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: Tibboh eht: Noissucsid Eivom:
Brian Sibley's Official Movie Guide to The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (some spoiler pics)
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page Last page  View All

Lacrimae Rerum
SnevaH Yerg

Oct 28 2012, 5:42pm

Post #126 of 207 (881 views)
Shortcut
Well you seem to have insights I do not. [In reply to] Can't Post

A "big majority" - so more than 50%, 60%, 70% will be material other than the journey of Bilbo and the dwarves? Well anything is posisble but I haven't formed that impression myself.

I'm not sure what "vague notes" you are referring to?

I don't have any issue with the term "based on" but then I don't think this means to me what it means to you. Any adaptation of a text is based on the text. You seem to have some additional definition in mind.

Again you seem to feel that how things "seem" to you equates to knowledge, proportions and percentages which are worth discussing. I tend to think that they are "made up" and, in your terms. "based on" reality. We can guess if we like, but it's no more than a guess.

LR


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Ronilav

Oct 28 2012, 6:12pm

Post #127 of 207 (862 views)
Shortcut
"Based on" is implied by the title [In reply to] Can't Post

The movie is called "The Hobbit: Unexpected Journey". Tolkien never wrote any such thing. Thus, the fact that it is "based on" but not directly adapting, "The Hobbit" is implied.

I would have rather had a straight adaptation of the book too, but I'm happy to make the best of what we are getting. Some of it might even be pretty good!

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Sinister71
Aessere Lot


Oct 28 2012, 6:15pm

Post #128 of 207 (865 views)
Shortcut
Like I said [In reply to] Can't Post

I see an adaptation as bringing the text of the story to life, what I see with Peter Jackson's version of the Hobbit is something, that while it may include the Hobbit somewhere within it. With the inclusion of Sauron and making the ring more than just a burglers tool it will be IMO out of context with the original story. The original tale while it is touched upon is NOT about Sauron or the ring or the fate of middle earth. All made up plot devices brought into the Hobbit by Jackson. Or at least my copy of that book has none of that.Angelic

Radagast all material made up by Jackson since he wasn't in the Hobbit and Tolkien never mentioned what he and Gandalf did during this time (made up content)
Nazgul in tombs by the Dundain, from my understanding never happened in Tolkien (hmmm more made up content)
Bolg being the "Torturer of DolGuldur" while Bolg was in the Hobbit his involvement with DolGuldur is not (MORE made up content)
DolGuldur subplot while I think its interesting still there are only a couple paragraphs Jackson can use from the appendices that coincide with the Hobbit so the whole story is MADE UP CONTENT "based" on a couple paragraphs
Azog being Thorin's nemesis (came directly from an interview with Armitage) To my knowledge Bolg was the Goblin Thorin had to deal with and Azog was long dead killed many years before the dwarves quest by Dain, beheaded and his head put on a stake with the small purse of money in his mouth outside Moria to warn other goblns . which is told in appendix A So him being anywhere outside that situation is Made up content
Dwarven back stories well here is the largest section of the appendices that has anything whatsoever to do with the Hobbit but its only 8 and 1/2 pages not really enough to expand into a big chunk of film IMO
That stuff isn't adapted from the book or the appendix its made up content not in the story of the hobbit but I will say it is "based on" parts of the appendix whether it is according to Tolkien or not.

seems some people need to try and justify these sections of made up content somehow instead of just admitting they are fabrications of Peter Jackson's "based on" the appendices which have no real details in them. only bits and pieces from what I read. That and only about 12 pages at most are related to the Hobbit in any way shape or form


(This post was edited by sinister71 on Oct 28 2012, 6:18pm)


tolktolk
Neirol

Oct 28 2012, 6:23pm

Post #129 of 207 (842 views)
Shortcut
Enjoying? [In reply to] Can't Post

So after spending months expending thousands of words ranting, raving and railing against Peter Jackson and the "sheep" who do not share your vision, you are planning to enjoy the film?

There's nowt as strange as folk.


AinurOlorin
Nevle-flah


Oct 28 2012, 6:26pm

Post #130 of 207 (838 views)
Shortcut
This is pretty much my sentiment. I do not doubt I will have plenty to. . . they get after you for naughty words on here. . to [In reply to] Can't Post

Bark and complain about. And where I feel it is called for, bark and complain I shall. But, overall, I am very happy the movie is at least being made, and I feel pretty strongly that I will, on the whole, love it much more than I hate what is wrong with it, even when I am on a tirade blasting the wrongs.

In Reply To
The movie is called "The Hobbit: Unexpected Journey". Tolkien never wrote any such thing. Thus, the fact that it is "based on" but not directly adapting, "The Hobbit" is implied.

I would have rather had a straight adaptation of the book too, but I'm happy to make the best of what we are getting. Some of it might even be pretty good!


"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."


Lacrimae Rerum
SnevaH Yerg

Oct 28 2012, 6:30pm

Post #131 of 207 (817 views)
Shortcut
Which you feel will be a "big majority" of the films? I tend to disagree. [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Sinister71
Aessere Lot


Oct 28 2012, 6:32pm

Post #132 of 207 (836 views)
Shortcut
and why id that so hard to believe? [In reply to] Can't Post

These films are NOT nor ever will be the Hobbit as far as I am concerned. They are merely "Based on" the Hobbit. THAT is how I will enjoy these films because contrary to what people want to believe that is the truth. There is already too much fan fiction made up content being shoved into these films to be considered anything else. unless your one of those who believe an adaptation is an original tale based on a book but not following its plot line or structure which is what we are getting.


Sinister71
Aessere Lot


Oct 28 2012, 6:33pm

Post #133 of 207 (834 views)
Shortcut
we can agree to disagree [In reply to] Can't Post

they can only make so much out of 309 pages no matter how you look at itAngelic


Lacrimae Rerum
SnevaH Yerg

Oct 28 2012, 6:51pm

Post #134 of 207 (817 views)
Shortcut
Well I look at it from the perspective [In reply to] Can't Post

Of having done a fair amount of analysis of textual word count to film adaptation duration (whilst word count is far from perfect, page count is an even poorer measure as it fails to take account font size, layout, margins, page size etc).

Or we could just go off what we reckon.

LR

Also the only word we have recently on the Dol Guldur sub plot, which encompasses most of the additions you list above, is that a chunk of it has already been moved out of the first film into the second. I will be intrigued to see how it tots up to your 60 / 70% plus.


Sinister71
Aessere Lot


Oct 28 2012, 7:01pm

Post #135 of 207 (799 views)
Shortcut
with all the dwarven backstory [In reply to] Can't Post

and liberties Peter Jackson is taking, I would almost be willing to bet money on there will be at most a 40/60 split in favor of Jackson's made up content to what Tolkien actually wrote in the films... Actually i have a friend who is just as faithful to PJ as you are LR and we have a 20 dollar bet riding on Tolkien's content and Peter Jackson's enhancements and which will make up most of the films. Can't wait to collect that 20 bucksWink
And considering Jackson is probably changing most of the dialogue or altering it (from what we have seen already in the trailer) there's no way to tell from the words either.


Lacrimae Rerum
SnevaH Yerg

Oct 28 2012, 7:23pm

Post #136 of 207 (780 views)
Shortcut
So 96 minutes or more [In reply to] Can't Post

Of dwarven history and the dol guldur plot (outside of the Thrain visit of course) in the first film?

Well anything is possible....

LR


AinurOlorin
Nevle-flah


Oct 28 2012, 7:29pm

Post #137 of 207 (776 views)
Shortcut
The things aren't mutually exclusive. [In reply to] Can't Post

In reality, as with most things, there are aspects that one likes and aspects that one dislikes, and it is the ratio and intensity of one to the other that will decide whether one views the films positively as a whole. There may be several attributes which one hates and rants about, but if the majority is made up of attributes one liked or love, one will still enjoy the work, even while cringing at certain parts.

In Reply To
So after spending months expending thousands of words ranting, raving and railing against Peter Jackson and the "sheep" who do not share your vision, you are planning to enjoy the film?

There's nowt as strange as folk.


"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 Altaira on Oct 28 2012, 7:39pm)


Sinister71
Aessere Lot


Oct 28 2012, 7:33pm

Post #138 of 207 (774 views)
Shortcut
Thank you AO // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


jtarkey
NahoR


Oct 28 2012, 7:41pm

Post #139 of 207 (767 views)
Shortcut
I know I use this movie a lot as an example but... [In reply to] Can't Post

Jurassic Park is a groundbreaking film that didn't really resemble the book it was based on at all. It is possible to make a good movie that strays from the book. I think trying to prove how faithful these films will be is beating a dead horse.

We haven't seen them but, we KNOW there will be a lot of extra material. The quality of that material is yet to be seen. What's important to me is that these are good movies in their own right. I'm not saying the book doesn't matter, but don't we all know by this point that we aren't getting a very faithful adaptation?

"You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"


Shelob'sAppetite
Ronilav

Oct 28 2012, 8:00pm

Post #140 of 207 (758 views)
Shortcut
You're certainly not alone [In reply to] Can't Post

I generally disliked the LOTR films, for a whole host of reasons.

However, I am hoping (perhaps against hope) that the Hobbit films will be more enjoyable.

I love Tolkien, and I love film, so I cannot let go of the hope of a great film based on Tolkien's material.

Fingers are crossed.


Estel78
Aessere Lot

Oct 28 2012, 8:01pm

Post #141 of 207 (751 views)
Shortcut
I can only speak for myself but [In reply to] Can't Post

i don't need to justify anything. Honestly, i don't care whether PJ follows the book slavishly, i only want a good movie. That's all. Well, that's not entirely true, i actually want him to not follow the book slavishly, because i don't consider the book that great, to be honest, i'm not 12 anymore. Don't shoot me, it's charming but i wish it had more depth and be a little bit more serious.

I can understand people getting upset by the axe in the head but i don't understand people getting upset by the movie showing Gandalf with young boy Bilbo, because it is not in the book, or some changed dialog. I have no sympathy whatsoever for people with such extremist views.


In Reply To
seems some people need to try and justify these sections of made up content somehow instead of just admitting they are fabrications of Peter Jackson's "based on" the appendices which have no real details in them. only bits and pieces from what I read. That and only about 12 pages at most are related to the Hobbit in any way shape or form



(This post was edited by Estel78 on Oct 28 2012, 8:04pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Ronilav

Oct 28 2012, 8:02pm

Post #142 of 207 (771 views)
Shortcut
You can enjoy something [In reply to] Can't Post

And still be greatly disappointed that it didn't live up to it's great potential.

The LOTR and Hobbit films are based on timeless classics, and I personally, wish the films could be called that as well. Perhaps the Hobbit will win me over?


Shelob'sAppetite
Ronilav

Oct 28 2012, 8:05pm

Post #143 of 207 (757 views)
Shortcut
A food fight in Rivendell? [In reply to] Can't Post

Really?

This batch of interviews seems to reveal so much idiocy, that my high point of anticipation for these films is almost completely dead and gone.

This is the sound of expectations being lowered.


GothmogTheBalrog
Llednevir


Oct 28 2012, 8:20pm

Post #144 of 207 (745 views)
Shortcut
Eh. [In reply to] Can't Post

If a movie is really unlike the book, I just pretend it's an alternate universe. Works for me.

"It was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man shape maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and go before it." ~FotR


Shelob'sAppetite
Ronilav

Oct 28 2012, 8:32pm

Post #145 of 207 (724 views)
Shortcut
Do you not see [In reply to] Can't Post

The irony in the following statement:


Quote
I have no sympathy whatsoever for people with such extremist views.


Wink


Malveth
Llednevir

Oct 28 2012, 8:39pm

Post #146 of 207 (753 views)
Shortcut
Yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

Tolkien was explicit. I think he mentions "sillification" somewhere as well (did he coin the word? It's wonderful).

I'm not just responding to TH in a vacuum. I saw TLOTRs. At the time I was okay-ish with them but the honest truth is they did zero for me and I never watch them, there are so many other films that provide that kind of "buzz" for me, and Tolkien's words are more than sufficient to satisfy my desire for Middle Earth.

I was originally going to give PJ the benefit of the doubt. Then I saw "TinTin". It not only represented the worst of Spielberg it also represented the worst impulses of PJ. I was appalled by it. I've rarely seen a film so aggressively opposed to the tone and qualities of the source material. Now with all the details of TH emerging, I am less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. I wonder why he doesn't acquire an original script or write his own story. Food-fighting, flower-eating dwarfs? Go right ahead. Giant bunnies pulling sleighs through forests (I don't even see how that's physically possible, with things like roots and stones, but...) go right ahead. Elf-girl warriors? By all means, it's *your* story, do whatever you want!

But how does this relate to what Tolkien wrote, I must ask?

There's a real schizo quality to all of this. "We love the Hobbit, but we're changing it all over the place and adding tons of stuff that completely violates the authors own views on fantasy and his own work." And let us be frank: Tolkien was a brilliant author who slaved for decades and decades to compose, revise, and present his corpus to the world. Jackson & his writers have yet to create anything original not attached to a previously created work that people care about, apart from a comparatively tiny PJ fan community. A little humility is in order.


GothmogTheBalrog
Llednevir


Oct 28 2012, 8:45pm

Post #147 of 207 (715 views)
Shortcut
Honestly? [In reply to] Can't Post

Food-fighting and flower-eating seems to me like things these Dwarves would do. The sled is over the top. I'll definitely give you that. But what's wrong with Tauriel? Elves aren't human. How do you know they wouldn't have female warriors?

"It was like a great shadow, in the middle of which was a dark form, of man shape maybe, yet greater; and a power and terror seemed to be in it and go before it." ~FotR


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Ronilav

Oct 28 2012, 8:46pm

Post #148 of 207 (713 views)
Shortcut
If you think that The Hobbit doesn't have very much depth [In reply to] Can't Post

You simply aren't paying attention. There are so many intricate levels buried underneath the facade of a simple children's tale.

I do agree with you on this, however:


Quote

I can understand people getting upset by the axe in the head but i don't understand people getting upset by the movie showing Gandalf with young boy Bilbo, because it is not in the book



Showing Gandalf with young Bilbo (if that even happens, which I am not convinced of yet from what I have seen), is a perfect example of using film to show, not tell. If that appears and helps demonstrate why Gandalf chooses Bilbo to go on the quest (and it is done well), I will be thrilled. I think that is a perfect example of good adaptation, and one that shows the advantage of having more time to tell the story in.


'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Malveth
Llednevir

Oct 28 2012, 8:53pm

Post #149 of 207 (714 views)
Shortcut
Honestly... [In reply to] Can't Post

The craziest thing the Dwarves do is sing a sing about breaking Bilbo's crockery:

"And of course they did none of these dreadful things, and everything was cleaned and put away safe as quick as lightning, while the hobbit was turning round and round in the middle of the kitchen trying to see what they were doing. Then they went back, and found Thorin with his feet on the fender smoking a pipe."

I assure you, there is no female elf warrior anywhere in the Hobbit. If the story you want to tell requires one, then you have obviously selected the wrong story to film. I would have advised Jackson & Co. to write their own story, and put in a whole army of elf warrior girls, since that is what they wish to write about.


jtarkey
NahoR


Oct 28 2012, 8:55pm

Post #150 of 207 (733 views)
Shortcut
I think we as Tolkien fans are a little spoiled... [In reply to] Can't Post

Even though everyone is entitled to their own opinion, LOTR was an amazing achievement in cinematic history. It is certainly considered by the majority of the film community as a modern classic. I would have to agree. Is there any book to film adaptation that is more widely praised? You could argue that there are, but I feel there aren't.

I know some people think that PJ slaughtered Tolkien, but I think we could be a little more grateful. I'm a film buff so to speak, and I am still blown away by the depth and care that was put into LOTR.

People tend to forget that there were no films like these before they came out. In the years that followed we, as an audience, have been battered with spectacle and fantasy. Special effects keep getting better and better so we're used to it now, but i still remember being floored when I watched FOTR for the first time.

It will take a misstep of George Lucas like proportions to mess these films up as films. While it is entirely possible, I have a hard time thinking its likely especially when I haven't seen the films yet.

"You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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.