|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Jan 19 2015, 1:27pm
Post #76 of 165
(1095 views)
Shortcut
|
Tom Shippey, and John Rateliffe and plenty of other "Tolkien scholars" (a term that for some reason is being bandied about in this thread as some kind of insult, for some reason, which I can't help but find insulting).
And me, of course, I'm down there wallowing in the mud with the rest of you bottom-feeders. And loving it!
'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
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 1:33pm
Post #77 of 165
(1077 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A little perplexed by the "scholars" nomenclature, myself.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Perhaps I am misunderstanding something.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jan 19 2015, 1:51pm
Post #78 of 165
(1061 views)
Shortcut
|
|
And you are all an ornament to the company!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
(I assumed the word was used by mistake, as I've spotted quite a few scholars down here among the lowest of the low.)
|
|
|
smtfhw
Lorien
Jan 19 2015, 2:03pm
Post #79 of 165
(1062 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm down here in the "lowest common denominator" bracket with you. My old tutors at Oxford would be surprised, though it would seem that I am apparently stupid and never knew it before. Amazing where enlightenment comes from... i ought to be grateful that I've learned something new today.
|
|
|
Ham_Sammy
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 4:02pm
Post #80 of 165
(1033 views)
Shortcut
|
I think if it hadn't have been for the Thorin gymnastics, dancing on the snout of the dragon, boogie boarding on the gold I would have been okay with most of it. The forges itself at the start was not that bad. It was the overly developed action that followed. The golden statue itself was fine and the gold floor as you said was a great visual that I enjoyed. I just didn't care for all the OTT action swinging from wires, dancing on the dragon and the like. I realize you have to have some action and I'm all for it but that honestly took me out of the film and I didn't care for it. I do think it was a good idea to have some kind of chase through Erebor with the dwarves and them finding the area where they all had died was very emotionally powerful.
All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you, Gandalf the Grey
|
|
|
Brandybuckled
Lorien
Jan 19 2015, 4:38pm
Post #81 of 165
(1030 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thorin's plan could have doomed Middle Earth...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
What if the molten gold filled in Smaug's empty scale like a gold dental filling?
Bard would never have gotten the shot off, Smaug would have allied with Sauron and Middle Earth would have been lost for ages.
NAArP: Not An Ardent purist since Arda was dented
|
|
|
Ham_Sammy
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 4:44pm
Post #82 of 165
(1018 views)
Shortcut
|
But what ifs are some thing I can't really make a criticism on. I like to deal more with what is. But it's a fair point.
All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you, Gandalf the Grey
|
|
|
moreorless
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 5:15pm
Post #83 of 165
(1017 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It was somewhat of a joking comeback BUT...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tom Shippey, and John Rateliffe and plenty of other "Tolkien scholars" (a term that for some reason is being bandied about in this thread as some kind of insult, for some reason, which I can't help but find insulting).
And me, of course, I'm down there wallowing in the mud with the rest of you bottom-feeders. And loving it!
I went with the quote marks to try and differentiate with a lot of those who might actually be considered scholars and it was somewhat of a joking comeback BUT I would say there is a rather clear undercurrent of that kind here.
How often do we see someone with an obscure Tolkien name talking not just in tones of dislike/criticism about Jacksons films but being utterly dismissive of them? it seems more often than not this goes hand in hand with a total unwillingness of accept that anything outside of the material included in the books can carry any artistic/emotional weight that doesn't seem to be the result of thoughtful analysis but rather an appeal to authority.
(This post was edited by moreorless on Jan 19 2015, 5:16pm)
|
|
|
Michelle Johnston
Rohan
Jan 19 2015, 6:09pm
Post #84 of 165
(1003 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Just wanted to say thats where I am.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
That is why after "defending" and believing in the three movie solution for over two years, I have now to accept that - for me (though many others as well) - it failed.
_____________________________________________
I hope we all take enough interest in what each other is writing to see this. I defended AUJ to the hilt and took a wait and see view on the three films. I came round to the statue, thanks to people here, but always disliked the other elements. But now I am looking at the three films as a totality and the 8 hours of Theatrical Material and judging it accordingly. One of the effects of that fantastic Prancing Pony scene is to make me view AUJ in a different light. How much was the story advanced in 12 months of story telling (the elapsed time according to the movie) and what did we move forward with and bring with us after 163 minutes.
The attack on Erebor and Thorins desire to reclaim his homeland by finding the Arkenstone.
An introduction to an unlikely burglar a map, that was decoded and a key.
The origins of a knife needed an answer as did the sense of recovering evil growing evil.
They picked up three swords only one of which would have long term significance and Bilbo "Found" the ring.
Bilbo was shown to be capable and a card carrying member of the company and the Dwarves uncouth but loyal "men".
They crossed over a mountain range after running into Goblins and being rescued by Gandalf.
For a made for TV mini series thats fine but something conceived to harmonise with the LOTR pace and tell the three key principals stories way to little has been achieved.
As to the Tolkien scholars view point in order to make a fantastic fast paced 2 film structure I would have cut and cut elements from the T E that TS's would have winced over.
My Dear Bilbo something is the matter with you! you are not the same hobbit that you were.
(This post was edited by Michelle Johnston on Jan 19 2015, 6:13pm)
|
|
|
FernysApple
Bree
Jan 19 2015, 7:07pm
Post #85 of 165
(968 views)
Shortcut
|
what is the golden statue other than hamfisted and unsubtle film making. Its got precious little to do with storytelling of any kind. Its meaningless spectacle. it serves no purpose.
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 7:16pm
Post #86 of 165
(972 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I am indeed dismissive of Jackson's fan-fiction...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I went with the quote marks to try and differentiate with a lot of those who might actually be considered scholars and it was somewhat of a joking comeback BUT I would say there is a rather clear undercurrent of that kind here.
How often do we see someone with an obscure Tolkien name talking not just in tones of dislike/criticism about Jacksons films but being utterly dismissive of them? it seems more often than not this goes hand in hand with a total unwillingness of accept that anything outside of the material included in the books can carry any artistic/emotional weight that doesn't seem to be the result of thoughtful analysis but rather an appeal to authority.
I have often said, in regards to both the LotR films and now with The Hobbit trilogy, that the further Jackson strayed from Tolkien's original plot, the farther Jackson's fan-fiction elements went to strain credulity, drift into juvenile snot humor and feed a petulant ego driven by CGI overkill (even an actor like Vigo Mortensen was vocal in his dismay). If one has been discussing the films for any length of time here or on other Tolkien-related boards, the major complaints from both book and film fans deal mainly with the inane additions Jackson foisted on Middle-earth: Arwen at the Ford of Bruinen; the insipid "Arwen is dying" line uttered by Elrond; the emasculation of Faramir and the psychosis of Denethor; Aragorn falling off a cliff, frenching his horse and spending 10 minutes of film time doing nothing to move the story forward (not to mention a 1/2 hour warg attack that did nothing but pad the movie with Jackson's horror elements); making Treebeard a bumbling idiot; Frodo abandoning Sam; the giant green scrubbing bubbles whisking away the dirty orcs and bleaching the walls of Gondor white again; the surfin' safari Legolas action doll, etc.
The list is endless and could be as long for The Hobbit films (I will not add them here as I am obviously talking to a brick wall). And sorry, the useless gold statue sequence could be eliminated entirely and not change the fundamental plot at all. Smaug would still be enraged and attack Laketown and Thorin could have his mind-altering psychedelic hippy flashback scene (with mushrooms borrowed from Radagast, certainly) just staring into the unbelievable piles of gold heaped so high that one wonders if any gold were left elsewhere in Middle-earth. Again, what touched most people? What cause the hair to rise on the napes of the necks of the posters here? It was Gandalf cheering up Pippin describing "a far green country under a swift sunrise", not Faramir babbling about his "quality" as he dragged Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath for no good reason. It was the dwarves singing about Erebor in Bilbo's hobbit-hole, not Thranduil and Tauriel's awkward "Because it was real" debacle. Even when Tolkien's original dialogue was given to another character, it resonated far beyond the poor scripting of Jackson/Boyens.
Yes, I am dismissive of Jackson's flotsam and jetsam because it is painfully obvious where his ideas intrude on a literary classic and do not carry the "artistic/emotional weight" you claim is somehow apparent. Yes, keep making the WitchKing's mace larger, keep adding to the swaying goiter on the GoblinKing's neck, have giant Transformers whittling down the Misty Mountains, throw in sand worms from Arrakis, and by all means have Legolas defy any notion of the laws of gravity. Deep. Very deep.
Please visit my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music and literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 7:27pm
Post #87 of 165
(961 views)
Shortcut
|
Do you feel The Hobbit films took it further down the wrong path? Or is it all a wash for you?
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 7:40pm
Post #88 of 165
(957 views)
Shortcut
|
This always seems an entirely circular argument at heart - "I have literal tastes when it comes to adaptation, therefore literal aspects are better" (and examples or aspects selected to suit). The rest is just a game of snap in drag.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jan 19 2015, 7:43pm
Post #89 of 165
(973 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Michelle, I respect your view, and Arannir's, but I couldn't disagree more....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
For me AUJ achieved everything it needed to achieve.
It re-opened the door to Middle Earth for those already familiar with the previous films...
It told the story of Erebor, the enmity between dwarves and elves and the coming of the dragon - all pivotal to the story....
It established the characters of the young Bilbo; the thirteen dwarves and the deep emotions that still tied them to all that they had lost...
It showed us the start of the journey just as Tolkien did: Bilbo's reluctance to go and reluctance to stay; the mixed feelings the dwarves had about him; the encounter with the trolls - his first encounter with real danger and our first inkling that there was more to him than anyone but Gandalf guessed...
Then Rivendell, the goblin caves and the eagles, and the company safely established beyod the mountains ready to begin the next stage of the journey.
Thus far the book, but then AUJ also set up the new storylines which would develop through the later films:
The corruption of the Greenwood, emanating from Dol Guldur; hints that the Nazgul had returned and question marks over the identity of the Necromancer.
The character of Azog and his designs on the House of Durin
The personalities of the White Council and the relationships between them
All this set in something like the fairytale atmosphere of the early part of the book - which would steadily darken as the story progressed, just as the book darkens. AUJ set up the story and gave us the characters. Going back to it now (I've just rewatched it) every detail seems richer and deeper now to me, having seen how the whole film plays out, all but the final EE.
I always defended the two-film adaptation against those who said it should be one, but even so it worried me. I couldn't see how they were going to manage it: by my reckoning the natural break between two films would have been on the edge of Mirkwood - I didn't believe they could cover any more of the journey in the first film without brutal cuts to the story. So the three-film split delighted me and it does still now I've seen the films.
None of us knows what the two-film adaptation would have been like because none of us has or will ever see it, so I'm not going to tell you that I think it would have been even more of a disappointment to you than the three-film version - I don't know that. I'm just glad that they got to make three films. My one regret is that the decision wasn't taken right at the start, giving them more time to plan the whole trilogy without the pressure of people looking on and criticising. But sometimes things just happen the way they happen.
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 7:53pm
Post #90 of 165
(944 views)
Shortcut
|
Have a group of posters come up with a list of the crappy moments in the films. Chances are good most of them are Jackson fan-fiction.
This always seems an entirely circular argument at heart - "I have literal tastes when it comes to adaptation, therefore literal aspects are better" (and examples or aspects selected to suit). The rest is just a game of snap in drag.
On the contrary, when a director is capable of adapting a classic to film, I really don't have an argument. I would take any of Sir David Lean's book adaptations over Jackson's any day. I found Harry Potter movies very satisfactory (heresy, I know), and I am aware from reading HP books with my daughter that many changes were made. Regarding Jackson's LotR films, I have stated often that the cinematography and attention to detail was astounding, and certainly warranting all the awards deservedly; however, the look and the feel of The Hobbit changed drastically from my perspective, and where Jackson's fan-fiction was an annoyance in parts of LotR (but was overwhelmed in the totality of the movies), he went completely overboard with Tauriel and Legolas and Kili and Orcs-with-Forks for arms and addled Radagast, etc. The entire fiber of The Hobbit was rearranged to make a mundane Hollywood action trilogy, and there is hardly anything remaining of the former. That was not the case in LotR. LotR received adulation and Oscars; The Hobbit, a rotten tomato and no awards.
Please visit my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music and literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
(This post was edited by Morthoron on Jan 19 2015, 7:59pm)
|
|
|
Old Toby
Grey Havens
Jan 19 2015, 7:58pm
Post #91 of 165
(928 views)
Shortcut
|
Honestly, such snobbery is pathetic.
"Is it lonely up there on the heights?" LOL! well, we know the only place to go from 'up' don't we?
"Age is always advancing and I'm fairly sure it's up to no good." Harry Dresden (Jim Butcher)
|
|
|
BlackFox
Half-elven
Jan 19 2015, 8:04pm
Post #92 of 165
(916 views)
Shortcut
|
(This post was edited by BlackFox on Jan 19 2015, 8:07pm)
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Jan 19 2015, 8:19pm
Post #93 of 165
(918 views)
Shortcut
|
Lit a few Forges & Furnaces.. HERE?
Wowie,
LOOKS
Like?..There is a Lot of Fire-Breathing goin' on...in
This Thread.
Also,
Looks
Like, Littl' Ol' Bomby.. Izz NOW a "Charter Member" of the
LCDzzz ...The
...Lowest Common Denominator around ..?
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
(This post was edited by Bombadil on Jan 19 2015, 8:20pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 8:22pm
Post #94 of 165
(906 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Such lists show no correlation to how literal they are.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
If you are looking at the general audience. The blind tasting, as it were.
Of course, as I say, for those posters who like literal adaptations, unsurprisingly they like literal scenes.
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 8:31pm
Post #95 of 165
(903 views)
Shortcut
|
What did not work, what was eye-rolling, disgusting or downright stupid to most folks, whether literal or not. Again, I think it's a fair assumption, based on the posts I've read here and elsewhere, that the majority of complaints stem from Jackson's fan-fiction.
Please visit my blog...The Dark Elf File...a slighty skewed journal of music and literary comment, fan-fiction and interminable essays.
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 8:41pm
Post #96 of 165
(900 views)
Shortcut
|
Audience perception of what was good or bad dies not correlate with whether things were literal or not. Have a look at reviews and you will see no such pattern there for example.
This is at odds with the circular argument of those who like the literal - otherwise we would see no difference in taste between the two groups.
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 9:02pm
Post #97 of 165
(882 views)
Shortcut
|
as meaning exactly as in the book?
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 9:15pm
Post #98 of 165
(870 views)
Shortcut
|
I can't think of anything which is or could exactly as in the book - unless we projecting the text.
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
Jan 19 2015, 9:22pm
Post #99 of 165
(864 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I guess I'm not sure what you mean then
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I mean, you could say that Thorin's name is exactly the same? There are all kinds of things that are exact.
Can you just elaborate on what you mean when you say:
Audience perception of what was good or bad dies not correlate with whether things were literal or not .
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Jan 19 2015, 9:32pm
Post #100 of 165
(856 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well I was thinking of things other than names
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But even then you could say that names are not always said as a reader might think of them in their head as they read. I don't think there are many things at all, if any.
But, sorry to the main point - firstly ignore the typo! I mean that if, and let's imagine that we can do this relatively straightforwardly for the sake of argument, we drew a table of scenes, characters or aspects of the adaptation and scored them on how literal they are and how much the general audience thought they were good, we wouldn't see a correlation in those scores.
|
|
|
|
|
Where do I sign up? //
[
