It's really interesting to see what people think makes a story true to its origin. Both in the history video and in the comments of the movie, most people seem to think it's only the dwarves and lack of a Princess and Golem's name that make The Hobbit story what it is. They are unironically saying this version is *nothing* alike the original book.
So I was quite surprised at how very closely this movie captured so many moments of essence that I think are far more important to The Hobbit, in terms of plot, characterization, character arc, obstacles to overcome, even dialog. The spirit of the scenes is the same, too, boiled down tidily.
My favorite example is how Gandalf & Crew showing up to foist Bilbo away in a big rush feels *exactly* like Rankin-Bass and the original text. (I was singing "That's what Bilbo Baggins hates!" as it played.) Yet they cover this scene in less than a minute.
You'd be hard pressed to find two original folk versions of Rumplestiltskin this closely aligned at many points of the film.
Maybe being trained in plot design and motifs gives me this eye for what makes a story what it is? Yes, this movie is a knockoff. But names and labels and the existence of side characters is only incidental to the heart of a story. I really hope normal people are more insightful than that.
🧵
#Hobbit #tolkien #fantasy #film #WritersCoffeeClub