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:
HUGE Announcement from Peter Jackson's facebook page TITLE CHANGE AND DOS EE
First page Previous page 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next page Last page  View All

Magpie
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 2:52pm

Post #276 of 337 (2744 views)
Shortcut
I'm not sure I worked out what you were trying to say... [In reply to] Can't Post

it had a bit of that 'like half of you half as well as you deserve' sense to it and my face was probably as comical trying to work it out as the Hobbits in the movie... :-)


But I have actually thought about this. I have spent a fair amount of time, thought, discussion, and energy on The Hobbit movies. The thought that occurred to me was, had I never seen LOTR, I would have spent almost no time on The Hobbit movies. I would have watched them, talked about them in the car on the way home, and never given much thought to the again. Except to decide if I wanted to watch them again when they came to my second run theater.



LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide

(This post was edited by Magpie on Apr 25 2014, 2:52pm)


Darkstone
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 2:57pm

Post #277 of 337 (2735 views)
Shortcut
Yep. [In reply to] Can't Post

In the end AUJ and DOS were "more of the same".

For all the praise of FOTR, if Jackson had had the time and money there would have been hordes of Watchers in the underground lake, Gandalf fighting a slime balrog up the Endless Stair, an Elf-Orc battle at the entrance to Lothlorien, and a running Fellowship/Orc battle on the Anduin. (The last probably much like the barrel scene in DOS, with Legolas hopping on the heads of friend and foe alike. I mean, he'd alread hopped on the head of the cave troll during the battle of Moria so it's not like it would be something new. And the number of arrows he shot at Amon Hen was toned down because even Jackson found it a bit ridiculous.)

(I won't even mention the huge set-piece warg night attack on Edoras originally planned in TTT but scrapped on account of money.)

So yeah, if The Hobbit trilogy had been filmed first in 2001-2003 I bet dollars to donuts we'd be sitting here complaining about how bad FOTR (2012) and TTT (2013) were compared to it.

******************************************
https://www.facebook.com/slatesforsarah

(This post was edited by Darkstone on Apr 25 2014, 3:07pm)


BlackFox
Half-elven


Apr 25 2014, 3:12pm

Post #278 of 337 (2725 views)
Shortcut
Here you go, Rem! [In reply to] Can't Post



Tongue


"Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake." - Henry David Thoreau


Elessar
Valinor


Apr 25 2014, 3:20pm

Post #279 of 337 (2722 views)
Shortcut
Well said [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree people have seemed to get worked up. I do believe its because people don't use the right verbiage. Too many times people state their opinions as fact without using ways of writing that show its an opinion. Also going back to a point I made last night some terms used become hyperbole. I honestly don't care who doesn't like this films and would gladly talk with them on why. I would just ask those people to be respectful in how they write things as I do honestly try and do the same.



Glorfindela
Valinor


Apr 25 2014, 3:44pm

Post #280 of 337 (2697 views)
Shortcut
Thanks very much for that, Magpie [In reply to] Can't Post

It chimes a lot with my view, and is very intelligently put. Smile

And the following is also true, perhaps, as far as I'm concerned, although this point is difficult to assess because I have seen LotR, many times:

'The thought that occurred to me was, had I never seen LOTR, I would have spent almost no time on The Hobbit movies. I would have watched them, talked about them in the car on the way home, and never given much thought to the again. Except to decide if I wanted to watch them again when they came to my second run theatre.'


(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Apr 25 2014, 3:49pm)


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Apr 25 2014, 4:21pm

Post #281 of 337 (2676 views)
Shortcut
I don't buy it either... [In reply to] Can't Post

In fact, I've always found it somewhat mildly offensive. I remember it was the excuse used by many in regards to the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Now, granted, the originals aren't exactly Lawrence of Arabia Tongue, but they're tremendously exciting and endearing sci-fi adventures with endearing characters you can care about. Whenever I heard the "you've changed, the films haven't" line, I always felt it was a way of letting the new movies off the hook for their failings.

Same here (though, obviously, I think The Hobbit films are leaps and bounds above the SW prequels). My love of the LotR films has remained as it was when I first saw them - all I have to do is watch them for a few minutes and it's readily apparent to me that they are on a higher cinematic level than The Hobbit films (heck, pretty much most other films). To say that that's just due to nostalgia, or be being younger when they came out, etc. just rings false to me.

I've seen so many classic films throughout the years, at different points in my life - some right before the release of a belated sequel, prequel, etc. The fact that I've been able to discern the qualities and shortcomings of those films vs. the follow-ups speaks to my ability to recognize the actual qualities of a film and not just be caught up in boyhood nostalgia or some such thing.

"The danger with any movie that does as well as this one does is that the amount of money it's making and the number of awards that it's got becomes almost more important than the movie itself in people's minds. I look at that as, in a sense, being very much like the Ring, and its effect on people. You know, you can kind of forget what we were doing, if you get too wrapped up in that."
- Viggo Mortensen


(This post was edited by Aragorn the Elfstone on Apr 25 2014, 4:26pm)


Bumblingidiot
Rohan

Apr 25 2014, 4:28pm

Post #282 of 337 (2675 views)
Shortcut
These are adaptations [In reply to] Can't Post

of twentieth century classics. What is not often discussed is that for most classic books of that era or earlier, there have been a number of adaptations made - some close to the book and others more accurately described as "based on". Once a classic has been adapted for the screen - such as David Lean's Oliver Twist or Great Expectations, then it matters a lot less if someone comes along and takes a few liberties with a later version. Baz Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet would probably have been subject to widespread condemnation if it had been the first attempt at adapting that particular play for the screen. Until PJ came along we didn't have a film adaptation of LOTR, and he succeeded enough, both as film and as adaptation to satisfy most people - and was given extra leeway, because LOTR was considered by many to be un-filmable. The Hobbit isn't un-filmable - it's comparatively straightforward in plot and scope, and the technology is now well established, partly thanks to PJ, WETA et al. So, without that extra leeway, people are wanting the first attempt at a Hobbit film to be a good adaptation of the book. Also, the rights aren't available for anyone else to have a go at a more faithful rendering, so, for many people, this one is all we're going to get.

"Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear."


Magpie
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 4:43pm

Post #283 of 337 (2679 views)
Shortcut
well... [In reply to] Can't Post

I think wanting people to express their opinions in a certain way starts to become a kind of dogma that must be adhered to before one can have their opinions considered.

There are certainly folks on these boards and on all other venues on the internet (and off... I've met these folks in community meetings) that are going to complain and rant and rave and be agitated and antagonist and unpleasant no matter what anyone does. Some are in their head and can't get out. They are angry and they perceive the world in away that feeds that anger. Some like playing with people. They are purposefully baiting folks to get a rise out of them. They will take whatever you say and turn it back on you just to keep you engaged.

Those folks are not ones you want to play with. Walk away. Don't expect them to own their rantings as 'their opinion'.

Then there are folks that feel passionately and aren't well spoken. They might be young and haven't learned the skill of writing in nuanced ways. Or perhaps English isn't their primary language. Or maybe they're use to a type of language from another venue that doesn't play out so well here. Or maybe they're just having a bad day and today... they're mad as hell and they're going to tell the world so and they're not mincing words.

The subject of how we speak to each other is important. But at some point, when do we become - to use a net-speak term - own-your-opinion-Nazis about it?

I think I'm more aware of language and how we use it that many. I often edit myself up to 15-30 minutes after I've written a post or letter to eliminate ambiguities and ill chosen terms. But I don't make it a point to own every statement I make about a movie or tv show as 'my opinion'. And I don't think that most people in the Monday Movie thread on Off Topic do. We just accept that it's our own opinion and that people will differ. Most of the time, no feathers are ruffled and no one reacts badly. (there has been, in my observation, one except: Downtown Abbey... lol)

You thought my long post was well said but you didn't respond to one point I made about 10 years after. You only responded to something that let you make the point, once more, that people should choose their words carefully. That's not a criticism or complaint. It's an observation.

You're right. You're absolutely right. But I think we have to let it go, sometimes. Not because it's not important. But because we're never going to achieve any state where people do the right thing.

I tend to (try to?)...
...either dismiss someone, silently and personally, as not worth my time

...cut them some slack about how they phrased things and move on to their point. perhaps - while I'm addressing the points I might comment on what I perceive to be an ill-chosen phrase or label.

Or just walk away completely.

If I find myself reacting badly to how people are communicating more than 4 or 5 times in a row... it's time for me to take a break. Either because that environment is polluted... or I'm in a head state that won't let me perceive anything other than offense.

This isn't about being right or wrong, sometimes. It's about finding middle ground, getting along, and copacetic states of mind. If the debate is always about how we said things, why bother unless we're earnestly working out together how to effectively communicate. And that happens. But not very often on the Hobbit board. That's not why people come here and not enough people are interested (although many are... and kudos to them.. they have more patience than I do).

and with that, I must attend to real life and Founders Day events. Watching this thread has been fascinating in terms of watching different personalities operate and seize the moment, so to speak. :-) And in terms of people still wonderfully struggling with how to deal with sharing disappointments and delights with each other as a community.

I think there were some small triumphs over people trying to co-exist as a community over people taking the "Hans and Franz" persona with "We are here to rile (clap) you up!"

cheers.



LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide


Loresilme
Valinor


Apr 25 2014, 5:02pm

Post #284 of 337 (2651 views)
Shortcut
lol :) // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Darkstone
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 5:08pm

Post #285 of 337 (2647 views)
Shortcut
Yes [In reply to] Can't Post

It’s funny how trying to be a social, reasoned and otherwise normal person who connects with other human beings can often lead you astray. In the end you have to properly distance yourself from the abnormal, caustic psychopathy of the dysfunctional. Just don’t engage with those who can’t or won’t conform to a minimum standard of decency.

Words I should live by, but poking them with a stick is just so much fun.

******************************************
https://www.facebook.com/slatesforsarah


Magpie
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 5:10pm

Post #286 of 337 (2653 views)
Shortcut
*whispers to Darkstone* [In reply to] Can't Post

and it's pretty fun to watch you poke sometimes, too



LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide


Elessar
Valinor


Apr 25 2014, 5:27pm

Post #287 of 337 (2616 views)
Shortcut
Choosing topics [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree. That's why I try (not always very well) to stick to that approach.

I agree. Some people will go one way or the other no matter what and there is nothing you can do about it. That wasn't the types of people I meant really.

I think its fair to hold people to their opinions. I mean at somepoint you have to walk away from them but I do expect people to own them all the same. If someone doesn't as you said I will walk away from them.

I did. I thought your post was very well written and thoughts laid out in a manner that was engaging to read. I didn't pick out on the points of the 10 years because I've already mentioned my thoughts and didn't want to beat that horse again.

So that is why I choose the last point because I felt the discussion needed reminding that at times its not what's said but how its said that might ruffle feathers. For me that's a somewhat large issue, which is why I choose it. I wasn't picking on or at you either so much by doing so but tossing it out as food for reminded thought.

You're right though its more about just realizing it is a total pipe dream to reach that level. Finding ways to communicate on The Hobbit board is a challenge at times no doubt.



Glorfindela
Valinor


Apr 25 2014, 5:39pm

Post #288 of 337 (2617 views)
Shortcut
'A good adaptation' [In reply to] Can't Post

As far as I'm concerned, it is not that I wanted an utterly faithful adaptation of the book, because that wouldn't interest me very much, given that the book was written for children. There were many deviations from the books in LotR, too, and the characters (apart from Gandalf and younger Bilbo) were completely unlike I had imagined them. However, LotR captured the spirit of the professor's work: for example, it had emotional moments a-plenty (even though it also had some ham acting!), some wonderful outdoor scenes and music that blended seamlessly with the films.

As a 'good adaptation', I would have liked to see (in The Hobbit) something that reflected the spirit and heart of Tolkien's work. While AUJ did this to a certain extent, DoS strayed widely of the mark – there was nothing moving about it at all. As I have mentioned before, the visuals, apart from the ninja-elf action and the appearance of one character, were spectacular, but the story was too broken up and fast, relying on too much action, and there was not enough of the key canon characters (Bilbo,Thorin, Gandalf, Beorn, Thranduil, etc.). (IMHO, of course) Given this, I do not feel DoS was 'a good adaptation'.


In Reply To
Until PJ came along we didn't have a film adaptation of LOTR, and he succeeded enough, both as film and as adaptation to satisfy most people - and was given extra leeway, because LOTR was considered by many to be un-filmable. The Hobbit isn't un-filmable - it's comparatively straightforward in plot and scope, and the technology is now well established, partly thanks to PJ, WETA et al. So, without that extra leeway, people are wanting the first attempt at a Hobbit film to be a good adaptation of the book. Also, the rights aren't available for anyone else to have a go at a more faithful rendering, so, for many people, this one is all we're going to get.



Old Toby
Grey Havens


Apr 25 2014, 5:41pm

Post #289 of 337 (2621 views)
Shortcut
Hey there Thranderz [In reply to] Can't Post

let me jump in here real quick. I think it's not that people are criticizing the movie - yet - since it hasn't even come out. But I think the negative responses to the title change result from the supposition that the title indicates the stress, the most important element, of the movie. (And I have to admit I fall into that camp.) So I think it's not that the title is affecting the content, but rather the other way round. And although the battle may consume a great deal of the last part of the film, some of us are hoping that it isn't the most important part of the film, the heart of the film, and that character and story don't take a back seat to cgi and action sequences that go on and on. Having seen what PJ has done in the past, I'm confident he can pull it off, but I too personally prefer the previous title for the last film.

BTW I see by your name and pic that you are definitely into that elvish king. I thought Lee Pace was simply brilliant and look forward to seeing more of him in the next film!

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


Old Toby
Grey Havens


Apr 25 2014, 5:51pm

Post #290 of 337 (2621 views)
Shortcut
You state this so much more succinctly than I ever could [In reply to] Can't Post

LOL! I was just responding to another poster earlier on and it took me a whole paragraph to say what you said in one sentence!

"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)


Darkstone
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 5:57pm

Post #291 of 337 (2593 views)
Shortcut
Here [In reply to] Can't Post

Letter #210:

(Or rather a precis to avoid copyright issues.)

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Letter_210

And a comparison of three treatments::

http://www.academia.edu/...n_Boorman_and_Beagle

******************************************
https://www.facebook.com/slatesforsarah


Patty
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 6:11pm

Post #292 of 337 (2592 views)
Shortcut
Welcome, welcome Ranger Anduiel! [In reply to] Can't Post

My fear is that there are those who won't read the books because they will think that they are just "action" stories if the heart of the story is gone from the film. I'm with you, it will always be there and back again to me.

Glad to have you out of lurkerdom.

Permanent address: Into the West






Darkstone
Immortal


Apr 25 2014, 6:57pm

Post #293 of 337 (2589 views)
Shortcut
"...the spine of the story..." [In reply to] Can't Post

In “Which Lie Did I Tell?: More Adventures in the Screen Trade” screenwriter Willaim Goldman (“The Princess Bride”) notes that “good screenwriters have to discover the spine of the story and stick to it”.

What is the spine of The Hobbit?

As squire puts it, the spine is:

The growth of Bilbo to immaturity.

The story is about Bilbo, and how he "had an adventure, and found himself doing and saying things altogether unexpected. He may have lost the neighbors' respect, but he gained -- well, you will see if he gained anything in the end."

None of the rest matters: not Elrond, the dwarves, Gollum, the eagles, Beorn, Lake town, or Smaug. It is not about seeing Middle-earth become real, and it is certainly not a prologue or prequel to The Lord of the Rings. It is about Bilbo's transformation. If we don't believe he is a fatuous boob at the beginning, and a bit of a hero at the end and a poet to boot, the movie isn't worth spit.

-TORn, Movie Discussion: The Hobbit, Dec 25 2007

Agreed.

******************************************
https://www.facebook.com/slatesforsarah

(This post was edited by Darkstone on Apr 25 2014, 6:59pm)


zalmoxis
Bree

Apr 25 2014, 7:24pm

Post #294 of 337 (2551 views)
Shortcut
LOL [In reply to] Can't Post

"What is the spine of The Hobbit[movies]?

The growth of Bilbo to immaturity. "

Tongue

Agreed.



MirielCelebel
Rivendell


Apr 25 2014, 8:16pm

Post #295 of 337 (2509 views)
Shortcut
yes but [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
The Battle of 5 Armies are exact words from Tolkien himself and a catchier title than TABA.And in marketing terms it is better imo.I really liked the title TABA myself and i am glad that it will be used as a title for the whole trilogy at least!

And DOS EE over 25 minutes!!I hope it reaches any magical number between 30-35.I would be delighted.


"The Road goes ever on..."

Writing Bliss


TheSexyBeard
Lorien


Apr 25 2014, 8:43pm

Post #296 of 337 (2501 views)
Shortcut
Total War [In reply to] Can't Post

Ha, never meant that good catch, I couldn't get into the seires but I'd give a Hobbit version a go. Tongue

Yes, my username is terrible.


burgahobbit
Rohan


Apr 25 2014, 8:58pm

Post #297 of 337 (2502 views)
Shortcut
We will certainly get 25 mintues this time [In reply to] Can't Post

I remember specifically that last time he said, "Probably around 20-25 minutes", and this was after some one asked him about it. He was put on the spot and gave a rough number, then things changed.



This time he spells out "over 25 minutes" and adds that it's just about finished. That's solid information, and he just brought it up out of the blue as a bonus treat for us fans. He wouldn't have said anything to get our hopes up again if he wasn't sure.

"I've found it is the small things, everyday deeds of ordinary folk, that keeps the darkness at bay. Simple acts of kindness and love. Why Bilbo Baggins? Perhaps it is because I’m afraid, and he gives me courage.” - Gandalf the Grey.

"Do not be afraid Mithrandir, if ever you should need my help, I will come." - Lady Galadriel.

(This post was edited by burgahobbit on Apr 25 2014, 8:59pm)


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Apr 25 2014, 9:04pm

Post #298 of 337 (2495 views)
Shortcut
Agreed, and also... [In reply to] Can't Post

...I'm so happy it will have over 25 minutes - not just because I like me some added footage Tongue, but because it means the film will now be longer than AUJ (even in it's extended form). I don't like my movies to get shorter PJ - only longer. Sly

"The danger with any movie that does as well as this one does is that the amount of money it's making and the number of awards that it's got becomes almost more important than the movie itself in people's minds. I look at that as, in a sense, being very much like the Ring, and its effect on people. You know, you can kind of forget what we were doing, if you get too wrapped up in that."
- Viggo Mortensen


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Apr 25 2014, 10:18pm

Post #299 of 337 (2466 views)
Shortcut
I agree it is not the same [In reply to] Can't Post

Still, I will remain skeptical until it is completely official. I am reasonably confident that it will be more than last time, but I think it is too early to be sure. And before you say "but it must be official, Jackson posted it on his Facebook page," remember that the 20 questions were posted on his Facebook page as well. Wink

'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


Bumblingidiot
Rohan

Apr 25 2014, 10:20pm

Post #300 of 337 (2537 views)
Shortcut
I read an interesting quote from Tolkien the other day [In reply to] Can't Post

Can't remember where - but he was saying, effectively, that "There and back again" was the spine of the story. Which is similar to what you said - and interesting that this thread is partly about the scrapping of There and Back Again as a film title. Will they do justice to the "back again" part of the story? I know they've shot it - and PJ references it in the AUJ EE commentary. If they do use it in the Theatrical Edition, then I think there is a good chance that they will have kept the "spine of the book" at least partly visible, albeit with a lot of additional and often unnecessary action and elf stuff.

"Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear."

First page Previous page 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 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.