|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grand Bob
The Shire
Nov 14 2014, 9:48pm
Post #26 of 89
(1051 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I agree with you, for the most part.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I agree that if The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit movies were closer to the source material that they would still be commercially successful. For example, The Fellowship of the Ring movie was as close to the material as one could expect, and all of the Tolkien fans that I am familiar with embraced it. But if there are many of these "purists", they are remaining strangely silent. Even on this website - which advertises itself as a Tolkien site - it seems that they are outnumbered by the "if you don't like it, lump it" crowd by a minimum of ten-to-one.
|
|
|
Magpie
Immortal
Nov 14 2014, 10:23pm
Post #27 of 89
(1090 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think one reason you're finding the 'purists' 'strangely silent' is....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
the whole concept of 'purist'... what it is... and who fits the definition... is way too tenuous and variable to be of any use.
And if the purists are strangely silent, then how can you judge how many - if any - there are? I think all the famous Hollywood actors on the board are silent. Or... maybe there just aren't any here.
And even though I don't consider myself a purist, if I were to make my point one more time about why the Hobbit movies left me greatly unsatisfied, all I'd get is 5 people telling me that they felt completely differently. I know they do. Why are we just continually each making our point: liked it... didn't like it... liked it... didn't like it.
I haven't seen any discussion recently that achieves anything past offering one more place for people to declare their own like vs dislike opinion. Soapbox. Not discussion in the sense that, together... by sharing our own personal heartfelt opinions we grow to learn something new about ourselves, our friends, and/or our relationship either to the movie or the book.
I don't see people seeking to understand and grow. Only to declare "My Opinion"
To be honest, I'm about at the point where I'd like to make invisible (to me) any post that uses the term 'purist' or 'fanboy'. The terms are used to no good or productive effect and I am so over starting a conversation with them.
LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide
(This post was edited by Magpie on Nov 14 2014, 10:24pm)
|
|
|
Kristin Thompson
Rohan
Nov 14 2014, 10:39pm
Post #28 of 89
(1046 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Everyone has a right to their own reaction
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
What I don't get is why this family expected to get their money back. Especially after having sat through half of the movie. Lots of people see movies they don't like, but there's no money-back guarantee when you buy a ticket that you will like the film.
If the projection is bad, if there are disruptive people in the theater and the staff doesn't deal with it, or something of that sort--those are reasons for getting money back.
Kristin
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Nov 15 2014, 3:44am
Post #29 of 89
(1084 views)
Shortcut
|
It's telling that actors seem to be distancing themselves - or perhaps it's their handlers - from The Hobbit. For instance I saw a blurb about Cumberbatch's upcoming voice work and another about Luke Evans' upcoming roles and neither cited TBot5A.
Disappointment in TH is not only the domain of so-called purists. And as much as Tolkien fans may have "moved on" -- I mean perhaps it is as simple as that, afterall -- marketing hasn't exactly been great (though the surprise third film may be to blame there).
There's a real sense that in many ways this trilogy hasn't lived up to expectations; but this may be because the fandom has changed. I think after the success of the first trilogy we all became more knowledgable about Tolkien, and perhaps more protective of our individual impressions of his work.
Finally, and I think Darkstone alluded to this, it may be that because Sir Peter's LOTR was suprisingly so much better than what came before that he set the bar too high for anything to follow? In short, perhaps this trilogy is a victim of the former's success.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Nov 15 2014, 3:51am)
|
|
|
F.Wizard
Registered User
Nov 15 2014, 11:17pm
Post #30 of 89
(972 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Extreme fans are a problem in all entertainment. Nothing to see here.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
F.Wizard
Registered User
Nov 15 2014, 11:23pm
Post #31 of 89
(1002 views)
Shortcut
|
I basically agree with NottaSackville - the wild success of Jackson's movies combined with the long tail of digital media means that we aren't likely to see another big budget Hobbit adaptation for a long time, if ever. So while the Hobbit movies aren't terrible in and of themselves, they're especially disappointing because the mistakes made here won't be corrected for quite a while. Perhaps not until the movie license expires and Christopher Tolkien tries again. Or perhaps not until the estate comes into new hands. Perhaps not until the copyright expires.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Nov 16 2014, 12:08am
Post #32 of 89
(1003 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, it seems to me that the success of Peter Jackson's....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... adaptations (commercial success that is) make other adaptations more likely - rather in the way that the commercial success of the Harry Potter films is now spawning a prequel of sorts. The studios won't want the income stream to dry up.
But setting that aside, it sounds as though the adaptation NottaSackville longs to see is much smaller and closer to the book, with less CGI. Why would that need to be a big budget adaptation?
|
|
|
F.Wizard
Registered User
Nov 16 2014, 12:54am
Post #33 of 89
(989 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Closer to the books != less CGI
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm not sure why you think a closer to the book adaptation would need less CGI? None of the objections to the movie that I've heard were related to CGI or special effects at all. They're about tone, the directing and camera work, the screenplay, etc.
|
|
|
arithmancer
Grey Havens
Nov 16 2014, 1:47am
Post #34 of 89
(979 views)
Shortcut
|
...TONS of complaining about the CGI in these films, on this board anyway. The CGI is unrealistic. It defies physics. It is not as good as minatures. CGI Orcs are not as good as actors in prosthetics. Azog is "bad CGI". CGI is cartoonlike. These films are as bad as the Star Wars prequels because of the heavy use of CGI in both. And so on...
Maybe you liked it (I did too, when I can identify it, which is not often...) and disliked other things, but plenty of disappointed fans isted CGI as a top reason to dislike these films.
|
|
|
F.Wizard
Registered User
Nov 16 2014, 2:09am
Post #36 of 89
(956 views)
Shortcut
|
I mostly saw story, characterization and theme complaints, but I mostly hang out in fanfiction circles so I may have just missed the CGI complaints. Or I may have unconsciously glossed over them because CGI is always over the top, the point of CGI is that it does unbelievable things we can't reproduce without it. If makeup and prosthetics could reasonably reproduce the same effects, moviemakers would use it. :/
I don't think we could seriously decrease the CGI in a Hobbit adaptation - there's always going to be the huge BoFA, Orcs, goblins, etc that are hard to do otherwise. Personally, I think if the movie had been better directed and scripted so that it wasn't such an over-the-top action movie people wouldn't have lost suspension of disbelief, and mildly jarring CGI would have been glossed over. That's just IMO, though. I'm sure there are people for whom the visual look is important enough to impact their enjoyment, I just don't happen to be or know many.
|
|
|
FoundEntwife
Rivendell
Nov 16 2014, 2:53am
Post #37 of 89
(962 views)
Shortcut
|
on another forum. That is the one huge complaint I have with these films. Too much CGI in my opinion. But I'm sure others disagree.
In fact, because of that I've refused to even watch them in the movie theaters. When the LOTR films came out I was one of the first people in line to see them on opening day. Not with the Hobbit films. I wait until they come out on dvd to watch them.
Having said all that I still can enjoy them and I doubt i would have gotten up and walked out of the theaters like that one family did. For me it's not that serious.
This tale grew in the telling. . .
http://pencilword.blogspot.com
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Nov 16 2014, 8:42am
Post #38 of 89
(958 views)
Shortcut
|
My own personal view is that without CGI The Hobbit would be impossible to film. I was referencing NottaSackville's ideal film as described in her (I think?) post, which was to have had less CGI. And if you haven't heard any objections to the amount of computer graphic work in the present films, try hanging round the Hobbit board for a while. Seems to me to be one of the more frequent complaints!
|
|
|
sador
Half-elven
Nov 16 2014, 11:27am
Post #39 of 89
(925 views)
Shortcut
|
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Nov 16 2014, 12:14pm
Post #40 of 89
(924 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Ah - thanks. Apologies, NottaSackville! //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
Eleniel
Tol Eressea
Nov 16 2014, 12:42pm
Post #41 of 89
(951 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The complaints from fans of the films are about the quality of the CGI...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
whilst those who are less than enamoured of Jackson's take on The Hobbit feel that there has been way more CGI used than is absolutely necessary to bring to the book to screen. But as you say, the majority of the complaints from the "Purists" seem to be regarding PJ's direction/humour/tone and the screenplay.
"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
¯ Victoria Monfort
|
|
|
grammaboodawg
Immortal
Nov 16 2014, 2:40pm
Post #42 of 89
(967 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Having been a waitress in my past life
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and coming across a myriad of "personalities", I can say without hesitation that there is no way to please everyone. The extremely negative reaction in the case of the films make me automatically think those same people would send back food or demand refunds if everything isn't their idea of "perfect".
Now... I know that Tolkien's works are nothing compared to food; but I'm talking about attitudes and latitudes.
I consider myself a "purist" when it comes to the books. But that's specific to the books. I love the films and what Peter, Fran and Philippa have done with them. Knowing they all have great respect for Tolkien's works is the first green light, imho. Their changes are 99% okay with me and at times brings more to the stories. In fact, most times it's like having more Tolkien... for me. Not everyone has to agree for me to enjoy myself and embrace all the LotR & Hobbit films. The only big problem I've had with The Hobbit films is that they're using "The Battle of THE Five Armies" instead of "The Battle of Five Armies". Fingernails on the chalkboard every time I hear it! *shudder*
I really pass over the negativity and the opinions of film critics/reviews. This is one of those times where I'm content having my own personal relationship with the books and the films.
If I want to read the books with the original stories... I'll read the books and be grateful they're intact and not affected by films trying to "literally" move from page to screen.
If I want to watch the films and be taken away on an adventure (visually and emotionally), I'm gang-busters ready!
I respect the ranters; but choose to be content.
6th draft of TH:AUJ Geeky Observation List - November 28, 2013
4th draft of TH:DOS Geeky Observation List - May 15, 2014
"There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West."
I'm SO HAPPY these new films take me back to that magical world!!
TIME Google Calendar
TORn's Geeky Observations Lists for LotR and The Hobbit
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Nov 16 2014, 3:25pm
Post #43 of 89
(946 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"I respect the ranters but choose to be content."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yes.
This. In shedloads!
|
|
|
Arandiel
Grey Havens
Nov 16 2014, 9:49pm
Post #44 of 89
(908 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think you're on to something there...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Darkstone, too.
Not being an expert on the matter, I can only guess at what sort of pressures, external and internal, visit someone who has met with such rampant success in her or his chosen field in mid-career. How do you go on from there? In short, how could Peter Jackson follow the apex experience that was the Lord of the RIngs trilogy with another apex experience? Maybe that's what he tried to do - with subject material that would have been better served by more intimate storytelling. Or maybe he fell into the formula. Or faced pressure from studio execs to 'do it again'. Or something else entirely - I don't know.
I will say this: I find Jackson's Hobbit trilogy, thus far, to be far less horrid than Lucas' Star Wars prequels. Not a ringing endorsement, perhaps, but not near as much of a condemnation.
Walk to Rivendell: There and Back Again Challenge - traveling through Middle Earth with thirteen rowdy Dwarves, one grumpy Wizard, and a beleaguered Hobbit
Join us, Thursdays on Main!
|
|
|
Plurmo
Rohan
Nov 17 2014, 12:35am
Post #45 of 89
(921 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Liking it is fine, thinking it is somewhat good is fine,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but literally loving a movie based off of fiction....why?
|
|
|
Glassary
Rivendell
Nov 17 2014, 2:58am
Post #46 of 89
(900 views)
Shortcut
|
You've made this easy for me as I agree with everything you stated.
|
|
|
NottaSackville
Valinor
Nov 17 2014, 12:27pm
Post #47 of 89
(876 views)
Shortcut
|
My fault - when I picked a version of "Not a Sackville", it never occurred to me that the "a" ending was a feminine form. :)
 Happiness: money matters, but less than we think and not in the way that we think. Family is important and so are friends, while envy is toxic -- and so is excessive thinking. Beaches are optional. Trust is not. Neither is gratitude. - The Geography of Bliss by Eric Weiner as summarized by Lily Fairbairn. And a bit of the Hobbit reading thrown in never hurts. - NottaSackville
|
|
|
NottaSackville
Valinor
Nov 17 2014, 12:36pm
Post #48 of 89
(918 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I've been mainly silent because I don't really see the point
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I don't really see the point of posting over and over that I don't like something. Let the people who enjoy talking about the films talk about them. I don't really have any interest in ruining the films for someone that likes them, and I'm certain that no one is going to convince me to like them.
I posted vigorously about the LOTR films (at times negatively), because I enjoyed talking about them, appreciating what PJ did well and debating about changes I didn't like.
But talking about the Hobbit films just makes me kinda sad, so I don't bother. Basically, I just ignore their existence for the most part on these boards.
Notta
Happiness: money matters, but less than we think and not in the way that we think. Family is important and so are friends, while envy is toxic -- and so is excessive thinking. Beaches are optional. Trust is not. Neither is gratitude. - The Geography of Bliss by Eric Weiner as summarized by Lily Fairbairn. And a bit of the Hobbit reading thrown in never hurts. - NottaSackville
|
|
|
NottaSackville
Valinor
Nov 17 2014, 12:40pm
Post #49 of 89
(873 views)
Shortcut
|
I think you're definitely right about PJ making it likely that there will be remakes in the future. I'm a lot more doubtful that any remake will be less epic than PJ's version.
But only time will tell, and hopefully I'll be proven wrong sooner rather than later.
Happiness: money matters, but less than we think and not in the way that we think. Family is important and so are friends, while envy is toxic -- and so is excessive thinking. Beaches are optional. Trust is not. Neither is gratitude. - The Geography of Bliss by Eric Weiner as summarized by Lily Fairbairn. And a bit of the Hobbit reading thrown in never hurts. - NottaSackville
|
|
|
Alassëa Eruvande
Valinor
Nov 17 2014, 4:02pm
Post #50 of 89
(892 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Are we identical twins separated at birth?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I could have written, verbatim, your post above.
I guess that explains why I haven't seen you around here that much.
*silently slinks back into Lurktown*
I am SMAUG! I kill when I wish! I am strong, strong, STRONG!
My armor is like tenfold shields! My teeth like swords! My claws, spears!
The shock of my tail, a thunderbolt! My wings, a hurricane! And my breath, death!
|
|
|
|
|
