|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Sep 8 2012, 6:57pm
Post #176 of 205
(5403 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Sorry I missed your earlier post
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and the more I think about it, the more I like your idea.
(Further to my apology... There are just so many threads covering similar ground that it's hard to keep abreast of it all, even for someone who spends a fair bit of time here.)
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Sep 8 2012, 7:08pm
Post #177 of 205
(5300 views)
Shortcut
|
then what would be the ending of movie 2 if not the death of Smaug? I would consider that a "messy" scene, you know, blood, death, fight, etc. Which is the same thing expected in the Bo5A. Why having two in the same movie?
In the LOTR trilogy each movie ended with the 'ending' of something.
DoS might end with the White Council's assault on Dol Guldur, saving the demise of Smaug for the first or second act of TaBA.
'Thus spake Ioreth, wise-woman of Gondor: The hands of the king are the hands of a healer, and so shall the rightful king be known.' - Gandalf the White
|
|
|
rings7
Rohan
Sep 8 2012, 7:30pm
Post #178 of 205
(5332 views)
Shortcut
|
|
hmmm, i still think the *spoilers*
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
death of Smaug should be in movie 2.
(This post was edited by entmaiden on Sep 8 2012, 8:32pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Sep 8 2012, 7:31pm
Post #179 of 205
(5974 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Who knows? It could still happen that way.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It is seeming more and more likely that Smaug's end will come in the final film. But, honestly, it could still go either way.
'Thus spake Ioreth, wise-woman of Gondor: The hands of the king are the hands of a healer, and so shall the rightful king be known.' - Gandalf the White
|
|
|
Ardamírë
Valinor
Sep 8 2012, 7:38pm
Post #180 of 205
(5309 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm having trouble keeping up as well.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Not sure what I'm gonna do come film release! 
About Film 2's end, I just hope PJ think it's a good idea.
Think about it - Smaug's reveal during his conversation with Bilbo, followed by the reveal of his full glory during his flight and rage. Then film three will have his full power and destructiveness shown through his brutal attack on Laketown.
"...and his first memory of Middle-earth was the green stone above her breast, as she sang above his cradle while Gondolin was still in flower."
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Sep 8 2012, 8:27pm
Post #181 of 205
(5178 views)
Shortcut
|
|
1/4 of the entire story you say?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
hmmm might explain the summer release for film 3... they are secretly planning to spring a fourth film on us with a December 2014 release. 
Aside: I wonder if all this film splitting portends a looming writer's strike... the last one jammed things up for a good year or so.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Sep 8 2012, 9:41pm
Post #182 of 205
(5098 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Translation = I am not upset, so you shouldn't be either???
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Begging your pardon, but we are. It is too early an ending, unless there is a GREAT deal of Addenda. And even so, it suggests a gimmicky cliffhanger ending. I know there are some who will find ways to excuse and praise every change Peter makes from here unto infinity. He could announce Smaug will actually be depicted as one of Sauron's were forms, and some would justify and praise it, and ask the rest of us what our problem is for not seeing the brilliance.
I have always supported some flashback and Dol Guldur appendecies material, so long as it did not blatantly contradict the events which are specifically mentioned in the source text, and so long as those aspects did not drown/entirely overtake the main story (or excessively alter the structure thereof).
Here is my problem, speaking solely for myself. I rather dislike being jerked around. I do not enjoy being told, or having it strongly and implicitly implied, that things are going one way for months on end, and then having everything upended at the last damn minute. Among my longtime concerns about the splitting of the movie were the following: 1) that we would get cliffhanger endings, more as a gimmick than out of any proper or required narrative structuring. 2) that the first film, which in some ways should be the most enchanting and true to the novel, would either end too early in the story, or that it would end up over bloated with addenda. Or both. Now what seems likely is both.
Whether you share them or not, there are LOTS of causes for concern among those have long been wary of the constant restructuring of this story and these films. Is it still 'extraneous C**P' if it was written by Tolkien?
Sorry, but I really don't understand why this particular announcement makes so much difference. It's still the same film, just divided differently. If you really hate the idea of the backstory of the dwarves and the White Council v. Necromancer story being developed from their brief appearance in the book, or of other unspecified Appendix material being added, then I can see that you would have problems with the film(s) but I can't see why those problems are better or worse because the film's ending in a different place. If you were going to like it before then you'll still like it, won't you? If not, then it probably won't make any difference where they end.
Whatever, I hope you'll enjoy it more than you're expecting.
"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"
"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."
(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Sep 8 2012, 9:44pm)
|
|
|
rings7
Rohan
Sep 8 2012, 10:29pm
Post #183 of 205
(6175 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Im one of those who *always* praises PJ no matter what
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but i've had a hard time doing it since yesterday. I always i say i trust PJ and he can do all the mess he wants. But yeah, this is the first time i can honestly say that im angry with this (the split of movie 1 and 2). To me movie 1 has been mutilated. Too early of an ending. Not hyped about AUJ anymore. I know it will be good, but im not that excited anymore. And this is from an all time supporter.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Sep 8 2012, 10:52pm
Post #184 of 205
(5390 views)
Shortcut
|
It was a genuine question (to someone else) whose position on this I didn't understand and wanted to. And as your objections to what you're expecting to see in the film are different from the other poster's I'm not quite sure why you're getting snarky with me for asking them a question. I admit I was a bit taken aback - still am - by seeing Tolkien's background and Appendix material described as 'extraneous C**P' but if that's their view, it's their view (it doesn't appear to be yours, though).
Do I expect everyone to feel about it as I do? No, of course not. But if nobody is ever going to try to understand how the other side thinks and feels, what's the point in talking about it at all?
|
|
|
marillaraina
Rohan
Sep 8 2012, 11:37pm
Post #185 of 205
(5090 views)
Shortcut
|
I honestly don't get the issue. I mean I get that it's not something some people prefer but it's it's not like these characters/stories have been removed, they are just going to be in the next film. What's the big deal? How does it matter WHERE the film ends, so long as the ending is well done? It may not be a cliffhanger, it may be that they actually get rescued and are taken to the eyrie and from thence off to...much like in FOTR the fellowship broke and from thence off to... What do people think Barrels out of Bounds would be if not a "cliffhanger" ending? They are riding barrels down a raging river, that's pretty cliffhangery, more so than being rescued by the Eagles, assuming they rescue is actually completed and it ends with them planning their next move from there.
I'm not sure I understand why it's a big deal to have to wait a little longer for a character to show up, the character is still going to be there. The main characters are Bilbo, Gandalf and the some of the dwarves, they are all going to be there from the first film. Some of the other characters will show up in the 2nd film instead of the first.
I can't see how it's a bad thing to flesh out some of the stories that Tolkien himself related to The Hobbit in appendices and stuff like that. Clearly he wanted the information out there and for people reading it to consider it part of the story, otherwise he wouldn't have bothered to do it.
One could no more create an equation to express the value of the Mona Lisa than one could to describe the narrative distribution of a story over three cinematic installments. In any case:
Original AUJ:
The Shire/unexpected party
Throllshaw
Rivendell
Misty Mountains
Eagles
Beorn
Mirkwood
Elves/Thranduil
Barrels out of Bond
Necromancer/White Council
Dwarf flashbacks
New AUJ:
The Shire/unexpected party
Throllshaw
Rivendell
Misty Mountains
Eagles
(less) Necromancer/White Council
(fewer) Dwarf flashbacks
Beorn, Mirkwood, the Spiders, the Wood Elves/Thranduil/Legolas/Tauriel, barrels out of bond, at least some of the White Council/Necromancer storyline (Rhosgobel? the Thrain attack?), and probably some of the flashback material, have all been removed if the new ending is correct. So yes, easily half if not more (alright so 2/3 may have been a slight over-exaggeration) of the actual NARRATIVE/CHARACTER development), will not longer be present in the film coming out in December. The story's been severed edited down, the cast has been reduced, and if anything, we'll be getting 1/4 of the total story, rather then the original entire "journey" which was to included in Film 1...IF this new ending is correct (which it seems to be).
(This post was edited by marillaraina on Sep 8 2012, 11:47pm)
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 9 2012, 12:25am
Post #186 of 205
(27900 views)
Shortcut
|
This likely means that not only will those other characters/storylines not be removed, but they will most certainly get the time and attention they deserve. I always feared that a film 1 that went from the Shire to the River Running would give Beorn, and Thranduil, short shrift.
(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Sep 9 2012, 12:25am)
|
|
|
marillaraina
Rohan
Sep 9 2012, 6:40am
Post #187 of 205
(4961 views)
Shortcut
|
This likely means that not only will those other characters/storylines not be removed, but they will most certainly get the time and attention they deserve. I always feared that a film 1 that went from the Shire to the River Running would give Beorn, and Thranduil, short shrift.
I agree. I couldn't see how a film that covered that much ground could possibly do more than give a passing attention to those characters. It would "Oh here's Beorn....talking animals?...Bye Beorn"...Lost in the Mirkwood...Oh look Legolas' dad!..Capture/Escape....no more Legolas' dad for a while"
I'd also imagine the three films individually will be a little shorter than the two films individually. Maybe add 15 or 20 minutes to each film individually, so instead of 2 films equally 6 hours, maybe it'll be three films equaling about 7, maybe a little less.
I mean I don't know about that, but it's possible they might not be adding THAT much, just enough to do more justice to some of the individual story parts and the characters involved in them.
If someone wants to see Beorn I'd thing it would be better to wait a movie and get to really see him, really have him make a an impression instead of just essentially running past him as would have to happen in movie that went all the way to River. That would leave an awful lot of space to film in the following movie(s).
(This post was edited by marillaraina on Sep 9 2012, 6:44am)
|
|
|
morro91
Bree
Sep 9 2012, 6:50am
Post #188 of 205
(5790 views)
Shortcut
|
|
*spoiler* is in the first movie
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Not sure if this has been seen before but the poster for AUJ
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-7-j0psUOmzk/UEwF2OX7nJI/AAAAAAAABww/jqHf4iopBJs/s1024/splash_background.jpg
Has Orlando Bloom and Evangeline Lilly in the cast credits, which is kind of interesting.
|
|
|
Gimli1252
Bree
Sep 9 2012, 6:55am
Post #189 of 205
(5444 views)
Shortcut
|
''There is one dwarf yet in Moria, who still draws breath''
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Sep 9 2012, 7:46am
Post #190 of 205
(5660 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I understand exactly how you feel about the films.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I still want to see them, very much. I still expect them to be good movies. But I am not excited the way I was prior to all of these changes.
And, as I have said, it may just be one change too many. This may be that proverbial straw that breaks the back of some of us camels. Even with a world of filler, it has the ring of a too abrubt ending. But what is to be expected when The Hobbit is forced to take the shape of a trilogy? but i've had a hard time doing it since yesterday. I always i say i trust PJ and he can do all the mess he wants. But yeah, this is the first time i can honestly say that im angry with this (the split of movie 1 and 2). To me movie 1 has been mutilated. Too early of an ending. Not hyped about AUJ anymore. I know it will be good, but im not that excited anymore. And this is from an all time supporter.
"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"
"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."
|
|
|
Mooseboy018
Grey Havens
Sep 9 2012, 8:26am
Post #191 of 205
(5328 views)
Shortcut
|
"How does it matter WHERE the film ends, so long as the ending is well done?"
Right now, it's just hard to imagine how they're suddenly going to turn the eagle rescue into an ending when it was never meant to be one. They had the barrel scene as the ending for years, and the character arcs led up to that moment to work as a single film. Now that has been completely abandoned, and what was probably originally just going to be an action scene is going to somehow be changed into an ending.
And if they finished shooting the pickups BEFORE the decision was made, they're not going to have much to work with to transform it into an emotionally satisfying ending. There's definitely a danger of it feeling too much like a cliffhanger without the sense of accomplishment that would have come from Bilbo freeing the dwarves on his own and escaping down the river towards their final destination.
|
|
|
rings7
Rohan
Sep 10 2012, 2:30am
Post #193 of 205
(5396 views)
Shortcut
|
so much excitement after the comic con, and now im all 'whatever' about it. At least for movie 1.
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 10 2012, 2:48am
Post #194 of 205
(5162 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Wait until you see the new trailer
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I guarantee you will not be "whatever" about film 1 after that... 
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Sep 10 2012, 2:57am
Post #195 of 205
(5232 views)
Shortcut
|
all these changes have sucked the joy out of these films. I can't speak for anyone other than myself but I think all these last minute changes are ridiculous. To take something that was years in the thought process and to change it with mere weeks left on the deadline. After giving numerous spoilers that will likely be over a year in the waiting, it just seems a bit of a cruel joke to me and with not so much as a apology from PJ or WB to the fans who have been waiting patiently. Just seems to me it has become more about the money than anything else at this point. Which if your WB or PJ standing to make millions I guess its no big deal. 
|
|
|
Elessar
Valinor
Sep 10 2012, 3:09am
Post #196 of 205
(5205 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't think that's even close to correct. I think the people who it might have are folks who have been on the negative side from the start. I would say from what I've seen across the web and folks I've talked to everyone is still very excited. For me personally I'm as excited as ever and looking forward to the next three years having a theater experience in Middle-Earth waiting for me. Plus I'm sure I've got more overnight camp outs at comic-con ahead of me as well. lol
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 10 2012, 3:19am
Post #197 of 205
(5278 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Interestingly, with each change
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I have grown MORE excited about the films.
First, the three film announcement. To me, this meant that all the key moments from the book would be in, and that PJ would take his time telling a solid story.
Second, the decision to end film one at the eagle rescue, and this convinced me even more that PJ would not short-change any aspect of the journey.
Though I am dying to see Beorn and Thranduil in action, I think these decisions mean that when we do see them in action, we will get a robust treatment, rather than quick drive-bys.
Honestly, I am thanking PJ right now, and could not imagine wanting an apology!
|
|
|
MrCere
Sr. Staff
Sep 10 2012, 3:31am
Post #198 of 205
(6073 views)
Shortcut
|
I put it in black and white on TORn's front page on Aug. 1 at the end of a long article. I had a pretty good hunch.
I have no choice but to believe in free will.
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
The cake is a lie
My blog
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Sep 10 2012, 3:42am
Post #199 of 205
(7292 views)
Shortcut
|
|
MrCere speculated about it a while back (Aug 1)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And an unnamed source I am in touch with asserted as much a little over a month and a half ago.
(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Sep 10 2012, 3:42am)
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Sep 10 2012, 3:59am
Post #200 of 205
(6365 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That and Lacrimae Rerum's observation in
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
this thread (above) means it's a slam dunk as far as I'm concerned.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)
|
|
|
|
|
