Our Sponsor Sideshow Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
All problems in AUJ are linked to the 3 movie decision.
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page Last page  View All

Altaira
Superuser / Moderator


Mar 31 2013, 4:56pm

Post #126 of 221 (378 views)
Shortcut
I don't think there are [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
But I'm sad that there are more threads here complaining/bashing about TH than supporting/being excited about it.


As I scan page one of this forum, I only see one, maybe two threads that have a negative connotation in the subject line, and even those have many positive comments in them. If you liked the movie, or loved it overall, there are many, many others here that did too! They all may not have liked the exact same things as everyone else, but that's what keeps the conversation interesting. People who didn't like the movies are welcome to post here too, the trick is to not read their posts if it's annoying or depressing. There are many positive replies and threads you can move on to and enjoy! Smile


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





sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Mar 31 2013, 5:04pm

Post #127 of 221 (374 views)
Shortcut
I thought that Tolkien [In reply to] Can't Post

was actively doing the re-write, gave the first few chapters to a friend of his, she said something like "It's fine, but it's just not The Hobbit," so he gave up on it, only keeping the changes to Riddles, and a few smaller things here and there. So it's not as clear cut as "he decided it wasn't a good idea," because he thought it was a good enough idea to start, and continue for number of chapters, before heeding his friend's advice. Personally, i wish he'd kept at it, that way we'd have both-- the "kids" version and the "adult" version, so to speak.


(This post was edited by sauget.diblosio on Mar 31 2013, 5:10pm)


tarasaurus
Rohan


Mar 31 2013, 5:07pm

Post #128 of 221 (371 views)
Shortcut
Oh, I know! [In reply to] Can't Post

SmileI know there are others that enjoyed the film, but a lot of the threads (at least the ones I've posted in or have been reading) have turned into more of a bashing than a supportive thread. Frown


DanielLB
Immortal


Mar 31 2013, 5:19pm

Post #129 of 221 (366 views)
Shortcut
The un-finished re-write still contained the Trolls' names, and the talking purse. / [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Salmacis81
Tol Eressea


Mar 31 2013, 5:19pm

Post #130 of 221 (367 views)
Shortcut
Well, here's something we can agree on [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
What I am saying is that what precisely Gandalf was doing whilst at Dol Guldur wasn't explained by Tolkien. Which is why the filmmakers have to fill it in.



They do have some leeway regarding how they rout Sauron from Dol Guldur. In fact, the only bit of info I can recall regarding that is that Sauron was finally driven out by the devices of Saruman, or something to that effect. I know Sir Christopher Lee is severely limited in what he can do at his age, but hopefully they find a way to make it happen.


Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Mar 31 2013, 5:24pm

Post #131 of 221 (378 views)
Shortcut
from my understanding [In reply to] Can't Post

he wrote a couple chapters and then gave to a friend, she then said it was good but did not have the same feel tone or charm that the hobbit held. Apparently Tolkien must have agreed because he never finished the rewrite.

I guess for me the Hobbit has that childlike quality to it and I love that, since I read it at the age of 6 for the first time. I really don't need it rewritten to envision it in the same way the LOTR was. When I imagine it in my head, I have always seen it as a realistic yet at times, light hearted tale, with dark elements. And as I read LOTR it added more dark elements but I read those books as I grew older and have continued to read them. being able to see one continuous film in my head that has continuity from the start of the Hobbit to the end of ROTK. I can even picture the Dwarf and Goblin war material described in Tolkien's other writings. I really don't and probably never will see a reason to make the action and adventure in the Hobbit unrealistic and OTT when I can visualize it in my head realistically just like Jackson did with LOTR for the most part.


Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Mar 31 2013, 5:24pm

Post #132 of 221 (367 views)
Shortcut
Balance between the real time narrative and prologues [In reply to] Can't Post

When they sat down and wrote the screen play they could have slavishly followed the book or rewritten the story in its entirety or somewhere in between. To write a screen play which re imagines the story from an adult perspective and stick faithfully to what we know from the appendices would have meant the dimensioning of the character perspective would have toppled over the episodic core book.

Unfortunately Tolkiens writings about Thror, Thrain the Necromencer, the fall of Saruman, Galadriels role in middle earth in the second and third age and Gandalfs strategy for the north are utterly wonderful and far above the trite nature of the childrens book which he felt so bad he should re write the whole book (Humphrey Carpenter's Biography).

To produce a consistant and cohesive film screen play they went with Bag End/Riddles/Smaug-Bilbo and Thorin-Bilbo with great reverence though we have yet to see the latter two. All the other flavours from the book are there and analysis done 3 months ago puts the spine of the book items as the vast majority of time spent in AUJ. However to use the appendices material in a way that does not overun the real time narrative by wonderful endless prologues they brought some of the arcs into the real time. The rise of Sauron and Radagasts discovery and Azog are the first two , the third one will be in the next movie which I expect to be Thrain/Bolg.

You then have the other challange what were Radagast/Saruman/Galadriel and Legolas doing at the time of the Hobbit like Galadriel and the Silmarillion the latter existed without the former.

To weave these characters into the screen play as more than mere cameo's is something Tolkien did himself when rewriting the Silmarillion.

And to your specific point once you have rounded out the ingredients that you want to bring to the table you then have to offer a cohesive and understandable story within the context of the movies made 10 years ago. To place the re integration of Sauron and his deadliest servants into a clearly defined dynamic meant you could not go with 1650 years of vigorous independent action by his servants whom are in thrall to him. At a subcreative level it does not make sense to me as a deep reader, so it would be a real puzzle for film only fans. As an aside I do not think there is any evidence that Tolkien ever addressed the issue that the Nazgul's re emergence occured in 1100 T.A. followed by very public wars and the taking of Minus Ithil in 2000 to 2002 whilst Sauron was only confident to go public in 2951 T. A. If I had been the Witch King of Angmar I would have hunted for the one ring myself whilst my master was re intergrating that surely would be in the nature of evil. No Tolkien himself was not perfect in his creation everything in the narrative suggest a master slave relationship between him and the Nazgul whereas the appendices imply something else that they can act independently with their own agenda.

We can all have views about CGI/Models 2D 3D hot Dwarves and childish humour but the three film answer can only be given ... when we have seen all three





In Reply To

The fact is that this film is an adaptation of The Hobbit book. The story needed to be simplified for a much wider audience than just the well-versed Tolkien enthusiast – much of which has never read the books. Frankly, it seems to me that if some of the suggestions that I find so baffling were incorporated, the film would be incomprehensible to a wider audience. The film story is complex enough without it being made even more complicated. Yes, you might say that The Hobbit 'should' have been exactly like the book. However, had that been the case it would have been a far less enjoyable, specifically children's film, with a lot of cardboard-cutout characters à la Tolkien, which would have been of little interest to me and I suspect to many others.

I, for one, am very pleased with how The Hobbit has been interpreted. The storyline within the film makes perfect sense – and as I said, for me the books are one thing, the films another. As long as the acting, plot line, music and visuals continue to be of as high a calibre as they are in AUJ, that will suit me fine – and I'm sure many others who do love the film. (N.B. People I know who have seen the film in the UK are generally not very well versed in Tolkien – but they all love the film.)


I tried to save the shire , and it has been but not for me.


Salmacis81
Tol Eressea


Mar 31 2013, 5:27pm

Post #133 of 221 (357 views)
Shortcut
I've never read the 1960 re-write... [In reply to] Can't Post

but for some reason I seem to recall reading that Tolkien regretted giving those silly names to the trolls.

I can't believe he left the talking purse in though...I'm gonna have to read that one of these days.


emre43
Rohan

Mar 31 2013, 5:29pm

Post #134 of 221 (353 views)
Shortcut
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts... [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Salmacis81
Tol Eressea


Mar 31 2013, 5:31pm

Post #135 of 221 (350 views)
Shortcut
I hear ya [In reply to] Can't Post

They just had so much material that to work with in the appendices, so much rich backstory, but they either took it and made it unrecognizable, or they just threw out the text and devised their own plots. I would love to hear what the reasons were for some of the changes, because some of it baffles me.


DanielLB
Immortal


Mar 31 2013, 5:35pm

Post #136 of 221 (354 views)
Shortcut
I'm not aware of anything like this [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
but for some reason I seem to recall reading that Tolkien regretted giving those silly names to the trolls.


I can't recall a note, or a letter, that suggests this. I'm likely to have forgotten, so if someone does remember, please point me in the right direction.

I don't really think they are silly names either. Bert and William could easily be Germanic/Westron. I like to think, however, that they aren't their "real" names. Perhaps Men gave them their names, and they took them up themselves. Tolkien doesn't provide any explanation.


Elenorflower
Gondor


Mar 31 2013, 5:47pm

Post #137 of 221 (349 views)
Shortcut
I think some of PJs additions make things [In reply to] Can't Post

even more complicated rather than less for casual watchers who havent read the books.
1. The book starts with, 'In a hole, in the ground, there once lived a Hobbit'. its simple and to the point, it sets up the character and the place, it introduces Bilbo. In the film we have an exciting but confusing Erebor/Dale/Frodo/Bilbo everything but the kitchen sink mash-up.
2. Azog, who or what he is and what the hecks that battle? who is he killing and why, its all extra confusion for someone who doesnt know the backstory.
3. Is this story about Bilbo or Thorin? someone could be forgiven for wondering who the main hero is.
4. Radagast/Necromancer, what is this spooky castle who lives there what is that spooky thing and whats that strangely unscary shadow thing? someone might scratch their head over that lot if they didnt know about Dol Guldur and Nazguls lots of history etc etc.
5. why does Thranduil dislike helping Dwarves about to get Kentucky fried by a dragon? good question.
tis all a bit squiffy. if only it was as simple as the book.


(This post was edited by Elenorflower on Mar 31 2013, 5:48pm)


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Mar 31 2013, 5:50pm

Post #138 of 221 (341 views)
Shortcut
Well this should lift your spirits [In reply to] Can't Post

http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=18216


The morning after

Vous commencez à m'ennuyer avec le port!!!

(This post was edited by Lusitano on Mar 31 2013, 5:53pm)


Salmacis81
Tol Eressea


Mar 31 2013, 5:57pm

Post #139 of 221 (336 views)
Shortcut
Here [In reply to] Can't Post

"I might not (if The Hobbit had been more carefully written, and my world so much thought about 20 years ago) have used the expression ’poor little blighter’, just as I should not have called the troll William. "(Letter 153)

Not as much of an admission of regret as I thought, but still he regretted it nevertheless.


(This post was edited by Salmacis81 on Mar 31 2013, 6:02pm)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Mar 31 2013, 6:08pm

Post #140 of 221 (321 views)
Shortcut
Here is the problem with the giants. Such titanic juggernauts diminish Smaug, [In reply to] Can't Post

they diminish the Balrog, as they are evidently mountains inhabited by wild spirits, and they rather beg the question. . . why didn't Sauron just commandeer a couple of this lithotransformrs and send the to break Minas Tirith and every other enemy strong hold into rubble. King Kong size would have been great, about 50 feet per giant. These things were upwards of 500 feet tall. That is ridiculous in context with the rest of the films.

In Reply To
I'm glad you understand that. As I said that's not how the last part reads IMO. I'm sure there are fans who didn't just as there are fans who like/roll with them.
That discussion really goes no places IMO. I for one won't call you a narf and I don't think most folks would.

I agree Bolg being the main villain and we should have seen a glimpse of the Balrog at Moria. As far as Azog's look I thought he looked freaking cool. His design and the look on screen was much better than any video game. When people say that I wonder if they've actually played a video game especially God of War. I have and I can assure you that look we saw isn't achievable on any console at this time.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Mar 31 2013, 6:27pm

Post #141 of 221 (322 views)
Shortcut
That didn't bother me at all. I loved much of the films, and little embellishments were no concern HOWEVER what REALLY TROUBLED [In reply to] Can't Post

me, was the slap in the face MAJOR changes to things well established in the books. . . the parts that tell lay audiences an ENTIRELY different tale from the cannon account.

It bothers me that Gandalf is instigating a quest in the hopes of counteracting the plans of a villain. . . whom he does not yet know is active in these films! It bothers me that ANY Elf, even Galadriel, is portrayed as being, to a casual observer, some kind of supervising director over Angelic Holy Spirits sent by GOD ALMIGHTY to aid counsel, guide and aid the everyone, including Men, Dwarves AND Elves, against the growing threat of Sauron. It was NOT a case of them coming to guide humans, hobbits and dwarves, while the Elves managed all their own affairs. The Elves were in the thought of Eru and The Valar as well when they sent other Ainur into Middle-Earth to resist Sauron. It bothers me that the War of Vengeance became a territorial dispute, over a place the Dwarves had ABSOLUTELY no realistic hope of reclaiming anyway, because of the horrifically powerful Maiar Demon that ruled the place. The one that killed their mightiest Ancestor-King a thousand years before and drove a larger, better armed army into exile, along with a host of Elves from Lothlorien whom even the return of Galadriel to The Golden Wood could not sufficiently calm once the presence of The Demon was felt. It bothers me that an orc who was dead before this story begins may well become a more heavily featured villain in these films than Smaug or The Necromancer. Years from now kids may be asked about who the main baddy was in these movies and answer, "The Pale Orc, Azog! And then there was also a dragon, and an evil spirit sorcerer in a, this ruined fortress somewhere, and he had some screeching ghost kings that served him, and maybe there was a glimpse of a Demon in the mountains. But mainly, there was Azog, yeah." THOSE are the things that bother me.


I loved a lot of the film, even enjoyed some of Radagast when he wasn't rolling his eyes or tasting bugs. But the fact that I enjoyed it and found it very good, doesn't mean nothing was wrong with it. And some of the wrong was VERY, VERY wrong and bad, and it is okay to say so.

Quoth an old limmerick, "There once was a girl, who had a small curl right in the middle of her forehead. And when she was good, she was very, very good. And when she was bad, she was horrid!" lol

In Reply To
about AUJ was the line from Bofur, "if you've got the balls for it", that is so far from Tolkien era and I hated it. If it were a modern movie taking place in a modern world, it would make sense. But that is all.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Elessar
Valinor


Mar 31 2013, 6:30pm

Post #142 of 221 (313 views)
Shortcut
Knowledge of Tolkien [In reply to] Can't Post

Take heart that there are people who have spent time delving hard into Tolkien and come out loving the movies. I'm into my second decade of being a fan but I love the movies and have spent lots of hours learning about Middle-earth. So having all of that doesn't guarantee a like or dislike.



Elessar
Valinor


Mar 31 2013, 6:32pm

Post #143 of 221 (309 views)
Shortcut
As was said [In reply to] Can't Post

You just have to ignore those posts. If you love both book and movie as much as I do scream it from the mountain top and don't let anyone damper that. :)



tarasaurus
Rohan


Mar 31 2013, 6:34pm

Post #144 of 221 (308 views)
Shortcut
:) [In reply to] Can't Post

Haha I know, I think I've already beat my "I loved every bit of the movie" point to death so I won't say it again, but that quote disengaged me from that particular fantasy/Middle Earth era just for that split second because that is not their dialect (didn't ruin the film for me by any means though). That's one big reason why I hate Game of Thrones, to me it's a watered down LOTR (please don't flame me, I can't help it) because of the vulgarity and the language, totally takes me out of that world.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Mar 31 2013, 6:35pm

Post #145 of 221 (313 views)
Shortcut
I thought that gave the book more charm, and the trolls a touch of humanity. I am glad he [In reply to] Can't Post

didn't make those changes. I would have loved an "unabridged" Hobbit with all the Council and Sauron elements added in, Heaven knows. . . but not a version in which all the charm and humour was whittled out in favour of a second epic. I think, in trying to perfectly attune it to Rings, he might have accidentally thrown the baby out with the bathwater and chocked the Life out of The Hobbit. I prefer the more organic feel we get, to a static, perfectly uniform mythology where trolls are all so categorically wicked that they never feel a moments pity, and never make funny comments or have common names.

In Reply To
"I might not (if The Hobbit had been more carefully written, and my world so much thought about 20 years ago) have used the expression ’poor little blighter’, just as I should not have called the troll William. "(Letter 153)

Not as much of an admission of regret as I thought, but still he regretted it nevertheless.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


DanielLB
Immortal


Mar 31 2013, 6:38pm

Post #146 of 221 (310 views)
Shortcut
Thanks Salmacis81! If only we could remember everything we read ;-) [In reply to] Can't Post

It is strange that he wished to change William's name. Out of the 3, I think it is the least odd. If anything, Tom stands out the most.

And to sum up on the un-finished re-write, I personally wish he had finished it, if only to read it and then decide which "version" I preferred. However much I love the current published version, a re-write in the style of the LOTR would have been splendid.


(This post was edited by DanielLB on Mar 31 2013, 6:39pm)


Elessar
Valinor


Mar 31 2013, 6:39pm

Post #147 of 221 (308 views)
Shortcut
I guess [In reply to] Can't Post

I didn't really take issue with them to be honest. What they are is just a short bit of screen time and in Middle-earth they're barely mentioned. Greater issues as you and I have discussed lay with the changes to The Battle of Azanulbizar and no Balrog. I get what you're saying but I have other issues for me that are bigger. I'd even say the snot, belching, and bird poop are bigger issues for me.



AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Mar 31 2013, 6:43pm

Post #148 of 221 (304 views)
Shortcut
I think Game of Thrones actually gives you, in some ways, a more accurate depiction of that aspect [In reply to] Can't Post

of the ancient world. People were, as now, vulgar. People were then, as EVER, very sexual. The notion that Sam never felt an excitement rousing in his loins for one of those Elf ladies in Rivendell, or for Frodo, or for anybody until he married Rosie, or that Gimli never took notice of how closely he was positoned against the prettier than many a lass Legolas as they rode astride the same horse, or that during his stay in Rivendell Boromir, a war veteran and soilder, never even considered making a pass at one of those beautiful Elf Women . . . that is far more unrealistic than Phantom Kings, all the Dragon fire vomited onto Erebor or Rings that make you invisible.

In Reply To
Haha I know, I think I've already beat my "I loved every bit of the movie" point to death so I won't say it again, but that quote disengaged me from that particular fantasy/Middle Earth era just for that split second because that is not their dialect (didn't ruin the film for me by any means though). That's one big reason why I hate Game of Thrones, to me it's a watered down LOTR (please don't flame me, I can't help it) because of the vulgarity and the language, totally takes me out of that world.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Mar 31 2013, 6:59pm

Post #149 of 221 (297 views)
Shortcut
I haven't entirely blasted them on this because I hold out hope, and there is a good chance that it may still happen. [In reply to] Can't Post

If it hasn't come up by the end of the third film, I will complain plenty. For now, I merely caution that it would be a bad oversight, not only because it overlooks the single most significant event in the history of The Dwarves of The Third Age, and the only ever recorded slaying of a Durin in the existing annals (we have already heard Durin's name half a dozen times in the first film . . . might be worth a mention that he was the Dwarves Reincarnating Ancestor-King, and that the last time he reigned he was slain by The Demon of Moria), but also because of the inconsistency of having the place feature in what are now to be films/episodes 1 - 3 of the sextet, without giving any mention to the hugely significant Dark Power who is going to prominently feature there in Episode IV, and whom the two most recognizable Wizards in the films clearly are already well aware of.

There is still plenty of time for that allusion to take place, so I will wait before I shout foul, even as I advise against overlooking it.

In Reply To
and we should have seen a glimpse of the Balrog at Moria.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


tarasaurus
Rohan


Mar 31 2013, 7:04pm

Post #150 of 221 (288 views)
Shortcut
That's why [In reply to] Can't Post

I much prefer Middle Earth. But...not to get off topic to GOT...

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.