Ah, slightly peeved reviews of the Hobbit. Enjoyable, they are.

I know that this somewhat snarky Slate review of the Hobbit was probably meant to infuriate me:

…a moment when the dwarves, gathered around the fire on the eve of their departure, spontaneously burst into a ballad of longing for their lost homeland. Truth be told, I kind of enjoyed the solemn melancholy of that dwarf ballad, but did it need to contain so many stanzas?

Fortunately, I can chuckle about it.  Largely because Peter Jackson made this movie for me, me, ME! – and it’s already brought in $123M domestic in eight days*; so go chew some cram, haters.  Don’t worry if you don’t know what cram is; Peter will be happy to show you.  And make jokes about it that will have me rolling in the aisle, at least.

Moe Lane

PS: For the record, the poem in question was drastically cut down in length for the film. And, yeah, I was disappointed by that.

*Translation: “He’s going to get away with it.”


  • acat says:

    Why did it need so many stanzas? Maybe because, in the source material, *it has that many stanzas*?
    Sheesh! I thought the “review” whining about how “this Tolkien fellow” stole everything from J.K. Rowling was bad, this is just pathetic!

  • Crawford says:

    I’ve told people “if you can recite the riddles along with Gollum and Bilbo, this is your movie; if not you might be disappointed”.
    I will say that Peter Jackson turned Sylvester McCoy from my least favorite Doctor to an actor I will no longer avoid.
    And I already liked James Nesbitt.

  • Luke says:

    My reaction is a horrified “They cut it down”?

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by