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 Hobbit:
Those with concerns...
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next page Last page  View All


Oct 4 2012, 6:52pm

Post #26 of 135 (3828 views)
I'm worried that this film is for the mainstream adience [In reply to] Can't Post

-Shorter, lighter, and funnier than LOTR. While the book is this way, I feel they will take it too far.

-Remember that scene is Episode III of Star Wars when Chewbacca was needlessly there? I feel like we're getting a lot of cameos like that, making Middle Earth feel very small. At least Star Wars had the sense to leave out Young Han Solo, please do the same with Aragorn. He is not important to this story.

-Gollum. He is a terryifying character in the book. I am worried he will not be in the movie.

-Dwarves. If mostly all of them are comic relief, I will get annoyed quickly. Bombur is your comic relief, anyone else being goofy just makes dwarves look goofy as a whole. They ruined Gimli, please don't ruin the race of Dwarves.


Oct 4 2012, 6:56pm

Post #27 of 135 (3676 views)
That's true ! We can only judge the trailer in itself ! [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't really like that trailer, the music and the rythme are not of my taste, but I can't say for the films for now. Even a 10min sequence of the film would probably not be enough ! If I only had seen of tRotK the battle at the black gate sequence, with aragorn's speech, if think I would have been sure this movie was crap.


Oct 4 2012, 7:32pm

Post #28 of 135 (3703 views)
beating a dead horse [In reply to] Can't Post

poor Bill the pony, leave him alone! Angelic

"The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair; and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater."-J.R.R. Tolkien

"Thanks for the money!" -George Lucas


Oct 4 2012, 7:35pm

Post #29 of 135 (3727 views)
a thousand times yes [In reply to] Can't Post

I feel Tolkien makes it very clear these Dwarves are way in over their head from the get go. I mean really, what were they planning to do once they reached The Lonely Mountain?

"The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair; and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater."-J.R.R. Tolkien

"Thanks for the money!" -George Lucas

Dlanor da Great

Oct 4 2012, 9:58pm

Post #30 of 135 (3722 views)
Yes, i fully believe that .... [In reply to] Can't Post

...the movies will progress to a different tone and color palate as the LOTR trilogy did.
Especially when you consider how the FOTR felt different from TTT and ROTK which both largely took place in the world of Men.
Just based on how PJ handled the LOTR trilogy, I think those who are concerned of the tone of The first Hobbit movie should take heart in the likely hood that the tone will be more fantasy and light hearted until we reach the 'real' world of Men in the next two movies.
The second and third Hobbit movies largely take place in the rather moody looking Laketown where you will find a brooding Bard and the corrupt Master of Laketown. Plus considering how dirty the dwarves appear to get in the blogs , and the Tragedies that happen, I pressume to expect less "cartoonish" looking characters.
And ,of course, the evil characters Smaug, the Necromancer and the Non-CG orcs I will expect to be more menacing then the Great Goblin, cave trolls and Gollum.

Tol Eressea

Oct 4 2012, 10:01pm

Post #31 of 135 (3650 views)
One can only hope so// [In reply to] Can't Post


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Oct 4 2012, 11:07pm

Post #32 of 135 (3653 views)
I fully agree with the need for openmindedness [In reply to] Can't Post

And just such commitments as we have here not to pre-judge the films before we have seen them. I was recently in the position of having an acquaintance tell me about this short story he had written about Pinocchio eating porky pies while his pants were on fire and it occurs to me that if I hadn't adopted the sort of neutrality and openmindedness which is exemplified in these posts, well, I would have thought the whole thing was a load of baloney.



Oct 5 2012, 12:21am

Post #33 of 135 (3517 views)
I think that they WOULD have become such generational classics if they had kept the number of films [In reply to] Can't Post

down to 1 or 2 at most. I think three is too many for a sit down holiday classic. But we shall see.

About many of the other things I agree. I am fine with the colour being lighter and brighter. It should be. It is that kind of story. I am fine with some of the villains (goblins in particular) looking a little cartoonish, so long as the CGI is flawless. I do have concerns about shortcomings in the CGI with the wargs, and I don't like that evidently animitronics are out for the films.

I hope the increased colour and flare will also come with a greater incorporation of Gandalf's magic from the books. Wink

In Reply To
that skews the facts toward the dark and dismal side.

The Hobbit was never "part" of Lord of the Rings. It has always its own animal. The Hobbit is a fairytale and not high fantasy. Its style is different. Its vision of Middle-earth is limited and fanciful. Parts of it are cute, humorous and silly. I would expect any movies produced from this book to honor all of those qualities.

There is an old saw: Familiarity breeds contempt. I think that there is some of this at work here. I also believe that many false expectations have been clung to and cherished to the point that they limit the ability to see what is good.

I knew when Del Toro left and Peter announced his intent to film in 3D that we were looking at a horse of a different color. That feeling has grown with the passing of time but it has not been a negative thing for me. I think that these movies might just turn out to be the generational equivalent of what The Wizard of OZ was to the children of the 1930s-1940s-1950s-1960s...

I am looking forward to the the December opening. I think that I will not be disappointed by what has been put up on the screen. And though it will only follow the book's outline with embellishments from other sources within Tolkien's writings it will become The Hobbit and take us on the greatest adventure, an adventure filled with humor, pathos, and even grief. By its end we will know and love each and every one of the characters and see Middle-earth in a new and magic light. Just sayin'...Cool

"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."

Intergalactic Lawman

Oct 5 2012, 12:25am

Post #34 of 135 (3631 views)
It feels like Star Wars all over... [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm sorry -it does. I have this really bad gut feeling (That I am never really wrong about) that these films will bomb. They WILL make money but WONT be viewed as masterpieces. Unsure

The Parallels between Lucas and Jackson are too many to ignore...

Both made brilliant trilogys that everyone loved! But they had MANY people around them pulling alot of the strings... Not anymore.
Both made millions from their films = great success (Went to their heads)
Both decided that even though everyone LOVED the originals they would change the tone of their new films (cheap laughs like jar jar stepping in poo/bird poo sliding down Radagasts face)
Speaking of tone, Star Wars was brilliant with the action/adventure feel and so was LOTR's...so why turn the prequels to both into very lame comedies??? Answer? Both directors got older and their humor got worse...
Both wated to PUSH their technology with the new films (Putting it ahead of the story)
Both used cgi to death to the point where the poor actors had to do the majority of their craft infront of green screens!! Ask actors how they feel about this?? And in doing so BOTH sets of prequels will feel sterile! Real locations win everytime!!
Both are about the money...a trilogy for the Hobbit???
Horrible prequel designs (check out the dwarves and the jedi council etc)

I'm sorry -this is how I feel. Star Wars broke my heart. I was looking forward to 3 films where we got to see the rise of the Empire, real jedi, great locations, Vader!, etc and all we got was the WORST acting you will ever see in film and characters you didn't care about and...um...er...gungans??? Yeah that's better than seeing Stormtroopers and rebels getting into it Mad

The Hobbit feels the same way... Peter has stuck these guys infront of green screen, added very stupid comedy (Think if you already feel this way from the trailer -how worse will the films be with an extra 50 wise cracks!!) ,barely any of the characters look how they were described in the books etc etc etc

Hope I am wrong.

P.s -If you think I am wrong about the money part just WAIT until the films are 2hrs or 2.5hrs just so they can release 3hrs EE's!! And they will Frown


Oct 5 2012, 1:22am

Post #35 of 135 (3526 views)
But you are arguing for the elevation of CGI details [In reply to] Can't Post

Over the film aesthetic, and the substance. You should not over-light a scene just so you can show off the fact that your CGI team renders pores, or hair, extremely well. That's just not good film-making, IMO.

And in the end, CGI still tends to look far more convincing in poorly-lit environments. The cave troll, for example, vs. the wargs and oliphaunts.

Tol Eressea

Oct 5 2012, 1:37am

Post #36 of 135 (3597 views)
Too many parallels? [In reply to] Can't Post

You don't know the man, how do you come to the conclusion success has gotten into his head? How do you know Hobbit will be a comedy with lame jokes? How do you know he's putting technology ahead of the story? That's it's all about money? I could go on and on. It's pretty absurd to be honest. Sorry, have you seen the video logs? He's not putting actors in front of nothing, there are sets, green screen is being used for backgrounds, for set extensions primarily. LOTR had tons of green screen and CGI as well.

I can't even say for sure all that stuff holds true for Lucas. I don't know him. He might be just a talentless director that got lucky with the first Star Wars, the only one he directed from the old trilogy btw.

(This post was edited by Estel78 on Oct 5 2012, 1:41am)

Tol Eressea

Oct 5 2012, 1:47am

Post #37 of 135 (3431 views)
not that I agree with everything he said [In reply to] Can't Post

But to be fair there are scenes in some of the Vlogs showing some actors in front of green screen only Vlog 8 with Legolas springs to mind right away right near the end of the Vlog... I do see some parallels but I'll wait till I see the films before I say for sure they will end up like Star Wars episodes 1, 2, and 3

Tol Eressea

Oct 5 2012, 1:53am

Post #38 of 135 (3517 views)
They did that in LOTR as well sometimes. [In reply to] Can't Post

For instance, due to the height differences of races, when they needed to insert Gandalf into a dynimac shot with a Hobbit, sometimes McKellen had to play in front of only green screen. Or i think the scene in which Legolas takes down the Mumakil there was nothing there, just the actor, at least in some shots.

(This post was edited by Estel78 on Oct 5 2012, 1:54am)


Oct 5 2012, 2:30am

Post #39 of 135 (3669 views)
okay..why not just relax and try Not of over-analyize [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm going with Fresh Eyes

Feelings about Lighting
Feelings about Content
Feelings about Characters
Feelings about Storylines
Feelings about Adaption
Feelings about Mood
Feelings about the Book

Just get in The...way.
Ive waited a long time for this and I refuse to be dissapointed.

Something is Better than Nothing?
after...45 years.


Oct 5 2012, 4:38am

Post #40 of 135 (3575 views)
Because [In reply to] Can't Post

Some people find all that stuff in your list to be important, and a part of what they enjoy, or don't enjoy, about films.

Let's just relax and accept that people have different opinions on things. It'll make everything easier.


Oct 5 2012, 6:56am

Post #41 of 135 (3447 views)
But... [In reply to] Can't Post

those things totally make a movie what it is, and when it's a film that happens to be based on a story we love as much as The Hobbit, I care all the more how well they treat it. One of the reasons the LOTR films were as successful as they were (for a lot of Tolkien fans) was the careful choices they made.

Having standards about art is a good thing. I mean, why be into Tolkien, in particular, at all if standards don't matter? Like, why not just forget about The Hobbit and see some other random popular film, if standards don't factor into one's enjoyment? Tolkien stands out because his work reaches heigher heights than a lot of the lazy genre fiction out there - if he hadn't treated it as seriously as he did, and gotten as quality results, we wouldn't be talking about it today.

And sorry, but (in my opinion) Something is so not better than Nothing, when something really special ends up getting diminished or trashed. The Star Wars prequels, for instance, pretty much stained the Star Wars saga in a lot of fan's eyes, and I have to admit that I would much rather those films weren't made at all.

Anyways, I have several misgivings about how the films are looking so far, but honestly, I still can't get past the beardless dwarves! Like that alone suggests such a wrongheaded attitude to their approach for this film, while destroying the 'realism' of its world, that I have a very bad feeling about it (and I really, really hope I'm wrong, and will gladly admit it if I am).


Oct 5 2012, 6:59am

Post #42 of 135 (3478 views)
No, he didn't complete the rewrite [In reply to] Can't Post

because he realised lots of people liked it the way it was. It doesn't mean HE was happy with it personally, and in my opinion the rewritten fragments we have seen (including the summery version in the Silmarillion) are vastly superior to the original.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


Oct 5 2012, 7:10am

Post #43 of 135 (3508 views)
Heh Lacrimae [In reply to] Can't Post

I like the cut of your jib. This constant ridiculous melodrama is so very wearing - I really can't figure out why people insist on this masochistic behaviour. Still, at least in his indifference the poster is on this occasion adopting a civil tone and not referring to people on this forum as sheep, or desperately hoping for a backlash against Peter Jackson (!)


Oct 5 2012, 9:25am

Post #44 of 135 (3320 views)
Just a note on The Wizard of Oz [In reply to] Can't Post

it was, at the time of its release in 1939, both a critical and commercial flop. Too many people had read the books and starred, as children, in theatrical productions of Oz in the 39 yrs before the film came out, for them to welcome this lavish Hollywood production with open arms. (in this aspect, intestingly, the parallels between TWOZ and TH are intersting--75 yrs for a film adaptation and lots of fans starring in shcool productions.) They fretted about the parts of Baum's novel that had been removed, often at the expense of story (for example, the Emerald City sequence was targeted for special ire--instead of a biting political allegory, with such things as the green glasses for Oz's denizens and the Wizard changing appearances for his individual audience with each of the four being altered to become a silly musical seqeunce and a uniform fear-inducing Wizard). In the minds of most adults who saw the film, all its brilliant technical innovations came vastly at the expense of story. Victor Fleming had taken a complex, naunced, Lewis Carroll-like narrative and turned it into a juvenile Hollywood muscial (yes, the adult fans took Oz as seriously as we take Middle-earth.) Yes, the film did get an Oscar nomination for BP (back when it was 10 films) but that was mainly due to the Technical Branch votes, and Judy Garland got a special Oscar, and the Wicked Witch was praised, but the vast majority of rank-and-file critics and adult audience were less than enthused and box office was low.

The film was shelved, and not until the mid-1950's when a new generation discovered it on TV did it finally begin to gain critical respect, and those same children who had loved it in the theater were now the ones writing the critical reviews. the fact that the 1950's were also the dawn of the Golden Age of the Hollywood Musical, with such artists as Rogers and Hammerstein bringing respect to the art form at a time when Red-baiting was hurting Hollywood's artistic quality, didn't hurt either. In this atmosphere, a proper appreciation of Oz's merits as a *stand-alone film*, as opposed to the Hollywood adaptation of a much-loved novel, was much easier and necessary to making the film the classic it remains.

you might be interested to note that such classics as Disney's Snow White and Pinocchio also started out as commerical flops. While critically praised, and given a rapturous Hollywood premierie, the film was pulled from theaters after 2 weeks b/c it was too controversial--it was scaring kids so much that ushers were complaining about having to clean up seats where litle kids had wet their pants from fear (the scene where Snow White runs through the forest from the Huntsman being a particularily difficult scene for kids.) As for Pinoke, even adult audiences found it just too dark and depressing. (Even today, Pinocchio is a masterpiece...it i my favorite of all the Disney films, followed by Fantasia, and BATB.) Like OZ and SW, it had to wait another generation to be fully accepted.

Just a note for adult fans of today's franchises...

(This post was edited by Sunflower on Oct 5 2012, 9:30am)


Oct 5 2012, 12:13pm

Post #45 of 135 (3330 views)
This film [In reply to] Can't Post

could be the most perfect in the world technically, it could follow as faithfully as possible to the source, it ould have the best actors known to mankind, but if it lacks that mysterious and indefinable 'something' that magic I saw in LOTR, it will fail for me. That magical something you cant buy or cgi into place, I have faith that PJ will give us it in bucket loads, but then I am an optimist.

(This post was edited by Elenorflower on Oct 5 2012, 12:14pm)

Tol Eressea

Oct 5 2012, 12:43pm

Post #46 of 135 (3345 views)
Mods up! [In reply to] Can't Post


"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
Victoria Monfort

(This post was edited by Eleniel on Oct 5 2012, 12:43pm)


Oct 5 2012, 1:15pm

Post #47 of 135 (3357 views)
Nonsense [In reply to] Can't Post

a.) Peter Jackson does not own any of the rights for Tolkien's legendarium. George Lucas on the other hand owns Star Wars.

b.) The tone of "The Hobbit" is vastly different from "The Lord of the Rings". Jackson did not create this distinction. The original Star Wars trilogy was full of childish, non-sensical humour too (C-3PO, ewoks).

c.) How do you know that "The Hobbit" will put the technology ahead of the story? Have you seen the film yet? Are you one of the editors, working on the film right now?

d.) "The Lord of the Rings" used plenty of CGI shots too.

Could "The Hobbit" share the same fate as Lucas' prequel trilogy? While I think it is unlikely, the possibility exists. The thing is, a lot of adolescents who liked/loved the LOTR trilogy could be dissappointed with the Hobbit, just as many people who had loved Star Wars as children hated the prequels. The original Star Wars trilogy was full of moronic humour, awful dialogue, shallow characters and a world view created for eight-year-olds...people just started complaining when they saw the same stuff again as adults. Yes...the prequel trilogy accentuated the weaknesses, but the fact remains that the whole prequel franchise is hugely popular with children - and Star Wars is for children. A similar reaction could happen with "The Hobbit". It could be regarded as a childish, less gritty version of the Lord of the Rings. While a lot of people might not like this, "The Hobbit" is just that: A light-hearted fairy-tale.

Ceterum censeo montem artis magicae atrae esse delendum.

Kangi Ska

Oct 5 2012, 1:32pm

Post #48 of 135 (3400 views)
Tolkien made his own choice not to finish the rewrite of The Hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post

an as to superiority of text, that is just a matter of style and taste. It depends if you want the Hobbit to remain "The Hobbit" or be incorporated into "The Lord of the Rings". Tolkien chose not to change "The Hobbit's" style, plain and simple.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 5 2012, 1:33pm)

Kangi Ska

Oct 5 2012, 1:50pm

Post #49 of 135 (3244 views)
If you are stopped at the relative beardlessness of the dwarves [In reply to] Can't Post

then you have not seen much of what has been revealed. I suggest letting go of these small things and to quit getting in your own way. The movies Peter makes will be what they are. We will see if Mr Jackson's vision works when the product is completed and presented.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.


Oct 5 2012, 1:56pm

Post #50 of 135 (3411 views)
atmosphere [In reply to] Can't Post

so far i really do have only minor concerns.
The most important thing will be if the hobbit can achieve to pull us back into the world of middle-earth and give us a feeling for the new and different cultures.
The second trailer failed completely to do that imo, caused by the music. Seeing it with shore's music attached can do it, also looking through all the pictures realeased i do get a feeling of middle-earth.

Another thing that for me will really do it is the acting. In this
the small part from 4:46 on with bilbo in rivendell just gives me chills, you get a real feeling of the small hobbit that starts to become an adventurer. the bit with bilbo in front of rivendell looking around is so utterly lovely. He looks around and his head tips down a little and a slight smile appears on his mouth like he is finally thinking: Yes, this is it, i don't know how i got into this but i'm ready Smile great moment

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 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.