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

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
edit: this comment had small beginnings

unexpectedvisitor
Rohan

Dec 28 2012, 10:29pm


Views: 141
Shortcut
edit: this comment had small beginnings [In reply to] Can't Post

one of the reasons that critics gave that they would not let their youngest kid watch the movie was because Azog was a "nightmare." so there are some that definitely disagree with you on the Azog not being scary thing.

Azog is not the film's strongest addition. but he's fine. there are bigger changes that were made in the LotR films that actually affected themes and so forth. as brilliant and careful as he was, Tolkien often contradicted himself within his mythology, so to act like he can't be contradicted isn't even true to the way that Tolkien approached his own universe--like he was simply a scribe relating lore and mythos from a bygone era. yes, the given history of a minor character in Tolkien lore is revised here to present a Lurtz element. to argue that it adds something that wasn't present in the story more than Lurtz or potato-face did--i would argue just the opposite. indeed, it brings an element of the existing backstory into the current story, rather than adding a new character out of neither the backstory or the current story as given by Tolkien. it also helps minimize the very episodic feel of the first third of The Hobbit as related in the book.

if you approach it from a non-purist perspective, i dunno why people have a problem with Bilbo jumping into the action at the end of a three hour movie. too soon? i don't think the rest of the general audience or the critical world would agree with you. that act of courage and the resulting moment between Thorin and Bilbo after they've been rescued by the eagles is a very necessary dramatic beat for this first installment to end on, or it really would have fallen very flat at the end. so it does really all boil down to whether you're opposed to it being three movies now. i myself was very skeptical about that, but then i saw AUJ, and i have to say--yes, there are a few minutes here and there that i could have done without, but not nearly enough that i would have rather had two three hour movies than the three that we are getting. shots that are beautiful and stately in AUJ would have been much shorter, action and reflective moments alike truncated or cut out all together. Bag End would have lasted ten minutes at most.

but The Hobbit is not some sacred tome to me. i love it, it's great, but i was actually looking forward to seeing what changes or additions were made. i don't want to see the same version of the story i see in my head when i read the book. i want to see something else, something fresh, and to see the filmmakers work on connecting it to the larger story and to the LotR movies they made. so, different expectations for me. but some of you have to remember, just because the filmmakers do something differently than the way it was done in the book, it is not at all like they are saying "we think the book would have worked better if it had been written this way." because they aren't trying to rewrite the book. they're trying to make a movie based on the book, and due to the timing they also have the extra obligation of connecting that with movies already made on the books that came after. so, when you see changes from the text, it is the filmmakers saying, "we think the movie we are trying to make will work better if we do it this way." and i can see all the reasons for the changes and decisions they made. i don't necessarily agree with all of the choices, but some are claiming that this film is an example of lazy writing and that the writers didn't think stuff through--and i'm sorry, but that is just blatantly wrong. the amount of effort and care that was put into adapting this story in a way that would broaden the scope out through the appendices material into something that would work both as "The Hobbit" and a bona fide prequel trilogy to the LotR movies, while delving even deeper into the themes of what defines heroism, the importance of home, and the role of fate in our lives--i mean, it is readily apparent and it is astounding.

the filmmaker's job in an adaptation is not to give you a visual "translation" of the literature. that removes all of the artistic responsibility or credit on the filmmaker's part and is an insult to your own imagination. the filmmaker's job is show you their own vision as inspired by the source text. i understand that, from all of our different subjective standpoints, there will always be negatives to point out. the same was true of the LotR movies. the same is true of every movie. it's fine to point that stuff out. yet, it seems like in almost every thread that gets started about this movie, we continually are seeing posts that make a point of talking about the stuff they didn't like. now, this thread was kind of asking for it, anyways, but i've just been seeing it over and over and over again, no matter what the thread is about. i end up trying to defend the movie over and over and over again because i like it so much and have such a difficult time understanding why some fans are so disappointed or why some critics can't seem to get past their preconceptions of prequels as nothing but cash-grabs. but, critics, i mean, whatever. but the fans...the fact that we could get a movie with all those dwarves included (a pure logistical and storytelling nightmare from a filmmaking perspecting), a film with THAT prologue, THAT Unexpected Party (good gracious, the scene where the dwarves sing and Bilbo is listening? the perfection of the moment when he decides to join the adventure?), THAT Trolls scene, THAT version of the Troll hoards and the added conversation between Bilbo and Gandalf, THAT White Council, THAT adaptation of the Gimli/Gandalf conversation in the LotR appendices into the beautiful convo between Galadriel and Gandalf in AUJ, THAT added moment between Bilbo and Bofur, THAT Riddles in the Dark, THAT incredibly resonant moment in which Bilbo spares Gollum's life, THAT speech that Bilbo gives to the dwarves about choosing to help them reclaim their home, THAT sublime vision of the company being carried by the eagles...and all of it somehow greater than the sum of its parts, one thing leading to another and building up the character arcs and the larger narrative...and yet we choose to focus on the negative? it saddens me. because i know the movie ain't close to perfect but i can see, plain as day, how the filmmaking team poured their hearts and souls and considerable skills into making that movie.

Subject User Time
I do not get the..... YaznegSouth40 Send a private message to YaznegSouth40 Dec 28 2012, 4:39pm
    So-tell us what you liked about Azog! Aragalen the Green Send a private message to Aragalen the Green Dec 28 2012, 4:43pm
        All I am saying.... YaznegSouth40 Send a private message to YaznegSouth40 Dec 28 2012, 4:54pm
            Welcome to the internet. sauget.diblosio Send a private message to sauget.diblosio Dec 28 2012, 4:58pm
            Azog badass Ęleniel Tindome Send a private message to Ęleniel Tindome Dec 28 2012, 5:02pm
            Bravo! painjoiker Send a private message to painjoiker Dec 28 2012, 5:05pm
            I like his design and ... DanielLB Send a private message to DanielLB Dec 28 2012, 5:09pm
            Sadly, that's the nature of a comment thread. Aragalen the Green Send a private message to Aragalen the Green Dec 28 2012, 6:50pm
    If this were the case DanielLB Send a private message to DanielLB Dec 28 2012, 4:43pm
        I can suggest it Ardamírë Send a private message to Ardamírë Dec 28 2012, 5:06pm
    EY! painjoiker Send a private message to painjoiker Dec 28 2012, 4:47pm
    i sorta get it unexpectedvisitor Send a private message to unexpectedvisitor Dec 28 2012, 4:48pm
        Not quite the same as Lurtz Fredeghar Wayfarer Send a private message to Fredeghar Wayfarer Dec 28 2012, 8:38pm
            Very true, and well stated by you. AinurOlorin Send a private message to AinurOlorin Dec 28 2012, 9:04pm
                Azog and Arwen Mahtion Send a private message to Mahtion Dec 28 2012, 10:12pm
                    Personally GothmogTheBalrog Send a private message to GothmogTheBalrog Dec 28 2012, 11:07pm
    In general Lindele Send a private message to Lindele Dec 28 2012, 5:02pm
        Exactly...Lindele... YaznegSouth40 Send a private message to YaznegSouth40 Dec 28 2012, 6:56pm
        Or it could be... Ardamírë Send a private message to Ardamírë Dec 28 2012, 6:58pm
            Well if you are going to make the argument Lindele Send a private message to Lindele Dec 28 2012, 7:08pm
                He looks worse than all of those Ardamírë Send a private message to Ardamírë Dec 28 2012, 7:09pm
                    I'm saying Lindele Send a private message to Lindele Dec 28 2012, 7:16pm
                    Perhaps it's.... YaznegSouth40 Send a private message to YaznegSouth40 Dec 28 2012, 8:16pm
    Well, that's the nature of the world Eledhwen Send a private message to Eledhwen Dec 28 2012, 5:03pm
        Oh that is perfect. Ataahua Send a private message to Ataahua Dec 28 2012, 8:12pm
    No one says they hate him like Hitler... Kassandros Send a private message to Kassandros Dec 28 2012, 5:22pm
        Kassandros I understand that.... YaznegSouth40 Send a private message to YaznegSouth40 Dec 28 2012, 7:07pm
            "The Warrior's of Nain, Gror's son, drove through the orcs. . . all the while they cried 'Azog! Azog!" AinurOlorin Send a private message to AinurOlorin Dec 28 2012, 7:59pm
                On The Dwarves having Azog's name on their axes. . . I attempted editing this post AinurOlorin Send a private message to AinurOlorin Dec 28 2012, 8:18pm
    Azog work for me Simon Send a private message to Simon Dec 28 2012, 5:22pm
    I don't hate him, sauget.diblosio Send a private message to sauget.diblosio Dec 28 2012, 5:25pm
    I will say again, the character is fine, as I see him. His placement is horrendous, and is part of a larger flaw. AinurOlorin Send a private message to AinurOlorin Dec 28 2012, 6:12pm
        I highly agree!. I just can't tear myself away from that canon which is ingrained in my head :(. -that's- exactly what I've found wrong Xanaseb Send a private message to Xanaseb Dec 28 2012, 6:35pm
            Not a purist either. sauget.diblosio Send a private message to sauget.diblosio Dec 28 2012, 6:53pm
    I think one can sum up the Azog-hate quite easily: Iowaboy Send a private message to Iowaboy Dec 28 2012, 6:44pm
        Couldn't have said it better Iowaboy IDLookout Send a private message to IDLookout Dec 28 2012, 8:25pm
        I agree with you Iowaboy Elenorflower Send a private message to Elenorflower Dec 28 2012, 9:20pm
            edit: this comment had small beginnings unexpectedvisitor Send a private message to unexpectedvisitor Dec 28 2012, 10:29pm
                Thank you for being so wonderfully insightful & optimistic! // RhodeCamelot Send a private message to RhodeCamelot Jan 1 2013, 11:58am
    How about Jar Jar Binks? Ardamírë Send a private message to Ardamírë Dec 28 2012, 6:56pm
    I liked Azog - wayyy more than Gothmog from ROTK morgul lord Send a private message to morgul lord Dec 28 2012, 11:04pm
    I loved the film Rostron2 Send a private message to Rostron2 Dec 29 2012, 12:35am
    I too loved the movies and thought Azog was cool Ziggy Stardust Send a private message to Ziggy Stardust Dec 29 2012, 1:37am

 
 
 

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

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

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

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