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:
AUJ short cut
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Grey Havens

Jan 22 2013, 5:16pm

Post #1 of 48 (1304 views)
Shortcut
AUJ short cut Can't Post

I had he chance to see aan made cut of the movie only book canon, it lasts 1hour and 45 minutes.
They removed al the intro with old Bilbo
The prologue was inserted just before Gandalf puts the map on the table, and because we hadnīt heard th voice of Ian Holm it seems that is oe of thedwarves that is arrating it, I saw twoversions of this, one with Azanulbizar right after the downfall of Erebor, narrated as if Balin picks up the narration, and wthout Azanulbizar, theone with Azanulbzar incuded Azog jut at the end, and it seems to be more efective. But the book canon doesnīt show Azog. And it works.
Then no mysti mountain song, because of the path, and I didnīt miss it too much, but I did. No conversation between Gandalf and Bilbo, and nor Balin Thorin interacion, jut asBilbo faints we go to the mornign after. And it works.
Then right to the scene were is raining, but it cuts just beforeBilbo asks for the Wizards, and then the discussion of Thorin and Gandalf, and then the trolls and the swords. And it works.
No Radagast, no Wargs chase.
Thenwh have some images of the company wlking and then into the secret passage to Rivendell. Right into the dynng room and then the Moon Letters, No withe council at all. Nor revelation of Azog as well.
Then the company leaves and we dont know where Gandalf is, only Bilbo looking at Rivendel with that feeling of nostalgia.
Then all the mountain path and all that uncut untill Azog reapears at te top of the hill. We only hear the wolves and the company flees
Then into the pan...and Azog appears only to be a super orc ofsome kind, no mtivation in him, but it woks, n confrontation between him and Thorin and no Bilbo rescuing, only te eagles coming. And finlly the carrock,and no hugh between Thorin and Bilbo, Bilbo an Thorin had his moment when Bilbo reapears and tell him that he has returned to help him.
Then the en. nd it works.
It makes m think of the entire hour they had to show Beorn and Mirkwood, and all th path issues we have heard
Som of these cuts seemed cheesy but it gave me th feeling that despte themovie is good and Ii love it,two movies perhaps woud have been better choice.

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!


Owain
Tol Eressea


Jan 22 2013, 5:24pm

Post #2 of 48 (671 views)
Shortcut
The movie is what it is. [In reply to] Can't Post

I find it actually quite offensive that people would think their cut of the movie is superior.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


Arthael
Lorien


Jan 22 2013, 5:30pm

Post #3 of 48 (633 views)
Shortcut
That sounds like a terrible movie [In reply to] Can't Post

No character development, no motivations, no Misty Mountains singing, random orc pops up at the end, just a bunch of scenes tied together. Jackson's movie is far from perfect, but those cuts sound like made-for-Disney adaptations

"There are no safe paths in this part of the world. Remember you are over the Edge of the Wild, and in for all sorts of fun wherever you go."


Rostron2
Gondor


Jan 22 2013, 5:32pm

Post #4 of 48 (589 views)
Shortcut
To each their own [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't condone plagiaristic work like that either. But if they're going to do this, they ought to just go to school, work their way up, and in ten years do their own damn work with a new version. Then see if they can take criticism.


Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Grey Havens

Jan 22 2013, 5:36pm

Post #5 of 48 (652 views)
Shortcut
Well I find the movi quite interesting I mean PJīS [In reply to] Can't Post

Andhave seen it several times, but yo know since i the adaptation of a book I can unerstand that some people find quite ofensive to change a lot of it, and I understand also that PJ did it in a respectfull way, but some book lovers felt ofnded anyway. I find it quiteinteresting to see the moie like this, there is room for chrater development, just more or less as the bookalowed characters to evolve untilthe carrock.
But there is a film that we ae all enjoing and there is a book that we all enjoy, so Iīm happy

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 22 2013, 5:37pm

Post #6 of 48 (569 views)
Shortcut
I wonder... [In reply to] Can't Post

...what people would say if someone rewrote the book adding in the extra parts of the movie. I'm sure there would be an uproar. This basically sounds just as ludicrous to me.


stoutfiles
Rohan


Jan 22 2013, 5:43pm

Post #7 of 48 (594 views)
Shortcut
huh? [In reply to] Can't Post

No character development

Are you claiming the book didn't have character development? This cut is more accurate to the book.

no motivations

Claiming Erebor IS the motivation. It's all you need.

no Misty Mountains singing

I agree that should have stayed, but it's not a crucial plot point.

random orc pops up at the end

Yes, FOTR suffered greatly from Aragorn battling Lurtz. Why would he fight him? Where was the motivation, the character development? No, it still worked.

just a bunch of scenes tied together

Isn't that just about every movie ever? I don't know what it is with attention spans these days that characters need to be constantly chased from Point A to Point B.

but those cuts sound like made-for-Disney adaptations

There would need to be romance or extreme silliness for that to happen. This cut removes the silliness.


irreality
Bree


Jan 22 2013, 5:45pm

Post #8 of 48 (578 views)
Shortcut
Why would you cut the misty mountains song? [In reply to] Can't Post

It is canonical and easily the best part of the whole movie. It shows the dwarves' character and virtue better than pretty much any part of the movie, makes Bilbo want to go on this adventure, sets the tone and mood, etc.

I'm actually a big fan of the 3 movies decision. Not only because I love having more middle earth material, but I don't think the climactic moments would work well for TABA, unless you have one movie mostly dedicated to hunting the dragon and a separate movie for the dwarf/human/elf/goblin/orc interactions and fighting. It would probably suffer from a "too many endings" issue again, otherwise.

I don't think they "padded" AUJ in *order* to have a trilogy. They had extra stuff PJ et al. really liked and added it in, but it isn't like you can't have a 1.5 hour movie if that is what the director really wanted for his trilogy. I think they had a trilogy because, sort of like dividing the LotR into two movies didn't make sense to them, dividing the Hobbit into two didn't make sense to them -- it is a back heavy story, the second movie would have been unbalanced.


Owain
Tol Eressea


Jan 22 2013, 5:47pm

Post #9 of 48 (613 views)
Shortcut
No there is no comparison in your argument. [In reply to] Can't Post

Peter Jackson acquired the rights to the work legally and has spent an immense amount of his life/resources to bring these works to life.

Someone sitting in their basement deciding that they can edit it into a "better" movie after it's a completed work, but had no involvement in the production, isn't the same thing as not liking Peter Jackson's adaptation of Tolkien's book.

This just get's ridiculous at times.

If people don't like the movies, then they shouldn't watch them. But actually taking the time to edit the work to weave it into something that is more in line with one's own vision, because you don't like the artist's rendering... show's no respect for the people who took the time, energy, and life's effort to make those movies into a reality.

In effect, people who don't like it should... well... move on.

Jackson didn't just open Tolkien's book, get out a home movie camera, pop it into iMovie, press bake, and presto, we have a movie.

Why is Tolkien afforded so much respect for his life's work and Jackson not? There are plenty of people that think LOTR and The Hobbit are terribly written and boring stories but you don't seem them editing Tolkien's work.

Unsure

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 22 2013, 5:55pm

Post #10 of 48 (558 views)
Shortcut
This point... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Are you claiming the book didn't have character development?This cut is more accurate to the book.


I think most anyone, even fans of the book, and definitely scholars, will claim that the character development in the book is very poor. Even Bilbo, who is the only character the audience can see the thoughts of, is not as well developed as he could be (to this day, I couldn't tell you exactly why he agrees to go on the quest). All of the dwarves are treated as one character 99% of the time, and have no depth to them at all. Gandalf remains mysterious, his abilities are really unknown to the audience, and then he leaves for half of the story. So yes, the character development in the story is abysmal, because the characters are more representative of a moralistic tale to teach children right from wrong (ie: thorin's comments as he is dying would be the moral of the story), than characters with many different facets to them.


elevorn
Lorien


Jan 22 2013, 6:02pm

Post #11 of 48 (520 views)
Shortcut
I agree [In reply to] Can't Post

If you are that convinced that you are the person who has THE Hobbit movie ready to go. Aquire the film writes, hire the actors, film the movie and see where you stack up. Other than that, don't rip someone else's movie off to try to prove your point. Its rude, offensive, and illegal (to have a copy as it has not been released for purchase).



"clever hobbits to climb so high!"
Check out my writing www.jdstudios.wordpress.com

(This post was edited by elevorn on Jan 22 2013, 6:03pm)


Rostron2
Gondor


Jan 22 2013, 6:11pm

Post #12 of 48 (537 views)
Shortcut
*applause* well said // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Grey Havens

Jan 22 2013, 6:14pm

Post #13 of 48 (539 views)
Shortcut
With all respect [In reply to] Can't Post

Iīm sayng I saw t, not that I did it myself,also, Iīm pretty sad that mos of the movie is on youtube. I donīt lik that because affects movie selling. But I had the chance to see tat cut, and I did it.

It was book canon, and I found it interesting, as a stand alone movie no. It not works as a stand alone movie. Perhaps with more footageof DOSto fullfill the three hours could have worked.

Iīm not judging anyone here, nor if PJ hasdone a good or a terrible job addaptating it. In fact I loved the movieand I have seen it 4 times.ī

Iīm just saying that I found it interesting, because I know it has ben debated in this forums before.

Didnīt pretendto disturb anyone.

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!


stoutfiles
Rohan


Jan 22 2013, 6:14pm

Post #14 of 48 (548 views)
Shortcut
Comparing apples and oranges [In reply to] Can't Post

Why is Tolkien afforded so much respect for his life's work and Jackson not? There are plenty of people that think LOTR and The Hobbit are terribly written and boring stories but you don't seem them editing Tolkien's work.

Because Jackson didn't write The Hobbit or LOTR? They aren't his stories, they're Tolkien's, and most people read, love, and accept that story. Then Jackson adapts it and completely changes some major plot points. This is like saying a director of a Shakespeare movie should get the same level of respect as Shakespeare. Creating work and adapting it are not comparable.

If you want to compare Jackson to other directors though, I'm sure he's up there (but not at the top).



Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Grey Havens

Jan 22 2013, 6:22pm

Post #15 of 48 (505 views)
Shortcut
Iīm agree [In reply to] Can't Post

Creating (though some of the dwarves names exsisted in northern mythology peviou The Hobbit, among some other influences) is not the same as addapting.
The yo have those who addapt t wordby word and its arguably or not. Or those who take some changes on the story, but respect the soul of the material, and that is arguably or not. And those who donīt respect the material at all. And that is arguably or not.

Nobody here is disrespecing PJ hard efforts to put his vision on screen, at all. But he was taking risks changing some things, and probaly he is awae tha the movie was not going to make happy everyone, just as LOTR.

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 22 2013, 6:24pm

Post #16 of 48 (490 views)
Shortcut
Not apples... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
This is like saying a director of a Shakespeare movie should get the same level of respect as Shakespeare. Creating work and adapting it are not comparable.


Not true. There are many adaptations that more popular or better than the original story. For example, Mozart wrote "The Marriage of Figaro" hundreds of years ago...how many today would know that his opera was based on a popular play of that time? However, Mozart's adaptation and music live on today, while the original play has now become obscure (despite being popular in its day). Most people today know Tolkien's work through the movies now, and who's to say, 100 years from now, which version stands the test of time? That's why the argument "the book is always the better version" doesn't hold water.


(This post was edited by bborchar on Jan 22 2013, 6:25pm)


Arthael
Lorien


Jan 22 2013, 6:25pm

Post #17 of 48 (520 views)
Shortcut
Most the Dwarves barely even had lines in the book [In reply to] Can't Post

much less something you could call character development. There's certainly development with Bilbo, and there's some with Thorin, although it doesn't hit until right at the end.

Lurtz wasn't random. We saw his "birth", we saw Sarmuan grooming him to be the leader, we saw Saruman giving him specific orders ("kill the others") and we had close-ups of him running through the trees. By the time he shot Borimir, we were ready to hate him. This is what they attempted to do with Azog, they just didn't pull it off as well.

No, movies are not random scenes tied together. Good movies flow from beginning to end, every scene (and in a really good film, every shot) flowing seamlessly. Tolkien's book is episodic and just jumps from one adventure to the next with very little flow, because it's a bedtime story and I'm sure little Chris Tolkien didn't want to be bothered by conversations, character development, and transitions. He wanted to hear the next adventure they we're going to get into!!

I love the book, and I definitely think PJ's cut could have been a lot better, but this "fan cut" the OP describes would make for a pretty sub-par movie watching experience.There's a different between a good adaptation and a good film. This cut might have been a better adaptation of the book, but it certainly doesn't sound like a good movie. (To be fair, I wouldn't put AUJ in my top 5 of 2012 anyway, at least as far as film making standards go)

"There are no safe paths in this part of the world. Remember you are over the Edge of the Wild, and in for all sorts of fun wherever you go."


egret
The Shire

Jan 22 2013, 6:27pm

Post #18 of 48 (475 views)
Shortcut
Who is the apple? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
I donīt really understand your point. Both (Pj and Tolkien) did their job with passion and love and, for that reason, they deserve the same respect. No more, no less. Different levels of respect??? Why? In fact , I find the term "levels of respect" quite infamous. No one deserves less respect than another one.


Rostron2
Gondor


Jan 22 2013, 6:28pm

Post #19 of 48 (472 views)
Shortcut
Good point [In reply to] Can't Post

This is like saying a director of a Shakespeare movie should get the same level of respect as Shakespeare.

I could go on all day about directors that savagely distort these stories for the sake of their vision. You do have a point.





Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Grey Havens

Jan 22 2013, 6:34pm

Post #20 of 48 (468 views)
Shortcut
the same "level" of respect but in dfferent areas maybe? [In reply to] Can't Post

I feel that you are right, I have a cpy of thehobbit anotated and some of th pasages of the book are pretty close to some stories of the folclore of Northen Europe. So there is not big deal, or maybe yes, I think PJ has done a massive good job in LOTR, not so shure on The Hobbit, does the passion of an artist make worthy or justify his art?

I donīt now

But maybe PJ putted the same passion as an adapter as Tokien as a creator...

My respect for both

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true!

(This post was edited by isaac on Jan 22 2013, 6:36pm)


Owain
Tol Eressea


Jan 22 2013, 7:33pm

Post #21 of 48 (423 views)
Shortcut
I agree. [In reply to] Can't Post

They are apples and oranges.

Peter Jackson could no sooner tell Tolkien how to write an epic novel, as Tolkien could never tell Peter Jackson how to make an epic trilogy. They are different mediums indeed.


Quote
They aren't his stories, they're Tolkien's.


I never said otherwise. They are indeed Tolkien's stories, which where, again, legally acquired by Peter Jackson for movie adaptation. In all of the lawsuits that have occurred, none of them have been aimed at Peter Jackson and Co (especially because of adaptation differences) because the Tolkien Estate can't sue Jackson or his crew for something they have done legally.

Whether they deviate and whether one likes them has nothing to do with Tolkien's ownership.

Christopher can say whatever he wants about his view of the Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies... those are his views. But they are nothing more than that. If they were, there wouldn't be any movies.


Quote
and most people read, love, and accept that story


This is a gross assumption. I know plenty of people that dislike them.


At the end of the day, JRR Tolkien sold the movie rights to his most well known works, and these are the movies we have thus far.

Disrespecting the movie makers' works by sitting on a home pc and cutting it down to what one feels is right, without having put any effort into the planning, execution and actual editing of the movie is arrogance in the highest order.

Now... if someone goes out and acquires the rights, plans the movie, shoots it, edits it, distributes it, and does a better job... then awesome! I'm all for things improving.

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."

(This post was edited by Owain on Jan 22 2013, 7:34pm)


Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Jan 22 2013, 7:44pm

Post #22 of 48 (418 views)
Shortcut
I agree 100% [In reply to] Can't Post

It's fair enough I suppose but it's not to my tastes.

Indeed, if a group of dedicated purists went out to shoot their versions of TH and LOTR then it would save them all the trouble of having to re-edit PJ's version, now wouldn't it? If The Hunt for Gollum can be done these films could be re-done too (though there's no need whatsoever imho).

Taking a film apart in this manner and sticking bits of it back together again may make a more accurate-to-canon movie, but it'll be missing a lot of plot and by god it'll show...

"These are Gundabad Wargs! They will outrun you!"

"THESE are Rhosgobel Rabbits! I'd like to see them try...."



Rostron2
Gondor


Jan 22 2013, 10:51pm

Post #23 of 48 (327 views)
Shortcut
and... [In reply to] Can't Post

no one would go to see it unless it was distributed through the Internet.


LordotRings93
Rohan


Jan 23 2013, 12:09am

Post #24 of 48 (328 views)
Shortcut
Sounds meh. [In reply to] Can't Post

All the good stuff I enjoyed's cut, like the warg chase. I really liked that scene. I kinda wish some of this was in the book, to be honest.

Lover of Medieval Fantasy
"I know what I must do. It's just... I'm afraid to do it."


bborchar
Rohan

Jan 23 2013, 12:15am

Post #25 of 48 (339 views)
Shortcut
You heretic! [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
All the good stuff I enjoyed's cut, like the warg chase. I really liked that scene. I kinda wish some of this was in the book, to be honest.


Lol, I'm the same way. The movie was more fun and engaging with the extra stuff.

First page Previous page 1 2 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.