|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
labingi_maura
Rivendell
Oct 7 2007, 7:21pm
Post #1 of 124
(2404 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Hobbit, the movie: will it be a fantasy epic or a children's film? Or both?
|
Can't Post
|
|
I personally love "The Hobbit" but it definitely has a different feel to it than the LOTR books and films. "The Hobbit" feels more like a children's story to me. What makes it feel more child-like to me are the talking animals and trolls. That lends the story a fairy-tale quality.
Notice that in the LOTR films, there aren't any talking animals although in the LOTR books, there was a little fox who "speaks" to himself in FotR, and Gwaihir the Eagle speaks to Gandalf on a couple of occasions. I like it that PJ chose NOT to have the animals talk, it made the movie seem more... for lack of a better word... believeable and adult-oriented.
(Although, for some reason, I accepted Treebeard as a speaking fantasy creature without feeling like the film had suddenly become a children's story, and I can't explain why!)
In "The Hobbit" there are important sequences with talking creatures such as the three trolls, and then the talking Eagles, and then of course the important and story-point-relevant conversation that Bilbo has with Smaug, the Dragon.
Now, all this is part of what makes the book "The Hobbit" so charming, but I am wondering how this will affect the perception of the film(s). I don't want the films to be thought of as "merely" childrens' stories, I want them to have that epic grandeur (and respect) that imbued the LOTR films.
So, I am rather of two minds about this issue. Is it possible to have the talking animals, and still have the film not be perceived as a kind of Disney movie only enjoyable by children or by adults who like fairy-tales?
-Maura
"I am in fact a hobbit in all but size." - J.R.R.Tolkien
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Oct 7 2007, 9:53pm
Post #2 of 124
(1784 views)
Shortcut
|
It will depend on who directs. At this point we are all betting and hoping for PJ and team.Though if someone like Guillermo Del Toro ends up with it, all bets are off. (If you haven't seen "Pan's Labyrinth", do yourself a favor and do so, but prepared, it is VERY violent. PL is a film that might invent a whole new genre, it is completely unlike anything you will ever see. FYI, "Pan" is a creature of the heroine's imagination, a tall, misshapen, menacing-looking faun who talks. The Labyrinth..well, I won't give that away.)
If PJ only executive produces and Toro gets the directing role, it'll be sad but the film will not be a disaster. In fact, we're worried about the Hobbit being too dark if PJ directs it, he'll take the childlike element out of it; but if Del Toro gets it,...!...PL was darker, IMO, then PJ's LOTR.)
Hopefully, PJ can find a delicate compromise. I seem to remember such a controversy in Disney's "Beauty And The Beast." Should the Beast sing or not? This was a cartoon version of a Broadway musical, after all. It was a testament to Howard Ashman's singular genius that the Beast only sang once, a brief stanza that talked about his wonder that Belle actually touched him without being repulsed. So not only did the Beast sing only once, (thus downplaying the corniess factor) but in EXACTLY the right place, in a song which highlights the exact moment they find themselves falling in love. ("She's never looked at me that way before.") So when he did sing, it made it all that much more powerful. It could have turned out so much differently, in the hands of someone with lesser talent. But the Beast was singing from the joy that welled up in his soul in that moment, so it wasn't corny at all.
I have to admit that I need to refresh my memory reading the Hobbit again, but most of it I remember. Smaug will certainly talk, and he will NOT be "cute" or childlike, whoever directs. One of the big concerns for me is that none of the dwarves ends up as comic relief. There can be no equivalent of Gimli in this one. What PJ did with Gimli was fine, , we needed comic relief and it could have come from nowhere else; in the Book Gimli had some great lines, though towards the end PJ was making him a bit too earthy and contemporary (the infamous drinking contest.) I suppose the good thing about the long gap between the Hobbit (whenever it hits) and ROTK, with King Kong and Lovely Bones in between, is that he'll have had adequate time to de-toxify and get the last bits of megalomania out of his system...it was beginning to show by ROTK. (No avalanches of skulls here!)
As with the Beast, if each animal could have only one or two lines, it might not come across as childlike. I really have to refresh my memory of the book. After Bilbo's trek through Mirkwood things get darker; after Dale it descends almost into TTT territory. Great care will have to be taken that the Battle of Five Armies is different from all the other ME battles. (That is one of PJ's achievements: making each battle seem different.) As a whole, PJ and crew will do a really good job of having it start out as lighthearted but getting darker as things go along. As it happens that ids also the challenge facing the producers of Harry Potter 6; the first 2/3rds of the book is a leap between Melrose Place at Hogwarts interspersed between dark, Dickensian flashbacks in the Pensieve; but the last third of the story is dark to the point of being a horror film,and the transition is quite rapid.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 7 2007, 10:10pm
Post #3 of 124
(1741 views)
Shortcut
|
One of the big concerns for me is that none of the dwarves ends up as comic relief.
Oh, I don't know. There are times in the book when they're presented as somewhat ridiculous, and that should be in the film. Another challenge is that, with a few exceptions, the dwarves are characterized more as a collective than as individuals (there's nothing to differentiate between say, Ori, Oin, and Bifur). My recommendation is that the dwarves be treated like the conspiring junior samurai in Akira Kurosawa's Sanjuro. (See them in the background here. That's is a wonderful film, by the way.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
orcbane
Gondor
Oct 7 2007, 10:37pm
Post #4 of 124
(1754 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thats the 300 Million Dollar Question
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I have read quite a bit about how fans feel about this. You both make good points, and the Hobbit is a book of much different tone and atmosphere. And as concieved, designed to be a children's book, it is a masterpiece of the genre. I have read and listened to it many times in the last few years. I get many laughs from Tolkien's characterizations, such as the Trolls, Bilbo, and really all the rest, Gandalf & Dwarves included. It has witty humor throughout.
Many want something as close to LoTR as they can get, PJ and original cast included and are willing to sacrifice the original Hobbit story for it.
Many are divided on the subject, wanting both a film like LoTR and Tolkien's children's story. They frankly don't know what would be best, or how it would be done, but hope for a successful synthesis.
A smaller group, I believe, want a film true to the book Hobbit's themes and dialogs.
The idea of making the Hobbit in two films, or creating an additional artificial film out of 'connecting material', makes the concept more complicated.
Most, I think it safe to say, want something much sooner rather then later.
Ultimately, it will likely be decided by the vision that wins out in the company boardrooms, and that will be the one that seems likely to them to have the most chance of large financial success. I don't feel it has to be completely mercenary, in that what is portrayed as 'what the millions of Tolkien Fan's want and expect' or likely to meet fans approval will carry some weight in the arguments. It will probably be said if the hardcore fans don't buy it, it will probably not be the blockbuster all hope it will be.
But to return to the original subject, we are not sure what we want.
|
|
|
Compa_Mighty
Tol Eressea
Oct 8 2007, 2:22am
Post #5 of 124
(1713 views)
Shortcut
|
I have no doubt. Ig PJ does it, it will be an Epic, he will reinvent The Hobbit in the way Tolkien would have wanted it to be later in his life.
He will introduce the story in the same tone as the rest of the legendarium!
Let it be heard! We want Jackson for The Hobbit!
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 2:32am
Post #6 of 124
(1874 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Have you read Tolkien's revision attempts in "The History of 'The Hobbit'"?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
If so, do you prefer those three chapters to what appears in The Hobbit we know?
I have not, but that book's author/editor, John Rateliff, wrote here that Tolkien's "abandoning the attempt was essentially a decision to let the earlier books stand on its own merits".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
Compa_Mighty
Tol Eressea
Oct 8 2007, 2:37am
Post #7 of 124
(1714 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm still waiting for my edition...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But... Tolkien did say he regretted the childish tone in which he wrote The Hobbit. That doesn't mean the book doesn't stand on its own, or that Tolkien didn't respect his previous work, it only means that eventually it could have worked in a more mature way. I think that is what Peter Jackson will bring us. Don't expect la-la-la-ing Elves in Rivendell, or talking Eagles à la Narnia.
All those things will be addressed in a LOTR-like way, plus the Necromancer and White Council businesses will draw it closer to The Fellowship.
Let it be heard! We want Jackson for The Hobbit!
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 3:34am
Post #8 of 124
(1708 views)
Shortcut
|
have brought the story of the White Council and the Necromancer forward? Or would they have remained in the background, as being irrelevant to the story of The Hobbit?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
Cuinniel
Registered User
Oct 8 2007, 6:10am
Post #9 of 124
(1728 views)
Shortcut
|
I would hope that it would be both. A fantasy epic children's film. We would all go see it no matter how the movie is labeled. The story was mandatory reading when I went to school so you have a huge group of middle aged people who will watch a movie filled with childhood memories. It was written as a children's book and I would just hope it would be done very well like LOTR.
'There are three,' said Legolas, gazing out over the plain. 'See how they run? There is Hasufel, and there is my friend Arod beside him! But there is another that strides ahead: a very great horse. I have not seen his like before.'
'Nor will you again,' said Gandalf. 'That is Shadowfax. He is the chief of the Mearas, lords of horses, and not even Theoden, King of Rohan, has ever looked on a better. Does he not shine like silver, and run as smoothly as a swift stream? He has come for me: the horse of the White Rider. We are going to battle together.'
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Oct 8 2007, 6:15am
Post #10 of 124
(1701 views)
Shortcut
|
Oddly enough, that oner detail I remember from the Hobbit while first watching FOTR....hard to imagine any of PJ's Elves in Rivendell singing "la la la!"
Tolkien's "regretting" the childlike tone of The Hobbit is the natural reaction of an artist who had significantly evolved in his work, and whether in terms of life or art of whatever, thought that he had "progressed" far beyond the percieved "limitations" of that work. This happens all the time with artists, esp musicians. It's fascinating to read, for example, of Bono's reactions to going back and listening to U2's early 80's work... ("I sound like a girl!" was among the milder comments. LOL! Even more interesting when they go back and re-do a song from 16 yrs before.)
What always fascinated me about these comments was that the germ legends of The Silmarillion had been written long before The Hobbit, of course, so it's actually more of a stretch to imagine how (and why) he had decided to "dumb the Elves down", so to speak, for The Hobbit. This, more than any sort of hatred for percieved deficiencies in the work, is probably why he made the comments. The Elves of The Hobbit don't jive with those of The Sil, and he knew readers of LOTR would be the first to point out the inconsistency. Though not many seem to have minded.
You know, I used to think that a script would be an easy thing, no matter who wrote it; but this is going to be more of a pain than one realizes. At least the fans were all of one opinion more or less about the tone of LOTR.
Honestly, I have to go back and re-read the book before I canhave an honest opinion...I haven't read it in yrs. But I would like to think that PJ< above all, knows that in order for him to grow as an artist, he can't just make "an organic extension" of LOTR. IMO< It must start out as a kid;s film and "grow into" the LOTR pre-narrative. I think he can manage such a transiton. Look at the opening scene of ROTK. Talk about a change in tone in just 5 minutes!
|
|
|
Donry
Tol Eressea
Oct 8 2007, 6:16am
Post #11 of 124
(1652 views)
Shortcut
|
like it to be a fantasy epic....just cause.
What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?"
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Oct 8 2007, 6:23am
Post #12 of 124
(1715 views)
Shortcut
|
I hate to say it, but IMO, any filming of the White Council would depend on if Chris Lee is A) still with us, and B) if he is again on talking terms with Peter. As I understand it, he is still, shall we say, less than happy at his footage being cut out of ROTK (and his not getting a Screen Actors Guild Ensemble trophy as a result.) It would be possible that PJ would want those scenes filmed first, for....well, painfully obvious reasons. Lee is still in very good shape, considering his age, but you neverknow.
Knowing PJ, OF COURSE he'd bring the White Council and Necromancer story forward--esp if there were 2 films. If not, there would at least be "flashbacks" a la FOTR when Gandalf at Isengard was shown onscreen,thoughin the book it was a narrative flashback from Elrond. I think that evenb if it were a kid's film he';d still want to have it "organically fused" to LOTR as much as possible. Which of course woud differ it from the book. But then, that would be consistent with his cinematic vision. And after all, it IS his version and vision. I wouldn't mind. Either way.
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Oct 8 2007, 6:25am)
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Oct 8 2007, 7:26am
Post #13 of 124
(1746 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I find that a lot of the "childish" tone...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
comes from the narrator's voice. Reading The Hobbit is like having a story told to you as a child, full of little asides; "Gandalf! If all the stories I've heard about him....!", "he wished he were back in his hobbit hole...not for the last time!" and so on. That element will almost certainly be dropped. And I'm pretty sure the tra-la-laing Elves will go too, though perhaps we might get some Elvish music that isn't a lament, as nearly all the Elvish songs in LOTR were.
Which leaves us with talking trolls, Eagles, spiders and a dragon.
The stone trolls PJ showed us in FOTR had markedly more "human" faces than the Cave Troll we saw in Moria, so if the voices are done well, they should be able to show them as a more intelligent variety of troll which can speak. Plus, we already heard Bilbo telling the story of how they were arguing over how to eat them, and saw them along the journey so the groundwork has already been laid for the returning audience.
We only see the talking Eagles while Gandalf is with the party, so I would think he could be the interpreter for the rest of the group and we wouldn't need to hear the Eagles speaking. We already saw him speak to a moth to summon an Eagle in FOTR, so I don't think most people would think it strange if he were shown to communicate with them again.
The spiders in Mirkwood talk in the book, but hissing whispery noises might be enough in a movie. Or perhaps understanding them might be spun as an effect of wearing the Ring, which Bilbo does at that point.
Which leaves Smaug. Talking dragons are fairly common in fantasy literature and movies, which might present more of a problem than otherwise, since it would be hard to avoid seeming to copy other films. I think I might prefer a sort of mental telepathy, similar to what we saw between Galadriel and Elrond in LOTR, where Bilbo would hear his voice, but you wouldn't see Smaug speaking. This would emphasize the power and intelligence of Smaug, while sparing us a dragon with jaw movements that are trying to resemble human speech. A lot could be done with good creature design and expressive eye and facial movements. Or you could keep him mostly in shadow, with just glowing eyes and his outline to be seen during the conversation with Bilbo, and only show him fully when he charges out to attack from the air and level Laketown, at which point he's roaring in fury rather than talking. That could be pretty effective dramatically as well; seeing just his eyes and size and outline and a claw or a wing or so and hearing his voice, then seeing his full size as he roars out of the Mountain to seek revenge.
I really think that talking animals shouldn't necesarily prevent this movie from being epic, grand and respected. If the world feels the same as it did in LOTR and the same care is put into creature design as for the previous movies, it should be exciting seeing new elements of Middle-earth, rather than distracting or cheesy. Assuming Weta and PJ working on the film, even if PJ isn't directing. Under a totally new creative team, all bets are off.
Silverlode
"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you." -On Fairy Stories
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 8:56am
Post #14 of 124
(1702 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The "childlike tone of The Hobbit"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
was there because it was a story written for Tolkien's own children, appropriate to the age they were at the time. He didn't intend the tale for publication. When Allen & Unwin picked it up, he had to write an ending, which is indeed in a rather different tone from the earlier part.
I haven't read The History of the Hobbit, but from the Letters I gather that he first conceived of it as independent of the Legendarium: Elrond wasn't that Elrond, for example, just a familiar name, and I'm quite sure the la-la-ing, drunken elves weren't those elves!
Early drafts of "the Hobbit sequel" read very much like The Hobbit. It was really only after LotR began to take its final, more mature shape that the connections to the Legendarium fell naturally into place, and post-LotR drafts of the Sil material made adjustments to facilitate the connection. I would interpret any statements he might have made about "regretting" the tone of The Hobbit as reflecting the realization that it really should be retrofitted into the "big picture" as it had evolved. Your comparison to Bono and other artists is quite apt.
Son of Elizabeth in Frodo's tree
March, 2007
Elizabeth is the TORnsib formerly known as 'erather'
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Oct 8 2007, 11:44am
Post #15 of 124
(1681 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I hope this post shows "right"...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...have gotten a mail from one of the mods that my replies are popping up in the wrong place?
This site has, over the past few days been a great distraction to me, but I can temporarily be distracted not much longer. I have something personal that I just HAVE to vent about, and I'd rather not do it on TORN. So if anyone is interested, please mail me privately at cochrane_tina@yahoo.com. Hey, I know I'm one of TORN's epic lurkers and sometimes posters, but...:)Thanks
|
|
|
hasufel
Rivendell
Oct 8 2007, 3:01pm
Post #16 of 124
(1672 views)
Shortcut
|
It must start out as a kid;s film and "grow into" the LOTR pre-narrative. I think he can manage such a transiton.
Absolutely how I see it as well.
This is one of the reasons Jackson is a must for this project.
I believe he will remain true to the original work, yet transition so it all fits together nicely.
After all is said and done, he will be judged on the entire body of Tolkein work. And I believe the majority will be very pleased.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 4:19pm
Post #17 of 124
(1672 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"thought that he had 'progressed'"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I agree with Elizabeth that your comparison to Bono is apt; but as your use of scare quotes indicates, we needn't agree with either Bono or Tolkien that their earlier work had been superseded; only that it has a different tone than the later work. If the tone of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings can differ as books --as you note "not many" readers "seem to have minded"-- why not as films?
What always fascinated me about these comments was that the germ legends of The Silmarillion had been written long before The Hobbit, of course, so it's actually more of a stretch to imagine how (and why) he had decided to "dumb the Elves down", so to speak, for The Hobbit.
Ah, but have you read the Book of Lost Tales, Tolkien's original attempt at an elvish mythology? The elves there, at times, are not so far from The Hobbit -- "The Cottage of Lost Play", anyone?
At least the fans were all of one opinion more or less about the tone of LOTR.
The consensus is "too grim" -- right? ;-)
But I would like to think that PJ, above all, knows that in order for him to grow as an artist, he can't just make "an organic extension" of LotR. IMO, It must start out as a kid's film and "grow into" the LotR pre-narrative. I think he can manage such a transiton.
I like that idea, and I hope so.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 4:27pm
Post #18 of 124
(1684 views)
Shortcut
|
|
There's no story to "bring forward".
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The thing about the White Council's attack on Dol Goldur is, Tolkien wrote almost nothing about it. They attacked, and Sauron feigned defeat and left. Beyond a few snippets of debate at Council meetings, there is nothing more. Jackson & Co. may invent something very good, of course.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
labingi_maura
Rivendell
Oct 8 2007, 4:37pm
Post #19 of 124
(1648 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Wow, exellent ideas and observations.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I was never aware that later in life Tolkien was thinking about revising "The Hobbit" to feel less child-oriented! But it makes sense, I can totally understand that. Good observation that a lot of that child-like quality comes from the narrator, which could be easily avoided in the film(s). All the ideas everyone offered make me feel much more optimistic that this film really could synthesize the charming elements of the book with a crackin' good epic adventure film. I agree: starting off in a lighter vein, and then "evolving" into the dramatic tale of sweeping grandeur that would then segue beautifully into the tone of LOTR... I think that is a wonderful way to approach it.
I really like the idea of having the talking creatures communicate telepathically, with Gandalf or with Bilbo, I think that would work. I love the idea of Smaug being mostly in shadow at first, but it is a long convervsaion... Maybe he could be revealed suddenly when he becomes impatient and angry with the dratted intruder he can't see, because we do need to see clearly at one point the bare spot on his chest.
And you are right, Sunflower, that "Pan's Labyrinth" is very dark even though it has talking fantasy creatures. I personally found it so dark and tragic that I was rather depressed for a couple of days after seeing it, it was that powerful to me. (I hope that nobody took any children to see it; I think it would traumatize a child to see that film, excellent though it was.)
And I like the idea of individualizing the dwarves; they should be able to be distinguished from each other. And, if the elves sing, I hope its done with an ethereal quality, more like the LOTR elven atmosphere. I think Elves should be awesome, not pixie-like.
So, overall, everything I've read you guys discussing sounds very encouraging, that "The Hobbit" can do it all: it can start out with sweetness, humor, charm, and high adventure, and evolve into serious epic drama with the huge Battle of the 5 Armies and include lots of character development and change. Bilbo starts out extremely callow and naive, and ends up a very worldy-wise hobbit who is then considered "mad" by his fellow hobbits. Very encouraging!
-Maura
"I am in fact a hobbit in all but size." - J.R.R.Tolkien
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 4:43pm
Post #20 of 124
(1684 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Semi-independent of the legendarium.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
When Tolkien told the story to his children, he may have kept elements of the legendarium out --and at that stage, Elrond may have just been a name-- but when he began to write out the tale, it was quickly set in a fairy-tale version of Middle-earth (before that name was used), including an early reference to Sauron's defeat by Lúthien. That was cut from the later drafts, but the Necromancer remained Sauron, and the first edition of The Hobbit includes references to the kindreds of elves, and of the "Other Side" of the Sea.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 4:46pm
Post #21 of 124
(1694 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"Jackson.. will be judged on the entire body of Tolkien's work"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Can you clarify what you mean? The rights to most of Tolkien's work are not available for adaptation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
Patty
Immortal
Oct 8 2007, 4:51pm
Post #22 of 124
(1633 views)
Shortcut
|
Quote
"starting off in a lighter vein, and then "evolving" into the dramatic tale of sweeping grandeur that would then segue beautifully into the tone of LOTR"...
is very appropriate. The lighter vein at the beginning of the LOTR films is the perfect example. When the story is about life in The Shire it is by nature going to be light, even filmed as Jackson did on a sunny day, to show the general way life there is lived on a day to day basis. Howard Shore could score a small ominous musical undercurrent as Thorin et al are telling the backstory of how the dragon came and took their treasure and sacked Dale. Lightness again showing Bilbo's initial unwillingness to go.
The journey up until the encounter with the trolls, again light. More backstory could be told during this journey if necessary. Optimism up to and including their time in Rivendell, with again threads of ominous music (music will again be very important in this movie to maintain the balance between all the different themes and moods.)
More danger and growth as it segues into pre-LotR as it goes along is, I agree, the best way to go.
For Gondor!
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Oct 8 2007, 5:03pm
Post #23 of 124
(1650 views)
Shortcut
|
Some of the best writing in the book. And Tolkien was quite content to keep a talking dragon in even his grimmest tale, after all.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Discuss The Children of Húrin in the Reading Room, June 11-October 14.
|
|
|
labingi_maura
Rivendell
Oct 8 2007, 5:32pm
Post #24 of 124
(1642 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Definitely, music is such a key factor
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I really hope that Howard Shore can and will be the composer on "The Hobbit". I had heard that although he had felt that LOTR was like his signature piece and he was very glad he'd had the opportunity to create that masterwork, that it just pretty much wiped him out there at the end; he was being worked nearly to death. So, I wonder if he is interested in doing "The Hobbit". I really hope so.
One of the things that concerns me most is continuity. I don't want there to be jarring inconsistancies from TH to LOTR, in any area. My idea of perfection would be for TH and LOTR to feel seamless.
-Maura
"I am in fact a hobbit in all but size." - J.R.R.Tolkien
|
|
|
hasufel
Rivendell
Oct 8 2007, 7:02pm
Post #25 of 124
(1631 views)
Shortcut
|
|
apostrophe "s" added changes meaning
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You added an apostrophe "s" to Tolkien in my statement.
I was not implying that he would be judged on ALL of Tolkien's work.
But he will be judged on the entire body of Tolkien work that he has done.
In other words, he will be judged on the five movies (Hobbit, prequel, FOTR, TTT, ROTK) as one giant project.
So he can either quit while he is ahead. Or he can add to his legend.
Look at Star Wars. There are many people who believe that the 2nd trilogy has actually reduced the impact of the first one.
Jackson will not make the same mistake. To me these five movies need to flow into each other and provide close to seamless storytelling. All the while remaining as true to the orignial stories as possible.
It will be difficult. but I believe that Jackson already has a plan for it, and we will all be pleased with the outcome.
|
|
|
|
|
1
