|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Oct 28 2012, 9:04pm
Post #151 of 207
(1843 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I have no problem with Tauriel
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
as long as she is a character that does not alter the events of Bilbo's journey. Now if she is sympathetic to the dwarves and helps free them I think I will puke right in the theater. Or if she helps Bilbo dispatch the spiders I would be rather upset since that stuff IMO is unnecessary and just not needed. I mean its no secret Boyens wrote her in because they felt the Hobbit needed a strong female presence, well Tolkien didn't need her, so I feel the films don't need her, but in this PC society I guess there are concessions to be made. So I have no issue with her as long as she is something that adds to the story instead of changing it. I think the captain of the guard, which is who she is taking the place of, should still get drunk and pass out making way from Bilbo to get the keys and free the dwarves and nothing more with them.
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Oct 28 2012, 9:08pm
Post #152 of 207
(1828 views)
Shortcut
|
|
nothing says these aren't going to be Peter Jackson's Star Wars...episode 1, 2, and 3
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Lucas didn't write those to be disasters either, but look how they are perceived in the Star Wars community. Every die hard fan I know personally thinks they are the worst films ever. or the get 5 thumbs down out of 6 and number 6 is trying to be optimistic 
(This post was edited by sinister71 on Oct 28 2012, 9:09pm)
|
|
|
Malveth
Rivendell
Oct 28 2012, 9:10pm
Post #153 of 207
(1805 views)
Shortcut
|
Oh man, talk abt "PC", no *way* are they letting their precious Tauriel get drunk and pass out. Not a "positive role model" for tween-aged girls. She'll be as pure as driven snow, smart as a whip, and able to "kick orc butt" at the drop of a feather. I'm sure she'll get at least a hint of weepy romance as well.
Again, "Tauriel", a coming of age fantasy epic about an elf warrior, sounds like a splendid movie for Jackson & Co. to make, why didn't they make it? Because Tauriel will pale in comparison to Tolkien's characters, she's there to fill up a quota and help marketing, and to help Boyens feel comfy in Tolkien's world. With effort, sure, they could make a very original fantasy picture about a girl's coming of age, or a female warrior leading an army, I'm not sure high fantasy has done that on the screen yet. But I don't see where she comes into Tolkien's story at all.
(This post was edited by Malveth on Oct 28 2012, 9:11pm)
|
|
|
Malveth
Rivendell
Oct 28 2012, 9:15pm
Post #154 of 207
(1788 views)
Shortcut
|
I had no problem at all with the SW sequels or the animated series. It's his world, he organized those elements and determined what could and could not happen there. So I was never upset that he went off on a tangent. And I think, as a visual artist, he's the best in the world right now, but like Tolkien's text, it takes an enormous amount of effort to get past the surface and really see what he's doing; but it's brilliant. As a dramatist....I plead the fifth!
TH, on the other hand...we already know what is supposed to happen.
|
|
|
jtarkey
Rohan
Oct 28 2012, 9:18pm
Post #155 of 207
(1780 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That's why i said it is possible
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
However, I don't think PJ is even capable of writing dialogue that is THAT bad. Those prequels are, IMO, laughably terrible in almost every aspect of film making. Everything from the story, to the sets, to the script, to the characters. It was just awful.
I think I can safely say that I can pre-judge these films to be better than that, simply because of the amount of time and care taken into making them.
Of course, they could be worse . Haven't seen them yet, so I don't know. Simple as that.
"You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Oct 28 2012, 9:21pm
Post #156 of 207
(1781 views)
Shortcut
|
As the reader gets to fill in the white spaces and plat the fog into the people they choose. A film has to make those choices for us. For a film we have the option of showing no women or women only as silent background characters.
To do either of these, would make much more of an issue of sex (which I do not believe was an issue for Tolkien) than creating a (marginally) less unusual gender balance for a film of this nature.
If a positive role model crops up as a result - how wonderful.
LR
|
|
|
Malveth
Rivendell
Oct 28 2012, 10:03pm
Post #157 of 207
(1770 views)
Shortcut
|
...say this?
"For a film we have the option of showing no women or women only as silent background characters."
Is this every film or only this one?
Again, if you are intending to make a film about a character you have invented out of a desire to tell a story about that character, why not simply tell that story, why import your character into a completely unrelated one?
Generations of non-males have loved this book, and there has been little or no complaint that it lacks anything at all. But Tauriel is only a symptom, not the sickness itself.
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Oct 28 2012, 10:12pm
Post #158 of 207
(1745 views)
Shortcut
|
As there are no female speaking characters in the text. I'm not sure if you follow the argument but I'm not sure where it isn't making sense.
If you eliminate Tauriel (and indeed Galadriel) then you seem to imply there would be another option outside not showing women or having them as background extras? I'm not sure what this would be (other than re-sexing one of the existing characters- but I suspect that is not your thought)
LR
|
|
|
Malveth
Rivendell
Oct 28 2012, 10:27pm
Post #159 of 207
(1737 views)
Shortcut
|
Do we need a female character?
"If you eliminate Tauriel (and indeed Galadriel) then you seem to imply there would be another option outside not showing women or having them as background extras? I'm not sure what this would be (other than re-sexing one of the existing characters- but I suspect that is not your thought)."
If Jackson & Co. are so concerned about portraying female characters, why choose to adapt a book that has exactly no female characters? I'm sure you can see the perversity of this.
I think I am going to make a film. It will be called "Jack The Ripper". It will be set in Victorian London. But Jack will kill no one. Why? Because some of the audience might find that offensive and also I want to make a film about a doctor. So in my film, Jack will be a doctor, a kindly, wise, good doctor. That makes sense doesn't it? I'm sure it will be enjoyed as a film, because films are special and different from all other storytelling mediums, and it would be oh-so-very boring if I simply retold the Ripper story!
Next I am going to adapt "Jane Eyre" as a male-bonding war movie. There had to be war going on *somewhere* in the world, I'll just "elaborate" on that part of the "story".
I'll be a "genius" like PJ before you know it!!
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Oct 28 2012, 10:47pm
Post #160 of 207
(1714 views)
Shortcut
|
Choice to absent all women from a trilogy of films (or to portray them as silent extras) is also a choice. In a film such choices are made for all viewers (as opposed to the latitude given the the reader of the text to make individual choices of imagination)
My contention would be that absenting women from three such films places "sex" as much more of an issue for the audience than it is in the text, wheras offering a (still slim) gender balance makes it much less of an issue for the majority of viewers.
Of course I may be wrong and it may be that the general audience would not give a moments thought to seven and a half hours of film which travels across cultures and half a world but, by genuine coincidence, never encounters a female. But I suspect it would create a sense of oddity for many - an oddity which is not designed in the text, and could therefore be happily avoided.
LR
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Oct 29 2012, 3:41am
Post #161 of 207
(1677 views)
Shortcut
|
"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."
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Oct 29 2012, 3:53am
Post #162 of 207
(1715 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Like and yet unlike. I agree, except where I don't.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
On the one hand, I think, when deciding whether to adhere more closely to the actual story, or to the particular tastes of a subset of viewers who read the story decades ago and want it to have changed and intensified just because they may have done so, I would rather one stick to the source.
On the subject of young Bilbo. I actually don't see that as a problem at all. I rather like it. It is not contradictory, in so much as the book really does tell you all the essentials: that Gandalf was friends with Bilbo's grandfather, and indeed had a history of taking more adventurous hobbits, particularly members of the Took clan, off on adventures that spanned many generations of Hobbit and Shire history. It is stated that he knew Bilbo as a child, and that Bilbo was very fond of the Wizard's tales, and minor feats of magic, and his enchanted fireworks etc. etc. So I think, on the whole, this is not only an easily justified inclusion, it is one that really does not require much in the way of justification.
There may be other alterations which are not so plausible, which do not agree with the text, and which not only beg some justification, but may indeed be unjustifiable, beyond the rather loaded perameters of "whoever is directing/producing the movie can do whatever they please," which is a dreadfully poor standard of measurement indeed. Scenes of Gandalf and a young Bilbo, however, don't fall into that category. The text supports it rather explicitly. 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. 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
"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 Oct 29 2012, 3:54am)
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Oct 29 2012, 4:10am
Post #163 of 207
(1692 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Entirely agreed about this. One can dislike certain choices he made, but unless
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
you are going to take the Cathy Bates route of Stephen King's Misery, it is hard to tell him what he shouldn't do with his story. And, to be fair, he didn't do any of the taboo and appalling things which some creators attempt, i.e. eggregiously re-writing the very rules and principles of their secondary universe, or killing off favourite characters as a personal power trip etc.
The standard is very different for a writer adaptaing an existing work, and especially a classic, than for a writer furthering his or her own tale. I had no problem at all with the SW sequels or the animated series. It's his world, he organized those elements and determined what could and could not happen there. So I was never upset that he went off on a tangent. And I think, as a visual artist, he's the best in the world right now, but like Tolkien's text, it takes an enormous amount of effort to get past the surface and really see what he's doing; but it's brilliant. As a dramatist....I plead the fifth!
TH, on the other hand...we already know what is supposed to happen.
"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."
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Oct 29 2012, 9:06am
Post #164 of 207
(1789 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Spoilers from the Visual Companion
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I've only been able to flick through the pictures. It contains few new pictures. The only new ones I noticed were of Radagast (with bird nest), goblins (the goblin scribe seems to have no legs?), and orcs (similar to Bolg, but also similar to LOTR orcs).
Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!
|
|
|
Eleniel
Tol Eressea
Oct 29 2012, 9:29am
Post #166 of 207
(1693 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Glad you've got your books now!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Seems the release of images is being very tightly controlled...
(btw, I did post about the trolls in the very first post of this thread! )
"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
¯ Victoria Monfort
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Oct 29 2012, 4:15pm
Post #167 of 207
(1617 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think that you need to come to terms with the fact...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
This is Peter Jackson's The Hobbit and not JRR Tolkien's book. It is an adaptation; there will be changes. Some alterations will work better on film, others (arguably) won't or will be seen as vandalizing the original work.
Tolkien's story is told very sparsely in places. Descriptions of characters are brief and the narrative moves quickly from one place to another, spending little time on establishing setting and supporting characters. A film has to show more of the physical environment. We need to see Thorin & Company interact with their surroundings more, which means invented characters that don't exist or aren't fleshed-out in the novel. Think of Tauriel that way and maybe you won't be quite so upset about her--depending on how she is used in the film(s).
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Oct 29 2012, 4:23pm
Post #168 of 207
(1610 views)
Shortcut
|
If you would be so kind, can you scan those?
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Oct 29 2012, 4:25pm
Post #169 of 207
(1613 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Personally, I have come to terms with that
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And expect nothing more. That should help me enjoy the Hobbit more than I did LOTR.
It is just a shame that Peter Jackson has such bad instincts when it comes to using the film medium to tell a good story. He's a sloppy director, with a muddled vision. There is no clarity whatsoever in his style.
But I am prepared for that.
|
|
|
Malveth
Rivendell
Oct 29 2012, 4:40pm
Post #170 of 207
(1630 views)
Shortcut
|
And I dislike what Mr. Jackson is doing.
"Tolkien's story is told very sparsely in places. Descriptions of characters are brief and the narrative moves quickly from one place to another, spending little time on establishing setting and supporting characters. A film has to show more of the physical environment. We need to see Thorin & Company interact with their surroundings more, which means invented characters that don't exist or aren't fleshed-out in the novel."
My advice to Jackson & Co.: If the book is so unsuitable for filming (which Tolkien warned of, anyway) why try to film it? Make up your own inane story and leave The Hobbit in peace.
|
|
|
Elenorflower
Gondor
Oct 29 2012, 5:15pm
Post #171 of 207
(1601 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Got to disagree with you on that point.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
''There is no clarity whatsoever in his style''.
I have always found PJ's style crystal clear, and very much unique.
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Oct 29 2012, 8:09pm
Post #173 of 207
(1593 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Is Thranduil still in the visual companion?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Or has he been removed. I've only been able to flick through the pictures. It contains few new pictures. The only new ones I noticed were of Radagast (with bird nest), goblins (the goblin scribe seems to have no legs?), and orcs (similar to Bolg, but also similar to LOTR orcs).
"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."
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Oct 30 2012, 12:32am
Post #175 of 207
(1528 views)
Shortcut
|
it is crystal clear but sometimes its like looking thru the wrong window. Perfectly clear but your looking in the wrong direction  just MY opinion though so i guess its basically worthless 
(This post was edited by sinister71 on Oct 30 2012, 12:33am)
|
|
|
|
|
