|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:06pm
Post #76 of 112
(1556 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I disagree about the split-point
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I see no way that Film 2 will not go through at least Bilbo's encounters with Smaug. I just don't see it happening at all. Smaug will be shown in DOS, and probably more than once.
I do agree, though, that the attack on Laketown and subsequent happenings will be left for film 3.
"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:09pm
Post #77 of 112
(1547 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Never said Smaug would *spoilers*
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
die at the beginning of TABA. Likely, closer to the middle.
I believe TABA will start with the dwarves visiting the ruins of Dale, trekking up the mountain, waiting for the keyhole to appear, debating who goes in first, showing us Bilbo's key moment of courage in the tunnel, followed by his experiences with Smaug, and finally, Smaug's departure. That could take about an hour, really. Then Smaug flies off to Laketown and is killed, paving the way for the buildup to the Battle of Five Armies.
Don't think that sounds so crazy. It may not happen, and Smaug may die in film 2, but I really do not think PJ will kill off Smaug so early.
And honestly, MrCere and I were sometimes dismissed as insane, and/or bordering on foolish for suggesting that film 1 would likely be ending with the eagle rescue, long before that became official.
-SA
P.S. And no, having film 2 named "The Desolation of Smaug" does not in and of itself create an expectation from the audience that Smaug will die in the film. Nothing about that title requires his death.
(This post was edited by entmaiden on Sep 30 2012, 12:16pm)
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:12pm
Post #78 of 112
(1557 views)
Shortcut
|
The problem, however, is that starting film 3 with such a major moment as Smaug's death would not be wise, IMO.
Smaug can be briefly introduced before Bilbo even meets him. Either in flashback, or other ways.
(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Sep 29 2012, 7:13pm)
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:13pm
Post #79 of 112
(1574 views)
Shortcut
|
So the film will not end at the eaves of Mirkwood...
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:17pm
Post #80 of 112
(1576 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I wouldn't start Film 3 with Laketown
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I wouldn't make the Laketown destruction and death of Smaug the starting point of the film. I'd say it should be around the 45 minute mark or so. This allows it to be more than just an opening action scene, while at the same time allowing there to be adequate time afterward for the politics, ect. and the BoFA.
And I disagree that Smaug will be introduced before Bilbo sees him. It's the perfect opportunity for the big reveal and there's no reason to spoil that. And Bilbo will meet with Smaug in Film 2 - I'd take that one to the bank 
"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:20pm
Post #81 of 112
(1533 views)
Shortcut
|
I certainly can't say that I'm sure; I'm only stating what makes the most sense to me. I think you are under-estimating (perhaps out of wishful thinking) how huge TBOFA will be. I also think that a significant portion of the Dol Guldur/White Council plot will be in the third film, and will be more closely related to TBOFA than we (or at least I) would like it to be.
'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'
The Hall of Fire
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:22pm
Post #82 of 112
(1512 views)
Shortcut
|
I would start TABA in the following way:
I believe TABA will start with the dwarves visiting the ruins of Dale, trekking up the mountain, waiting for the keyhole to appear, debating who goes in first, showing us Bilbo's key moment of courage in the tunnel, followed by his experiences with Smaug, and finally, Smaug's departure. That could take about an hour, really. Then Smaug flies off to Laketown and is killed, paving the way for the buildup to the Battle of Five Armies.
Add an opening prologue of sorts to that (perhaps an extended scene of Dale's destruction by Smaug?) and you have Smaug's death happen about halfway through.
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:26pm
Post #83 of 112
(1533 views)
Shortcut
|
IMO, Bilbo has to have already met with Smaug by the end of Film 2. Otherwise there is way too much to do in the third film, especially with the addition of all the Dol Guldor shenanigans.
I think it'll happen like this. Film 2 will end with Smaug leaving the mountain. Then, film 3 will begin by following Gandalf/Dol Guldor subplot for a while, mixed with scenes of Bilbo and the dwarves in the mountain. Only then will it switch back to Smaug and show his attack on Laketown and his death.
"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower." -Unfinished Tales
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:26pm
Post #84 of 112
(1522 views)
Shortcut
|
But a film 2 that includes Smaug's death would be, IMO, massive and unwieldy, particularly as it will now start before Mirkwood (with Beorn)...
Plus, even though BOFA will be huge, I think it would be an even huger mistake to have the battle (buildup, battle itself and aftermath) take up the entire film.
Once Smaug is killed, many people will feel that the dwarves can take back their homeland. The politics of how that happens, and whether or not they should share the wealth with elves and men, is deeply interesting, but it may not sustain a general audience for an entire movie.
|
|
|
Lightice
Lorien
Sep 29 2012, 7:41pm
Post #86 of 112
(1543 views)
Shortcut
|
|
If this was just two movies you might have a point, but not in a trilogy
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Likely, closer to the middle.
I believe TABA will start with the dwarves visiting the ruins of Dale, trekking up the mountain, waiting for the keyhole to appear, debating who goes in first, showing us Bilbo's key moment of courage in the tunnel, followed by his experiences with Smaug, and finally, Smaug's departure. That could take about an hour, really. Then Smaug flies off to Laketown and is killed, paving the way for the buildup to the Battle of Five Armies.
That leaves sorely little substance for the second movie, and as I have said repeatedly, fails to introduce that movie's title character. All buildup and no conclusion. If The Hobbit had been just two movies I could have seen the escape from the Elvenking's dungeons as a reasonable cutoff point, but in a trilogy? Not a chance, and adding in a Laketown epilogue would just add insult to the injury. That would not be The Desolation of Smaug, no matter how you look at it. If it had been called The Darkness of Mirkwood or sometihng you might have been onto something, though the pacing would still have been poor, but with that name? Not going to happen.
Just the Battle of the Five Armies alone is hard to stretch into a whole movie, but if you take the events of Dol Guldur into consideration, things become much clearer. Benedict Cumberbatch has already insinuated that in the movie the Necromancer will figure out to the Battle in some way. This indicates that the White Council's battle and the Battle of the Five Armies are closely linked events that may take place simultaneously. And there are several ways this can be used to stretch the conflict for an entire movie.
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 29 2012, 7:44pm
Post #87 of 112
(1520 views)
Shortcut
|
Beorn-Mirkwood-Leggy and Tauriel-Thranduil-Imprisonment-Dol Guldur-Barrels-Laketown-Desolation seems like a good amount of material to me, with plenty of dramatic opportunities.
But we'll see...
The most likely scenario, IMO, is that film 2 ends with Smaug flying off, but I can see the problems with such a cliffhanger, and generally don't want that to happen...
|
|
|
Altaira
Superuser
Sep 29 2012, 8:27pm
Post #88 of 112
(1467 views)
Shortcut
|
--> some personal comments edited out of this sub-thread
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Please remember to reply regarding a person's points, not about the person making them. This is 100% speculation right now, so there is no right or wrong.
Thanks!
Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.
"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower
"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase
|
|
|
Elenorflower
Gondor
Sep 29 2012, 8:39pm
Post #89 of 112
(1485 views)
Shortcut
|
as an audience member I would find it more satisfying if Smaug occupied the whole of the second film, rather than chopping him off at the end with no resolution. I want the big baddie of the book to get a whole film to himself like the title suggests. I think Smaugs death is going to be a big to do, and they wont slap it at the start of film 3 as it cuts of the drama up to Smaug flying off to Laketown, we need to see it through to the bitter end, otherwise its like the charge of the Rohirrim and the battle of Minas Tirith chopped in two. We need a slow build up with Smaug and Bilbo getting to know each other, then the poop hitting the fan and Laketown is in flames and Bard is surfing rooves and such like. Death of Smaug, aftermath, end of film 2. well thats how I see it anyhoo.
|
|
|
Elenorflower
Gondor
Sep 29 2012, 8:57pm
Post #91 of 112
(1465 views)
Shortcut
|
Smaug and Bilbo are the heart of the book surely? 
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Sep 29 2012, 9:16pm
Post #92 of 112
(1458 views)
Shortcut
|
Smaug is very important thus he deserves to be introduced and killed in under two hours of the whole trilogy?
I'm surprised that the option of Smaug being alive for an extra six months doesn't appeal more, if that is one's impetus.
LR
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Sep 29 2012, 9:34pm
Post #94 of 112
(1486 views)
Shortcut
|
There is every reason to expect beats/structure to match LOTR. Narrative film form is formulaic across the industry, even more so inside a given film maker's repertoire. Ultimately I see it as a good thing if they are still interested in producing a seamless whole across the 6 Middle-earth based films.
(Also, I see now that I used the wrong "brake" in my "Good News Everyone" post. I'm heartbroken.)
|
|
|
Lightice
Lorien
Sep 30 2012, 11:44am
Post #95 of 112
(1364 views)
Shortcut
|
Smaug is very important thus he deserves to be introduced and killed in under two hours of the whole trilogy?
I'm surprised that the option of Smaug being alive for an extra six months doesn't appeal more, if that is one's impetus.
It is a question of pacing, as I have repeatedly pointed out. You would have him banished to the peripheries of the two final movies, making him a secondary plot thread for both. Also, two hours is all that you need with him. The second movie is likely to be slightly over three hours long, as per Peter Jackson's standard style. The first hour or slightly more can be devoted to Beorn and Mirkwood, though I continue to hold the opinion that it would be better for Beorn to be at the end of the first movie for longer screentime in the forest, and the remaining two hours can deal with Smaug exclusively. This way Smaug will star a whole movie as the main star, and receive a worthy sendoff in an epic climax, rather than being shoved to the first minutes of the third movie as a fantasy version of a James Bond opening.
This will also serve as an excellent false climax for the series itself. People will be curious and confused about what can happen after the dragon has been defeated, and how the remaining plot threads will be resolved. When there were just two movies, I considered it likely that Smaug would bite it around the two hour mark, so that ordinary moviegoers would imagine it to be the ending, and then be surprised when more important stuff piles up for the last hour. Now that there's three, there's a need to produce this false sense of closure in a different way. Remember that the characters believe that everything will be fine once the dragon has been dealt with; this belief needs to be transferred to the audience, as well, so that they will be shocked and surprised when this turns out not to be the case. This doesn't work if there's most of the movie yet to go when Smaug meets his end. This is the most important reason why I consider it a dramatic necessity for him to die in The Desolation of Smaug.
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Sep 30 2012, 12:20pm
Post #96 of 112
(1418 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Hmm not sure I agree with that.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
When there were two films you imagine that Smaug would die at around two hours, leaving one hour for the Battle and wrap up of the film.
However, you also say, now that there are three films, that Smaug would have to die in the opening minutes leaving the best part of three hours for the battle and wrap up.
I'm not sure I see that leap at all. I don't see any particular reason why Smaug could not die an hour or more into the third film.
Now as it happens I'm not one who thinks that fictional character's "deserve" anything so it doesn't really matter to me on that basis, but nonetheless.
I'm not convinced by your second point and actually I think the sense of faux resolution would work much better mid-film rather than at the end of a film. In fact I think it might be quite dangerous from a commercial standpoint to essentially resolve the main thrust of the quest as it is originally conceived and then rely on curiosity to bring people back for the third film.
LR
|
|
|
Lightice
Lorien
Sep 30 2012, 12:39pm
Post #97 of 112
(1359 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm not sure I see that leap at all. I don't see any particular reason why Smaug could not die an hour or more into the third film.
The second movie is called The Desolation of Smaug. This makes it quite clear that Smaug will be the main pull of its marketing. This in turn requires him to receive a good chunk of the screentime. There are not that many Smaug scenes in the book, and adding in more would reduce his dramatic value. Added to the fact that the second film requires an epic climax to work, there are little options available besides Smaug's demise.
I am aware of the Dol Guldur subplot ofcourse, but it can never have the same impact on the audience as Bilbo's struggles. As cool as they are, you can never get inside the heads of the god-like Istari the way you can with a simple hobbit, and this is ultimately Bilbo's story, not Gandalf's. This is why I believe that the White Council's battle will complement the Battle of the Five Armies, rather than have its own, individual climax, much like the Ents' attack on Isengard complemented Rohhirm's desperate stand at Helm's Deep.
Now as it happens I'm not one who thinks that fictional character's "deserve" anything so it doesn't really matter to me on that basis, but nonetheless.
It's just a saying. It doesn't mean that I think that Smaug deserves something as a person, but as a highly important plot device.
In fact I think it might be quite dangerous from a commercial standpoint to essentially resolve the main thrust of the quest as it is originally conceived and then rely on curiosity to bring people back for the third film.
Ofcourse there still has to be an epilogue after Smaug's demise that reveals that the real problems have only just started, even though their exact nature won't become clear unil the third film. And obviously there will be more than just curiosity; rather, marketing with the clash of dwarvish and elvish armies will bring the audiences back for the final resolution.
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Sep 30 2012, 12:58pm
Post #98 of 112
(1372 views)
Shortcut
|
|
So we have two further arguments here
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
One that the title defines the content (which I tend to disagree with) although it makes no bones as I do think that Smaug will receive some considerable screen time in the second film (between contemporaneous scenes and flashbacks). I am not sure if you are suggesting that the flashbacks fall into the camp of "reducing his dramatic value" but would disagree if so.
The second point is that the second film needs a climax and the only possible solution is Smaug's death. Tend not to agree that this is the only option and might well point out how many folks argued that Shelob must be in TTT for the very same reasons.
I'm even less drawn to your last point now that we have added an epilogue to set up the third film. It would be almost impossible for our company to reach Smaug less than an hour into the second film and then we begin to chop off his time at the opposite end as well?
Of course film three will be marketed but just doesn't ring true to me to structure a quest to kill the dragon and reclaim the treasure such that the dragon is dead and the treasure is reclaimed at the end of the second film. Too much risk of waning interest by the casual punter, or so seems the risk to me.
LR
|
|
|
Estel78
Tol Eressea
Sep 30 2012, 1:14pm
Post #99 of 112
(1450 views)
Shortcut
|
|
So what is the climax for film 2? //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
Elenorflower
Gondor
Sep 30 2012, 2:43pm
Post #100 of 112
(1379 views)
Shortcut
|
'' I continue to hold the opinion that it would be better for Beorn to be at the end of the first movie for longer screentime in the forest, and the remaining two hours can deal with Smaug exclusively. This way Smaug will star a whole movie as the main star, and receive a worthy sendoff in an epic climax, rather than being shoved to the first minutes of the third movie as a fantasy version of a James Bond opening.''
Exactly what I think should happen. There is no way Smaug should be in film 3. It would ruin the build up to that moment if we get to the Lonely Mountain, meet him, Bilbo starts up the conversation, only for him to fly off to destroy Laketown. End of film. If the film is cut at that point I would hurl my popcorn to the floor and stomp on it. I want to see (well actually I dont want Smaug to die) the end of Smaug and the film should finish afterwards with the Dwarves and Bilbo wondering what the heck is going on, and the Laketowners turning to Bard for leadership. End of film. Its far more satisfying as we wonder whats going to happen to everyone now but its not a cliffhanger which is cheesy.
(This post was edited by Elenorflower on Sep 30 2012, 2:44pm)
|
|
|
|
|
