Fit for a Hobbit: Hypable’s ‘Hobbit’ trailer analysis

By Marama Whyte (@maramawhyte) at 1:00 pm, September 19, 2012

The new Hobbit trailer landed online earlier this morning, and Hypable is here to break it down for you. Anticipation for the film is building, so what exactly does the trailer tell us about the first Hobbit film?

The Plot

Tolkien vs Jackson

Before we get started, we have a confession to make. We didn’t hate Arwen in Lord of the Rings. We don’t mind when Peter Jackson makes changes to Tolkien’s story – we don’t love them all – but we don’t inherently hate them. Phew, it’s a relief to get that confession out there.

The problem is, if you start drawing too many book-to-film comparions, you are guaranteed to be disappointed. Die-hard Tolkien fans are unfortunately never going to be satisfied with the films (“Where was Glorfindel?! Elves at Helms Deep?! TOM BOMBADIL?!”), in the same way that die-hard Potter fans were never satisfied with the film adaptations (“MARAUDERS?!”). Although we consider this to be a totally legitimate gripe, we plan on keeping Tolkien’s glorious story and Jackson’s (assumedly) epic interpretation separate, thereby assuring that we’ll enjoy them both.

You are welcome to join us on this quest.

‘Lord of the Rings’ Throwbacks

PJ has gone to great pains to present The Hobbit films as much more of a Lord of the Rings prequel than the book ever was. The first trailer worked hard to establish this, through the opening shot of Lord of the Rings-era Frodo and Bilbo, and the new trailer spends just as much time in Hobbiton to remind us that we are revising the same place; can we just say, Hobbiton looks damn good.

Similarly, the coloring of the trailer is almost identical to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, again to establish a sense of consistency. This trailer didn’t hit us over the head with quite as many references as the previous one did, but we still get the scenes with the ring, the return of fan-favourite Smeagol/Gollum, and Galadriel’s cameo, all the remind the casual viewer of Rings and firmly establish The Hobbit as a prequel.

Additional Material

We’ve previously reported that Jackson will also be adding in extra material from the Lord of the Rings appendices and the trailer gives us a hint at what those scenes could be. You’ll have to excuse us for getting our nerd on for a second here. The appearance of Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), who was absolutely not in the book, points to inclusion of the White Council storyline, which Gandalf runs off to deal with in the book, but we never see.

Plus we keep seeing Gandalf wondering around alone on creepy staircases – we are guessing these scenes are set in Dol Guldur, the fortress of the Necromancer (Benedict Cumberbatch). Again this is briefly mentioned in the book, but never dwelt upon. Yet here’s another Lord of the Rings reference – who does the Necromancer turn out to be? None other than our good friend Sauron. Spoiler: He’s the bad guy.

The Split(s)

Only Peter Jackson could casually mention that he would love to turn the Hobbit franchise into a trilogy, and have it actually happen. Fans are still divided over the merits of this idea, and whether there is even enough material for three films. Still, now the all-consuming question (apart from, “is PJ completely crazy!?”) is this: Where will the split(s) be?

Based on the trailer, our guess is it will be after the ~~Riddles in the Dark scenes~~ the scenes with the wolves and eagles (as some sharp-eyed readers pointed out). We still think there will be a huge focus on the scenes between Bilbo and Gollum, when Bilbo acquires the (in)famous gold ring. That means that, like Fellowship of the Ring, this film will be primarily establishing and introducing.

The second installment is subtitled The Desolation of Smaug, so we imagine that it will end after the defeat of the dragon Smaug. Which leaves There and Back Again to deal with the Battle of the Five Armies, and Bilbo’s return home. Any other guesses?

Pages: 1 2

View the latest articles in: Features

Seamus MacGillicuddy

Once again, trailers are designed to lure people to the cinema to see the film. I don’t think you can draw too many conclusions from the trailers other than how much you want to see the films, or not. I appreciate the analysis, but don’t take it too far.
- Liderc
  
  Not true at all. In the Deathly Hallows Part 1 trailer it showed where the break would be in the first film. There’s definitely interesting things to analyze in trailers nowadays, sadly they give away more than we want most of the time.
  - Seamus MacGillicuddy
    
    I take film adaptations of literature with a grain of salt. The keyword is “adaptation.” The screenwriter isn’t obligated to do anything other than write a good film. So if Peter Jackson has included new material, added material from appendices of other books or changed the fate of a character or two- then I don’t care. I’m interested in seeing a good movie, and the trailer makes the film look promising. I think some people are a bit too invested in the differences between the book and the films. The films don’t alter the magic of the books in any way.
    - Samuel
      
      But it’s different when it’s kind of classic literature like The Hobbit/LOTR
http://twitter.com/JennySDCC MoonlitShadow

I think the split for the first film is much more likely to take place after the grand barrel escape from Mirkwood. Nice breaking point in the story, and sets up an introduction to Lake Town and Smaug’s domain.
- Samuel
  
  I personally think that’s way too far in because then the second film will just be Smaug and the third film will just be the Battle and hardly any story for either the second or the third.
Flunky

I think the first film will end with Gandalf leaving the company before they go into Mirkwood, and the second one after Smaug dies.
http://twitter.com/TokoMasho Matthew Potter

I may be wrong, but hadn’t Bilbo already caught up with Gandalf and the dwarves after his encounter with Gollum when they were attacked by the wolves? The trailer definitely had them in flaming trees, so I’m thinking that it will be after the eagles come to get them maybe?

I’m wondering how they’re going to change Radagast’s involvement though. I know it’s been stated by Sylvester McCoy and Christopher Lee that his role will be more important, but from the trailer it almost looks as if he encounters Bilbo and the dwarves rather than just being present at the White Council. Perhaps he will be the one who sent for the eagles or was at least with them at the time, seeing as he’s the one who alerted them in Lord of the Rings to go save Gandalf from Saruman.

If that’s the case, then part two can begin with the attack on Dol Goldur, have all of the Mirkwood stuff, and then deal with Smaug. I almost think that it may end after Bilbo speaks to him. So my guesses for the films would be:
Unexpected Journey: Chapters 1-6
Desolation of Smaug: Chapters 7-13or14
There and Back Again: Chapters 14or15-19
Now that I’m thinking about it though, I’m probably wrong about the Smaug bits ending in the beginning of part 3, haha.
- Guest
  
  About your first comment, Bilbo does catch up shortly before the whole wolf meeting scene, which is why I don’t understand why the author of this article commented that they thought the first film would end right after Riddles in the Dark….unless they don’t mean right after…..I didn’t think they’d have the wolves in the trailer if they were going to end part 1 before then…
  - http://twitter.com/TokoMasho Matthew Potter
    
    Probably just an honest mistake. Still a great article though.
    - https://twitter.com/maramawhyte Marama Whyte
      
      Nope, you guys are totally right, thanks for pointing it out (: Edited to reflect this.
http://twitter.com/TokoMasho Matthew Potter

I wonder if Peter Jackson is still planning on making each film pretty long or if he’s cutting the lengths significantly by splitting them a second time.
http://twitter.com/Merina2 Merina

Great analysis :) one typo, though – *material, not matieral. I don’t mean to be clever or picky or anything, I just thought you’d like to know..
grl727

Looks to me that Thorin, as the bad-ass leader of the dwarves, and Kili, who is rumored to have a romance with Evangeline Lilly’s elf Tauriel (not in the book), are more human in appearance than the rest of the “comic-relief” dwarves, perhaps to lend them more credibility. Subtle “racism”?
ThatDoctor

I honestly just don’t see how they can make an entire movie about the battle of five armies and have it have a cohesive story arch like ROTK did. Sure, the battle of hogwarts took up most of DHP2 but that movie didn’t have a story arch in the traditional sense either. If the third Hobbit just wraps everything up in a baffling two hours or more I’d be seriously disapointed.
- Samuel
  
  and The Battle of Five Armies isn’t even as epic as The Battle of Hogwarts, seeings as Bilbo is knocked-out for most of it.
http://twitter.com/CriticallyJoe Joe

Just finished reading the book for the first time today. Absolutely loved it but could see it all in a three hour film easily, two films OK but THREE!? I cannot see it filling a third film… the second film will probably be the ‘pay off’ but I’m more looking forward to the first one (the journey!) than Smaug and on – the journey to Smaug I found far more exciting than the battle and on the way back!

Also, I’ll be miffed if the first film is less than two hours.
Azeem

I know you guys are worried about the splits and the material, but PJ has added the White Council and Dol Guldur, Radagast, most likely an extended Gollum scene, a prologue most likely, plus all those Mirkwood snippets with Legolas and Tauriel which will definitely altogether add up to about 1.5 hours of the film. Don’t worry guys. Just enjoy the films!

Hypable encourages the community to use our Comments feature to hold thoughtful, polite, and critical discussions. We do NOT tolerate inappropriate, rude, or downright mean discussion towards the news story's subject matter or towards other Hypable users. We reserve the right to delete or ban comments and users who violate these guidelines.