|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HeWhoArisesinMight
Rivendell
Apr 20 2014, 12:01am
Post #1 of 53
(2825 views)
Shortcut
|
|
After further review, it just doesn't make sense
|
Can't Post
|
|
Upon my second viewing of DOS, I had some objections of how PJ handled some things, even though I thoroughly enjoyed the movie.
1. Why did Bilbo take off his ring when confronted by Smaug. Yes Smaug goes on about "sensing" something great that Bilbo carries, but come on, it makes no sense to take off the ring so he can be seen (then he conveniently puts it back on when Smaug is ready to chow down on him).
2. PJ often goes too much for over-the-top action rather than letting the story carry itself. The tension between Bilbo and Smaug could have carried the final scenes much more than the stupid fight between the Dwarves and Smaug. Yes, the battle scene was action-packed, but it still was stupid. Smaug should have easily killed them. He could have made it more believable if instead he had Smaug keep them alive out of some devious plot (as Glaurung often did with his victims; he didn't always kill them right away).
3. OK, I did enjoy myself, but I hate the silly action sequences, even if I take guilty pleasure in them. But PJ should watch Game of Thrones and take a page from that series. Often, the best tension comes without action and is simply dialogue. The "Purple Wedding" demonstrates how awesome tension can be without a battle sequence. But then again, GoT is for a more mature audience....
|
|
|
MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea
Apr 20 2014, 2:05am
Post #2 of 53
(1960 views)
Shortcut
|
how do you know it was smaug that sensed the ring? it could have been sauron because we saw the eye of sauron before Bilbo removed it. Loved the furnaces action sequence, smaug could have easily killed them, perhaps, but he is so big it would be like trying to swat multiple flies around you.
The flames of war are upon you.
|
|
|
ghost_matt
Rivendell
Apr 20 2014, 2:46am
Post #3 of 53
(1882 views)
Shortcut
|
It could have been Sauron or the ring itself that made Bilbo take the ring off just then. Remember in LOTR that the ring would sometimes play tricks on its bearer. If it can slip on someone's finger when it wants to draw attention, why not slip off someone's finger?
|
|
|
Ataahua
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Apr 20 2014, 2:56am
Post #4 of 53
(1883 views)
Shortcut
|
I took it that he used his draconic influence to prompt Bilbo to take off the ring.
Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."
"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded beggar with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.
Ataahua's stories
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Half-elven
Apr 20 2014, 4:45am
Post #5 of 53
(1864 views)
Shortcut
|
Re #1, the rationales above seem a little thin. I think Bilbo took it off because Jackson didn't want to film the whole sequence with the "invisibility" effects on.
As for your last two points, I entirely agree with you. But there have been a number of threads, such as this one, in which people expressed preferences for Dwarves v. Smaug and some others that were thoroughly cartoonish. Unfortunately, there's a market for that stuff, and Jackson is catering to it.
|
|
|
patrickk
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 5:29am
Post #6 of 53
(1811 views)
Shortcut
|
|
He took the ring off becuase Smaug sensed it
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...and used the term 'precious' and maybe even knew what it was. I tmade sense to take it off then as to leave it on was a greater risk. Bilbo put it on briefly later to get away but did not give Smaug enough time to work it out. I also hope you are not suggesting Tolkein fans are somewhat immature: now that is really a big call . I do not watch tele so have no idea of the Game of Thrones TV show or what 'more mature audience it is aimed for' - but really!!!
|
|
|
Annatar598
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 6:34am
Post #7 of 53
(1835 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Game of Thrones relies on misery, bloodshed and death
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
to establish and grind its narrative. Not that its a bad thing but It certainly isn't to the taste of many. I've read all the books and am somewhat caught up with the show so I really do love Westeros (despite Martin's shoddy writing).
These ME films are a whole different form of storytelling. GoT doesn't have the budget to do stuff like this (If it did, everything would be different).
And I do wonder how you could create tension WITHOUT a battle sequence in this scenario.
People need to watch other movies these days to label such scenes in DOS as "action-packed." They're still pretty tame in comparison to some other movies like Captain America 2 or Spider-Man 2.
"[Annatar598] is an overzealous apologist [for PJ]" - Certain TORn member.
Really? Alright...
Well, proud to be one I guess.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Apr 20 2014, 7:24am
Post #8 of 53
(1827 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Why so grudging about enjoying it?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You enjoyed it, focus on that. No need to feel guilty about it.
There's nothing 'silly' or 'stupid' about DOS, just as there's nothing intrinsically mature in Game of Thrones. They're different, written from a completely different ethos. Game of Thrones is about the very worst that humanity can be and do; Tolkien's work always has hope at its core, even in the worst of circumstances.
Besides, Peter Jackson is an experienced film maker with his own style. No reason on earth why he should look to something like that - or to anything else - as his model, and I'm very glad he doesn't. He's making Tolkien, not Martin, and in DOS I'd say he's achieved something extraordinary and at times very beautiful.
|
|
|
NecromancerRising
Gondor
Apr 20 2014, 7:47am
Post #9 of 53
(1791 views)
Shortcut
|
I completely agree with every single word you wrote.I,myself am a big Game of Thrones fan but at the same time i am grateful and glad that Hobbit movies don't bear the slightest resemblance to that style of the depiction of events and to the writing as well.
"Obsession and narrow-mindness is the trend of the 2000's"
|
|
|
CathrineB
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 10:01am
Post #10 of 53
(1729 views)
Shortcut
|
My take on the first one was that the Ring made Bilbo pull it off or something. Since we know it has the ability to manipulate the bearer.
The fight though. I did enjoy it, but yeah I think the movie could well enough pull it off without all the dwarf dragon fight. They made Smaug a very intense, strong character so the scene is far from boring. Having a huge dragon tracking after our hero is creepy enough. Also all that time spent running around Erebor could have been given to Mirkwood or something. Must be my biggest gripe with this movie. The lack of the Elvenking 
|
|
|
Annatar598
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 1:24pm
Post #11 of 53
(1678 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Dormouse, you could never have put it better!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I think it's the tiny and very minuscule minority on the internet (and these boards) that are affecting people like the OP into believing that enjoying The Hobbit movies makes you stupid and dull in some fashion.
(ON A HUGE OFF-TOPIC NOTE: I just watched Captain America 2 and Amazing Spider-man 2 this month and really? Are critics that daft that they accuse DOS of being loud and noisy but bestow medals of honour on the two comic book movies? Such reeking BS)
George R. R. Martin, intentionally or unintentionally, loses a sense of realism in his stories in making everything terrible and dark because humanity isn't necessarily all doom and gloom. Tolkien finds the right balance IMO with characters such as Boromir and Samwise Gamgee.
"[Annatar598] is an overzealous apologist [for PJ]" - Certain TORn member.
Really? Alright...
Well, proud to be one I guess.
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Apr 20 2014, 1:27pm
Post #12 of 53
(1669 views)
Shortcut
|
And re point number one, to me Smaug's abilities are mysterious - there's a difference between a mocking, focused Smaug vs. a Smaug who seems confident he has more or less pinned Bilbo down, where Bilbo seems frozen in fear.
Tthe more I watch DOS, the more I appreciate the dwarf/Smaug clash, the details, and the thought that went behind those scenes. While I am both a GOT fan and love huge movies and epic books, there were already complaints about the Smaug sequence going on for too long.
Considering the situation - realistically just how much longer could the Smaug/Bilbo conversation be kept going? Last season I skipped 4 episodes of GOT, as I was getting bored. Endless tense conversations can all start to blur together, and I found my attention wandering - and when I finally started watching again, it didn't seem to have made a difference that I missed some episodes (not that I am not watching this season, which so far has been interesting - and I have read all the books).
DOS laced everything going on outside and inside Erebor nicely together, I thought.
"Richard Armitage’s performance has been one of the best things about the new trilogy, making you believe that a hairy dwarf, so often the comedy element of the LOTR films, can be a heroic, tortured, and dangerous badass." - Den of Geek, The Hobbit: There & Back Again, 7 Apr 2014 - 07:07
|
|
|
MasterOrc
Rivendell
Apr 20 2014, 1:47pm
Post #13 of 53
(1680 views)
Shortcut
|
Couldn't agree with you more.... To much negativity on these boards. Makes you really not want to participate. Maybe they should create a Happy Forum and a Grumpy Forum  .
The more I watch AUJ, the more I'm starting to appreciate what Peter Jackson has done. Bilbo, Thorin, Gandalf, etc are fantastic characters to say the least. The DOS is an incredible bridge film that once the final installment is out most of us will really come to appreciate it. The first five minutes of TABA should be the tell all.
se
|
|
|
FaramirAndEowynMorningStar
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 2:50pm
Post #14 of 53
(1632 views)
Shortcut
|
|
For your first question, I think it should be "Why did Bilbo not put the Ring on sooner when confronted by Smaug?"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The answer though to your question is simple: magic. In the book, it was said that Smaug had a little dragon magic. When he says "precious", you will notice it is supposed to echo in Bilbo's head. It forces him to take it off because the chant was getting louder.
I do agree with your other two points. They could have used more of the confrontation than the fight. Frankly, I thought that part was going to end sooner - like, when Thorin pulled on the chain and the molten gold poured out. I thought it was going to rain down on Smaug from above and, in rage, he would flee from the mountain. I knew, however, that it would not end with the dragon being killed. I knew that was going to be in the third film - The Hobbit: Whatever The Third Film Will Be Called.
And, I think indeed that the best tension comes from the dialogue rather than the action. There are many scenes in GoT where that is emphasised. I think that is what Peter lacks in DOS because it was more about the action with the "Barrel Chase", "Lake-Town attack" and "Driving the Dragon out of the Mountain" scenes. Don't get me wrong, though, he has his own filming style and I do like it. I just think there is no "arc" in their bridge between AUJ and the third film.
 ..The Lord of Silver Fountains
.....The King of Carven Stone
..The King Under the Mountain
.......Shall come into his own
..And the bells will ring in gladness
......At the Mountain King's return
..But all shall fail in sadness
....And the lake will shine and burn
|
|
|
tsmith675
Gondor
Apr 20 2014, 3:18pm
Post #15 of 53
(1637 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Totally off topic, but I just want to put my opinion in here.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
(ON A HUGE OFF-TOPIC NOTE: I just watched Captain America 2 and Amazing Spider-man 2 this month and really? Are critics that daft that they accuse DOS of being loud and noisy but bestow medals of honour on the two comic book movies? Such reeking BS)
I have yet to see Spider-Man 2 yet, but I'm really not that excited to see it. It looks far to busy to me. However I loved Captain America 2. I thought it was phenomenal. It definitely didn't feel like a comic book movie at all, to me anyway. I really loved it.
To bring this back (sort of) on topic, I can't really compare it to DoS. They're completely different. But I definitely think the critics have been way too hard on these Hobbit films.
Our destiny lies above us.
|
|
|
Elarie
Grey Havens
Apr 20 2014, 3:28pm
Post #16 of 53
(1639 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I found the dwarves vs. Smaug fight interesting in another way
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
mainly, in how Thorin's reaction to Smaug changes. The first time Thorin sees Smaug inside Erebor the expression on his face is pure terror, possibly the only time we'll ever see that particular look on his face. And he remains nervous as they creep along the walkways to the western guardroom. It's when they find the dead bodies and Thorin says, "I will not die like this" that all that fear gets replaced by anger and he decides to attack the dragon no matter what the consequences, and even taunts him and threatens him face to face. It's a big change from the prologue of AUJ where we see Thorin telling people to run for their lives and asking the elves for help against this incredible monster, and I'm wondering if this shift in attitude, where caution gets thrown out the window, will get tied in to his further personality changes in TABA.
Hop to it, Radagast, we've got dark powers to sleigh.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Apr 20 2014, 4:50pm
Post #17 of 53
(1596 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I totally agree with this sentiment
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It's just a shame that in DoS the story deviated unnecessarily to non-canon characters and story lines, and ninja-elf action.
More of Bilbo, Thorin and Gandalf, as well as Balin, Beorn, Thranduil, Bard and Smaug will be excellent. Those are the characters the film should be focusing on. (And I had no problem with any of the Smaug sequence in DoS.)
Bilbo, Thorin, Gandalf, etc are fantastic characters to say the least.
(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Apr 20 2014, 4:52pm)
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Apr 20 2014, 5:40pm
Post #18 of 53
(1595 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, the rationales are sort of thin and stretched...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...like butter scraped over too much bread. 
I do so enjoy the unbridled umbrage some posters here show when The Hobbit films are compared to Captain America or The Avengers -- when that is exactly what The Hobbit has become.
The films have become overly cartoonish, but that is what one gets when one strives to make a comic book out of literature. The subtlety is stripped away and garish color and cartoon violence takes the place of wit and wording.
So, rather than rely on the plot that made the book a classic, PJ adds matrix and Mary-Sue elves, outrageous orcs lining up just outside Thranduil's demesne like theater patrons for a Saturday matinee, and poor Bilbo forced to remove his Ring when any sensible hobbit would never do such a thing before a dragon who could eat him in one gulp.
Why? Obviously because PJ believes, like in his LoTR films, that modern film audiences do not have the capacity to think or comprehend more complicated plot points. Why tax the audience's brief attention spans when a few more decapitations, gratuitous fight scenes and rollercoaster chase sequences do the trick?
Perhaps PJ is a visionary and is catering to the next big marketing demographic: house pets.
So look for quick film movements, dangling string and more rabbit sleds in the third film. Your cat or dog will love it.
Please visit my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music and literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
|
|
|
shadowdog
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 8:20pm
Post #20 of 53
(1505 views)
Shortcut
|
We have not seen the complete tale. I will wait to see all three before I judge a piece of the tale.
|
|
|
Annatar598
Rohan
Apr 20 2014, 8:34pm
Post #21 of 53
(1501 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You're calling The Hobbit movies cartoonish?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I wonder what the book is under that fashion of labelling.
Juvenille?
Silly?
Ridiculous?
Talking wallets and all you know?
There is more depth in these movies than there ever was in the book. That's the entire reason behind the 3-flim split so we don't have stuff like a complete stranger shooting the main villain out of the sky.
"[Annatar598] is an overzealous apologist [for PJ]" - Certain TORn member.
Really? Alright...
Well, proud to be one I guess.
|
|
|
Elarie
Grey Havens
Apr 20 2014, 9:18pm
Post #22 of 53
(1481 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Alas, quite a few audience members really can't follow complicated plots
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In response to:
Obviously because PJ believes, like in his LoTR films, that modern film audiences do not have the capacity to think or comprehend more complicated plot points.
___
Even though it's been quite a few years now, I remember very clearly walking out of the theater after Fellowship of the Ring and hearing the person behind me ask their companion, "So, were Aragon and Boromir really brothers?" just because Boromir used that term when he was dying. And other people who watched the movie without reading the books have asked me questions about the plot and characters which I thought were pretty clear in the movie.
I think the people who make movies are very well aware of this and walk a fine line when trying to bring something long and complicated to the screen. Like it or not, they have to sell tickets to pay for the costs of making the movie and the cost of creating Middle Earth on screen are apparently enormous.
Hop to it, Radagast, we've got dark powers to sleigh.
|
|
|
NecromancerRising
Gondor
Apr 20 2014, 9:21pm
Post #23 of 53
(1495 views)
Shortcut
|
It is extremely easy to judge things in life.Here is another example.
Subject:"HOW THE MOVIE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE"
I would have gladly preferred a movie with 13 anonymous Dwarves with blue and yellow beards, with one stick-out called Thorin or whatever his name was.. whose only character trait is that he's proud and angry.. especially angry.
I would have preferred that Gandalf randomly leaves the film with no proper mention of where he's going and appears 10 minutes before the end.
Also.. who cares about who actually kills the major villain of the story? It definitely should have been some random guy whom we haven't seen or heard before.A guy who learns the vulnerability of that main villain by a talking thrush,the ultimate hero of the story.
Also, the camera should be panned at Bilbo AT ALL TIMES. You know that awesome battle of Five Armies that are probably going to get at the end of TABA? forget it. I want to see Bilbo faint. -cut to black- and then wake up when all this is over.
And then this guy... Thorin, this really angry Dwarf dies plus 2 other anonymous Dwarves die with him..
and where was Gandalf all this time? oh.. you know.. somewhere.. having a quarrel with a villain totally unrelated to the story. Who cares?
It would have made a fantastic movie,imo. Don't you agree?
"Obsession and narrow-mindness is the trend of the 2000's"
(This post was edited by Altaira on Apr 21 2014, 3:02am)
|
|
|
Escapist
Gondor
Apr 20 2014, 9:28pm
Post #24 of 53
(1469 views)
Shortcut
|
making sure that the movie uses a narrator voice through almost every scene and that it must talk about various anachronistic modern comparisons and a special emphasis needs to be placed on the comforts of home - namely things like toast and bacon. And when I say "special emphasis" and "various", what I really mean is verbatim as the book is written taking the book as the script directly.
All of that being said, in no way shall there be any kind of book - end style introduction or explanation of who this narrator is. It shall simply be obvious that Bilbo is writing it because people just know things. Give them credit. It would be the obvious assumption. Unless we get a computer generated voice (and by computer generated, what I really mean is find an old recording done for radio several decades ago) completely matching JRRT himself reading his introduction out loud.
If all the world's a stage then who's writing the script?
|
|
|
KW
Rivendell
Apr 20 2014, 9:49pm
Post #25 of 53
(1502 views)
Shortcut
|
The Coen Brothers do this exact sort of thing in one of their movies! It's one reason why they always pop up in my head when I think of The Hobbit. Like Tolkien they aren't constant slaves to the hackneyed way of handling things. Tolkien chooses to focus on the consequence of the battle rather than fetishize it.
You know that awesome battle of Five Armies that are probably going to get at the end of TABA? forget it. I want to see Bilbo faint. -cut to black- and then wake up when all this is over .
|
|
|
|
|
Not just house pets
[
1
