|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Captain Salt
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 4:18am
Post #26 of 178
(1440 views)
Shortcut
|
And to be honest, I'm interested in how more fully exploring a character and culture will DETRACT from TH, to be honest. If they've expanded Bofur's part - Bofur, he of three lines - what's wrong with more of Bard? Bilbo and the Dwarves will be there anyway, all the film will do is cover some of the interaction glossed over in the book. In what's sure to be an opus 4-6 hours in length, there's more than enough room to focus on other in the cast...
My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, with axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 4:20am
Post #27 of 178
(1434 views)
Shortcut
|
|
right, I think we can tell that you're a Bard hater................hehe no worries, we all have our hated characters
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
......I think
:)
unless you dont rly hate him, but hink he's over-exaggerated (which might I say is very very obvious from your posts  )
The Five Isari:
Sarry, Gandy, Raddy, Ally and Pally
A great bunch :)
|
|
|
Thorgal
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 4:32am
Post #28 of 178
(1410 views)
Shortcut
|
......I think :) unless you dont rly hate him, but hink he's over-exaggerated (which might I say is very very obvious from your posts )
The Prince of snowhite
The prince of cindarella
Gaston of the beaty and the beast
Clayton in Tarzan
While Beorn, dwarves, Gandalf Radagast Smaug and all beastly adventures in the story represents anarchy, Bard represents the boring uninteresting typical stereotypical "hero" character. Also I can't get the image of a Orlando Bloom from Troy out of my head. Bard is like...macho snobby human leader. Either he will be emotional orlando bloom...or he will be macho "hero". You are right I don't like the idea...
|
|
|
Gandalf'sMother
Rohan
Dec 2 2011, 6:51am
Post #29 of 178
(1520 views)
Shortcut
|
What is there some sort of a consensus limit on the degree to which one can criticize the films?
How can something subjective be considered "bottom of the barrel?"
Do you mean to say that melodramatic, cheesy, repetitive, gratuitously manipulative and cliched scenes of women and children crying in the Glittering Gaves were the heights of filmmaking?
Please. Peter Jackson is not a God, and his films are not the Holy Grail. They are ok movies, with a lot of sub-par stuff in them.
IMO, of course.
-GM
|
|
|
Marillë by the Sea
Rivendell
Dec 2 2011, 7:41am
Post #30 of 178
(1415 views)
Shortcut
|
True, there are people on this board and in life that criticize PJ's version of LOTR (a lot) more than others, but that doesn't mean those who like/love the movies should be condescending. We all like and dislike bits in the movies for different reasons. I personally love the movies despite them having many flaws, and there are people who dislike the movies BECAUSE of their many flaws, but I certainly do not shake my head in wonderment and think we've reached the "bottom of the barrel". It would be totally boring if we all just SQUEE!-ed 24/7 about how the movies are awesome and perfect 
|
|
|
Marillë by the Sea
Rivendell
Dec 2 2011, 7:50am
Post #31 of 178
(1416 views)
Shortcut
|
I believe Bard is a far more important character than Beorn in the story for exactly the same reasons you just listed. Beorn just helps Bilbo & co. along the way and while he does show up later on at the 2nd climax, I never really saw him as all that important, since he kind of just disappeared after the battle was over. Bard, however, is going to be the KING and while having yet another human hero can be boring and will remind some of Aragorn, Bard (to me) is still pivotal nonetheless. I mean, he kills the dragon. The dragon we've been reading about and wondering how it will be killed. That's why I think it would be great to lengthen Bard's screen time, so that he doesn't appear out of the blue to kill the dragon. I wouldn't call delving more into his character fanfiction... adding Legolas in The Hobbit and seeing what he's up to sounds more fanfiction to me (although I understand why he's included)
|
|
|
RosieLass
Valinor
Dec 2 2011, 9:19am
Post #32 of 178
(1431 views)
Shortcut
|
|
And your problem with that is...?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Everyone is entitled to be as critical as they want to be, as long as they keep their criticism to the films and don't start criticizing other posters.
As someone else said, this board would be pretty boring if the only people who were allowed to speak were the ones with complimentary things to say.
It is always those with the fewest sensible things to say who make the loudest noise in saying them. --Precious Ramotswe (Alexander McCall Smith)
|
|
|
EyeRock
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 10:00am
Post #33 of 178
(1413 views)
Shortcut
|
Also, one must remember that the people on these forums only make out a microscopic part of the LOTR-movies' fanbase. More than half of those have never read the book, hadn't heard of Tolkien before the movies.
Despite all of this, the LOTR-movies are some of the most beloved movies of these last decades, partly because many grew up with them as an integral part of their childhood (me included) .
I think this is the reason one might get severly frustrated when you find someone who says; "meh, just okay".
I know I was
|
|
|
Thorgal
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 10:42am
Post #34 of 178
(1483 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Peter jackson said himself that if he could revisit..
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
the movies he would. I'm sure there are tons of things in them he regret. There are indeed tons of scenes that are very bad in the movies. I'm going to list the ones I can remember from my head. (haven't watched movies in years)
-Gandalf leaving shire coming back in very fast. One thought he had been gone for a few days. When he really had been away for a long time.
-Nazguls in forest, I just found these scenes really badly shot when they discover the hobbits. Could be made better. Too many camera angle changes.
-Legolas in just about every scene.
-The design of Lothlorien. (Looked like something out of Star wars)
-Pippin/Merry's adventures, Treebeard were a comical character and he should not have been.
-Battle of helms deep, lasted for too long plus Haldir didn't look the part.
-I had no problem with crying women and children.
-Army of the dead, they weren't scary to me. The main guy almost appeared to be comical at times.
-Legolas fighting scenes.
-The middle eastern looking guy that appears in the wilderness, they could have chose to show anyone...but they had to show someoe that looked like he had been playing world of warcraft for 4 + years. That scene broke the illusion of midde earth being a real world.
-Pellenor fields, too long battle.
-The mouth of sauron, I mean wtf?
-The potrayal of Sauron as an eye.
-Inside the spider's nest, I think this could have been more scary. Gollum is brilliant but the cave was not. Also the spider wasn't as creepy as some spiders I know. It was clumsy...
-Their journey through mordor, we saw almost nothing. They could have added some scenes in here no?
-Aragorn being stomped by a troll...I don't see a reason.
-About every comic relief scene in the movie.
-Pippin and Merry.
-Gimli and Legolas.
-A lot of people didn't look like they belonged in middle earth for example:
Theoden
Merry
Haldir
Figwit...no he didn't look elf.
Galadriel's husband, that is NOT a elf.
The guy who rules gondor, I could tell he had a wig.
The guy who they found that is from the east
Faranur
Yeah that is about it, overall the movies are bad because of how much action there is. There were more fighting than there was character scenes. That is at least my impression.
|
|
|
Maiarmike
Grey Havens
Dec 2 2011, 10:52am
Post #35 of 178
(1379 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm not even going to attempt to counter some of those bullet points, because...
"I warn you, if you bore me, I shall take my revenge"
--J.R.R. Tolkien
(This post was edited by Maiarmike on Dec 2 2011, 10:55am)
|
|
|
EyeRock
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 11:23am
Post #36 of 178
(1389 views)
Shortcut
|
The majority of the LOTR-movie fanbase doesn't care about stuff like that. They don't care about the technical flaws, originality or similarity to the original book. They want a great adventure!
Almost every guy loved the fightscenes, every girl loved Legolas and Aragorn, almost everyone were frightened by Shelob and almost everyone laughed at "Nobody tosses a dwarf!"
Like Indiana Jones, STar Wars or Harry Potter, these movies were made to please EVERYONE, not just the fans of the book or the most hardened movie-doc. That's a hard thing to do, and for the most part, I think they succeeded.
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 11:35am
Post #37 of 178
(1364 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Gondor in RotK is a better example
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The film failed to make Gondor/Minas Tirith feel like a real society with real people, and therefore I as an viewer didn't care one wooden penny of their fate. The city was just a fortress for the heroes to keep or lose. I was interested in what happened to Aragorn, Éowyn, Gandalf, Pippin etc as characters, but only because I had already begun to care about them during the previous movies. And when Aragorn in the end was crowned the king of this place, it was really a "Right, what ever, I guess that's cool then" moment.
I did care about Rohan. Not because of "stock clip of women and children cying", but because of Theoden, Éowyn, Gríma - real characters I had been given chance to get to know. If they had lost the war, I as a viewer had been devastated.
Sauron's war against them ment something to me.
Frodo's journey to sacrifice himself for the people of Middle-Earth ment something.
If they don't let us know any of the inhabitants of the Lake-Town, later when Smaug destroys it and Bard kills him, most of the audience will just think "THAT (edited) KILLED THE AWESOME COOL DRAGON, HOW DARE HE?!!!!!1"
So they don't need to show "stock clips" of children and women of Lake-Town, but let some of them have "face and name" so we care about it when something bad happens to them. That's movie making. And yes, it's important that we care, even if they're not "the important ones".
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
(This post was edited by Ataahua on Dec 2 2011, 6:17pm)
|
|
|
Thorgal
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 11:46am
Post #38 of 178
(1373 views)
Shortcut
|
Like Indiana Jones, STar Wars or Harry Potter, these movies were made to please EVERYONE Which means by definition these movies can't be anything but mediocore. Everyone includes idiots yeah? The lord of the rings movies deserves to be watched once or maybe twice. I haven't watched the movies in years, that is mainly because there is not much to watch for me. I might occasionally watch the balrog/Gandalf fight on youtube.
But I can't find myself interested in watching character scenes, mainly because most of them are badly done. In fact if I think ahead I think the only reason I would ever watch any of the lord of the rings movies again would be only because of the hobbit. Just to see how the hobbit blends into lord of the rings. I don't think I will see the movies again in my lifetime maybe once more. They aren't that good for me to return and watch them.
I however think I will rewatch Akira Kurosawa's movies and Igmar Bergman's movies more. These can be revisited, especially Kurosawa. Lord of the rings are block buster movies, they are impressive in the cinema because of great special effects and action. In the comfort of ones home they aren't really rewatchable.
I also can't help but to think the movies kind of ruined the books, sure the books are still great. But one can't help but to think of the movie when reading the book. Your own image of middle earth is distorted by much of what is bad in the lord of the rings movies. Entertaining average movies with impressive special effects, nothing that is really great or excellent.
I think in the lord of the rings movie trilogy what should be appllaud is:
Special effects
Makeup/Props
Music
Everything else is mediocore and of average quality. I see no difference between Troy and Lord of the rings. Or Kingdom of Heaven and lord of the rings.
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 11:47am
Post #39 of 178
(1332 views)
Shortcut
|
I agree with you in every way. In Tolkien's writing, the importance of a character can't be (always) decided by how much page time they get.
Or has everyone forgotten Arwen?
You can't understand Aragorn without her, and she's mostly in the Appendice.
And just how many juicy lines does Sauron get in the book? How many scenes does he steal?
Arwen, Sauron and Bard are characters who are important via being active in the universe of which the books tell of........ off-page: we aren't directly shown what they do, but still the mark their existence leaves on the universe can be felt everywhere. That's part of the magic of Tolkien's story telling, part of how he does the famous "it feels like real world" thingy of his.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
|
|
|
Alientraveller
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 11:49am
Post #40 of 178
(1381 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Kingdom of Heaven is a brilliant film
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As anyone who has seen the director's cut can attest.
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 11:53am
Post #41 of 178
(1366 views)
Shortcut
|
I love the director's cut... it's on my DVD shelf.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Dec 2 2011, 11:53am
Post #42 of 178
(1322 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Looks like we all see things very differently -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
- I'm starting to think it's all just a matter of personal taste.
Like a few people have already mentioned, Bard seems to me to be a prototype of Aragorn (or rather, Strider). Making him into a family man turns him into a different kind of hero, one which I personally think is more suited to 'The Hobbit' movies.
I also think that while the book version of 'The Hobbit' is centered around Bilbo, the movie version will be focused on quite a few of the other characters, especially as you get deeper into the story.
Like Indiana Jones, STar Wars or Harry Potter, these movies were made to please EVERYONE, not just the fans of the book or the most hardened movie-doc. That's a hard thing to do, and for the most part, I think they succeeded.
I consider myself a fan of the books and found the films impressive, though ......
The film failed to make Gondor/Minas Tirith feel like a real society with real people, and therefore I as an viewer didn't care one wooden penny of their fate
Yes, Gondor wasn't quite as I had imagined it. I couldn't blame Aragorn for not wanting the throne.
We are going to need a 'Gondor' movie of some sort to make the place more 'real', to show it as being something more than a war zone.
(This post was edited by Hanzkaz on Dec 2 2011, 11:58am)
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 11:58am
Post #43 of 178
(1440 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think people are overplaying the "concentrate on Bilbo" factor
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yes, the main character needs to be the main character, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world doesn't matter.
Saying things like "Bard is not important, he's an archetype, he's minor" etc grossly underestimates the importance of the last part of the book: what happens after Smaug's death. It's all about Bard, Master of the Lake-Town, Thranduil, Gandalf, Thorin and Bilbo + the orcs playing out the final drama and climax of the thematic journey they started in Bag-End. All the players are needed. You can't have the Hobbit with just the Hobbit and Thorin.
Ps: And consider this: Bilbo is a "down the rabbit hole" character. His relationship and understanding of the rest of the world is crucial to him as character; it's what he's all about. Without Middle-Earth and all the different people he meets and gets to know there's no journey for him.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
(This post was edited by Faenoriel on Dec 2 2011, 12:04pm)
|
|
|
Maiarmike
Grey Havens
Dec 2 2011, 12:03pm
Post #44 of 178
(1284 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Good points, and I agree fully. //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"I warn you, if you bore me, I shall take my revenge"
--J.R.R. Tolkien
|
|
|
Calmandcloudless
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 12:08pm
Post #45 of 178
(1297 views)
Shortcut
|
And for me, one of the most heartrending scenes of the trilogy was the "Where is the horse and the rider" one at Helm's Deep. However cheesy others may have found it, I was really affected by the images of child soldiers being taken from their mothers and handed their weapons. I felt that it was perhaps the closest Peter Jackson came to showing us one important thematic component of the Scouring of the Shire: the far-reaching consequences of war and the forceful loss of innocence that results.
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 12:13pm
Post #46 of 178
(1301 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Tales of war and danger are meaningless without understanding of what is at stake.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I liked the "Where is the horse and the rider" scene too. Bernard reading out Tolkien's potery with that nice voice of his didn't hurt it either.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
|
|
|
Calmandcloudless
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 12:26pm
Post #47 of 178
(1292 views)
Shortcut
|
Quote
Like Indiana Jones, STar Wars or Harry Potter, these movies were made to please EVERYONE
Which means by definition these movies can't be anything but mediocore. Everyone includes idiots yeah?
This comes across as a bit elitist to me. Setting aside any specific debate over whether the LOTR trilogy is anything better than mediocre, I believe that it is perfectly possible to create art that will appeal to people on all parts of the critical and intellectual spectrum. A music teacher once told me her view that the genius of Mozart's music lies in its ability to appeal to people on so many different levels. Now, you may feel that the LOTR films tried to do that and failed, but I don't think it's helpful to make sweeping statements to the effect that *any* film that appeals to people you consider less intelligent than yourself must be mediocre, "by definition".
|
|
|
Thorgal
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 12:28pm
Post #48 of 178
(1383 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Men and why they should have no spotlight placed on them
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
grossly underestimates the importance of the last part of the book: what happens after Smaug's death. It's all about Bard, Master of the Lake-Town, Thranduil, Gandalf, Thorin and Bilbo + the orcs Umm I don't recall master of laketown having much to do at all with the battle of the five armies. And Bard's role is to represent laketown at the doorstep of Thorin's. He had no big role in the battle itself, Thranduil is in comparison more important and I'm sure and I hope that Legolas/Thranduil/The elven girl will have a bigger role than the fat master of laketown and his bowman.
This movie should in my opinion not be about men and their laketown. Let's introduce some elven drama and let's keep the spotlight on Bilbo and his dwarves. Let's explore individual interesting characters instead of stereotypical bowmen and their master. Thing is I know exactly more or less how Bard will look in the movie. He will probably be like Hector in Troy.
Actually I know now why I dislike the idea of Bard, he will be the traditional "american hero". It always seems like every holywood movie has it's own super hero. The beautiful perfect guy who is just so perfect you know. I don't care about this archetype and find the idea of Bard a minor hero character in the book to be explored to the same extent as Aragorn. I know if they will expand on this guy the movies will go down the same path the lord of the rings movies did. I didn't care much of Rohan and Gondor in the lord of the rings movies and I'm certain I won't care at all about Laketown and it's bowman.
If Bard has his own family and his own son and their relationship will be shown in more detail like a mini drama. If I buy the movie on dvd I will be skipping these scenes. I just know Bard will be a television drama kind of character. Bad american stereotypical hero. I think him being a puppet to the audience and to Bilbo is a much better way to potray him in the movie. It's what Tolkien wanted him to be and it's what I want him to be.
EDIT: Putting spotlight on Bard will americanize or however it's spelt the hobbit book.
(This post was edited by Thorgal on Dec 2 2011, 12:32pm)
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 12:29pm
Post #49 of 178
(1316 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Goodness me Thorgal, thats practically most of the film's designs!.....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I wouldn't go that far :)
But its actually interesting to see someone with those points!
The Five Isari:
Sarry, Gandy, Raddy, Ally and Pally
A great bunch :)
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 12:34pm
Post #50 of 178
(1402 views)
Shortcut
|
|
of course its personal taste :)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
that's pretty clear in nearly every aspect of society lol
hehe
The Five Isari:
Sarry, Gandy, Raddy, Ally and Pally
A great bunch :)
|
|
|
|
|
