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 Lord of the Rings:
What the heck?!
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

sharku
Rivendell

Dec 19 2009, 8:20pm

Post #51 of 62 (240 views)
Shortcut
Special Effects [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

The last two movies got lost in their special effects.... I just thought and think that special effects should support the story and not the other way around.


So DID George Lucas - check out the review posted above - I think it's in part 6 or part 7. Enjoy.


thesithempire
Rivendell

Dec 20 2009, 12:58am

Post #52 of 62 (305 views)
Shortcut
effects [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
<<I never liked the ending (after the big battle) until the special edition. Lucas slipped off into the TOO CUTE Ewok thing and then the spook of Darth Vader? Anikin Skywalker pops up and all was forgiven. Lucas had not sold me on the fact that someone who was responsible for the murder of billions of people should get a place in jedi heaven. I understand now what he was going for, not because of his other movies but because of extensive reading of Joe Campbell.

The last two movies got lost in their special effects. I call this The Matrix Syndrome. Make a great SiFi movie and follow it with turkey sequels.

Sorry if any of this offended you. It was not intended to. I just thought and think that special effects should support the story and not the other way around.>>

Not at all, and I agree with you that effects are supposed to support the story. Of all the prequels, I think Revenge of the Sith is the most story-heavy, in fact, there may have been too much story for that film. It's also the most emotionally arresting.

But I agree the third Matrix film was simply devoid of story, a giant video-game with added bits of esotericism to make it look like something more profound than it was. I think the second hinged on the third. It might have been great had the third been something that explained the mysteries of the second and provided a good story unto itself. Because it didn't, the second proved to be style over substance. Shame because the original had something to say. The sequels just pretended they did.



Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Dec 20 2009, 1:30pm

Post #53 of 62 (232 views)
Shortcut
The Bridge Movie [In reply to] Can't Post

will come. But first the complete telling of the Hobbit and the Middle earth events surrounding it.

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


xy
Rohan

Dec 21 2009, 1:14pm

Post #54 of 62 (232 views)
Shortcut
it will ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I thought it was abandoned once they chose to go with a two-part Hobbit...


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Dec 21 2009, 2:52pm

Post #55 of 62 (219 views)
Shortcut
There are no plans [In reply to] Can't Post

But the source material exists and sooner or later someone will pick it up and make a movie or three out of it.

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Dec 21 2009, 3:51pm

Post #56 of 62 (227 views)
Shortcut
Why the Bidge was Killed [In reply to] Can't Post

When they looked at the Hobbit closely they realized that there was to much good material that would have to be wasted. The only adaptation of the Hobbit that I know that Professor Tolkien personally was personally involved in, was an audio adaptation on Argos Records (Decca) read by Nicol Williamson and released in 1974 after the Professor's death.
"Uncut, the telling of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins would havepoccupied about 18 long-playing records. Professor Tolkien granted permission through his publishers for his book to be condensed, but this had to be done without writing any 'link' passages to cover drastic cutting".
Their first draft condensed the story to the size of 6 LPs but they thought a six LP box set was not commercially viable so they continued until the pared it to 4 disks at nearly an hour per disk. It is still, in my opinion, the most brilliant adaptation of the story that has been done.

Now it takes less time to show you a picture than it takes to tell you what is in that same frame. So movies add another dimension of condensation. Still, to tell the whole story of the Hobbit and include the events that were taking place in its back story alone will easily fill two three hour plus films. The Bridge Film was dead.
I desire a telling of the Hobbit that is complete and as wonderfilled as it can be. If this means that a Bridge Film created out of the LotR back stories had to be put to rest, well then so be it. I am sure that a day will come when this idea is resurrected, (Probably after the Hobbit I & II return a billion or two at the box office.)

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


Arwen's daughter
Half-elven


Dec 21 2009, 4:20pm

Post #57 of 62 (230 views)
Shortcut
Some of us think it actually went the other way [In reply to] Can't Post

Depite GDT's comments, I think they found the birdge movie impossible to work with and expanded The Hobbit to fill their two movie obligation. I have no doubt that The Hobbit can be easily expanded into two movies, though.



My LiveJournal
My Costuming Site
TORn's Costume Discussions Archive

Screencap of the Day will be on hiatus until after the New Year.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Dec 21 2009, 4:50pm

Post #58 of 62 (269 views)
Shortcut
The Hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post

The point of the post was, that the Hobbit does not need to be expanded to fill two movies. A good abridgment of the text runs six hours (16 to 18 hours unabridged). So everyone acts like there is not enough material in the Hobbit to fill two movies. I believe they are thinking of a live action version of the Rankin Bass cartoon. Having listened closely to GDT, I believe he was the driving force behind the two Hobbit approach and that Philippa Boyens would have backed up that assessment.

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


xy
Rohan

Dec 21 2009, 9:37pm

Post #59 of 62 (204 views)
Shortcut
mmm - hmm [In reply to] Can't Post

Also I think the pre-existing LOTR movies probably influenced that decision too (perhaps more than the bridge movie being that much trouble to make). Yes they expanded the Hobbit in two movies but they also plan to connect it to Peter Jackson's trilogy. And therein lies the problem ; I'd like to see the Hobbit we know and love, not the Hobbit/Intro to LOTR mash up.

edit: The Hobbit IS being expanded, as evidenced by PJ&GDT when they said it will include Dol Guldur/Gandalf's travelling in the book/Necromancer. I still think it's too bad one book as short as the Hobbit gets two movies but anyway.


(This post was edited by xy on Dec 21 2009, 9:39pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Dec 21 2009, 9:52pm

Post #60 of 62 (196 views)
Shortcut
The Connection of The Hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post

to the Lord of the Rings happened long ago and at the hands of the Professor himself. I would not consider it a mash up. Though it could become one if the movie gets stuffed full of irrelevant cameo visits and script lines that are time warped to shoehorn them into the greater story of the Hobbit. This would be bad and I do not believe it will be done.

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Dec 21 2009, 10:00pm

Post #61 of 62 (242 views)
Shortcut
Impossible versus Unnecessary [In reply to] Can't Post

"I think they found the birdge movie impossible to work with..."

I believe that there was no reason to make the bridge as it already exists in the Hobbit back story, and given the space that a two movie format allows, the entire story can be told to its best advantage.


Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


Isis
Bree


Jan 3 2010, 9:05pm

Post #62 of 62 (192 views)
Shortcut
My thoughts precisely [In reply to] Can't Post

We watched the EEs (one per night) over the holidays and I'd somehow forgotten how annoyed I was with that scene - for all of the reasons you state - it makes no sense. And I am just as sickened by it as you are. In the book it was an ambiguous scene (which is fine with me) although it's implicitly understood that Gandalf the White is inherently more powerful than the Witch King and is there on a specific mission from the Valar.

Then right after Movie Witch King bests Gandalf the White he goes off and gets defeated by a female human - why didn't he just pull out his fiery blade then, eh? Eh? EH? Possibly he didn't think he needed it against a mere human?

Gandalf falls into the list of possibles for the 'no man can kill me' role too, along with hobbits and chicks, right? So why... Urgh. I don't want to think about this any more.

'Take now this Ring,' he said; 'for thy labours and thy cares will be heavy, but in all it will support thee and defend thee from weariness. For this is the Ring of Fire, and herewith, maybe, thou shalt rekindle hearts to the valour of old in a world that grows chill.'

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

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

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

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

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