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:
Radagast the brown (spoiler heavy)
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Azaghâl
Lorien


Dec 12 2012, 11:13am

Post #1 of 58 (2077 views)
Shortcut
Radagast the brown (spoiler heavy) Can't Post

So I went to the midnight screening here in copenhagen last night and I must say it was a good movie.
There were some things I really didn't like and somethings just felt completely out of place. One of them was Radagast.
Boy should they have had a different vision for him or maybe just had left him out of the story.
He was way too silly and in no way convincing. He actually makes the Istari look bad.

I am all for quirky characters as long as the movie takes them seriously. In this movie he is simply a plot device and a comic relief. It pains me to say this but I couldn't help but think of one thing: JAR JAR BINKS! Unsure

He really has no real importance to the story other than to deliver a morgul blade to Gandalf. Okay, he kinda "saves" the dwarves from the wargs in one of the weakest scenes of the movie (wargs vs. bunnysled car chase anyone?).

The whole Dol Guldur also feels a little tacked on. A side plot that is briefly touch upon by the White Council, and a brief scene with Raddy vs wraith, but then totally left out from the rest of the movie. They don't even make a strong link between Azog and his hunter orcs and Dol Guldur.
In my oppinion, they should have made this first movie all about the dwarves journey. Spending more time with them individually getting to know them and their motives and background a little better.

Radagast, Dol Guldur, Azog they should all have been dealt with a little more clever. In my opinion this is PJ's least genious take on Middle Earth.

*Baruk khazâd! Khazâd ai-mênu!*


dubulous
Rohan

Dec 12 2012, 11:58am

Post #2 of 58 (1084 views)
Shortcut
I actually thought the opposite [In reply to] Can't Post

Before I saw the movie I was afraid I wouldn't like Radagast, but I actually did like him. Sure, he's a bit eccentric and whimsical, but not in any way comparable to Jar Jar Binks in my opinion.

The Dol Guldur plotline was perhaps a little rushed, but I think they needed to get that council scene in while Gandalf was in Rivendell. I assume in the next movie we will see Gandalf leaving the dwarves to visit Dol Guldur and investigate more while they are in Mirkwood.


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 12 2012, 12:15pm

Post #3 of 58 (958 views)
Shortcut
Room for improvement in the next two films [In reply to] Can't Post

Note, I haven't seen the new film, so I can't say how bad Jaradagast the Binks is.

But it is *only* the first film (full to the brim of new characters, I might add). I don't really expect the character to be fully fleshed out (just look at no-line-Bombur). They need him to make a big impact straight away, or the character will just disappear into the background. A bunny-sled might be silly to us folks, but in Middle-earth, anything goes.

And since it looks like most of the Dol Guldur plot will be in DOS, I imagine Jaradagast the Binks will have more development with more screentime.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



(This post was edited by DanielLB on Dec 12 2012, 12:16pm)


RalphDamiani
Rivendell

Dec 12 2012, 12:26pm

Post #4 of 58 (882 views)
Shortcut
"Simple and a fool" [In reply to] Can't Post

"He actually makes the Istari look bad. "

It's funny you should say that, but Saruman would say the same thing. Isn't that intentional, even if it's over the top? He's supposed to be all hearts and a little cuckoo, reason why only Gandalf believes him.

Don't forget the Hobbit has talking animals, lots of goofiness and important scenes in a very queer structure. I doubt every dwarf will be given a backstory, simply because Tolkien didn't write any for most of them.

Radagast, Dol Guldur and Azog are being pulled from the appendixes, more or less. Otherwise we'd be complaining about the writers making up dwarven history.

I think the biggest villain here is the decision to shoot three movies instead of two, which may have opened the door for some sloppy editing. We must not forget the source. While beloved for its own merits, it's hardly action movie material for more 9 whole hours.


Azaghâl
Lorien


Dec 12 2012, 12:31pm

Post #5 of 58 (841 views)
Shortcut
I hope you are right (and I believe you are) [In reply to] Can't Post

You will see for yourself. And I think most on this board will agree when they have seen it.
Radagast isn't as bad as I might have stated. I am just a little frustrated with some of his scenes. They are just over the top in "comedy" and full of bad dialogue/writing (including him pulling out a stick-insect from his mouth in the worst scene of the movie) Crazy. All this just give you that Jar Jar impression. But the weirdest thing is how just disappears and seems like he hadn't even needed to be there in the first place. Like a mild disturbance.

Hope my english makes sense. I'm still a bit tired from the midnight screening!

*Baruk khazâd! Khazâd ai-mênu!*


RalphDamiani
Rivendell

Dec 12 2012, 12:41pm

Post #6 of 58 (798 views)
Shortcut
Understood [In reply to] Can't Post

It sure does, thanks for the report. Yes, I believe you're annoyed by how childish it looks, in contrast to LotR's sense of urgency and general lack of time for slapstick comedy. The Star Wars prequels are ever mentioned as toy commercials and lacking the gritty realism of the original films, when technology and costs forced the production to keep things grounded.

Which is why I fear PJ was given too much time with the decision to make an extra movie, no matter what he says. This sort of scene would be better left to an extended cut, which is what the critics have been saying.


Azaghâl
Lorien


Dec 12 2012, 12:57pm

Post #7 of 58 (763 views)
Shortcut
Yes exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

There are a few of those scenes in there and they just make you wonder what his grand vision for The Hobbit is. As we all know the story really well, we know that the events to come will be way more grave and serious, and my fear is, that this first installment might be too disconnected with the other parts.

I actually look very much forward to the extended edition. There are so many subtle things left unexplained. For example the oakenshield, and azanulbizar. This scene disappointed me a little bit. Just seemed way to short, and important things were left out. On top of that they had changed some rather important things in it.

*Baruk khazâd! Khazâd ai-mênu!*


Lightice
Lorien

Dec 12 2012, 1:06pm

Post #8 of 58 (842 views)
Shortcut
I couldn't disagree more... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
There were some things I really didn't like and somethings just felt completely out of place. One of them was Radagast.
Boy should they have had a different vision for him or maybe just had left him out of the story.
He was way too silly and in no way convincing. He actually makes the Istari look bad.


...At least when it comes to Radagast. He came off as quite competent and intelligent person who has hard time being taken seriously by his peers due to his eccentricities. He most definately has no resemblance whatsoever to Jar Jar Binks, in characterization or plot purpose. Yes, he is bumbling and comical, but he also faces off against a Nazgûl without blinking, and cheerfully leads a band of orcs, the most "serious" villains in this film, to a merry chase for an elven ambush. There was only one single scene that I found annoying with him, and that was because of the writing, not the acting: "No! Sebastian!" is a line that doesn't belong to Middle-Earth where modern Anglo-Saxon names have no place.


RalphDamiani
Rivendell

Dec 12 2012, 1:12pm

Post #9 of 58 (727 views)
Shortcut
By the way [In reply to] Can't Post

Did the end bother you? The lack of a satisfying conclusion may also have contributed to the bloating. When things are finally picking up, bang, you need to wait another year.
The LotR trilogy is far more episodic in that sense, because the books are already edited in that fashion.

Many reviewers seem to agree "the worst is now behind", even quoting Bilbo. My main concern, however, is the third movie. I fear the Battle of Five Armies will take most of its length, because there isn't much left to tell at that point, no possible fillers, even if they're silly character driven moments.


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 12 2012, 1:15pm

Post #10 of 58 (747 views)
Shortcut
Is it too much for *one* movie? [In reply to] Can't Post

Imagine that all the character's scenes had been spread over three 3 hour films ...

Would it still seem silly? It sounds like there's too much silliness for one character, in one film. Which, hopefully means that he won't be so ridiculous in the others?

A stick insect you say?! I want to see this film NOW! (please)

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Dec 12 2012, 1:20pm

Post #11 of 58 (734 views)
Shortcut
I've never been a fan of Radagast's inclusion [In reply to] Can't Post

...as i am not a fan of Sylvester McCoy. At all. I absolutely hated his era of Doctor Who, and seeing him with all those ticks and whistling in the vlogs filled me dread. But once i saw the first photos, and then saw clips of him from the actual movie, i started to warm to the idea (except for the bird poop, which i know is not his idea). While all the humor might not be to my liking (one of my fears about the movie in general), the character's pathos is appealing, his sympathy with the forest and it's creatures touching, and his integral role in the Dol Guldur sequences (an addition i'm really looking forward to) has me in the strange position of actually looking forward to him in this movie. This character might actually work for me, and that is the absolute last thing i would have predicted a year ago.


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Dec 12 2012, 1:22pm

Post #12 of 58 (750 views)
Shortcut
I'm not sure what you are referring to [In reply to] Can't Post

As I don't see it until tomorrow, but I would just point out that Sebastian is neither modern nor Anglo Saxon.

LR


Lightice
Lorien

Dec 12 2012, 1:29pm

Post #13 of 58 (734 views)
Shortcut
Indeed? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
As I don't see it until tomorrow, but I would just point out that Sebastian is neither modern nor Anglo Saxon.

LR


Let me put it differently: people in Middle-Earth don't have "ordinary" names. Their names are either from Old Norse or completely made up. Names that a modern person might have without raising too much attention don't belong to Middle-Earth.

And Sebastian is not an Anglo-Saxon name? That's news for me, I have never seen that name outside the Anglophone world.


Captain Sassy Pants
The Shire

Dec 12 2012, 1:46pm

Post #14 of 58 (691 views)
Shortcut
Well... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
"He actually makes the Istari look bad. "

It's funny you should say that, but Saruman would say the same thing. Isn't that intentional, even if it's over the top? He's supposed to be all hearts and a little cuckoo, reason why only Gandalf believes him.

Don't forget the Hobbit has talking animals, lots of goofiness and important scenes in a very queer structure. I doubt every dwarf will be given a backstory, simply because Tolkien didn't write any for most of them.

Radagast, Dol Guldur and Azog are being pulled from the appendixes, more or less. Otherwise we'd be complaining about the writers making up dwarven history.

I think the biggest villain here is the decision to shoot three movies instead of two, which may have opened the door for some sloppy editing. We must not forget the source. While beloved for its own merits, it's hardly action movie material for more 9 whole hours.


Azog is actually supposed to be dead, so they did make up dwarven history.


Captain Sassy Pants
The Shire

Dec 12 2012, 1:47pm

Post #15 of 58 (684 views)
Shortcut
Actually [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Note, I haven't seen the new film, so I can't say how bad Jaradagast the Binks is.

But it is *only* the first film (full to the brim of new characters, I might add). I don't really expect the character to be fully fleshed out (just look at no-line-Bombur). They need him to make a big impact straight away, or the character will just disappear into the background. A bunny-sled might be silly to us folks, but in Middle-earth, anything goes.

And since it looks like most of the Dol Guldur plot will be in DOS, I imagine Jaradagast the Binks will have more development with more screentime.


I think you have Middle-Earth mixed up with Narnia.


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Dec 12 2012, 1:48pm

Post #16 of 58 (722 views)
Shortcut
Apart from Tom, William and Bert? [In reply to] Can't Post

Rosie, Bill, Harry, Hugo, Angelica, Dora, Andy, Mat, Willie, Robin, Rory, Ted and Will?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by Anglo Saxon but guess you mean something rather different from the more specific use.

LR


(This post was edited by Lacrimae Rerum on Dec 12 2012, 1:51pm)


DanielLB
Immortal


Dec 12 2012, 1:49pm

Post #17 of 58 (664 views)
Shortcut
In what way? / [In reply to] Can't Post

 

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



RalphDamiani
Rivendell

Dec 12 2012, 1:53pm

Post #18 of 58 (683 views)
Shortcut
The way I see it... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Let me put it differently: people in Middle-Earth don't have "ordinary" names.


I beg to differ. Some hobbits and the lesser Men seem to have pretty mundane names and nicknames in their english translations. We have Tom, Bill, Bert, Rose, Daisy, etc.

Sebastian is a latin name, and very common one outside of the anglo world (Sebastião, Sebastiano, Sebastién). However, it could be that Sebby or Seba is just a translation of the actual westron name, like Samwise was actually Banazîr Galbasi.

Obviously I'm no loremaster, but I'd love to hear from one.


RalphDamiani
Rivendell

Dec 12 2012, 2:08pm

Post #19 of 58 (652 views)
Shortcut
It's not that bad [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Azog is actually supposed to be dead, so they did make up dwarven history.


No arguments there, but the impact on a global scale is minimal. He needed a villain, it had to be an orc, so instead of making up a new one, he used an existing character.
Jackson is obviously not a purist, he's taking known characters and placing them elsewhere, fast forwarding time, recycling existing names and moving around plotlines in the chronology of Middle-Earth.

But that's not new, he's done it extensively in LotR. This goes into Xenarven territory or fireball Saruman. Those deviances may be undesirable for book readers, but they're far more forgivable than having an elven army in Helm's Deep, tempted Faramir or Sauron fighting Aragorn, for instance, which rewrites Tolkien's themes of major importance, and not a single character's fate.


daemoon
Rivendell

Dec 12 2012, 2:42pm

Post #20 of 58 (649 views)
Shortcut
Sebastian? [In reply to] Can't Post

Who the hell is Sebastian? Radagast's crab companion? =D



Carne
Tol Eressea

Dec 12 2012, 3:05pm

Post #21 of 58 (602 views)
Shortcut
Porcupine companion [In reply to] Can't Post

Wink

Named after Jackson's assistant, Sebastian Meek.


marcuspaine
Bree

Dec 12 2012, 3:10pm

Post #22 of 58 (590 views)
Shortcut
What happens to the porcupine? [In reply to] Can't Post

Also, just out of curiosity, how much do we see of Radagast in Rhosgobel before he's attacked?

And is it true he's responsible for helping end the orc attack on the Company?


Azaghâl
Lorien


Dec 12 2012, 3:27pm

Post #23 of 58 (559 views)
Shortcut
It is too much. Sadly. [In reply to] Can't Post

He is portraied like a goofy fellow, not just an excentric forrest lover. Everything about him is just comedic (not in a good way) which dissapoints me, cause in the trailer he seemed like he had much more to offer. Unfurtunately PJ has decided that everything about him needs to be silly. It is, as I said, a little over top.
(more spoiler)
The part where Gandalf gives him a drag on his pibe to calm down, is just stupid. Why does he need to make cartoonish disney faces. Yuck.

I think Radagast is my least favorite character so far. Hopefully he will rise to the occasion in DOS.

*Baruk khazâd! Khazâd ai-mênu!*


Otaku-sempai
Half-elven


Dec 12 2012, 3:46pm

Post #24 of 58 (534 views)
Shortcut
Ordinary names in Middle-earth [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To
As I don't see it until tomorrow, but I would just point out that Sebastian is neither modern nor Anglo Saxon.

LR


Let me put it differently: people in Middle-Earth don't have "ordinary" names. Their names are either from Old Norse or completely made up. Names that a modern person might have without raising too much attention don't belong to Middle-Earth.



I think that William "Bill" Huggins and his buddies Tom and Bert might disagree. Then there's Tom Bombadil, Tom Pickthorn (a Bree-lander) and Bill Ferny (also of Bree).


Quote

And Sebastian is not an Anglo-Saxon name? That's news for me, I have never seen that name outside the Anglophone world.



The earliest Sebastian that I find referenced is the Christian saint who was reportedly born in Gallia Narbonensis, in what is now southern France. However, there is also a 4th-century Roman general named Sebastianus. Another Sebastianus siezed control of the Western Roman Empire in the 5th century.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring


Ave Moria
Rivendell


Dec 12 2012, 3:49pm

Post #25 of 58 (570 views)
Shortcut
Have you actually SEEN The Phantom Menace? [In reply to] Can't Post

Comparing that unwatchable mess to a Peter Jackson movie is insane. Further, comparing it in a forum that is supposedly for admirers of the films and books is even more bizarre.

Perhaps you should actually WATCH Jar Jar a little more closely and then tell me with a straight face he is anything remotely like Radagast. He isn't PERIOD.

The entire reason this Jar Jar nonsense is even around is because of the inevitable comparisons to the other known large scale pop culture prequel trilogy. Well, they needed something for a soundbite, so they compare an eccentric character to Jar Jar and boom, insecure fanboys foam at the mouth.

NO, the CG is not terrible in this. Did we see different films? HFR takes some getting used to. But in 24 and 48 the CG is great.

This is why I left this forum 10 years ago.

-In the Darkness, a torch we hold-

(This post was edited by Ataahua on Dec 12 2012, 5:12pm)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 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.