|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 7:24pm
Post #101 of 178
(1333 views)
Shortcut
|
Bjorn is back!!! Rebjorn as Thorgal.
Welcome back Bjorn!!
Bard as American hero-Priceless!! something about the eyes!?!
- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
|
|
|
triptrap
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 7:32pm
Post #102 of 178
(1327 views)
Shortcut
|
|
this thread turns into fantastic entertaining
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...and that mitchell guys is great, had to loose a few laughs there 
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 7:36pm
Post #103 of 178
(1315 views)
Shortcut
|
Totally agree.
Bard needs to be fleshed out in the movies. i always thought his character was a little "thin" in the books for what he accomplishes and what he will become.
- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
|
|
|
duats
Grey Havens
Dec 2 2011, 7:39pm
Post #104 of 178
(1319 views)
Shortcut
|
I've got a headache  .
First and foremost, the notion that anybody could have killed Smaug is unfounded.
- Bilbo finds out Smaug's only weak spot.
- He tells the dwarves and an eavesdropping thrush.
- The thrush tells the ONE person in all of Lake-town who can understand its language about Smaug's weak spot. That person happens to be a skilled long-bowman.
You can argue all day long about how Legolas or any skilled elf could have killed Smaug, but the simple fact is they didn't. They weren't there, and they had no reason to be. They were more than content to go about their lives in Mirkwood (they had their own problems to deal with anyway).
While having royal lineage, Bard is a mortal, middle-aged man. His only "otherworldly" quality is that he can understand the thrush language. That's it. He doesn't have a superhuman sense of sight. He doesn't have superhuman reflexes. He doesn't have one of those fancy elven bows with fancy elven arrows. He's just a skilled long-bowman who happened to be the only one who could deduce Smaug's weak spot from the thrush. Smaug's attack on Lake-town was an attack on men, women, and children, and it is only appropriate that a mortal man kill him. Men play a pivotal role in Tolkien's mythology. Why wouldn't the same hold true for The Hobbit?
Call it fate. Call it cliche writing. Call it whatever you want. But that's how it is. Bard killed Smaug, he was the only one in that situation who could have killed Smaug, and you cannot take that accomplishment away from him. The mere fact that we're debating this probably has Tolkien rolling in his grave.
As for the Bard's significance in the rest of the story, it's all self explanatory. He is the banner of men. He is the one that the people of Esgaroth rally behind. And most importantly, he is the one that Bilbo gives the Arkenstone to. He doesn't give it to some random Joe. He doesn't give it to Thranduil (who already has a well-known weakness for jewels). And when Bilbo finds out that Gandalf is in the camp, he doesn't pop back into the tent and say, "Hey Bard. I changed my mind. Could you give the Arkenstone to Gandalf to hold onto?" Nope. He gives it to the one man who is desperately trying to help his people survive and rebuild. Thorgal, you're just plain biased against the character if you don't see the significance in this.
And of course, if we want to take Bard's significance one step further, he goes on to rebuild the Kingdom of Dale - which plays a crucial role in the War of the North during The Lord of the Rings. Without the people of Dale, and the dwarves fr Erebor and the Iron Hills, Sauron would have claimed the north with ease. So even behind the scenes, Bard's significance carries through to the trilogy. Or are we to assume that just anybody could have restored Dale?
We can back and forth all day about which character is more significant. Bottom line: Every character, main or minor, is significant in their own way. They have their own unique part to play, which is why they were in the story to begin with.
(This post was edited by duats on Dec 2 2011, 7:43pm)
|
|
|
Thorgal
Bree
Dec 2 2011, 7:45pm
Post #106 of 178
(1336 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"American hero" the typical hero that needs to exist in every holywood movie...-_-
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm getting tired of this argument, not because I'm losing but because it feels like I'm repeating myself. The book and movie would be better without Bard. Bard is a plot device only used to get rid of the dragon, needing to know anything about him we don't.
The Hobbit is a book about adventures of few characters, not fates of entire races. I do not care about the "big" stuff in the hobbit. The story was a adventure story and we don't need to know about some future king of men and his family. Beorn the other hand is a character that is explained in the book and there is therefore a reason to explain him in the movie.
I agree with Tolkien if you don't fine, I do realize things needs to be changed in the hobbit to make it a movie. But Bard should not be seen as a hero, by having Bard be perceived as a hero by the audience that would be seeing the story from an objective perspective instead of the subjective view from where the dwarves and Bilbo sees the story.
There is no way Bilbo would be able to know anything about Bard's family and his past and there is no need for him to know anyting about him. It serves no purpose to the story and we don't need to feel the pain of Bard. Just because he kills a dragon he doesn't have to be a bigger character than he is, he doesn't need to be the hero of the story.
I would hate a minor character to be turn into dragonslaying hero just so we could get a bunch of fanboys to worship this guy. It was Bilbo that was behind the slaying of Smaug, anyone could have fired the arrow Bard just happened to be the one. He is a puppet, now please for the love of goodness may he remain to be a puppet in the movie.
If this turns into a holywoodinized movie and doesn't stay faithful to the book we all love that would be abandoning Tolkien's vision of the story in order for there to be a stereotypical hero that could be made into a toy for eight year olds. All I'm arguing for is leaving the plot like it is, maybe expand it where there are plot holes.
I have for example no problem with Tauriel or legolas, it's logical for them to appear. I have also no problem with the necromancer and the white council, that did actually happen. I do see little reason for Radagast but I see how it would explain a thing or two in the lord of the rings movies that come later.
There is no reason for us to know about Bard's feeling and his family. This story isn't about men but about the greed of elves and dwarves and the hobbit that is caught up in the mess. Beorn also happens to be in the storyline and have a bigger role than Bard in the book. Let him be in, that is what Tolkien wanted.
Actually it kind of grieves me that Bard's son is going to be in these movies. I hope he won't have no dialouge or maybe a tiny piece of dialouge like Gamling. If you read this Peter Jackson, don't mess up!! >:D
|
|
|
triptrap
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 7:49pm
Post #107 of 178
(1312 views)
Shortcut
|
at first i was really angry, because i just couldn't understand where thorgal's opinions came from(see the beorns role thread) but after reading this, it seems sooooooo unrealistic, absurd, ridiculous and hateful to me, that i can't take it serious anymore
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 7:49pm
Post #108 of 178
(1274 views)
Shortcut
|
There is a directors Cut?
and I already bought it on Blu-ray.
- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
|
|
|
triptrap
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 7:53pm
Post #109 of 178
(1278 views)
Shortcut
|
stay faithful to the book we all love thorgal? some posts before you said the beorns house scene was the only passage you found exciting!
|
|
|
duats
Grey Havens
Dec 2 2011, 7:54pm
Post #110 of 178
(1263 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You keep using the phrase "the hero"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Nobody is arguing that Bard is THE hero in the novel. He's A hero. He's one of the heroes.
- He kills Smaug - thus saving the people of Lake-town, Bilbo, and the dwarves from certain death.
- He essentially hands Thorin his treasure on a silver platter.
- He represents the poor and homeless people of Lake-town in the negotiations with Thorin.
- He leads the army of men in the Battle of Five Armies.
- When the battle is won, he helps rebuild Lake-town, and restores the Kingdom of Dale.
How are these actions not heroic?
But you are right, there is very little point in continuing this argument if you're able to read people's constructive posts in Bard's defense and still walk away believing that the novel would be better without him. You're clearly not going to be swayed, so any attempt to convince you otherwise is just a waste of time.
(This post was edited by duats on Dec 2 2011, 7:57pm)
|
|
|
Arwen's daughter
Half-elven
Dec 2 2011, 7:58pm
Post #111 of 178
(1265 views)
Shortcut
|
Which is probably the only film I know of that rivals LOTR in extended scenes and extras. The director's cut adds back 40 minutes of film and at least one major plot line that Ridley Scott was forced to remove. It's well worth a rent, at the least.
How will you get to the Lonely Mountain?
Help TORn log enough miles to get us to Smaug's home by Dec. 2013
Walk to Rivendell - Thursdays on Main
My Costuming Site
TORn's Costume Discussions Archive
|
|
|
Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor
Dec 2 2011, 7:58pm
Post #112 of 178
(1254 views)
Shortcut
|
because, although I know the user name you're trying to remember...those very, uh, amusing subthreads were eventually deleted. Don't bother searching for terms. Altaira knows what she's doing.
Trust her. Altaira sees all! ;)
**********************************
NARF
NABOUF
Not a TORns*b!
Certified Curmudgeon
Knitting Knerd
NARF: NWtS Chapter Member since June 17,2011
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 7:58pm
Post #113 of 178
(1275 views)
Shortcut
|
that cracked me up!! 
This thread rocks!
Though it seems mostly to be a rip the hell out of Thorgal thread............which isnt particularly nice.
sry Thorgal if you are offended in anyway :) :)
(although I'm sure some of us may have been offended by you )
The Five Isari:
Sarry, Gandy, Raddy, Ally and Pally
A great bunch :)
|
|
|
Gandalf'sMother
Rohan
Dec 2 2011, 8:01pm
Post #114 of 178
(1298 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Director's Cut of Kingdom of Heaven
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Is at least 20 times better than any of the LOTR films. PJ is simply not in the same league as Scott.
|
|
|
grinman
Rivendell
Dec 2 2011, 8:07pm
Post #115 of 178
(1295 views)
Shortcut
|
Since you're tired of this and I'm tired of this, I'll stop after this reply. No need to repeat yourself (to me) anymore.
Nobody is arguing against your opinion of not turning Bard into a "holywoodinized" hero. I don't think anyone here wants that. All that we are saying (at least myself) is that Bard is crucial to the story of The Hobbit. He plays a major role despite having very little dialogue or backstory. That is the part that PJ and Co. are probably going to build up. In order for the audience to cheer for the death of Smaug, you must cheer for the guy that slays him. That's not saying that he's going to be some "snooby prince charming". He'll most likeley be portrayed as a normal guy who steps up and becomes a leader. Not a super hero, or a reluctant hero, but an unexpected hero.
Let me put this out as an example: Han Solo. What if, in Star Wars episode IV, we had never met Han Solo? Or perhaps you only caught a brief glimpse of him as he flew Luke and Obi-Wan to Alderaan. You never got to know him or even care in the least about him. Then, in the final moments of the film, as Luke is being pursued by Darth Vader down the Death Star's trench and it seems that Luke is about to be killed, Han swoops out of nowhere and makes it so that Darth Vader is taken out of the picture. Allowing Luke to destroy the Death Star. The audience would be like "Huh? Where'd he come from? Who was that? Why?...". Do you see the point we're trying to make here? In a book, you have the luxury of describing a character. In a movie, you have to "show, not tell". His character will be shown through his actions.
And I beg to differ that The Hobbit is not about fates of entire races. That's what the Battle of 5 Armies is all about.. that's why Gandalf sent the Dwarves on the quest in the first place! The fate of Middle Earth could possibly hinge on whether Smaug is alive or dead when Sauron regains his power. The story is more intimate and whimsical than LOTR, but the themes are still as grand. They are just presented in a more simple fashion.
It shocks me to hear you say that you have no problem with Tauriel and Legolas being in the movie, but have an almost pathological hatred for expanding Bard's role because it's "abandoning Tolkien's vision". That just makes no sense at all! Logically, Legolas makes sense to be seen in the films somewhere. It makes sense to have an elf character that the audience can relate to (Tauriel), but all of a sudden it makes no sense to have a bit of backstory for the guy who kills the main antagonist and then leads 2 armies (essentially) and rebuilds Dale? Baffled.
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 8:10pm
Post #116 of 178
(1296 views)
Shortcut
|
.....that's going to be a permanent TORn quote in my mind! :)
Thorgal hasssss to be Bjorn, I mean have you seen the post further down? THe paragraphing is done in EXACTLY the same way as good ol' Bjorn hehe......
I'm extrememly sorry Thorgal if we're getting all these convictions about you wrong by the way!!!
I love that you bring some controversy into the boards! Its so invigorating!!! :) :) hehehehe
:)
The Five Isari:
Sarry, Gandy, Raddy, Ally and Pally
A great bunch :)
|
|
|
Xanaseb
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 8:12pm
Post #117 of 178
(1290 views)
Shortcut
|
|
If this isn't classic Bjorn, I'd be darned!! :)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm getting tired of this argument, not because I'm losing but because it feels like I'm repeating myself. The book and movie would be better without Bard. Bard is a plot device only used to get rid of the dragon, needing to know anything about him we don't.
The Hobbit is a book about adventures of few characters, not fates of entire races. I do not care about the "big" stuff in the hobbit. The story was a adventure story and we don't need to know about some future king of men and his family. Beorn the other hand is a character that is explained in the book and there is therefore a reason to explain him in the movie.
I agree with Tolkien if you don't fine, I do realize things needs to be changed in the hobbit to make it a movie. But Bard should not be seen as a hero, by having Bard be perceived as a hero by the audience that would be seeing the story from an objective perspective instead of the subjective view from where the dwarves and Bilbo sees the story.
There is no way Bilbo would be able to know anything about Bard's family and his past and there is no need for him to know anyting about him. It serves no purpose to the story and we don't need to feel the pain of Bard. Just because he kills a dragon he doesn't have to be a bigger character than he is, he doesn't need to be the hero of the story.
I would hate a minor character to be turn into dragonslaying hero just so we could get a bunch of fanboys to worship this guy. It was Bilbo that was behind the slaying of Smaug, anyone could have fired the arrow Bard just happened to be the one. He is a puppet, now please for the love of goodness may he remain to be a puppet in the movie.
If this turns into a holywoodinized movie and doesn't stay faithful to the book we all love that would be abandoning Tolkien's vision of the story in order for there to be a stereotypical hero that could be made into a toy for eight year olds. All I'm arguing for is leaving the plot like it is, maybe expand it where there are plot holes.
I have for example no problem with Tauriel or legolas, it's logical for them to appear. I have also no problem with the necromancer and the white council, that did actually happen. I do see little reason for Radagast but I see how it would explain a thing or two in the lord of the rings movies that come later.
There is no reason for us to know about Bard's feeling and his family. This story isn't about men but about the greed of elves and dwarves and the hobbit that is caught up in the mess. Beorn also happens to be in the storyline and have a bigger role than Bard in the book. Let him be in, that is what Tolkien wanted.
Actually it kind of grieves me that Bard's son is going to be in these movies. I hope he won't have no dialouge or maybe a tiny piece of dialouge like Gamling. If you read this Peter Jackson, don't mess up!! >:D I mean that paragraphing says Bjorn all through lol
I bet you're laughing you're head off right now aren't you?? hehe
just kidding man, as I've said, your posts rock, precisely because they are so controversial!
:)
The Five Isari:
Sarry, Gandy, Raddy, Ally and Pally
A great bunch :)
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 8:16pm
Post #118 of 178
(1244 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Do you mean the lack of Glorfindel
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
or what people have written in the defense of/accusation against it?
As far as I've seen, people are usually reasonable about it. It's a pity we couldn't have him, but the guy who once said to Tolkien "No more ******* Elves" had a valid point.
Where it gets turly weird is shipping i.e. romance.
Who would have known Aragorn was an evil woman hating rapist standing between Arwen and Legolas? Or that Arwen was an evil elitist female dog standing between Aragorn and Éowyn? Or that Legolas was an evil baby eat--- no wait, Legolas is never the bad guy. Sorry.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 8:24pm
Post #119 of 178
(1170 views)
Shortcut
|
Every character, main or minor, is significant in their own way. They have their own unique part to play, which is why they were in the story to begin with.
Sometimes I'm really curious about these people who know Tolkien's books better than him. Oh that foolish old Professor, why did he write in all the useless characters, these stupid songs, these un-Tolkienish talking animals... shame, shame. He certainly would have needed a good beta reader.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
|
|
|
Calmandcloudless
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 8:31pm
Post #120 of 178
(1227 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Is it possible that you are assuming too much?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I agree with Tolkien if you don't fine, I do realize things needs to be changed in the hobbit to make it a movie. But Bard should not be seen as a hero, by having Bard be perceived as a hero by the audience that would be seeing the story from an objective perspective instead of the subjective view from where the dwarves and Bilbo sees the story.
I don't think you can say for certain that Tolkien didn't intend Bard to be perceived as a hero by his readers, or indeed, that he didn't intend Bilbo to perceive Bard as a hero. People aren't arguing with Tolkien here, but with your interpretation of the book. I feel that it's important to be able to distinguish individual interpretation from authorial intent, which does tend to be one of the more tricky areas of literary theory....
(This post was edited by Calmandcloudless on Dec 2 2011, 8:37pm)
|
|
|
Altaira
Superuser
Dec 2 2011, 8:34pm
Post #121 of 178
(1156 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm faster than a speeding bullet too.
Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.
"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower
"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase
TORn Calendar
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 8:38pm
Post #122 of 178
(1151 views)
Shortcut
|
- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
|
|
|
RosieLass
Valinor
Dec 2 2011, 8:39pm
Post #123 of 178
(1178 views)
Shortcut
|
I mean, at some point, you just have to shake your head and admire the persistent idiocy of the arguments. Anyone who can be so thoroughly pwned by logic and evidence time after time, and still come out swinging has...well, gumption, anyway. 
It is always those with the fewest sensible things to say who make the loudest noise in saying them. --Precious Ramotswe (Alexander McCall Smith)
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Dec 2 2011, 8:46pm
Post #124 of 178
(1195 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Right to express their opinion
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Everybody is entitled to their opinion and this is an open forum and even if you dont agree with anothers opinion they have the right to express it without being ridiculed or insulted.
Now Thorgal, please continue with your mindless banter.
- "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
(This post was edited by Jettorex on Dec 2 2011, 8:51pm)
|
|
|
Faenoriel
Tol Eressea
Dec 2 2011, 9:04pm
Post #125 of 178
(1158 views)
Shortcut
|
persons' opinons are silly, his logic is massively flawed, and his arguments are simply wrong
He's still allowed to express them, and we're allowed to call him out.
<3 Gandy, Raddy, Sharkey, Ally & Pally <3
|
|
|
|
|
= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.
