrivaled by any other movie this year. Whether it be a dwarf riding a large hog, a dragon destroying a city, or a one-on-one showdown between Thorin and Azog, you'll have your fill of action in this installment. There are many great action set-pieces. There is however one issue with how the action is filmed. At times, the camera lingers on a certain part of the battle for too long. Too much focus is both a good and bad thing. On the one hand, it remains in one area for quite a while, leaving the audience wondering what is happening elsewhere. It causes the action to feel disjointed and hinders fluidity.  On the other, it allows for more investment on the part of the viewers since the camera focuses on a single aspect of the war.

Throughout the film, there are moments that are quite over embellished. Thorin's dragon sickness for instance. When speaking to Bilbo at one point, he begins saying the exact words Smaug said in the last film, which is a nice bit of parallelism. However, they take it a step further and do a voice-over of Smaug's voice on Thorin's, which I think goes a little too far and diminishes the beauty of the subtlety. Also, when Thorin is walking in the "hall of gold" where he tried to kill Smaug in the previous installment, he begins hearing voices in his head, which was fine. But then, in a psychological sequence, the golden floor begins sucking him in. The symbolism was already made and again I feel this gesture was a bit much. These are more like nitpicks though.

There are plenty of touching moments in this movie. The acorn scene is a particular standout for me amongst others. The film doesn't quite have the emotional weight that The Return of the King did but then again they are both striving to achieve different goals. It also doesn't help that some of the dramatic elements fell short of their mark, but overall the emotional pull is present.

*SPOILERS AHEAD* Near the end of the film, Thranduil has a few words with Legolas. He brings up a man who lives in the north, the son of Arathorn. He tells Legolas to find this man. When Legolas asks for his name, Thranduil says something like "You must find out for yourself". This is an example of an unnecessary scene. This added nothing to the movie and was not a very strong lead-in to the next trilogy. It makes no sense. This was pure fan service, which didn't really hinder the movie, but added nothing as well. In reality, Legolas' inclusion was also unnecessary. He wasn't in the book, and having him in the films didn't add much. Again, fan service. The scene where Beorn and Radagast ride to the battle on eagles though, was fan service done right. In the book, Beorn participated in the battle and thus it was a nice touch to have a short scene with him (even though I wish we would have seen more of him). And by having Radagast there, it makes perfect sense why the eagles showed up. In the book, the eagles just appear, without prior knowledge of the event. Here, it can be inferred that Radagast brought them. This was a smart move and a nice little addition.

*SPOILERS AHEAD* I will also say that all the deaths were handled well, save Smaug's. Fili and Kili died in the book but it was never really explained how. I found that both of their deaths were very well handled and Thorin's death was a great end to a great character. Smaug had only a few short minutes in the film, which really detracts from his death. On a separate note, there are one or two sequences that are just unbelievable. At one point, this line is spoken: "No more than a hundred...we'll take care of them." Dwalin and Thorin proceed to do just that. This is just not realistic and took me out of the experience. A similar occurrence can be found in The Two Towers. The difference is, no number was stated there. Another unbelievable instance is when Bard spots Smaug's weakness. He spots the small hole from a mile away. I feel if they took the book's approach, it would have produced a much better result.

*SPOILER FREE* All in all, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies is a very good movie and a satisfying conclusion to the Middle Earth saga. It has its flaws in terms of focus and storytelling but its cinematography is marvelous, its characters and actor performances magnificent, its direction impeccable, etc. The other five films stand tall not only in their genre but as films in general, and while The Battle of the Five Armies has plenty of quality, it does stand a bit shorter than its predecessors. I can easily say that it's the weakest of the six, without a doubt, but it still stands head and shoulders above many other films this past year. It has its fair share of issues but there is a lot to love here. For a while, the Hobbit films were going to be only two movies but the studio pushed Jackson for three. I can't help but feel that it would have been better if they had only made it two films, cutting all the unnecessary trimmings. It's a perfect tie-in to The Lord of the Rings trilogy and a satisfying end to its own trilogy.

Grade: B+