J.R.R. Tolkien fans are no doubt chomping at the bit—and I’m sure more than a few are already lined up—for tonight’s midnight premiere of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. It’s the second film in director Peter Jackson’s Hobbit trilogy. And given how expansively Jackson has reimagined Tolkien’s tale, it’s likely to beg the question of how much change to a beloved book is too much when bringing it to the big screen—a question lots of reviewers, fans and entertainment outlets are already kicking around.
Having seen the film, I can say that Jackson certainly felt the freedom to rework things—whether that’s expanding details only hinted at, adding elements that weren’t in the book at all, or significantly changing the story’s existing structure to fuse his vision of The Hobbit more seamlessly into the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Much more than Tolkien himself did, Jackson has sought to deliver a take on The Hobbit that’s a true prequel to the Lord of the Rings in terms of the entire saga’s overarching story arc about the finding of the One Ring and its critical importance in overcoming the dark lord Sauron.
Motivations for these changes notwithstanding, however, I think the deviations from the book beg this question: When does tinkering become tampering? And how much grace will hardcore fans of a beloved book give Jackson when it comes to altering that book’s details in fundamental ways?
Without giving away too much, one of those alterations is the introduction of an entirely new character, Tauriel. She’s a wood elf, played by Lost alumna Evangeline Lilly. She and Lord of the Rings veteran Legolas (played again by Orlando Bloom) play significant roles in the new film—and neither was in the original book. Tauriel, in fact, is a completely new creation.
Regarding her addition, Smaug co-screenwriter Phillpa Boyens said in a press conference, “Professor Tolkien actually wrote fantastic female characters. He just didn’t write one for The Hobbit.” Lilly, who was reportedly a big Lord of the Rings fan herself before being cast as Tauriel, added, “In Tolkien’s defense, he was writing in 1937. The world is a different place today, and I keep repeatedly telling people that in this day and age, to put nine hours of cinema entertainment in the theaters for young girls to go and watch, and not have one female character, is subliminally telling them, ‘You don’t count, you’re not important, and you’re not pivotal to story.'”
As for the inevitable discussion that’s likely to be generated by Tauriel’s addition to the story, Lilly said, “I just think they were very brave and very right in saying we won’t do that to the young female audience. And not just the young female audience, but even a woman my own age, I think it’s time we stop making stories that are only about men, especially only about heroic men. I love that they made Tauriel a hero.”
For those wondering what Tolkien himself might have made of these changes, interestingly, he expressed openness to the possibility of others being involved with his story in a letter written in 1951. “The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, ” he said, “and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.”
Perhaps he would have been nodding in agreement regarding Boyens and Lilly’s logic. Then again, perhaps he would have found himself standing among the purists, wondering whether Jackson’s imaginative, action-packed re-envisioning of The Hobbit really had to go as far as it does.
Recent Comments