The Single Biggest Flaw with the Entire Hobbit Trilogy
Alternatively Titled: Yeah, Well... Sorry Guys, But This is Just True, and You All Know it, or: You're a Cock! You're a Cock! You're a Cock! ... Cock!
Okay, calm down. First, yes there are spoilers here, kinda, so know that, but remember: let's be rational about this, there's no reason not to be. Personally, I loved the first Hobbit movie, and any questions that were in my head about how effectively Peter Jackson et al. were going to flesh out The Hobbit into a full trilogy without it feeling like bullshit are gone. And we barely saw Smaug at all, which I was really worried they might do too early. A few flashes, kind of, sure, and we do need to establish his horrific destructive force early, so that all worked great for me. His snout at the end? Honestly, I would've preferred we not get the eye, too, but it was still minimal; we still haven't seen his full body even once. Once again, 90% of the cast are either unknowns (for now, that is; can anyone honestly remember ever hearing the name "Orlando Bloom" before LOTR? Anyone else like me and still remember reading the early LOTR cast reports and saying, "What the shit is an 'Orlando Bloom'? That sounds like a gayer Knott's Berry Farm in Florida..."), and of course some are recurring, what-with your Sir Ian McKellen, and Hugo Weaving, and etc.
But tucked in amongst the familiar and unfamiliar faces alike is our old friend Martin Freeman, aka Watson, aka Ricky C. of the Westside, aka Tim Canterbury, the man with the hat... FM.
Y'know what, this one depresses even me, so I'll try to keep it short. We do need to backtrack to LOTR for a moment at this point, though, and back to a man named Ian Holm.
So now most of you have probably skipped ahead in your minds already and know what I'm about to say: Why is Martin Freeman playing a part that's already been cast? Because Ian Holm looks too old now? Do you realize we're talking about the same movies in which Andy Serkis' entire face and body are replaced in post? This is called a face-palm moment.
This is also why I said calm down at the beginning and bothered to gush for a minute about how much I did love the first Hobbit movie, because I do! Really, this should be a bonus for me, because I'm also a big fan of Martin Freeman, but I simply have to say that, number one, Ian Holm was already excellent casting, and in LOTR, we got to see him at different times go from a younger Bilbo, to an older Bilbo, to a deceitful Bilbo, and those of us who were forward-thinkers couldn't wait to see his own adventure across Middle-Earth to take back Smaug's ill-gotten gains.
And, number two, it will never not stick out to me the dramatic shift in facial proportions that we're supposed to believe Bilbo went through in the what, 50, 60 years or so in between The Hobbit and The Fellowship? Who has that arched of a brow well into their 40s, and then grows out of it? All of a sudden that's a distinct Hobbit characteristic, they look more like monkeys when they're young and then less so as they age? Yet after the character's second facial change, the one during LOTR that makes sense because he gives up the one ring and finally starts to show his full age, he, shockingly, seems to have kept the same face! I guess he just got lucky the second time around? Certainly got unlucky the first time we're supposed to believe his face changed; Martin Freeman may not be an every-GQ-cover type looker, but he's a decent step up from Ian Holm. But I can only say this stuff because I'm an ugly bastard, too, so I know the pain.
Calm down, fake Bilbo! It's just an odd and unnecessary choice, but I'm still gonna see all 3!
: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct
. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under "safe harbor" provisions and will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. For expeditious removal, contact us HERE