The Hobbit: Book vs. Films

image from here

Having recently re-read (and watched) The Hobbit, it's time to compare the book to the films, as I did for The Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Notable Differences Between the Book and the Movies

- The first and most obvious difference: they took three movies to tell the story in one book.  To justify that move (which many viewed as a money grab), the movies cover more than just The Hobbit story; they include content from the appendices to The Lord of the Rings.
- Saruman, Galadriel, and Legolas never appear in the book, but play important roles in the movies.
- Tauriel never appears anywhere . . . she was made up for the movies to add a female presence in the film.
- Several events in the book are compressed in the movie- their stay with Elrond, time with Beorn, journey through Mirkwood, and days in the Elven king's jails.  I say 'oddly' because you'd think making 3 movies out of 1 book would preclude the need for such compression.  But I admit, those are slower parts, so perhaps they were modified for that reason.
- No orcs are ever hunting the company in the book.  Azog the Defiler and his son Bolg feature hardly at all in the book, but play prominent roles in the film.
- The Master of Lake-town and Bard feature much more in the movie.
- Several changes to the film reference, foreshadow, or mirror events in The Lord of the Rings in ways the book never did.  This site covers that and has discusses detailed changes.

Other Thoughts

The Hobbit films are, sadly, overly dramatic.  The first movie was okay, but things dovetailed in the second, and the third was a lost cause.  They made every little thing 'a big deal.'  Legolas in particular has some action scenes were are just plain ridiculous and unnecessary.  I haven't even seen the extended editions . . . I can't imagine further additions to an already-bloated series.

Inherently, making the lighthearted and child-friendly Hobbit after the serious and 'more epic' Lord of the Rings was a bad move- they tried to make the tone of the former match the latter, and in so doing deviated from the spirit of the book.  The films are visually splendid, and I enjoy watching them for what they are, but I can't help thinking about what might have been.