(B)adaptations Script: The Hobbit
The Hobbit: Film v. Novel
by Diego Henning & Xiaochao Fu
Henning: Hello everyone and welcome to our channel where we discuss all kinds of film adaptations from the good to the bad to everything in between. Today we will discussing The Hobbit and some of the differences from the movie series to the novel.
Fu: The Hobbit tells a story that happened before The Lord of the Rings, so it can be regarded as a prequel of The Lord of the Rings. However, its plot is much simpler than that of The Lord of the Rings. The production level is very high and I was astonished by the special effects, like the dragon Smaug. Many critics have applauded its use of CGI as large part of the film is digitally edited in order to create the fantasy world. Overall, The Hobbit does not solely aim to the fans of The Lord of the Rings, but to the whole film market, and I think this is part of the reason it succeeded at the box office.
Fu: Of course there were some changes in the adaption from the original novel. First, the characteristics of Thorin in the film are different from him in the novel, specifically in his look and his age. The film also addresses different personalities of dwarves which the novel does not mention. The film makes the dwarves more careless and fun in the film than in the novel. I think these are good revisions which help embody the characters as playful and entertaining.
Henning: Adding on to that, one striking difference from novel to film was that in the second film, the dwarves escape Mirkwood in open barrels while in the novel they escape in closed barrels. If you’ve seen the second film, you will note that this escape scene is one of the funniest, thrilling, and most entertaining scenes in the entire series. It involves the dwarves floating along the river in these wine barrels as enemies attempt to capture and kill them. In the novel the barrels are closed so they just sneak past everyone, but the film creates a much more enjoyable scene by opening the barrels and allowing the audience to see how each dwarf reacts to the water and the enemies following them. This creates a hysterical scene that would not have occurred if the novel’s plot had been followed precisely.
Fu: Yes I think that is true and it’s good that the director’s decided to add some more entertaining parts as sometimes the novel has been criticised for being a bit dull and boring.
Fu: Going back to the first film real quick I think it’s worth mentioning that it quite reflects the original novel. It follows the pace of the novel to show their barriers during the journey and functions to present the characters and the arc that they will take. One major change that is critiqued sometimes is that when the dwarves and Bilbo are all captured by the trolls, it is really Gandalf who saves them. But in the first film, the creators chose Bilbo to save the dwarves and himself. And while some people are angry at that change, I can see why they made it. I think it was important to let Bilbo save the group because the dwarves don’t like him very much or value his skills as the beginning. And I think the audience is also made to doubt his skills somewhat, so having Bilbo save everyone establishes some credibility to the dwarves and to the audience that this is the protagonist and he is the hero of this story.
Henning: Yeah I think it was smart to let Bilbo have his moment so that both the dwarves and the audience can start to like him and see his value as a true hero.
Henning: But now moving on, the plot of the second film is very different from the novel.The most notable of which is the adding of the new female character elf Tauriel, which is nonexistent in the novel. While it seems unnecessary at first, the film series definitely needed a woman character as the entire time we’ve been following Bilbo, Gandalf, and a group of dwarves. So while many fans were outraged at this addition, it allows there to be a female voice in the narrative and it also creates a love interest, because she falls in love with the dwarf Kili.
Fu: I can see why they would want to add a female character but I think she had too much influence on the story and that her love with Kili is irrelevant to the development of the plot.
Fu: But anyway, to continue discussion on the second film, I think the dialogue between the hobbit Bilbo and Smaug is a highlight, and I think this part reflects the original novel very well. In fact the first two films occupy about eighty percent of the novel, thus the third film focuses on the fight scenes. The battle scenes are magnificent and I really enjoyed those in the film. One major difference is that the leader of Orc is not Azog but really his son in the novel. Many fans weren’t happy about this one but I think it is not that important because they were depicted very similarly.
Henning: Yes overall, as a normal audience, I think The Hobbit is a great adaptation in that the changes it makes from the novel allow for a stronger narrative with more complex characters. I believe fans were not happy about Azog but they can learn to leave with some inaccuracies to make the story more enjoyable for the audience as a whole.
Fu: Yeah, I think the film is easy to understand for anyone who has not read the novel before and its overall making is amazing. Some fans might think it is not a loyal adaptation due to its original plot and revisions of characters, but I give it a thumbs up.
Henning: I agree, because even though the film series changed several things, it was done to make the narrative more entertaining and it added more depth to the story. Overall it’s a thumbs up for me.
Fu: Thanks for watching see you next time.
