Does The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey really require any kind of introduction? Peter Jackson’s previous Lord of the Rings films are such an enormous presence in the film industry that this follow-up not only seemed inevitable, but maybe even bigger than its predecessors. The Hobbit makes a number of missteps, but it’s ultimately a worthy first chapter in a new trilogy.

The Hobbit is set 60 years prior to the events in “Lord of the Rings,” and stars Bilbo Baggins (played by Martin Freeman) as he’s wrapped up in an adventure with 13 dwarves and everyone’s favorite wizard Gandalf (played by Sir Ian McKellen) to retrieve a wealth of gold from the great dragon Smaug. Their journey takes them through goblin-infested caves under the treacherous Misty Mountains, elf cities, and orc lands, and all of these locations are marvelously realized from the pages of Tolkien’s original novel.

I chose to see the film in 48 frames per second, which, if I’m being entirely honest, I’m not sure I enjoyed the entire time. It is, however, the only way I’d choose to see this movie, and I hope more films follow in its footsteps. The faster frame rate makes some scenes feel sped up and look slightly off in regards to sound effects and voice-syncing, but it makes other scenes look incredibly real, which goes a long way with the film’s atmosphere.

Among the scenes that the high frame rate improves are ones that star the main cast and the scenes with Smeagol, whose appearance has been utterly perfected for this film, though he’s only in it for a few minutes. What it makes look worse, however, is the number of scenes with CGI creatures or characters, all of which simply showcase very strongly that these things are completely unreal. As a result, the film’s visual style feels inconsistent, whereas the look of the original films was strong and singular throughout.

The dwarves Bilbo journeys with are given more characterization than in the book, but the clear focus is Thorin Oakenshield (played by Richard Armitage), and it pays off. His backstory is intriguing, his personality strong, and aside from Gandalf, he’s probably the most interesting character in the film.

Much has been said about the decision to split the adaptation of a 300 page book into three movies that are each just under three hours a piece. It’s pretty clear why the decision was made (see The Apprentice theme song), and now that the first film in the trilogy is out, it’s pretty clear that the decision was a poor one. The movie’s pace is all over the place, with the early section at Bilbo’s home in The Shire lasting upwards of half an hour when it could be done with in closer to ten minutes. Everything feels too stretched out and padded for no real purpose at all (other than the obvious).

That’s a shame, since The Hobbit is full of great moments that are drowned out with all the scenes that are too lengthy for their own good. Bilbo and Thorin have great chemistry, Gandalf is always a delight to see on-screen, and the entirety of the Rivendell sequence is among the most gorgeous things in film in 2012.

The musical score is punctuated by the melody to the dwarves’ Misty Mountains song, which details their history with Smaug the Golden, and it’s a powerful and sweeping song, but the novelty wears thin over the three hour adventure, and the soundtrack as a whole doesn’t come close to the glory of the original trilogy’s orchestral score.

In the end, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is worth seeing, but it doesn’t do enough with its length to make it as compulsively watchable as the “Lord of the Rings” films, as long as they are. The high frame rate was an interesting experiment that didn’t pay off 100 percent, but it’s still something to behold.