The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
What did you think of the movie Thorin?



bborchar
Rohan


Jan 31 2013, 6:57pm


Views: 4128
What did you think of the movie Thorin?

Yes, I'm going to open the proverbial can of worms, and ask people what they thought of the depiction of Thorin in the movie. I know that this can be a touchy subject, but ALL opinions are welcome here, no matter what you thought.

1. Do you think he should have been older?
2. Do you think the character was done well?
3. Anything else you thought.


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Jan 31 2013, 7:33pm


Views: 2567
Surprise...I loved movie Thorin!

(Well, is surprised me, as I did not particularly care about the book character).

1) No, I do not think he should have looked older. After all, Viggo Mortensen played an 87 year old within the same franchise... ;) More seriously, Thorin in the book is introduced as "haughty" and "very important", with little to mark him as old (I would guess grey hair or beard probably gets mentioned at some point, but not so prominently that I can recall *what* point). I can recall no mention of age-related physical frailty for this character anywhere in the book. Thus, it is my opinion that, aside from needing him to be a mature character with presence and authority, I do not see the importance of his being, or appearing to be, any particular age. In my opinion, Richard Armitage's portrayal fits the bill. In particular, from reading the book and meeting the characters that way, I did not get an impression he was older than Balin, and having Balin be a noticeably older Dwarf in the movie was not only not weird, but something I liked. It fit my pre-existing mental image of the character, he was always grandfatherly to me and partly for that reason, my favorite Dwarf (and Thorin...wasn't either).

2) Yes, I think he was done shockingly well. Regarding the characters in the film, I was really looking forward to more Gandalf the Grey with McKellan, more of Andy Serkis as Gollum, and really hoping Freeman could be a Bilbo I could fall for (I had never seen him in anything prior to this film). You know, the characters in the Hobbit that are really impoortant. ;) But for the first 24 hours after seeing this film I was walking around and reminiscing about all of my favorite Thorin scenes rather than being delighted that the movie gave me exactly what I had been hoping for in the characters I had been looking forward to seeing. What I think worked really well was some of the script changes. Specifically, the prologue that introduced him to us before we actually got to "meet" him at Bag End, as a young dwarf in his grandfather's kingdom, during Smaug's attack, and in its aftermath, gave us a succinct (and impactful, and sympathy-arousing) summary of who this character was and what his motivations are. One could retrospectively reconstruct something along these lines for oneself at some point while reading the book or after (but as I was a precocious 6 when I first did, I didn't...and first impressions do matter.) I also liked the way his conflicts with Gandalf and Bilbo were developed (and in the latter case, resolved, in one of my many favorite Thorin scenes.) Armitage was an actor I already liked (I had seen "North and South" on DVD), and he did a great job with this material. I am looking forward to seeing more!


Ataahua
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jan 31 2013, 7:37pm


Views: 2562
I think the key to movie-Thorin is his voice.

RA's choice to lower his register gives Thorin gravitas, pain and anger. I hear so much of Thorin's character in that voice that Thorin's look and actions come second in explaining who Thorin is.

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded beggar with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


Owain
Tol Eressea


Jan 31 2013, 7:52pm


Views: 2490
Mods up! And...

he does lot with his eyes.

Dreamy as some may say... there's a lot going on in there. Methinks there are layers to this onion, Richard Armitage.

Smile

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


MasterOrc
Rivendell


Jan 31 2013, 8:07pm


Views: 2422
Simple to me...

I loved him..he represented most everything I thought he should.....

honor
loyal
brave
determined
destined
courage
leader
King

Already preparing myself mentally for when he departs..Frown


Brethil
Half-elven


Jan 31 2013, 8:21pm


Views: 2437
Its true.

There's no text that demands that he be butt-ugly.
I have always believed that since Durin was the greatest Elf friend among the Dwarf Father's perhaps he was the closest shot by in the dark to Iluvatar's ideas for the Children. So maybe that's what PJ is going for in linking the heirs of Durin by way of fairer appearance. And look at the range in Middle Earth humans.....Grima to Eomer? We can allow for variability surely. That said I thought the role is masterfully handled both scriptually and by RA. I've posted before that the soft stuff is well done and adds tremendous depth but I love the essential defiance and stubborn pride they've captured.

Can o' worms for sure here.Smile

...she took the point at once, but she also took the spoons.

(This post was edited by Brethil on Jan 31 2013, 8:22pm)


Angharad73
Rohan

Jan 31 2013, 8:22pm


Views: 2404
A very pleasant suprise!

The movie Thorin did surprise me in the best possible way. I knew RA can act, but I was not convinced that he could really play Thorin well. Too handsome and un-dwarvish. I thought he would be ok - well, when I saw the movie, I found that he was actually a lot more than ok. He really became Thorin to me. The movie-Thorin embodies everything he possibly should be - there are sadness, determination and courage, stubbornness and also a hint of a darker side. He also displays the proper dignity of an exiled prince and a great deal of pride. He doesn't need to have a long grey beard for that. So, for me, he turned out to be pretty perfect.


florian
The Shire

Jan 31 2013, 8:37pm


Views: 2384
I had no preconceived notions as to how he should be portrayed so:

I think the character's age was fine with me. I mean, dwarves live a long time and age differently than we do so his looking to be in his forties didn't bother me any. I think RA did an excellent job portraying him and made movie-Thorin more sympathetic and relatable and that made the movie better than if they had followed the book and had Thorin be such a jerk.


Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Jan 31 2013, 8:38pm


Views: 2381
I liked him actually

1) Although I felt that Thorin's character should have been older, I quite liked the fact that Balin was older in the film, as it gave the latter the chance to fill the classic mentor/second-in-command role.

2) I thought he was great: Just the right level of pride and haughtiness balanced with loyalty and sympathy-the hug with Bilbo at the end really helped to improve my sympathy for him. Unsurprisingly Richard Armitage gave a wonderful performance.

3) My only complaint was that I felt he didn't have enough screen time (I don't know why, but I just felt I didn't get to thoroughly know him in the way that I got with Bilbo and Gandalf, and, to a degree, Balin as well.) Hopefully my view will change when the EE comes out.

"These are Gundabad Wargs! They will outrun you!"

"THESE are Rhosgobel Rabbits! I'd like to see them try...."



Roheryn
Tol Eressea

Jan 31 2013, 8:51pm


Views: 2414
Mmmmm...

Someday I'd like an audio-recording of just his lines in all three movies, so I can close my eyes and listen to him without any other distractions.

Last night I read a really neat interview with him (from December, I think, and translated from French), where he talked about how he'd worked so hard on getting his Thorin-voice just right, but when they put on his prosthetic ears, he couldn't hear himself speak, and it drove him absolutely nuts. He said the make-up people worked really hard on fixing the problem and finally managed to get the fake ears lined up just right with his own ears so that he could hear himself again.


Kimtc
Rohan


Jan 31 2013, 8:56pm


Views: 2344
Was a bit different than what I imagined.

I thought that he was actually too nice. I am sure that this is part of the overall movie character arc they are creating, so when he goes off the rails, it will be in spectacular fashion. But my impression of him when I read the book was that he was, well, a jerk. I also thought he wasn't the most effective leader--everything he did seemed to go wrong. Here he seems very capable (even though he does end up needing saving by others) and kind of gruffly avuncular with everyone. However, this makes him a more pleasant character for me to watch in this movie, so I can't say this is bad.

As for age/looks, no issues there. I may have seen him as older, but I have made it horrifyingly, embarrassingly clear in many other threads that I have absolutely no problem with RA and watching him in this role.


Ataahua
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jan 31 2013, 9:01pm


Views: 2378
I had never considered those physical limitations

and how they could affect a performance.


In Reply To
...when they put on his prosthetic ears, he couldn't hear himself speak, and it drove him absolutely nuts.



It makes sense, though. Thank goodness the makeup people got the ears sorted out so that RA could give the performance he had been working toward!

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded beggar with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


Macfeast
Rohan


Jan 31 2013, 9:04pm


Views: 2340
Great acting, great writing, disappointingly short beard. //

 


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Jan 31 2013, 9:05pm)


Roheryn
Tol Eressea

Jan 31 2013, 9:23pm


Views: 2332
Frequently.

I haven't made any secret of it: he just blew me away, completely. Book-Thorin was mostly unsympathetic and not terribly interesting, at least until the very end. I had no idea they could do so much with the character on screen.

Taking Ataahua's suggestion a little further, I think the key to movie-Thorin's success is not just his amazing voice, but the entire presentation of the character. Yes, he's fantastic to look at too, but without the incredible acting job by RA, movie-Thorin would be just a bit of eye-candy. Instead, he's so much more. There's so much complexity, captured by RA with incredible subtlety in his facial expressions, body language, eyes, and voice.

I wouldn't have him any other way. His age seems just fine -- after all, dwarves aren't supposed to start looking old until they're around 250, right? He's in his prime, as he ought to be.

I'm really looking forward to seeing more character moments with him, especially between him and the princes. Can't wait for that, and to see how his character continues to develop, through having his meltdown and his ultimate redemption. So much to look forward to!


Old Toby
Grey Havens


Jan 31 2013, 10:30pm


Views: 2259
spectacular!

Of course for me, RA's Thorin is absolutely marvelous! In the book I couldn't care less about Thorin. Good riddance, actually. But THIS Thorin, now there's another story altogether! From the moment I first saw him at Bilbo's door, I adored him. Not just for his long locks, his handsome face, his deep voice, and his great singing, but for his regal bearing, the expressions in his eyes, his leadership qualities (always looking out for his group, being the first into battle, the last to safety), and the overall sense of nobility I get from him. He's charismatic. He's got a lot of class, and for a fierce warrior, he isn't so macho that he won't admit his mistakes, and has enough intelligence that he sees the sense in what Gandalf says, even though it grates against him.

Why in the world would I want him older? Just because the book Thorin is older? How would being older have made his character better? and how much older? Would you want a dwarf like Balin to be the head of the Company, leading the troops to battle? And about the shorter beard, RA stated that Thorin kept his beard short in honor of those who had theirs singed off by the dragon, and that maybe if and when he became King, he would grow it out long (and tuck it into his belt). I think RA plays Thorin with a good balance of strength and courage mixed with enough stubbornness and vulnerability to make him more of an 'everyman',' rather than a heroic figure who is above reproach.

I guess part of the reason I love RA's Thorin so much is because he shows us a man so different from the jerk that is portrayed in the book. I didn't expect, going in to the movie for the first time, to even like Thorin, let alone adore him! Of course RA has stated that we will grow to hate Thorin. I hope not. I hope he doesn't go so low as to make his final redemption beyond anyone caring. RA also stated that he knows his portrayal won't please everyone, but that he could only be HIS Thorin, and for me, he hit it right on, giving his character all the dimension, depth, and gravitas he deserves.

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


andwise
Rivendell


Jan 31 2013, 10:33pm


Views: 2243
thorin the great.

Genius!! Having RA as thorin was a stroke of the afformentioned! I commented on another post recently how I was bemused at his casting but he is just brilliant,stealing the show really and thats nothing against any of the other cast because they're all great,espesially freeman,mckellan,mctavish,stott and nesbitt. But RA does a job and a half.completely loved him.going to be difficult not crying at the end....

Arrow....black arrow,I have saved you to the last.you have never failed me and always I have recovered you.I had you from my father and he from old.if ever you came from the forges of the true king under the mountain,go now and speed well


Macfeast
Rohan


Jan 31 2013, 10:37pm


Views: 2267
As for the age.

That he was younger, was not something that I thought hurt the movie, or was essential to the story (well, you could make the case that an old Thorin risking so much to win a home for his people, even though he wouldn't live to rule it for long, would be pretty darn noble...but it's not something that makes-or-breaks the story).
To me, it was more of a missed opportunity than anything, a missed opportunity to do something really unique, visually, with the primary action hero of the trilogy (this applies to his shortened beard as well, if not more). How often do we see an elderly character, long white beard and all, being portrayed in film, not as a wise mentor-character (Balin), nor as an outright wizard (Gandalf), but as the primary action hero, the one whose quest pushes the plot forward? By making him younger (and shortbearded), I think they missed an opportunity to create something really unique and iconic, instead ending up reinforcing some common stigmas of cinematic storytelling.
Imagine Gandalf looking like a shortbearded man in his fourties, without a pointy hat; Sure, it wouldn't change the story, but it'd make him a little less iconic a character, visually. That's how I see Thorin, a much less visually unique character than he could have been.

That's my stance on movie-Thorin's age (and the short beard as well). It's not so much the change itself, as it is what the change represents, and the missed opportunity to do something unique and rarely seen in cinematic storytelling.


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Jan 31 2013, 10:38pm)


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jan 31 2013, 10:52pm


Views: 2255
Thorin was this movie's Boromir, for me

in that the movie made the character so much more likeable than he is in the book. Richard Armitage absolutely nailed the character, and deserves a huge amount of credit, but credit also goes to the makeup and costume folks who put together the look, and credit to the screenwriters for creating such a great character.

Boromir was such a pleasant surprise, as was Thorin. I had no problems going in with the Hot Dwarves, but even so I didn't expect to like Thorin as much as I did. Cool


Kimtc
Rohan


Jan 31 2013, 11:05pm


Views: 2234
Based on the early PR shots, he didn't look hot.

More like a Klingon, actually. So I too did not expect to be too interested in him, much less like him. I can say that movie Thorin is one of the primary reasons I keep going back to see it. Maybe the reason. Just like movie Boromir makes FOTR the more interesting of the original trilogy for me (as opposed to the books, where I found Faramir more compelling).

I can't wait to see if I have a similar reaction to other character in the next movies (i.e. Beorn).


In Reply To
Boromir was such a pleasant surprise, as was Thorin. I had no problems going in with the Hot Dwarves, but even so I didn't expect to like Thorin as much as I did. Cool



Old Toby
Grey Havens


Jan 31 2013, 11:36pm


Views: 2192
yeah in the earlier renditions


In Reply To
More like a Klingon, actually. So I too did not expect to be too interested in him, much less like him. I can say that movie Thorin is one of the primary reasons I keep going back to see it. Maybe the reason. Just like movie Boromir makes FOTR the more interesting of the original trilogy for me (as opposed to the books, where I found Faramir more compelling).

I can't wait to see if I have a similar reaction to other character in the next movies (i.e. Beorn).


In Reply To
Boromir was such a pleasant surprise, as was Thorin. I had no problems going in with the Hot Dwarves, but even so I didn't expect to like Thorin as much as I did. Cool




he had a much larger nose and a much more pronounced eyebrow...very neanderthal. Glad they canned that look!! Oh, and originally he didn't even start out with his own beard.

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


Eowyn3
Rivendell

Jan 31 2013, 11:42pm


Views: 2180
Love him as Thorin!

 


Rostron2
Gondor


Jan 31 2013, 11:48pm


Views: 2153
Spot on!//

 


Elizabeth
Half-elven


Feb 1 2013, 12:10am


Views: 2171
That nails it.

And I think it's a brilliant approach. I'm sure we'll see his bad side as things develop. One reason I dislike the ending of AUJ is that it forced a "sweetness and light" reconciliation between Bilbo and Thorin, which just means they'll have to have a falling-out (and another reconciliation, maybe a couple more times) in future installments.








bborchar
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 12:12am


Views: 2156
Guess I should answer my own questions...

1. I had not read the Hobbit since college, and I decided not to reread it before I saw the movie because I didn't want to form an opinion beforehand. I had forgotten the specifics of the characters (except for Bilbo and Gandalf, of course). Therefore, I had no problem with the way RA looked...even the beard didn't bother me at all. I reread the book the day after I watched it.

2. I think RA really gave a lot of depth to a character that really didn't have much depth in the books. In fact, on rereading the book, I was very much aware that I didn't care for the dwarves very much at all (actually, I was quite annoyed with them). I thought that I was be saddened that there was no Aragorn in this movie, but that was quickly remedied; I couldn't imagine Thorin any other way now.

3. I really look forward to his character arc...in the book, I really wasn't affected at all when he died. I know I will feel very differently watching the movie.


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Feb 1 2013, 12:49am


Views: 2158
Very well said!

"To me, it was more of a missed opportunity than anything, a missed opportunity to do something really unique, visually, with the primary action hero of the trilogy (this applies to his shortened beard as well, if not more). How often do we see an elderly character, long white beard and all, being portrayed in film, not as a wise mentor-character (Balin), nor as an outright wizard (Gandalf), but as the primary action hero, the one whose quest pushes the plot forward? By making him younger (and shortbearded), I think they missed an opportunity to create something really unique and iconic, instead ending up reinforcing some common stigmas of cinematic storytelling. "


I thought his performance was somewhat one noted. I was disappointed actually. I think Ian Mcshane, a more experienced and interesting actor, with a resumé that speaks for itself, could have done a much more iconic and unique portrayal of Thorin.

Missed oportunity indeed.


(This post was edited by Lusitano on Feb 1 2013, 12:50am)


Roheryn
Tol Eressea

Feb 1 2013, 12:57am


Views: 1045
Yeah, that's what I *meant* to say!

I second everything you wrote. Charismatic, yes, that's exactly what Thorin is. He exudes charisma. He's a fierce warrior, the kind of leader that people trust and respect instinctively (though said trust and respect has been very well-earned), and yet he's vulnerable: he's got his soft moments, his affection for those close to him, he can admit he's wrong (okay, not easily, but he's capable of it), and has a fair bit of deeply hidden self-doubt. Love these complexities.

Okay, really, I've got to stop thinking about Thorin and go clean the chicken coop...


Roheryn
Tol Eressea

Feb 1 2013, 1:07am


Views: 1056
But this younger Thorin has much more to lose...

than if he were old and venerable when he falls in battle. This Thorin could be a wise and noble King Under the Mountain for many years to come; if he were old, he wouldn't have much of his life left ahead of him. Having him younger and in his prime adds more tragedy to his character arc, and will make his death all the more poignant. It's not so tragic when an old king dies in battle: think Theoden, who achieved a noble death and, as it were, went out with a bang. Thorin's death won't be so noble, nor a fitting end for a warrior his age -- it will just be tragic. And Fili's and Kili's deaths, even more so.

So, I think we're getting a much stronger emotional impact with this Thorin than we would have had with an old Thorin. And I think that will make this trilogy all the more compelling.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 1:52am


Views: 1011
Alas!

As much of a PJ cheerleader as I am, and as much as I get annoyed with people constantly asking PJ about "how much of GdT is left in your film?" I have to say this is the one area where I find my self wondering "What would GdT have done?"

I've no personal beefs with RA, but I'm getting too much 'Braveheart' from him. I'm not catching the nuances that everyone else is talking about.

And while true, Viggo played an 87 year old, he didn't have any others of his race to show context against. Thorin does. Within TH:AUJ Balin has aged considerably...Thorin, not so much. Makes me wonder if he's holding on to the ring of power.

And the prosthetics (lackthereof) annoys me. He looks like RA, with a Rasta wig and a prosthetic nose. I see Hollywood hotness every time he's on screen. Something for the teen mags. It's really distracting. Viggo at least looked rugged and weathered as Aragorn is described in the books; his smile de-aging him considerably (again, like in the books. On a side note I think the teen mags is why PJ ever thought to cast Stuart Townshend in the first place.)

Anyway, I don't hate the portrayal but it is the one that has me wanting...not more, but different. But we still have 2 films to go and I was actually impressed with his end scene in AUJ. It caught me off guard and that cliche worked for once, so there is still hope.

He's a good singer too.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 1:54am


Views: 1036
Then why did Balin age so much?

But not Thorin?

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 1:57am


Views: 1050
He's more than eye candy?

Could've fooled me based on the posts around here. Tongue

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 1 2013, 1:58am


Views: 1017
I was much more pleased with him than I initially expected after first seeing the younger look

they gave him. He was properly noble, self-important, and bearing of gravity. I was generally pleased. He had a commanding presence, and stately bearing. He also came across as an authentic veteran of life.

In Reply To
Yes, I'm going to open the proverbial can of worms, and ask people what they thought of the depiction of Thorin in the movie. I know that this can be a touchy subject, but ALL opinions are welcome here, no matter what you thought.

1. Do you think he should have been older?
2. Do you think the character was done well?
3. Anything else you thought.


"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."


Macfeast
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 1:59am


Views: 1030
I thought Armitage was excellent. For me, it was all in the design. //

 


Macfeast
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 2:00am


Views: 1000
Old Thorin could have lived out his last years in peace, but didn't. He went to reclaim the home of his people.

That's quite a noble thing to do, really, and one I think audiences could sympathise with; There have been plenty of past characters who can be summed up as "sacrificed a lot for little personal gain" that audiences have responded well to. All things considered, I think "old king going on his last quest, reclaiming a kingdom that he won't get to rule for long" and "middle-aged king reclaiming a kingdom that he will rule for a long time" evens out quite well, each providing an equal amount of potential for gripping character arcs.
Also, keep in mind that the old Thorin has had 200 years during which to brood over the loss of Erebor, forging fruitless plans and cursing his inability to act. For him to actually succeed in something that he has dreamed of for a lifetime, only to die before actually seeing it...that's pretty darn tragic, any way you spin it.

I do not believe that a younger Thorin automatically becomes a more sympathic and tragic character than an old Thorin; Tragedy is not reserved only for the young.


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Feb 1 2013, 2:04am)


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 2:11am


Views: 1012
As much as I want to agree with you...

...I think I'm just tired of the cliche. All the dwarves have quirks and idiosyncrasies, but the heir to the throne just happens to be the hot, noble, levelheaded, yadda, yadda, yadda.

I may be bemoaning this too much, but with stories as famous as these PJ and team had the ability to change the perception of characters and archetypes in mainstream entertainment.

The lack of age annoys me, because I think this generation NEEDS to see people of age do something worthwhile. Older people need to be seen as capable, full of wisdom, etc. I'm sorry to say but I think a young Thorin is just reinforcing negative stereotypes of older people. It's ageism. And I'm pretty tired of seeing it. I don't want the writer assuming I can't relate to an older character and that he needs to be the hot young quaterback of the Dwarven team for me to identify or care for his plight.

I will admit that PJ has made both Thorin and Boromir much more sympathetic than in the books, but then again why does every character need to be sympathetic? The Hobbits are sympathetic enough. I quite like the idea of bucking conventional Hollywood exceptions, and Tolkien's stories are ripe for this. Although he wrote some archetypal roles he wrote complex character dynamics. In a company of 14, it's rare that you'd sympathize with each and every individual. (I used to be in the Army, and lord knows, although we were all 'on the same side' and on the same mission doesn't mean we all liked each other.)

Anyway, as much as I hate to admit it, I think GdT was much braver in his casting decision and vision of Thorin. And I think this Thorin is too conventional and taking the easy, pop culture road.

p.s.
Yes I know Gandalf is old and awesome.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


(This post was edited by hutch on Feb 1 2013, 2:12am)


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 2:15am


Views: 1020
I respectfully disagree.

 

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


florian
The Shire

Feb 1 2013, 2:50am


Views: 1010
In the movie Balin is portrayed as being older.

In the prolouge he is clearly considerably older than Thorin. Thorin had darker hair and Balin's was iron gray, not white. (I'm not sure where I read this but Thorin was supposed to be like 24 or something when Smaug took Erebor. Maybe in one of the movie books?) Now Thorin has streaks of gray and Balin has gone completely white. If I am not mistaken at least a 100 years has passed, if not more, since Erebor was lost. So for the purpose of the movie version they seem to me to have aged appropriately.


Gelir
Bree

Feb 1 2013, 3:12am


Views: 995
Movie Thorin

 
1. I don't have any issues with his age. I'm not sure if he is supposed to be younger in the movie, or if they just made him look younger but intend for him to be the same age as he is in the book. He could be the same age as in the book (195), and that wouldn't really feel wrong to me. Unless I'm misremembering something, dwarves aren't considered old until they are around 240, and that's when they really start to show signs of aging. So I could see movie Thorin being 195.

Of course that would raise the question as to why Balin looks so old if he is supposed to be younger than Thorin. But it's sort of that way in the book too. Balin is described as being a very old looking dwarf, and I would think that if Thorin was supposed to look that old, it would also have been mentioned in the book. Maybe book Balin just hasn't aged well for one reason or another. We all know people who look much younger or much older than their age. (Maybe movie Balin is simply supposed to be older than Thorin - just the way he talks to Thorin makes it seem as though he is older.)

2. I think his character was done extremely well. I always liked him more in the book than most seem to. I disagreed with some of his decisions (certainly at the end), but never thought of him as a jerk. I liked him even more after reading the LotR appendix. I think movie Thorin really captures the feel of the appendix, and still maintains some of the characteristics from The Hobbit.


florian
The Shire

Feb 1 2013, 3:27am


Views: 958
I think PJ did tweak Balin's age for the movie

Balin was on the balcony of Erebor with Thorin--he asks something like, "What is it?" and Thorin tells him it's a dragon. Balin had gray hair while Thorin is clearly much younger. I think in one of the companion books it says Balin is older and is something of a statesman type which I took to mean he had been an advisor to Thror at one time. I could be wrong on this.


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Feb 1 2013, 3:42am


Views: 994
Anyway, as much as I hate to admit it, I think GdT was much braver in his casting decision and vision of Thorin. And I think this Thorin is too conventional and taking the easy, pop culture road

Indeed Unsure

Brian blessed as Thorin would have been so interesting! Or Ian Mcshane.

And i wholeheartedly agree with your point about old people and proeminent roles in movies. Smile These cliches just make me role my eyes and not to take some things as seriously as they should be taken.

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


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Feb 1 2013, 3:48am


Views: 985
I didnt sadly

all his performance did for me was : grave face, grave face, angry face, moody face etc...And i dont have the patience to analyze his subtleties on his performance revealed by the movements of his upper lips or brows, like some RA's fangirls seem to have.Wink

Seemed too onedimensional,too one noted, as if the actor doenst have a lot of range.

I dont know...Mctavish as Dwalin was more convincing and endearing as a character just after one minute of screen time than RA as Thorin with greater screen time. I dont find him very interesting. Some actors just pull you in, and make your interested in them and watching them. Despite RAs impressive singing voice, i am disappointed with the performance.

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

(This post was edited by Lusitano on Feb 1 2013, 3:51am)


MistyMountain
Lorien

Feb 1 2013, 3:58am


Views: 966
practical and logical to go younger

 I think the movie makers have to think of the age of their primary actors very carefully. These actors are being asked to do very physical stunts and carry large amounts of weight up and down mountains, etc. The filmmakers have to be sensible and cast someone young enough and fit enough to endure all the hardship. I understand the desire to have an older character being the noble hero but let's be practical here. Look what happened to Richard Harris in the Harry Potter movies. Even if he hadn't died, would he really have been up for the physical stuff in the later films?


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Feb 1 2013, 4:08am


Views: 950
Lets be practical then

Doesnt Gandalf kick a** ?

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

(This post was edited by Lusitano on Feb 1 2013, 4:09am)


Retro315
Rivendell

Feb 1 2013, 4:52am


Views: 938
RE: Thorin

I thought Thorin was portrayed well, and Armitage certainly did for him what Sean Bean did for Boromir (complicated him and made him simultaneously sympathetic and slightly more repugnant - it's always brutal when you like a guy and understand why he makes a bad choice). Although perhaps a comparison to Theoden would be more apt - Theoden-in-reverse. But when he barks orders, despite his noble lineage it's not like the easy experience you get from Viggo's Aragorn, who we all just trust and sense knows exactly where he is and what he's doing. Thorin doesn't have that confidence - he's defensive, uncertain and vulnerable, and worse still - susceptible. Susceptible to losing his temper, losing his stamina ("feeling defeated" at the hands of the elves next film) and losing his control over the gold-lust. Viggo portrayed the exact opposite of the tragic figure, he was the triumphant figure. Humble beginnings, gold that doesn't glitter, a rise, not a fall. Thorin's gold glitters, but he's got a heart mined up from the coal mines of Ered Luin. Proper compression could forge a gem, but he's hasty and that + dragon's fire will cause ignition. Don't be hasty.

Design-wise, I wish he had more beard. But my opinion on that gives way to the fact that Armitage had the wherewithall to grow his own, really real beard. I like that compromise. His costume itself is stellar, rich, luxurious, but worn and worked. And sky blue, just like the book said, with silver tassels. Rock on. And while it's not "him", it's part of his character - Orcrist is one of my favorite designs ever from Weta. Making the Goblin Cleaver an actual Cleaver (while still keeping the design traits of Glamdring) was brilliant.

I know the company isn't "dressed for war" so comparing his costume to Gimli's is like comparing an Armani suit to a modern Army set of BDUs. It's striking and I like how dark he is, dark clothes, dark hair - I think that's where the Aragorn comparisons mostly stem from. I'm eager to see what armor would befit him. Since he'll be in full-on "gold mode", I imagine it'll be a hell of a glittering affair. Good funeral garb, too, one would think - the Arkenstone set upon his chest and the light off of Orcrist should be insane looking.

I do think Armitage would've looked fine with lots of gray (or rather, salt & pepper) hair, and not just a token touch of gray. I can dig that dwarves age slowly and his great age is still many years away from frailty. But noble houses in Middle-earth are notoriously for eerily long lifes in the genetics. It's a small matter, but I'd have done more gray were it up to me.

He gets an A minus for design. 'Strictly' very accurate, and the very few cosmetic changes he did get help to think about his character differently and endear him to us.


(This post was edited by Retro315 on Feb 1 2013, 4:53am)


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Feb 1 2013, 4:53am


Views: 939
He does not wear a costume weighing over 40 pounds.. (20-30 kg).//

 


Macfeast
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 6:55am


Views: 911
John Callen?

Certainly it's fair to assume that he, as many of the dwarves, might have had stunt-doubles for much of the action, but I distinctly recall some behind-the-scenes-footage, or interview or the like, where someone talks about all the running the actors did for scene 88, basically going "it's a lot of work, but they're pulling through. We even have a 70-year old (John Callen is 67) out there running".

Billy Connoly is 70, but he has made references to his heavy armor, suggesting that he too will get involved in some hardship.

And let's not forget John-Rhys Davies, who was just below 60 during filming, I believe. One of the funniest bits of behind-the-scene-footage from LOTR comes when he tells a story of how something like eight people had to carry his gear up a hill, and how he himself was told to run up a similar cliff after putting on said gear.

The two were far from main characters, obviously, but they show that there are older actors capable of keeping up. Had PJ and team decided to go with someone above 50, then I'm sure there would have been actors out there capable for the task. They wouldn't really need to go over 60, much less closer to 70, either, considering that Ken Stott is 58, yet manages to look quite old as Balin.

Again, I don't think the story needs it, but I'd be interesting to see. I agree very much with hutch, in that we might be due for an old character who manages to be as capable as Thorin, and is not the standard wise mentor (Balin) or someone who relies on magic to pull of his most impressive feats (Gandalf).


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Feb 1 2013, 7:02am)


Súlimë
Rivendell


Feb 1 2013, 6:56am


Views: 935
I love movie Thorin!

1) No. I like it how they made Balin older (and Thrain's man). This adds another layer of dynamics to the relationship between Thorin and the dwarves. Balin's recounting of the battle and his decision to 'follow' this young prince also makes a good realistic bit of their personal history (for the lack of a better word).

I love how old Balin adds such warmth to the company. The conversation between him and Thorin at Bag End is very touching.

2) Yes. Since I have very little regard to book Thorin, anything remotely likeable about the movie Thorin is extremely welcome.
I don't agree how people say he is the Hobbit equivalent of Aragorn. Thorin is actually flawed, and we are going to see more and more of that as the story progresses. However, they have made it so that we are sympathetic to him and his cause. What I really like is how we can see that he is really struggling. He is proud, but he knows that given his current situation, he sometimes cannot afford to be so, and we can see this very subtle internal struggle between pride and reason all the time.
Since I didn't expect much characterization from the movie -- Thorin's portrayal totally blew me away!


mefansmum
Rivendell

Feb 1 2013, 7:21am


Views: 946
prosthetic effects as well

It can't be helped in a role of that sort but I think having a prosthetic head that came right down and included false eyebrows, nose and cheeks also meant we did not get as much facial expression as we could without it. Movement of eyebrows and cheek muscles play a big part in our expressions and they were definitely not as flexible as the real thing.

As someone who has seen RA in other things he has very flexible eyebrows and a forehead prone to expression wrinkles and they were almost non existent features with the prosthetics.

Fortunately, his eyes can express a lot without the accompanying facial movement.


jimmyfenn
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 7:31am


Views: 943
good

a good character, but hes not a dwarf.

"You Tolkien to me?!" - Hobbit de Niro


ShireHorse
Rohan

Feb 1 2013, 2:16pm


Views: 891
Yes, he IS nice to look at

and I doubt if Davy Jones would have as many followers if he didn't have a cute face. BUT, RA is more than a good-looking bloke and most people on the net seem to have enjoyed his performance and admired his acting skills. I've read a lot of reviews and even the critics who weren't too thrilled by the film, had a good word to say for his Thorin. The most often-made remark from those who have read the book is that RA's Thorin is better and more satisfying.

I guessed how he would present Thorin before the film came out and I was sort of right. The only difference is that he was better than I thought he would be. If you run through the 1,965 TORn reviews, the average for his performance is running at 4.86 which puts him third, just behind MF and AS and - remarkably - ahead of Sir Ian.

Guess an awful lot of Ringers, of both sexes, like what he is doing with Thorin.


Alassëa Eruvande
Valinor


Feb 1 2013, 2:25pm


Views: 889
Surprise! I didn't like movie-Thorin much after the first viewing.

Yeah.
Chalk it up to a movie that is so packed full of stuff, Little Eruvande said it was "over flowing". There was so much going on, I was unable to focus specifically on one character, try as I might. I wanted to pay particular attention to the details of Bag End and the Shire, Bilbo, the trolls, Rivendell, the Goblin King, and so many other things.

However.

I was already smitten with RA and wanted to love Thorin, too. Getting together with you other fangrrls in the Thorin's hair threads, geeky observation threads, etc., helped me to see the nuances of RA's performance. For example, I never noticed the smile he gives Kili in Bag End until someone here mentioned it. That one tiny thing adds so much to the character. These observations plus a couple more viewings of the movie have made me the drooling fangirly mess I am today. It's all the fault of TORn and RA. Mostly RA. Laugh



I am SMAUG! I kill when I wish! I am strong, strong, STRONG!
My armor is like tenfold shields! My teeth like swords! My claws, spears!
The shock of my tail, a thunderbolt! My wings, a hurricane! And my breath, death!


imin
Valinor


Feb 1 2013, 2:29pm


Views: 1060
I like him

I am not that fussed his isnt older. I wouldnt be bothered either though if he did look maybe a decade older.

I thought the look of him was really good - would have preferred a longer beard but that is more a minor thing.

i think it is hard to compare him to the book as PJ is making this into a lotr size trilogy and because of that the amount of characterisation Thorin will get will be much more than in the book.

I dont view Thorin in the book to be a jerk as many here do though and i have always liked his character and felt really sad as a little boy when i read that he had died.

For me though the extra characterisation does help in getting one to know him better and i do feel by the time we get to TABA my feelings about what happens to him will be the same as in the book, but only heightened.

I knew he was a great actor and i think he acts very well, there are moments i dont like such as his cliched speech at the end but i dont think that is RA fault and i can see why they did it so the film could have a happy ending and set up the story for betrayal of thorin by bilbo later on.

As someone said on this thread - he is pretty much this movies Boromir. I also happen to think they are the two best actors - so far no one has been better than Sean Bean in my eyes but Richard Armitage is very close (as are a load of other actors/actresses).

Overall there are quite a few things i dont like about the film, but almost all of it is not to do with RA or his character.


Elessar
Valinor


Feb 1 2013, 2:39pm


Views: 1049
I liked him better

1. No, I think he was fine age wise.
2. I do think RA did a fantastic job of playing the character and making him feel like he was kingly. He also felt like he was a warrior that was run down a bit by life but still also had some energy left in the tank.
3. I actually think movie Thorin is much nicer so far than book Thorin. Book Thorin I think is a bit of a jerk from start to finish and at least in the movie he shows he's not a total jerk.



Kimtc
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 3:03pm


Views: 1065
This is a very interesting observation.

I never really thought of it this way. I really loved the character and kept going back to see him. But I guess I never really did think "oh yeah, and he's a dwarf." Upon reflection, I think I saw him as something oddly in-between.


In Reply To
a good character, but hes not a dwarf.



imin
Valinor


Feb 1 2013, 3:08pm


Views: 1048
Me to

Though i don't really know if that matters anymore.

Tolkien's elves especially first age elves were like humans, just better in almost all respects - though still close to human in they could do evil things/bad things, make stupid decisions etc.

With the film i think its ok to have him be basically a short human in look and personality as i always viewed the dwarves as stocky bearded short people as opposed to some weird looking humanoid creatures who were short.

Certain characters fit my mental image of what a dwarf looks like more than others - kili is a ranger and balin is a dwarf - but now i have seen the film i dont think it matters too much to me that i dont see some of them as dwarves.


Old Toby
Grey Havens


Feb 1 2013, 3:41pm


Views: 1052
one of the things I love about these dwarves


In Reply To
Though i don't really know if that matters anymore.

Tolkien's elves especially first age elves were like humans, just better in almost all respects - though still close to human in they could do evil things/bad things, make stupid decisions etc.

With the film i think its ok to have him be basically a short human in look and personality as i always viewed the dwarves as stocky bearded short people as opposed to some weird looking humanoid creatures who were short.

Certain characters fit my mental image of what a dwarf looks like more than others - kili is a ranger and balin is a dwarf - but now i have seen the film i dont think it matters too much to me that i dont see some of them as dwarves.



is how PJ has broken them out of their "short, stocky, bearded, fat" stereotype. They are all individuals and are all of different builds and appearances, even though they are all of the same race. Just like people. Imagine that!

And seeing the movie for the last time it's playing here in 3D HFR (sigh), I was once again struck by how Thorin most often deferred to Gandalf, such as admitting Bilbo to the join the Company in the first place, to letting Gandalf lead them (even though he suspected they were being led to Rivendell), to giving Elrond the map, even against the protestations of his advisor Balin. He had some faith and trust in Gandalf from the outset, for reasons we don't particulary see in this movie.

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


imin
Valinor


Feb 1 2013, 3:47pm


Views: 1041
They are all short and stocky

Edit: apart from Ori's neck, lol and Kili who like i said looks like a ranger.

Just because they are all short - doesnt mean they all have to be the same height - the hobbits were roughly the same height and weight yet i didnt hear people saying how they looked identical or anything.


(This post was edited by imin on Feb 1 2013, 3:50pm)


Old Toby
Grey Havens


Feb 1 2013, 3:58pm


Views: 1017
yes you're right

 But I think for a lot of the general public who may not be familiar with Tolkien's works, there is an image that dwarves are physically of a certain type, as reinforced by Gimli's appearance in the LOTR films. So I still applaud PJ for having the courage and the imagination to go against stereotype with dwarves like Thorin and Kili.

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


imin
Valinor


Feb 1 2013, 4:14pm


Views: 1006
Yeah i would agree with that

It was brave to do something different with them, knowing there would be people not happy about it.

To me the fact some look a little different (for me Kili's proportions make him look tall giving me the sense he is a full height human even though he isnt meant to be) but it was more a big deal when just the photos had been released.

When i watch the movie now i am not really bothered by it, though i wouldnt complain if he grew a beard throughout the film, lol.

I think PJ had to do something to make them different as there is 13 of them - i also think when the next two movies come out we will get to know the other dwarves a little more e.g. Bombur in Mirkwood.


jimmyfenn
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 4:49pm


Views: 994
atypical


In Reply To
but I think for a lot of the general public who may not be familiar with Tolkien's works, there is an image that dwarves are physically of a certain type, as reinforced by Gimli's appearance in the LOTR films. So I still applaud PJ for having the courage and the imagination to go against stereotype with dwarves like Thorin and Kili.


i think we forget sometimes that tolkien basically invented the modern view of what these creatures look like. all the cliched dwarves wes see in films , games, comics etc are rip offs of the ones tolkine invented. the same with elves, even that word is a tolkien invention. you might say it was breaking sterotype, but infact its more in keeping to go with the typical look. because it was original when tolkien invented it.

"You Tolkien to me?!" - Hobbit de Niro

(This post was edited by jimmyfenn on Feb 1 2013, 4:52pm)


Rostron2
Gondor


Feb 1 2013, 4:51pm


Views: 987
Good point

About young and pretty vs. aged and experienced.

However, we already have a sage in the group: Gandalf. He's not bad with a sword, either.


cartermoulton
Bree


Feb 1 2013, 4:53pm


Views: 987
on thorin

he really needed to be older. look at him; look at balin. tolkien wanted him to be an older character. he looks way too much like aragorn. he looks like a man, not a dwarf. (as does kili, who i'll excuse because of his youth).

i really do not like his costume design (especially the fur hanging down his front). i understand that a younger thorin reduces the disbelief about the quest to reclaim erebor, but in tolkien's book, it really isn't about erebor. it's about gold. yes it's important to the dwarves, but most of the dialogue in the novel deals with the treasures in the mountain. when you add in his participation in the stretched azog subplot, i can say now, that without a doubt, thorin is the biggest character letdown in the film—a poorer execution than even, say, azog. a real let down.

cineaesthetic, a high-res media blog


(This post was edited by cartermoulton on Feb 1 2013, 4:53pm)


bborchar
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 4:59pm


Views: 986
I think this is a good point...

People want to talk about clichés, but I think it was a big risk for Jackson to take by making the dwarves unconventional. To me, it really shocked me into thinking "wow, dwarves can be individuals"...which I never really thought so before.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 4:59pm


Views: 984
Davy Jones' role in the entertainment industry

was totally different than what Thorin's role is in these tales.
So let's not compare apples to oranges. And just for the record what Jones did far exceeded the expectation of him and his cute face.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:03pm


Views: 979
You seem to be implying

that because I'm in the minority of the RA lovefest that my take on the character is invalid. I stand behind my opinion fully. Some critics didn't love the film but loved RA's performance? Well, I loved the film but not RA's performance so much.

Pretty conventional take on an unconventional (in this modern day) character if you ask me and I don't like the 'Braveheart' after taste.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


jimmyfenn
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:04pm


Views: 974
snow white


In Reply To
People want to talk about clichés, but I think it was a big risk for Jackson to take by making the dwarves unconventional. To me, it really shocked me into thinking "wow, dwarves can be individuals"...which I never really thought so before.


have you ever seen snow white and the seven dwarves? there pretty individual ;)

"You Tolkien to me?!" - Hobbit de Niro


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:11pm


Views: 984
I say they're setting him up as Isildur.

Not sure I'm spelling that correctly. Anyway, I think he could avoid being "this movies' X' and being his own character if he were a little more: old, jerky, and selfish like in the book instead of another fallen nobleman. The antagonism between him and Bilbo plays a big part in why many people don't care for him in the books. And I didn't really get a sense of that in the film at all. And that's just the character Tolkien wrote, so any complaints should be addressed to the author or his heir.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:12pm


Views: 957
I can't name all of snow whites 7 dwarves

but I can name all of Tolkien's.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


lindorian
The Shire

Feb 1 2013, 5:13pm


Views: 988
Better than the book

I always found Thorin to be a pompous ass in the book, a foolish creature with an overinflated sense of his own ability to lead. I didn't shed a tear when he died. Rereading it recently only confirmed this view. Movie Thorin is already ripping my heart out. He has the arrogance of the book but by writing the exchange between him and Balin in Bagend, Boyens set up that this is a would-be king burdened by his heritage. His fear of not living up to what is expected of him shades the arrogance with vulnerablity. His hubris will ultimately bring about his end.

Armitage is able to use his eyes magnificently making this far from a cardboard character as he was in the book. I suspect as we see him go down a dark path far from his noble intentions, he will break our hearts.


jimmyfenn
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:17pm


Views: 966
better than the book?

surely the pompus book thorin is better, sure you wont be swooning over him but it makes more sense being a king after lots of gold!! and all this adds up too his eventual downfall and final redemption through bilbo!. perfect! i think the books just fine.

"You Tolkien to me?!" - Hobbit de Niro

(This post was edited by jimmyfenn on Feb 1 2013, 5:19pm)


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:18pm


Views: 960
In all honesty

I think it's the other way around: I applaud his willingness to make the other dwarves individuals and chuckle at his deferment to Philipa Boyens of making some hot dwarves-esp when the hot ones just happen to be 'the main three'. That's actually kind of a sellout.

But again, I'm not disgusted by it. Just disappointed because PJ showed what he was capable of with the other dwarves then when it comes to Thorin and Kili (I think Fili is fine) it just stands out as a concession for the teen mags. Just takes me out of the movie when I see them on scren, but as another poster noted I appear to be the only one on these boards that sees that, therefore it's invalid.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:20pm


Views: 944
We can have more than one elder statesman

heck isn't that what those silly 'Expendables' films are all about?

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:26pm


Views: 947
The other dwarves are unconventional

Esp. Bifur with the axe in the head.
Thorin is standard hot, leadership teen mag fare who's company are all fawning over him in the film.

I think we have a different definition of conventional. Everyone's complaining about book Thorin. No one wants to admit that he was basically greedy. That doesn't fit the modern day, hero archetype. Tolkien wrote a deeply flawed (and realistic) character. The filmmakers have glossed over this (so far) and made it sugar coated and easier to swallow for today's audience. I lament that they had the chance to bring a thought provoking character to the mainstream but copped out.

However there are still 2 movies to go, so I'll reserve final judgement until then.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


(This post was edited by hutch on Feb 1 2013, 5:27pm)


nycwine
Registered User

Feb 1 2013, 5:38pm


Views: 955
Better than the book?


In Reply To
Armitage is able to use his eyes magnificently making this far from a cardboard character as he was in the book. I suspect as we see him go down a dark path far from his noble intentions, he will break our hearts.


Yes! It's his eyes that pull you in. And his voice.

I love RA as Thorin, but I have to say that he unbalances the movie. The movie is supposed to be about BILBO not about Thorin. Why do we need so much story about Thorin?

How many people here keep saying they go back to see the movie for Thorin?! That just seems wrong to me.


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Feb 1 2013, 5:55pm


Views: 944
Thorin (book and movie) - jerk?

I have found it interesting to consider the many remarks regarding book/movie Thorin being, or not being, a "jerk".(So while I am replying to your thoughtful post, I'm thinking more generally than just your remarks).

I went back and reread the first chapter of the Hobbit yesterday night, thinking about just this question. Simply in terms of the script and RA's performance in the Bag End scene, is Movie Thorin shown as more, or less, of a "jerk?"

Well, we meet Thorin in the book at as he extricates himself from the bottom of the Dwarf-pile that results when Bilbo opens his door. He does not greet Bilbo in the manner of the other Dwarves (he is at no one's service, thank you!) and is described immediately as "haughty". He also blames Bilbo for the pile-up and poor Bilbo must apologize to him many times before he finally stops frowning at him. RA's demeanor as Bilbo opens the door to him is very comparable, that look, and his immediately addressing himself to Gandalf to complain, rather than greeting his host, seems much in line with his presentation in the book (rather than, less "jerk-like"). The movie moment of him asking Bilbo what his preferred weapon is, does not exist in the book. His conclusion, that Bilbo looks more like a grocer and a burglar, is given to Thorin in the movie (but was book!Gloin's, from a later moment in the scene). Thorin in the book displays, at least in his surface behavior, an acceptance of Bilbo's suitability for the position of burglar.

I've not read further (yet), but I am fairly certain from my recollection of multiple previous readings (albeit some 20 years ago most recently) that there is no book moment comparable to his telling Bilbo "you have no place among us" in the aftermath of the Stone Giant scene (short of, obviously, events at the Lonely Mountain which will occur in Movie 3). From which I conclude that, objectively, if Book Thorin is a jerk, so is movie Thorin.

I find this an interesting phenomenon for understanding the difference a film makes. To me in considering this, it seems that Boromir is indeed the right LotR character to think about. By giving us these two characters in movies, played by two talented actors in Sean Bean and Richard Armstrong, we have less left to our imaginations. The added scene of Boromir providing Merry and Pippin with basic training in the use of a sword, for example - it's not in any way inconsistent with the book character that lives in my imagination. But it makes him human, and attractive, in ways which I could have imagined when reading, but didn't. (He was a successful warrior and leader of Men, he must have had charisma and taken care of those under his command to get there, but showing it, makes it harder to miss.) There is also a power to seeing and hearing Bean deliver Boromir's lines about Gondor's need. The book has the words (more or less, I'm too lazy to check) but not enough description to convey the utter sincerity and conviction with which Bean delivers those lines. In Thorin's case, he describes some of his own backstory to Bilbo in his long speech explaining the situation. On an intellectual level, if I had stopped to think about it, I could have deduced that Smaug's coming and the destruction he wrought were of course key, emotional moments in Thorin's life. But the book does not tell me so. Seeing young Thorin barely save himself and Balin from the flames, seeing him stand with the soldiers as the dragon broke in, and watching him flee with all the other Dwarves, makes it impossible to overlook it. And where I have some understanding of the pressure a character may be feeling, and some sympathy for his past and current problems, it makes behaviors I might otherwise view as negative, more understandable.

Personally, I did not find either book or movie Thorin a jerk (at this phase of the story). But I would attribute this to personal taste. As people we have varying levels of tolerance of gruffness/sharpness in characters, so of course we will disagree to some extent on who is, or is not, "a jerk". I find both the movie and book character to have likable features along with this trait. (I just find the movie version far more vivid). So I realize some of our differences are going to come from this. I can understand why someone would say both Thorin's are "jerks" but this has in no way prevented me from falling head over heels for the movie character.


Macfeast
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 5:59pm


Views: 938
I don't think they risked that much with the unconventional dwarven designs, really.

While it's true that some of the dwarven designs are unconventional as far as fantasy goes, this is cinematic storytelling we're dealing with, a branch of storytelling that don't often feature characters with such designs. I believe the biggest risk lies in staying true to the dwarven guidelines, not diverging from them. Which audience is biggest, the one that knows conventional dwarven designs by heart and that would have been caught off-guard by their absence, or the audience that would have been caught off-guard by dwarven designs for characters of great importance in an big-league movie?

Take Thorin, for example. A middle-aged handsome man portraying the primary action hero, that's about one of the most common archetypes in cinematic storytelling. An elderly longbearded man in his last years playing that role? Much less common. Staying closer to the longbearded and elderly visage for a character like Thorin would have been a much bigger risk, because that is not really a proven approach to action heroes, as far as cinematic storytelling goes.
Kíli? Take away the costume, and he's the handsome guy in his early twenties that we've seen so many times before. No risk whatsoever. Portraying him with a decently sized beard would be much more risky, and would really push the limits of what audiences often considers an attractive character.


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Feb 1 2013, 6:03pm)


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Feb 1 2013, 6:31pm


Views: 1025
Surprised to see you write that

You did not get a sense of antagonism towards Bilbo from movie Thorin? Movie Thorin says disparaging things about Movie Bilbo on at least four occasions I can think of, none of which he said in the books (by the point at which the movie leaves off, with the Company at the Carrock). And Movie Bilbo is sufficiently affected by this that he considers leaving (another movie addition). To me it seems that if anything the movie plays this up far more (but then resolves it in the end, a scene which also does not occur in that book at this point, but which was also not called for in the book owing to the lack of a build-up of antagonism).


Macfeast
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 6:49pm


Views: 1014
I think you're spot on with the Boromir-comparison, with added scenes and the like.

I think movie-Thorin is more sympathetic, not necessarily because he's less of a jerk (because he certainly has his jerk-moments in the film), but because he has a better balance between sympathetic moments and jerk-moments than in the book. The book does not go much into detail when it comes to Smaug's coming (it is brought up as a backdrop to the quest, but Thorin does not linger on it), it does not focus on Thorin wandering and homeless life, it does not depict the tragedy and sorrow of Azanulbizar, and it does not show Thorin's background as a great and heroic warrior. The film, on the other hand, it shows the tragedy of Erebor in great detail, it gives us great glimpses of what Thorin had to endure in exile, it gives us a first-hand look at the tragedy of Azanulbizar, and it vividly depicts Thorin making a name for himself (literally!) as a warrior, and as a king. For me, the increased sympathy for movie-Thorin comes more from an increased emphasis on the things that were there (mentioned in passing in the actual book, or hidden away in appendixes) to balance out his otherwise jerkish behaviour, more so than the changes to the character. PJ and team really hit the right spots with the writing, and found the right things to emphasise, in their efforts to make Thorin a sympathetic character.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 9:26pm


Views: 977
It felt superficial to me

as if they threw a few comments here and there to humor any one that knows book Thorin. I get the sense that the filmmakers are just doing what they want with Thorin's character.

They did this with Faramir-but it made sense. They did have a bind in explaining the ring's effect on everyone and there was no room in the film to make the case for Faramir's exception. So they had to change him up.

That's not the case for Thorin. They really have no reason to make him 'nicer' or more 'relatable'. The one the audience is supposed to relate to is Bilbo.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 9:31pm


Views: 974
Gold was the dwarves' selfish folly

which is why they are kind of unsympathetic in the books. As someone else pointed out it was more about the gold than retaking their home (that's more of a 'Braveheart' thing).

So yeah, they did a good job of making Thorin sympathetic. No doubt. My question is 'Is that really the right move? Why must every character be sympathetic? Is Bilbo not enough? Is this Bilbo or Thorin's film?'

There is still time to show that the dwarves' greed toward riches is their own folly. We'll see. But for now I'm not so enthused with Thorin.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 9:33pm


Views: 965
Very true.

And wouldn't it have been a little more unconventional if the hot dwarf was another member of the company, not the 3 heirs to the throne? Imagine a pretty boy in the group always annoying the older more grizzled leader (Thorin). Ha!

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


(This post was edited by hutch on Feb 1 2013, 9:35pm)


hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 9:38pm


Views: 976
Book Thorin was much more complex and realistic

I'm not a book purist. but saying the pop-culture version of Thorin is better is pretty far out. Seriously.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


IdrilofGondolin
Rohan

Feb 1 2013, 9:58pm


Views: 997
Funny Thing

I always pictured Balin as being older than Thorin. And I never pictured Thorin as being old. Their movie depictions were spot on for me.


Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Feb 1 2013, 10:02pm


Views: 966
I know what you mean

I always imagined Balin as being the oldest of the company too. My personal image of Thorin was a grey-haired balding Dwarf, older than most but younger than Balin (with my idea of Balin being uncannily similar to how he is portrayed in the film).

"These are Gundabad Wargs! They will outrun you!"

"THESE are Rhosgobel Rabbits! I'd like to see them try...."



IdrilofGondolin
Rohan

Feb 1 2013, 10:09pm


Views: 957
Theoden

was supposed to be old and look what we got. His description in TT includes long white braids and those were not a result of Saruman's meddling. I was pretty put out by the "younging up" of Theoden.

But I didn't feel that way about Thorin because, really, what exactly does a young dwarf look like compared to an old dwarf? Let's say, just for the sake of argument that Thorin is pushing 230. He could still have the Bruce WIllis boyish charm and not look his age.


Gelir
Bree

Feb 1 2013, 10:13pm


Views: 939
Not alone :)


Quote
I dont view Thorin in the book to be a jerk as many here do though and i have always liked his character and felt really sad as a little boy when i read that he had died.

This was my experience exactly. Glad to read that I'm not the only one who felt that way.


Quote
For me though the extra characterisation does help in getting one to know him better and i do feel by the time we get to TABA my feelings about what happens to him will be the same as in the book, but only heightened.


I think so too. Though I do suspect that Thorin may become more unlikable in the movie than I found him in the book. Even if they do, I can't imagine myself being less sad than I was at the book - I fully expect it will be at least equal, and more likely heightened.


bborchar
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 10:15pm


Views: 961
How is book-Thorin complex?

I'm not asking as a comparison between the two, but simply, on his own, the book version of Thorin. I see no complexity in the character, embodying the negative qualities of greed and prejudice to serve as a cautionary tale for children. Even in the book, he is very straightforward about his avarice by saying that the dwarves were now well off, but simply wanted to recover their gold. He, nor any of the other dwarves, are grateful or appreciative of Bilbo's service to them, and he only repents on his deathbed (ie: the book's way of screaming "HEY, MORAL OF THE STORY HERE" very loudly). Therefore, I do not find his character complex at all- his behavior is very predictable and his death unmoving.


glor
Rohan

Feb 1 2013, 10:56pm


Views: 926
agree but..

Before I start I will clarify my position on RA; It was AUJ that made me notice RA, as actor whom I had been watching on TV for almost a decade and, didn't realise that John Thornton, The Vicar of Dibley's other half and Lucas North amongst others were the same actor, which is a good thing. I though his Thorin was immense and intriguing and Thorin's age/experience came through in his voice, a voice that was able to sing Misty Mountains as Thorin, as if it rumbled out of the mountain itself.


Quote
Take Thorin, for example. A middle-aged handsome man portraying the primary action hero, that's about one of the most common archetypes in cinematic storytelling. An elderly longbearded man in his last years playing that role? Much less common. Staying closer to the longbearded and elderly visage for a character like Thorin would have been a much bigger risk, because that is not really a proven approach to action heroes, as far as cinematic storytelling goes.


I totally agree with your point. I think ageism in film, and TV needs to be challenged and there was the potential for The Hobbit to take up this challenge. However, RA was the youngest actor that PJ and co auditioned for the role of Thorin, nor is RA an actor this 45 year old female would consider Hollywood Handsome, his nose is too big and his face too narrow for the conventions of mainstream movie good looks, that doesn't make him unattractive but I would challenge your notion that he is conventionally handsome in a stereotypical Hollywood sense.

As for beards, well I would loved to have seen long elaborate beards,but perhaps because I sat through many a BBC childrens TV shows in the 70s and bad Shakespeare for schools films, long elaborate beards tend to look ridiculously waggly and comical when actors speak. I believe that they had issues with JRDs prosthetic beard (allergies aside) and with intial costume tests for TH, when it came to beards falling off when actors talked, looking daft when movement was involved etc. There may be a good reason why the main 'action' lead dwarves lack substantial beards in TH and it may be the same reason why substantial beards are often omitted from film and TV, they just don't work in a visual medium with actors giving quality performances, they just move in an odd and distracting fashion. It is worth noting that even Gandalf's beard is wispy to avoid this effect and Gandalf the White in ROTK, where Sir Ian gets more action and fighting sequences has a shorter almost Thorin like beard, perhaps to avoid the ridiculous waggle effect?


Quote
Portraying him with a decently sized beard would be much more risky, and would really push the limits of what audiences often considers an attractive character.



May I challenge a stereotype Wink. This woman, along with many others I know find beards attractive, the bigger the better.



hutch
Rohan


Feb 1 2013, 11:23pm


Views: 927
ok fair enough

that's true. But what I meant was in regards to filmmakers needing to make characters within their films 'complex, relatable, etc. etc.' the sketch provided by Tolkien allows for complexity in movie Thorin. The whole quest for Erebor usurping the lust for gold thing takes away from the ability to introduce a new type of main-ish character to a mainstream film: someone on the 'good guy' team with less than noble intentions.

And again, it's too 'Braveheart' for me.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


(This post was edited by hutch on Feb 1 2013, 11:27pm)


Bellerock
Rivendell

Feb 2 2013, 1:43am


Views: 923
It's all about the eyes

Certainly RA has a compelling voice, but for me his Thorin is all about the eyes. They express such a range of emotions, from sorrow, to joy, to anger, that I can't help feel some of those things with him. That's much more interesting than book Thorin, who frankly, I find to be a bit of a jerk with no particular depth.


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Feb 2 2013, 3:04am


Views: 886
Just Bilbo? (***Book Spoilers***)

In a three-movie series which will likely have a running time of 8 hours or so, why must there be only one relatable character? I don't get it.

Anyway, I think that making Thorin at least somewhat relatable is important for us to be able to fully relate to Bilbo. Where we are heading. I suppose, is this:

"Farewell, King Under the Mountain!" he (Bilbo) said. "This is a bitter adventure if it must end so; and not a mountain of gold can amend it. Yet I am glad I have shared in your perils - that has been more than any Baggins deserves."

Having watched the first movie, I can picture watching Martin Freeman say these lines (or some reasonable facsimile thereof) to Richard Armitage eighteen months from now, and I believe it will be a great moment.

I can't picture Bilbo saying this to the character you describe, it would make no sense.

(I likewise can't picture Bard and the Elven king doing their iconic bits in the funeral for a character that is lacking in any nobility, though that's more book than movie as we've barely seen the latter, and not even seen the former).


(This post was edited by dernwyn on Feb 2 2013, 2:25pm)


sphdle1
Gondor


Feb 2 2013, 4:31am


Views: 873
Thanks for the no spoiler alert

I've never read the book, but now I know what happens to Thorin thanks to you ... did you just describe yourself?

Somtimes it sucks being on forums where people ASSume that everyone else has read the book, when in fact there are some people out there with a form of dislexia that prevents them from enjoying reading, so they look to movies for entertainment, hoping they will get to experience what happens for the first time on the big screen, only to have a Thorin in their side spoil things to come.

Guess there's no room for someone like me to participate in these forums anymore without having major plots points spoiled...


I think it would be great if they changed the plot completely now from the book and surprised us all! One can only dream and hope at this point.

sphdle1

"The last words Albus Dumbledore spoke to the pair of us?
Harry is the best hope we have. Trust him."

(This post was edited by sphdle1 on Feb 2 2013, 4:33am)


hutch
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 5:10am


Views: 870
So the relationship in the book makes no sense?

That quote was from the book in which Bilbo said that to a much less relatable and likable Thorin. So implying that I'm making no sense doesn't make sense (doesn't that make sense?)

Anyway, sure, there should be other relatable characters. But none should eclipse, ya know, The Hobbit.

Anyway, I'm not for making Thorin a total jerk that no-one likes, but his softness should be used sparingly. Only glimpses and sprinkles , not a noble, swell king throughout the whole trilogy. But whatever. What's done is done and the masses seem happy with the movie Thorin.

PJ is concerned about changing the way we see cinema with HFR. But he could've also done that by presenting the masses with a new type of character in a mainstream film.

I still mostly love what he's done and would want no other director.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


(This post was edited by hutch on Feb 2 2013, 5:12am)


moreorless
Gondor

Feb 2 2013, 6:35am


Views: 847
I wouldnt count out the gold lust


In Reply To
which is why they are kind of unsympathetic in the books. As someone else pointed out it was more about the gold than retaking their home (that's more of a 'Braveheart' thing).

So yeah, they did a good job of making Thorin sympathetic. No doubt. My question is 'Is that really the right move? Why must every character be sympathetic? Is Bilbo not enough? Is this Bilbo or Thorin's film?'

There is still time to show that the dwarves' greed toward riches is their own folly. We'll see. But for now I'm not so enthused with Thorin.



Braveheart is hardly the only film that covers such a theme and really I'd argue Gibsons Wallace is the worst thing about the film, a boring faultless action hero.

I think you maybe a little premature in believing that the Dwaves gold lust won't be an issue, the way Thror's lust was focused on in the prolog suggested to me we may well see more of it in the future.

As far as it being Bilbo's story for me the problem Jackson was always going to have in a version of the Hobbit that covered everything in the book was that there simpley isnt much for the character of Bilbo to get his teeth into pre Mirkwood. He makes the choice to join the party and really besides Gollum he's little more than an observer until that point where as Thorin allows many of the scenes to carry a bit more emotional weight.


hutch
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 6:59am


Views: 849
What I meant was

Thorin himself feels much like Mel Gibson in Braveheart. I'm seeing Mel in my Middle Earth and I don't like it.

'Lethal Weapon' is still pretty funny though.

Yeah, I'm positive we'll see some gold lust. Did you see Thorin's look in Erebor? Very much like Isildur when he became enthralled by the ring.

Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.


(This post was edited by hutch on Feb 2 2013, 7:02am)


moreorless
Gondor

Feb 2 2013, 8:16am


Views: 820
Not sure I really see that...


In Reply To
Thorin himself feels much like Mel Gibson in Braveheart. I'm seeing Mel in my Middle Earth and I don't like it.

'Lethal Weapon' is still pretty funny though.

Yeah, I'm positive we'll see some gold lust. Did you see Thorin's look in Erebor? Very much like Isildur when he became enthralled by the ring.



The characters have a somewhat similar motivation and screen presense but in terms of depth and interest I find Thorin far superior.

Gibsons Wallace was far too much of a goody two shoes, a cliched(and historically inaccurate) moral peasant fighting the good fight who was never really given any difficult decisions.

Even in AUJ we see Thorin show a much spiker personality holding a grudge agenst the Elves and questioning both Bilbo and Gandalf. Perhaps most importantly though we see the entire basis of his quest questioned, he's not fighting oppression but rather giving up a comfortable life to seek a return to "days of glory".


CathrineB
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 9:23am


Views: 816
Better than the book

I think the movie compliments the book very much in regard of the characters, like the dwarves actually personalities going with the names. In Thorin's case I like him better in the movie than in the book. In the book he wasn't likeable at all. Not to me anyway. I got his point of view, but he was really a douche bag. In the movie he was still harsh and all, but he was much easier to feel sympathy for.
And no I don't think he needed to be older. Also with him still young-ish he has still much left of his life. He's not taking Erebor back just for his men, but also for himself which is understandable enough.

So yes I thought the character was done well. Stern and intimidating, but squeezed in there you would see a soft and kind side often reserved for those of his family and his lifelong friends and that is what the book Thorin didn't give.



Ireth
The Shire


Feb 2 2013, 11:17am


Views: 864
Thorin

Well, I had thought he should have been older at first, but then I realized that dwarves have a different life-span so now I'm ok with his age. Besides, he doesnt look exactly young if you know what I mean. Not an old grey-bearded man, but not a youngster either. Just right.
The character was done amazingly in my opinion.
I think Thorin is awesome. I never thought I could like him so much. He's a bit different in the book, and I imagined him differently.
Reasons for liking him? He's noble, courageous, loyal, heroic...(and not perfect, which makes him so real). He's done brilliantly in the movie and I think that Armitage is a genius, he plays him so well.
(aaaaand I'm not one of those who are infected with the hot-dwarvish disease :P)
Anything else I thought? I thought Bilbo couldnt have acted otherwise, when he rushed out to save Thorin. I would have done the exact same thing.


Marionette
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 7:25pm


Views: 778
Being a fan of book Thorin before all this

I was, surprisinly not disappointed at allSmile
So far I am not, and thatīs maybe the first time I say so about a movie adaptation of one of my favorite books.

Well, maybe it was because I was pretty much aware of all the changes, but overall, I find the movie pretty good after all the book is not that detailed and thatīs a good point when it comes to movie adaptations. Something LOTR donīt have.

Movie Thorin is just younger, but all the adding he has to me are what I had in mind about Thorin while reading the book as well, excluding the whole Azog thing.

So, yes, the character is well done.

About not being old as he should be, well, I guess I am used now, cuz I love the hot dwarf thing totallyHeart


"Dear friend good bye, no tears in my eyes. So sad it ends, as it began"
Queen



Marionette
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 7:40pm


Views: 752
Wonder how can this be possible

People saying book Thorin is a jerk, in the book he never reject Bilbo and all that as he do in film. It sounds to me Thorin is less nice in the film.

And actually in the book Bilbo even say Thorin was one of the few nice dwarves. Becuase Tolkien dwarves do have some character.

I never understood that perception of Thorin for some of the readers.

Funny, indeed. But well...


"Dear friend good bye, no tears in my eyes. So sad it ends, as it began"
Queen



Marionette
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 7:46pm


Views: 752
Itīs sadder because he had flaws


Quote
I dont view Thorin in the book to be a jerk as many here do though and i have always liked his character and felt really sad as a little boy when i read that he had died.

This was my experience exactly. Glad to read that I'm not the only one who felt that way



Thorinīs death is the saddest I have read in a book.

Why? I think itīs because he *had* his flaws. He was not the perfect flawless hero, and at the very end he recognize *his mistake*:: Precisely thatīs why itīs the saddest death ever.


"Dear friend good bye, no tears in my eyes. So sad it ends, as it began"
Queen



bborchar
Rohan


Feb 2 2013, 8:34pm


Views: 897
I felt completely differently...

...book-Thorin had his flaws, but he didn't have any saving-graces to me. A character has to have both to be interesting.


Esmeralda
Bree


Feb 2 2013, 11:24pm


Views: 912
I wasn't looking forward to the Hobbit

at all. I did like the book, but I thought it was a simple little story compared to LotR, with rather silly dwarves, 'hoods bobbing, beards wagging' and a Hobbit who squeaked and fainted.

But then I saw one of the early trailers. I saw a regal Thorin wheel his pony around, backlit by sunlight. I heard him sing of his home, and the coming of the dragon in a voice that rose from the deep places of the earth.

This was the Thorin who had watched his people killed and driven from their home. Here was the young prince who had fought beside his father at Azanulbizar, and seen the hopes of the dwarves turn to ash for a second time. This was the dwarf, brought low, but still undefeated, who would return to the anvil to provide for his people and keep his arm strong until he could put a sword in it again and reclaim what had been lost.

Tolkien wrote this. It's all there, but passed over quickly or hidden in the appendices - much like Aragorn and Arwen's exquisite romance. Peter, Fran and Philippa excavated the character of Thorin. Richard Armitage provided a performance that revealed the sharp edges of his pride, and the brilliant facets of his desire.

So yeah, gorgeous job. I can't wait to see the rest.


(This post was edited by Esmeralda on Feb 2 2013, 11:31pm)


GloryBox
Bree


Feb 3 2013, 7:11am


Views: 886
I'm in total agreement with Peter Jackson

At a December press conference in Japan, Jackson called Bilbo the heart and Thorin the soul of The Hobbit. I can't think of a better description of these two characters (in terms of the film), and AUJ has convinced me that Freeman and Armitage inhabit their roles perfectly. As Bilbo becomes the willing heart and sensible center of the quest, I'm now able to see Thorin, despite all his admirable qualities, gradually buckling under the weight of bitterness, pride, and dragon sickness. I was sold on the journey his character would take when I saw the Bag End hallway scene between Balin and Thorin. A leader so driven by a self-imposed quest that he cannot accept that he has any other choice - even when his old friend Balin tells him very clearly that he does. That's a soul carrying a pretty heavy burden. I've always known what happens to Thorin; now I care what happens to him. Armitage has seen to that.

Frankly, I had no expectations at all (pro or con, high or low) for Thorin's role in The Hobbit -- and zero exposure to Armitage's work. (Fixing that pronto!) My hopes were all pinned on Freeman's Bilbo, and I was longing to see Gandalf the Grey again. Then on first viewing, I had my own personal version of a "Figwit moment" -- Freeman is great, who is THAT?! -- and the film immediately gained so much more depth as I watched Bilbo and Thorin work their way toward an honest appraisal of one another by the time they reached The Carrock.

BTW, the "Hobbit Japanese Press Conference" parts 1-5 is available on YouTube. It's well worth watching if you haven't seen it. Jackson is on stage with Serkis, Freeman, Armitage, and Wood. There are long pauses for translation, but the questions are very well constructed, the answers are detailed, and the whole thing is a lovely exercise in patience and politeness. Jackson's heart/soul comments begin at the end of part 3, I think. And part 4 contains a nice bit between Freeman and Armitage.

...one morning long ago in the quiet of the world, when there was less noise and more green... The Hobbit


grammaboodawg
Immortal


Feb 3 2013, 8:31pm


Views: 849
Just as Jackson's Boromir

was so much better in the film version than the book's Boromir (totally imho), Jackson's Thorin is TONS better than the book Thorin. I am always a bit detatched from the Book Thorin (BT), so his exploits and outcome add to the story, but I'm not personally or emotionally invested in him.

This Film Thorin (FT) has be completely captivated. His voice, his subdued yet emotion expression, his presence, his passion is fantastic. I can't wait to see more of him; but I'm so scared for film 3. I know this is "NOT THE BOOK", but Peter has diverted from the text often enough (Haldir/Elves/Helm's Deep; Faramir) that I find myself wishing that the outcome of the story for the 3 (no spoiler) could be different. The anticipation is beginning to distract me from completely losing myself in these characters. I know... I know... don't flame me for wishing. I do "know" what will happen... but still...



First draft of TH:AUJ Geeky Observation List - updated list coming soon



sample

I'm SO HAPPY these new films take me back to that magical world!!



TIME Google Calendar
TORn's Geeky Observations Lists (updated soon)



Old Toby
Grey Havens


Feb 3 2013, 11:14pm


Views: 835
Yup, with ya all the way gramma

I, too, am scared of film 3. Although I know what happens in the book, I hope PJ doesn't change it. And I really don't think he would. That would be passing up the chance, of all three of the films, to really bring a major emotional moment to the audience. And PJ does that so well. Damn him!

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


GloryBox
Bree


Feb 3 2013, 11:45pm


Views: 829
You're so right about Boromir and Thorin

Thanks for pointing that out. In the books I also found their fates to be touching, but not emotionally devastating. I was never invested in these characters til the films came out. And considering what Sean Bean did for Boromir in just one film, I'm already bracing myself for RA's character arc in three. TABA will be wrenching. And like Toby, I have no doubt that Peter, Fran, and Philippa will handle it well.

BTW Toby, I love your sig line.

...one morning long ago in the quiet of the world, when there was less noise and more green... The Hobbit


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Feb 4 2013, 3:57pm


Views: 747
Not exactly

This is a hard question for me to answer, as I read the book for the first time both a long time ago (over 35 years) and when I was quite young (6, to be precise). Certainly I don't recall that at the time this was a point that bothered me, but at the time, I knew grownups are weird, and that would have sufficed for me as an explanation if I had actively disliked Thorin. I did not, though, I simply found him not very interesting.

It is my feeling though that if as a more mature reader I had found Thorin despicable (again, not the case), yes, the book quote above would have baffled me, as would have the actions of Thranduil and Bard in the denouement. I plan to reread the book sometime soon, but it is not possible to do with completely "fresh" eyes. That things about how the character is written are appropriate for a heroic figure is knowledge I can't erase.

Because I tend to think of myself as a careful reader, and of Tolkien as a careful writer, it is my guess that I would not find Thorin despicable, and that in the early going of the book I would find those things that might make someone admire Thorin (other posters on the thread have indicated they did like the character in the book). A quick glance at the first adventure (Roast Mutton) shows a Thorin that expresses a willingness to help Bilbo out if he gets into trouble with the Trolls, and one who is marginally more ready than the rest of the characters to deal with trouble, but I'll be thinking more about this when I do re-read.

It is of course possible that I would not find anything to like about the character at all, but in that case I would find both the book quote and the other details that follow it, jarring. Assuming I liked the book, I would probably look back to see what it is about Bilbo and Thorin's relationship that I had missed. I take it as a reasonably clear statement by the author that he expected me to find things about Thorin I could admire.

Which is why giving me a movie Thorin I do find has admirable qualities (along with, as I have said, being someone that could be called a "jerk"), seems a good job of adaptation to me.


kiwifan
Rohan

Feb 4 2013, 7:10pm


Views: 731
Me, too!

Scared of TABA, that is. Will be making a complete ass of myself in the cinema, with a huge box of tissues on my lap and clutching my best friend's hand for comfort...

I agree with you that it's extremely unlikely that PJ and his team will change the ending --- much as I'd like it, it would be a major betrayal of the book's spirit and the purists would come down on him like a ton of bricks.

'Goodness gracious, you really are a messie!' 'Oh no, I'm not, these are all just mathoms...'


arithmancer
Grey Havens

Feb 4 2013, 7:39pm


Views: 1097
Nor do I think he would want to

I think he's a fan of the books as we are. I think he would want to do that part of the book justice in his film.