Down the Hobbit Hole, Part Deux

There can't possibly be a human alive who who has watched Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy and didn't fall in love with them. From 2001 to 2003, the man behind such studio bombs as Heavenly Creatures and The Frighteners tackled the beloved series of novels by J.R.R. Tolkien, and in doing so became the hero to fantasy fans around the globe, culminating with the climactic The Return of the King's win for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. There are many who consider that movie as among the greatest movies ever made, and many more would include it within their top 10 of all time. That's why people were so excited when Jackson was eventually tasked with taking Tolkien's introductory novel "The Hobbit" and adapting it to the big screen, even if it was going to be three movies (that's about 100 pages per entry), and featured brand new technology that showed the film at a crisp - albeit occasionally nausea inducing - 48 frames per second.

The one moment of rest in this crazy thing.

And it's also the reason many were somewhat disappointed in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, a movie that felt both overlong and overly-saturated with blatant Lord of the Rings fan service. While it was still better than most people gave it credit, there's no doubt that Jackson's delicate balancing act didn't quite pay off, as his additions to what was otherwise a bare-bones plot came off as not intended to make the best movie, but please the biggest crowds. However, despite An Unexpected Journey's many flaws, it was still good enough to keep both die-hards and casual viewers excited for Bilbo Baggins' continued adventures in The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug, which came out this weekend. While Jackson still has to add a LOT in to make up for the fact that he's made a two-and-a-half hour movie out of such a small part of a small book, his continuation of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellan), Thorin Oakenshield (Richard Armitage) and their company of dwarves as they journey to liberate the treasure-laden Kingdom of Erebor from the clutches of ginormous dragon Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch). Desolation sees the party arriving at the Lonely Lountain, after contending with Orcs, giant spiders, uncompromising elves, a huge shape-shifting bear, and - worst of all - small-town politics.

That's right, Bilbo, welcome to Camden, NJ.

That Jackson can create a genuinely fun film where his protagonists essentially face their threats through the same means every time (fighting and running, usually in that order) is very much indicative of how good a director he really is. No matter how big or small a budget is, bad directors will usually blow it, while good directors will almost always shine, and this is a man in his element. Jackson, through a mixture of New Zealand scene-capturing and green screen implementation on par with Lucas or Cameron at their best, recreates the world of Middle Earth with such clarity and vision that even the most discerning eye couldn't find fault with his approach. Most notably, the character designs are a huge step up from An Unexpected Journey, where most of the monsters were a bit cartoonish and lacked menace. Here, secondary antagonist Azog (Arrow's Manu Bennett) is vastly improved animation-wise, and Smaug himself is terrifying, through the latter is also enhanced by the talent and charisma of Cumberbatch, who steals the movie much in the way fellow motion-capture specialist Andy Serkis' Gollum did the first time around.

He's one bad mama jama.

Jackson also seems to show a keen insight of what worked and what didn't work in An Unexpected Journey. The Desolation of Smaug, story-wise, is superior in just about every way to the first installment. That's partly because Jackson finally gets it across that this is not Bilbo's story. Yes, the name of the movie DOES start with The Hobbit, and the young adventurer is certainly no passive observer, as things would easily turn out much different without him. But this middle entry makes it perfectly clear that the whole affair is really about an exiled prince's quest to reclaim his homeland, and what that journey does to him emotionally. Armitage's character grows so much this time around, as Thorin finds himself surrounded by familiar territory and the prospect of power looming. Borrowing from Lord of the Rings, the idea of power corrupting the noble is yet another link back to the first trilogy, but thematically it fits and stands as one of Jackson's better implemented connections.

You still can't remember all their names, can you?

But Smaug's overall quality improvement is also because there's more of a flow to the storytelling this time around. Jackson's addition of legitimate Tolkien lore - plus a few improvements all his own - don't feel nearly as ham-handed this time around. There is still a ton of fan service, but most of it - for instance the appearance of Orlando Bloom's Legoas - are perfectly sewn into the plot (although they couldn't resist throwing in a Gimli jab). The prequel elements are still in play, as Gandalf's adventures reveal more elements that won't come to fruition until The Fellowship of the Ring, but gone are the forced cameos from Christopher Plummer, Cate Blanchett (who does still have one small appearance), Hugo Weaving, Ian Holm, and Elijah Wood, which did little more than appease fans of the original trilogy. And you have to imagine that Jackson learned his mistake in including Sylvester McCoy's Radagast the Brown (also known as "Jar Jar") in reducing his screentime in Desolation. I'm just glad the director did not try to shoehorn a Gollum appearance in, as it would have been cool but counterproductive to the project.

Between this and Magneto, McKellan never has to work again.

As to the tale, there are four converging storylines - Bilbo and the Dwarves, Legolas and elf captain Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly, added because The Hobbit sadly has no ladies) hunting orcs, Gandalf tracking down the Necromancer (also Cumberbatch) and the political struggle of Lake-town between Bard the Bowman (Luke Evans) and the town's Master (the always amiable Stephen Fry) - and while three of those things were most definitely NOT part of the original novel, almost none of it feels out of place or unnecessary. The dwarves even have a bit more to do and say, although I still defy you to identify each one on sight and point out how each individual is important to the overall story. The only one of them to have an arc is Kili (Aidan Turner) who takes an arrow in the knee AND falls head over heels for Tauriel. Well, he is rather tall for a dwarf. However, I say "almost" all the sub-stories fit because the Lake-town political struggle comes late in the game and does little more than pad out the film's already-gargantuan run-time. But it also allows Richard Armitage's Thorin to make a big speech (aww, almost like a little Aragorn) and show what a leader he could be. So between that and setting up much of the struggle for the third movie, it serves its purpose.

Mark my words, Luke Evans is going to be huge very, very soon.

Because of that strong storytelling, Tolkien's characters also have quite a bit more to do this time around. Martin Freeman looks more comfortable in the hairy soles of Bilbo Baggins, and his natural charm combined with the character's everyman heroics make for an easy hero for whom to root. Armitage, McKellan and Evans also stand out, each bringing a slightly different bravado to the big screen that cements their identities in wholly different ways. Bloom, Lilly and Lee Pace (as the elven king Thranduil) add quite a bit of variety, with Bloom's obviously CGI-enhanced skin the only serious gripe I can muster. All the characters have something to add, whether it's plot exposition, or classic sword-and-sorcery tropes, or humor, though Jackson thankfully shies away from singing or childish gags this time around. Everyone's personalities are coming to a head, just in time for the epic showdown that will be next year's There and Back Again.

Because Middle Earth needs at least one kick-ass femme fatale...

In fact, The Desolation of Smaug shows few of it's many flaws on the surface, though some are remarkably vivid. Some scenes, such as an early one with Mikael Persbrandt as the skin-changer Beorn, feel included solely to appease fans of the novel, their actual relevance to the plot shoddy or un-revealed. Some new characters are merely rehashed versions of minor characters from the original trilogy. For instance, Ryan Gage's Alfrid (the Master's assistant) is practically a carbon copy of Grima Wormtongue. And the action sequences, while a whole lot of fun, tend to get more than a little silly and nonsensical, as well as over-long.

He's baaaack...

But the movie's biggest fault (beyond the story, of course) might become apparent if you see it on IMAX screens. Jackson's decision to film his newest trilogy at twice the normal framerate is quite the ambitious affair, as 48 frames per second was the next - albeit untested - effort to create a brighter, more crisp picture. But what happens when you're able to see things more closely is see more visual errors. This is apparent in the Lonely Mountain sequence, were a meticulously-rendered Smaug is perfect, while the settings around him have not been given nearly as much attention, and it shows. It's distracting, and can easily take the viewer right out of the experience, no matter the quality of the cast or director. It's not as noticeable if you're watching on a smaller screen (and certainly not in 3D), but it doesn't do much to positively endorse Jackson's ambitious method.

Oh, right, he IS in this...

I still contend that Tolkien's first major novel did NOT need to get separated into three films, as there simply hasn't been enough story for our main heroes to engage in without blast after blast of narcissism, nostalgia and unnecessary fan service in a deliberate (and when you consider the popularity of Lord of the Rings, unnecessary) attempt to appeal to audiences. That said, The Desolation of Smaug is still a big step up from its predecessor (let's call it an 8 out of 10), and there's nobody I'd trust more to compile this series than Jackson, who shows he's still got the goods a decade after his last great movie. And let's face it, if and when you see this (and An Unexpected Journey, which isn't great but is still a good, solid effort), there's no chance you won't be chomping at the bit to see next year's finale, which now feels ages away. It's not nearly up to the quality Jackson set with his first foray into Tolkien's work, but his Hobbit trilogy is turning into a decent - and more importantly, fun and exciting - moviegoing experience.

A Game Afoot

Well, not EVERY December film release aspires to be a major award winner. While studios DO release what they consider to be the best of the best at this time of the year in anticipation for the Academy Awards, Golden Globes, SAG awards et al, they still need to make money for their efforts. With so many nominated films being limited released, niche affairs, it only makes sense to put out a few serious moneymakers to distract those who might not have (or don't wish to see) The Artist or Shame playing at a theater near them just yet. That's why I saw Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows this past weekend. The sequel to the Guy Richie-directed 2009 Sherlock Holmes, this film brings back not only the visually prolific director, but arguably the best duo to have ever played the incomparable Sherlock Holmes and his loyal assistant Dr. John Watson. I'm the first to admit that I didn't think much of the casting choices when they were laid out two years ago, as Robert Downey Jr. had only recently proven his value and drug rehabilitation with 2008's superhero flick Iron Man, and I've tended to dislike Jude Law in whatever film he appeared (a trend that still continues today, mind you). When I did get around to seeing the new interpretation of the master detective, what stuck me most was the ability of the lead actors to play perfectly off of one another, which was more than enough to make up for the film's most acute flaws. This playful character interaction was what made me so excited to see the newly-released A Game of Shadows, as well as the addition of Swedish actress Noomi Rapace to the cast. Rapace made a name for herself playing Lisbeth Salander in the Swedish film adaptation of the Millennium series by Stieg Larsson (Rooney Mara, you have a lot to live up to), and I was excited to see what she could bring to her first English language film.

And THAT'S what happens when you cross the streams, Venkman

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows begins not long after the revelations at the end of its predecessor. Sherlock Holmes (Downey Jr) is hunting down proof that renowned Professor James Moriarty (Jared Harris) is responsible for bombings and murders across Europe, tensing the major nations for a potential war across the continent. Moriarty is very good at covering his tracks however, and Holmes can find no immediate proof to substantiate his claims. Meanwhile, Watson (Law) is preparing to marry his love interest from the first film, Mary Morstan (Kelly Reilly), and has stepped away from assisting Holmes in his investigations. However, when Moriarty sends his goons to kill the newlyweds as they travel to their Honeymoon, Sherlock whisks them to safety. The legendary mystery solvers pair up for one last mission, alongside a fortune-telling gypsy with a personal stake in the story (Rapace), to take down one of the era's (and classic literature's) most brilliant criminal masterminds.

There's a story here; I just know it

The story behind the film is of course based on the extensive works of Sherlock's creator, the great Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. More to the point, it is loosely based on his story The Final Problem, as pivotal a Holmes tale as you can have. Much of what made Sherlock Holmes so much fun two years ago is still here: visual appealing direction, properly-distributed spoken humor, gratuitous action sequences that are actually well-thought out; it's this last part that really makes Sherlock Holmes stand out among the glut of brainless action-oriented movies every year. Thanks to Holmes as a character being able to anticipate and adapt to any fighting situation, some of the film's best moments include the precursor to Downy Jr.'s battles, in which we see inside his mind and watch him plot out and choreograph every major moment in the upcoming brawl. From an aesthetic standpoint it's spotless, and the final product is often made all the better by seeing beforehand what will come. Director Guy Ritchie has become an expert on the different visual styles necessary to make these sequences stand out, and under his plan the whole thing feels organic and without error.

Oh, the happy memories...

The film also stands a head over its predecessor by skewing much more closely to its source material, and by sating Holmes' greatest fans' desires by pitting him against his most renowned villain, Professor Moriarty. In the former, several minor characters from Doyle's stories, including retired Colonel Sebastian Moran (Paul Anderson) and Sherlock's own brother Mycroft (Stephen Fry), are brought in to provide more character interaction. Ritchie not only introduces these characters, but presents them in the same or remarkably similar fashion as Doyle intended, a move that seems odd in this day and age of adaptations that barely resemble the material on which they were based. In the latter, bringing Moriarty into the picture could have been disastrous if done incorrectly. Fortunately, the man is in almost every way portrayed as Holmes' equal, and superior in the few moments when he is not. Ruthless, conniving, and altogether just a bad guy, he is infinitely more memorable than the original film's adversary (bonus points for those who can give me his full name and title without looking up on Wikipedia), who was by no means memorable or important in comparison.

Yes, run FROM the explosions!

As before, the witty banter between Holmes and Watson is the main source of enjoyment that the film provides, and thankfully Downey Jr. and Law are still at top form when playing off of one another. As Holmes, Downey Jr. continues to shatter all those old images of the master detective as a stuffy know-it-all. Instead, Downey continues to play him as a stuffy know-it-all who can also throw a punch when needed. In a way, Downey's Sherlock Holmes is like a nineteenth century Batman, self-taught to be the best at everything. Downey also plays for laughs when needed, both as a master of disguise and with his mannerisms and wit. Law plays Watson as the straight man to Downey's madman perfectly, and as I've mentioned this is one of the few roles I've ever liked for him as an actor. His constant frustrations with Holmes are tempered by the respect of Sherlock's skills and their lifelong friendship, and that he can convey it so easily is a point in his favor. While the pair at the top of the cast are of course wonderful, a good core of support characters makes the real difference when it comes to how the tale moves forward. Jared Harris is perfect as the evil genius Moriarty, his piercing gaze and subtle ferocity making him the perfect cerebral enemy for Holmes. He is by far the best addition to the series, and if the franchise continues I would love to see more from his corner. On a more practical villainy front, Paul Anderson is menacing and effective as Moran, Moriarty's sharpshooting second in command. I don't know where Anderson has been all these years, but he gets plenty of chances to shine in this film and doesn't pass on any opportunities. Though Mycroft Holmes is largely played to comedic effect, Stephen Fry is up to the task, and he does a good job when asked to do something other than drop some funny dialogue. The only real disappointment in the cast is Rapace, though this is by no means her fault. While her rendition of a knife-throwing gypsy fortune-teller with a connection to Moriarty's network is well-played, and it was nice to not stick her in a cliched love-interest role, I can't help but feel that she is sorely underutilized. This came as something of a surprise, as the ads and trailers made such a big deal about her involvement, only for her to be moved to the side at most opportunities.

He'll kill you with kindness... Ha ha, no, he'll just kill you

So what is it I like the most about Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows? Is it the wonderful visual effects? The compelling storytelling that misses no details? The ability to drop hints at the beginning that you completely forget until Holmes reintroduces it in solving his case? The wonderful acting, led by Downey Jr. and Law? The broad mix of humor and adventure? How about the exciting, climactic final battle between Holmes and Moriarty that is both a literal and figurative chess match? Presented with these options, I'm going to have to go with "all of the above", as Sherlock Holmes stands a good head over most movies released this year. It's not good enough for Top 10 status, but it holds place among other highly watchable and enjoyable fare with few flaws, among titles like The Muppets, Footloose and Crazy Stupid Love. Better than the original, and arguably better than any Sherlock Holmes film you can name, I can't recommend this title highly enough. Since The Artist isn't playing anywhere near you, try the next best thing: a smart, funny, highly engrossing title that won't make you feel stupid for having paid full price to see it.