Our Sponsor Sideshow 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

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Rambling Thoughts On Restraint and Fan Edits
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

brotherbeck
Rivendell

Jan 20 2015, 7:26pm

Post #1 of 109 (2449 views)
Shortcut
Rambling Thoughts On Restraint and Fan Edits Can't Post

I know fan edits are a controversial topic on these boards, with some people on here thinking they are downright wrong and immoral and other people thinking they are a great way to salvage what is great about these films, but I had some thoughts after coming across a recent one on a different website.

Making a film is a huge and collaborative effort. Hundreds if not thousands of people all have to work together towards a single goal. It is also a ridiculously expensive endeavor. Having watched and read a lot of behind-the-scenes material on films and filmmaking for these films as well as others, I've come to see that compromise plays a huge role in filmmaking as well. I don't mean merely one person compromising with another, or someone compromising their creative vision to appease the suits at the studio - I mean it in the sense of usually there is simply a limited amount of time and money and other resources when making a film. Often there simply isn't time to shoot a scene the way it may have been intended, or the weather isn't cooperating, or an actor is sick, or myriad other logistical problems that can arise when hundreds of people are doing something together. A creative solution has to be found.

Jaws turned out the way it did because they couldn't get the mechanical shark to work and a young Steven Spielberg had to come up with creative ways to still make his film work. The scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark were Indiana Jones simply pulls out his revolver and shoots the huge sword-wielding foe who outmatches him in every way was a result of Harrison Ford not feeling well that day and not wanting to go trough an elaborate fight scene. That ended up being an iconic scene. Those are just two examples, and I know they're both Spielberg, by they are the two examples that stick out in my mind the most.

With this trilogy of Hobbit films Peter Jackson really has had an almost unprecedented level of creative control. Yes, large movie studios ultimately footed the bill at the end of the day, but during the actual shooting PJ was largely free to shoot however he wanted. Most of the physical shooting for the actual Battle of Five armies wasn't even done in the original shooting block. This is a very unique situation and not one most that filmmakers find themselves in.

Having watched the three films now, it is apparent that their solution to almost any situation that came up during filming was to fix it with CGI in post, and usually by inserting a lot of action that carries on for a long time. When they felt they needed a climax for DoS they came up with the battle in the forges sequence rather than writing and shooting new scenes involving actors with drama that advance the plot.

The behind-the-scenes material for TTT showed that they originally envisioned a much longer battle between Gandalf and The Balrog, one that showed what happened between when they plunged into the water down in the depths of the world and when they battled up high in the Misty Mountains. The waterlogged Balrog was going to look like a big slippery steamy snake. Gandalf was going to have trouble holding onto it. The scene would have presumably carried on for a long time.

This scene was ultimately cut for budget reasons, a decision which I think turned out entirely for the better. That scene plays perfectly as it is already. That fight may have looked cool in the end, but the film did not need it at all and it would have actually hurt the film.

That much longer version of the fight between Gandalf and the Balrog which never actually came to be represents to me where PJ went wrong with The Hobbit trilogy. On this trilogy, those types of scenes were not cut for budget reasons or any other reasons. They were shot and filmed and completed and allowed to play out in all of their excessive glory, and in my opinion it severely hurt the films. I actually remember the fight between Gandalf and The Balrog vividly. It was tense and dramatic and it contained a couple of absolutely iconic shots. I don't think the fifteen minute long, action packed, completely CGI'd version of that scene would stand out in my mind quite the same way.

The fan edits that I have watched and enjoyed don't aim to take what PJ has made and chop all of the non-Tolkien material out - they simply try to rein in some of the excesses that take over these films from time to time and approximate what they would have looked like had they been made in the same manner as the LOTR trilogy. Changes are still made to Tolkien's original story, huge changes in some cases, but the goal is to keep the focus on the story being told and to try to keep the respect for the material that was shown in the first trilogy.


Istaris'staffs
Rivendell


Jan 20 2015, 8:24pm

Post #2 of 109 (1474 views)
Shortcut
Agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

Firstly, I don't understand the vitriol towards fan edits on these boards. Mostly people write that you shouldn't mess with another's art work; I agree to an extent, but editing is an artwork in itself, and rendering a different vision of someone else's piece of art isn't necessarily inappropriate.Fan edits also open the door for those fans who realize they like a good deal of a movie and wish to enjoy it without the superfluous distraction of the parts they do not like. Just my two bits on that.

The saying "Art through adversity" comes to mind. While there seemingly was a good deal of adversity when filming TH trilogy, I think you're right to say that a good portion of the adversity was alleviated with CGI, often to its detriment. For instance Dain, Thror, Azog, Bolg, other CGI orcs, landscapes and sets... Originally some of these were practical, but PJ didn't like them, so he turned to CGI. There was probably adversity in turning two films into three: PJ needed a climax for film two, so he turned to CGI to create an extended and arguably pointless and superfluous encounter between the dragon and the dwarves. I realize some of these points are generalizations, but I think a general trend exists with these movies, including LOTR. CGI was the answer to many problems. I don't think CGI is in itself a problem, but certainly its execution in these movies can be argued. Need more tension? CGI action effects. Need to move the story along? CGI battles. Want a character to look more menacing? CGI visuals. Want a pretty landscape? CGI visuals. We can argue over how effective these answers were to the problems.

I also agree that PJ and Phillipa Boynes had a massive amount of control over these movies. Just think what they had to get through to even get LOTR from two movies to three--it almost didn't happen. Back then they constantly were fighting against New Line Cinema. Budgets were tight. Unlimited CGI fight sequences were grossly too expensive. The story and script was questioned.

All that changed for the second go around. Warner Brothers, the massive financier, allowed for an unlimited budget, and when listening to the commentaries compared to the LOTR commentaries, Warner brothers seemingly never questioned the script and execution of this movie. This left PJ and PB with tunnel vision, in which they produced these movies in a vacuum, the end result their singular, unquestioned vision. Someone should've been pressing them, asking questions, etc, to create a more thought out script that is more self aware of its problems.

Massive ramble, sorry. I'm sure someone will pick it apart though, lol. Bottom line: PJ seemingly did have a near god like control over these movies, and his vision of them progressed unquestioned and unchecked and produced a movie with some unthought out portions.

"Are you mad? You'll never out run them, those are Gundabad warns!"
"And these are RHOSGOBEL rabbits! I'd like to see them try."


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Jan 20 2015, 8:41pm

Post #3 of 109 (1440 views)
Shortcut
I don't follow any vitriol either. [In reply to] Can't Post

Fan edits don't hurt anyone or anything.

Personally, I just don't see the point of them. You don't emerge with anything more than a film with bits cut out.

Seems like an odd endeavour to me, but if people enjoy them, why not.

On alternative, hypothetical versions of the film, who knows? They might have been better and more popular or they might have been worse and less popular.


TnuaccayM
Bree

Jan 20 2015, 9:10pm

Post #4 of 109 (1400 views)
Shortcut
I don't really have a problem with fan edits [In reply to] Can't Post

I actually finished my own of The Hobbit trilogy. It is very entertaining and fun. What I don't like is when people actually claim that those fan edits are actually better than the original work. I did it because I wanted to see how the film looked like with all the extra material not from the book taken out. I haven't seen it yet, and I don't think I will anytime soon. Its just that you feel great when you achieve such clean cuts from one scene to the other putting all the audio and music together.

I really don't think any fan edit will be good enough. These movies are fine as they are. The only thing that I think would work would be to cut the movies individually, still having the same trilogy, but shorter. Mashing them together in just one film won't work. Maybe it does for many people, but that is after watching the original complete movies. If you show someone who knows nothing about the original movies it won't work because what they are looking at is an incomplete work.

I just hate when people criticizes other people's work like if they could do better. It always happens. Not only with TH, but with other movies like, for example, the Star Wars prequels. Although with Star Wars it's even worse because they are saying that what it's creator (George Lucas) made is garbage. That's like saying that Tolkien's book are garbage and that he has to rewrite them. I think we should appreciate the work that these people do, especially considering all the time and love that PJ and Co. put on these movies, all of them.. And by the way I am not talking about you specifically. It's many things that other people say that really makes me angry.

The scene in the forges that you mentioned for me was the only moment in the trilogy that felt a little strange, but not because it was long, but because there's a moment when the music and pace of the scene slows down and everything seems a little boring. I particularly don't have any problem with the rest of the trilogy and no fan edit will replace the experience I had when I first watched these films on the big screen, and if it does for someone it's because he or her didn't like the movies in the first place. .Tongue


Avandel
Half-elven


Jan 20 2015, 9:19pm

Post #5 of 109 (1394 views)
Shortcut
*shrug* [In reply to] Can't Post

IMO, skipping through a DVD or a BR IS a kind of fan edit, on the fly. So I don't know why anyone would have an issue of someone editing something for personal use, if that's what they want to do. As far as "compromising art" we're not talking about giving the Mona Lisa a new hairstyle.

No different than skimming a book chapter because you don't find it interesting.



WholeUnderGround
Registered User

Jan 20 2015, 9:29pm

Post #6 of 109 (1400 views)
Shortcut
My thoughts on fan-edits [In reply to] Can't Post

If no one is profiting financially from their edits, I don't see any problems (especially if they bought the DVD/BR, and even if they did profit perhaps - more on that later). We're lucky that we get to experience such a huge project for what is to most people a small amount. Whether or not you enjoyed it, at least it didn't cause you to be broke. I liked the movies, there are a few things I would prefer to be changed, but that isn't why I would watch or like various fan-edits. I feel like The Hobbit is simply well suited to being edited and cut up because of the various ways to interpret the story, and the length of work we have been given to play with. It can be a short children's story, a long epic, a tie-in to other Middle-Earth stories or a standalone, a fun adventure romp, a commentary on greed and ownership, etc. The films we have amount to over 500 minutes with the EEs, so while you can't create entirely perfect movies by mostly cutting, moving, and slightly altering sounds and visuals, there it a lot to work with and it can certainly be a lot of fun and you may just end up with a satisfactory little 'home movie'. I even posted my own fan-edit thread about the film being split into chapters, which I had a lot of fun making. Unfortunately I think I went a bit overboard on *my* specific way of going about splitting it into chapters, and my intended discussion about the idea of a 'chapter' film never took off.

While all of that may be cheery and fun, concerning ownership I think there is something important about people creating their own works, whether original or inspired. And this concerns more than just these films, but in this context I'll work within Tolkien's legendarium. This man has essentially achieved his dream to my knowledge. He set out to create a kind of anglo-saxon legend, and it has certainly entered the common mind. Hundreds of millions of people know about the stories and people of various episodes from Middle-Earth, and talk about them in similar ways Shakespeare, Plato, Jesus, Thor, Columbus - even Beowulf, are referenced. And in this way I really see absolutely no reason why there are a seemingly arbitrary set of people who are said to 'own the rights' to creating artwork from Tolkien's work while the rest of us can only choose to participate or not participate in these people's work. Of course, in many ways I have benefited from this reality because people feel confident investing large amounts of money in creating movies because they know someone else will not create a competing movie from the same story, and thus there are even huge, excellent films from which to morph. To me, ownership or control over the ME property is out of anyone's hands. Just as Tolkien had inspiration from Nordic texts and various novels and truisms of his time, Peter Jackson has been inspired from Tolkien and other films out there. It's all a shared process in that sense, and in this time we the viewers through commentary, edits, artwork, music, fan stories, and our own 'original' stories have been helped and inspired by all of the events preceding us. And I can't help but be thrilled with all of the amazing creations inspired by Tolkien I have been treated to and a part of.

It's all a part of the legend Tolkien played a large hand in creating, and I think that if he were to reappear for today he may detest the movies with all his heart, but I have trouble believing there wouldn't be a little part inside of him squealing with delight "You did it!".


sycorax82
Rohan

Jan 20 2015, 9:32pm

Post #7 of 109 (1380 views)
Shortcut
Fan edits are being discussed more with TH because of the 3 movie split [In reply to] Can't Post

I have made my own basic edit of a 3 hour AUJ that ends at the barrels and Gandalf's imprisonment (as originally intended) and it works pretty well. It feels like a complete film.

These kind of edits are being done by people because...well in my own personal opinion the 3 movie split made just about everything into a big mess. A movie lives and dies in the edit, and I believe there's not much wrong with the majority of stuff Peter shot. It's all about what to include and what not and the pacing of scenes.


BrandonMata
Registered User

Jan 20 2015, 9:41pm

Post #8 of 109 (1419 views)
Shortcut
Barrie Osborne and Mark Ordesky... [In reply to] Can't Post

...or someone like them would have been a welcome sight on The Hobbit journey.

I love hearing their passion and input on the LOTR BTS footage.

Producers who have a passion for the director's vision, but are still willing to question creative choices, financial decisions, and give strong input help a project.

(A great example is for TTT when Barrie Osborne is sharing about the decisions that led to including Arwen at Helm's Deep and then removing Arwen from Helm's Deep.)

I personally think that the lack of creative question was the main issue with the notorious SW: Prequels... having a producer who is a "yes man" like Rick McCullum is just as bad. (Watch the BTS stuff on any of those productions and the number of times Rick calls George a genius and says excitedly "Yes" to every decision that is made cracks me up.)

Just because George Lucas, Peter Jackson, James Cameron, etc... made a great project/world/universe the first time around doesn't guarantee that it will happen again in a different creative environment.


WholeUnderGround
Registered User

Jan 20 2015, 9:47pm

Post #9 of 109 (1333 views)
Shortcut
... and an example involving all concerned parties [In reply to] Can't Post

For a great integration of Tolkien's songwriting, The Hobbit movies, and a fan creation; check this out.

I was watching AUJ about a month ago and I stopped the movie sometime while in Rivendell during the night just after the Moon Runes scene, and went to bed myself. It was a good place to stop for me, and I like sort of following the rhythm of books and movies. Anyway, as I was laying in bed I played a fan's version of 'Far Over the Misty Mountains Cold' (link below). As I listened, I imagined it was the Dwarves singing it that very night in their room in Rivendell. They've just received information about what they need to do to enter the mountain, and they are excited. It's not as boisterous as in the book because they are in Rivendell and it's quiet at night so they don't want to be too disruptive, and also they are probably a little bit enchanted by the place themselves so their singing is a little more like the Elves'! Perhaps it is longer than what is sung in Bag-end because they have written more of the song, or are simply feeling like singing more, or maybe Bilbo falls asleep and misses the rest of it in his home, and you can even ignore that part and imagine this is the first time they've sung it 'in' the movie or the first time it has been sung period. All of these are right, it doesn't matter and that's what I love about it.

You can also extend the above idea and incorporate into you as not only a viewer, but a kind of participant. You can imagine yourself as an Elf listening in to the songs of these foreign folk passing through your land. Or maybe the Elves of Rivendell themselves are the only reason that you (as 'you' now, not an Elf!) even know about the existence of this song. You can view it as a historical event, and the Elves recorded the song of the Dwarves because that's something they are interested in doing and the records have survived through the resilience and record-keeping of the last homely house. So this is the version that you know of. Perhaps using the same tone and beat, and many similar lyrics perhaps, the Dwarves have sung of other things, but this is the version that has been passed down because of this one moment in history. This isn't 'canon' or an 'official song' of the movie, but I can certainly view it like that and derive a lot of enjoyment out of it. And I'm happy that Tolkien, Jackson, Clamavi de Profundis, and everyone else involved has taken the effort to create such creative works of art.

Here is the song in question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8ymgFyzbDo

Edit: And to bring it back to how Tolkien would view all of this, I imagine he would be very humbled that indeed people literally ARE singing the songs he wrote and they are being incorporated into the real world and his stories that have leaped off the pages.

(This post was edited by WholeUnderGround on Jan 20 2015, 9:50pm)


Legolas_Shoehorn
Bree


Jan 20 2015, 10:30pm

Post #10 of 109 (1312 views)
Shortcut
These Hobbit movies are crying for a Fan Edit [In reply to] Can't Post

Right now i'm also working on my own Fan Edit. By cutting out some stuff, that i don't really like (mostly Over-the-top Legolas Action, Radagast Silliness, Stone Giants, Goblin Town Escape, keeping the Dol Goldur subplot much more subtle) i discovered some interesting new contexts & character motivations.

Example 1: I always thought that Gollums 'Hobbit' introduction is simply lame. He just crawls into the scene, he loses the One Ring - oh great, completely without tension. If AUJ is supposed to be the first ME Movie for coming generations, Gollums needs a much more spine-chilling introduction. By revealling Gollum completely not before he jumps right in front of Bilbo makes his introduction much more creepy and intense. Blibo regains consciousness, he finds the One Ring and hears Gollums voice far in the distance and so on.

Example 2: By removing Legolas over-the-top Mirkwood introduction (silk sliding & ground slipping) results in a scene that mirrors perfectly the sudden appearance of the Lothlorien Elves in FOTR - again much better impact.

BUT that's just my personal opinion Wink

My English is not that good, my Elvish is better ;-)


Mooseboy018
Grey Havens


Jan 20 2015, 10:58pm

Post #11 of 109 (1305 views)
Shortcut
LotR "fan edit" [In reply to] Can't Post

For the last couple weeks I've been working on a roughly 4.5 hour long edit of The Lord of the Rings. Trying to cut out 7 hours of footage is painful and strangely amusing at the same time. But I'm obviously not doing it because I feel LotR needs to be "fixed" in the way so many people think the Hobbit movies need to be. This is purely for fun and to see if it's even remotely possible. So far I can't get the movie shorter than 5 hours and 10 minutes.Laugh


(This post was edited by Mooseboy018 on Jan 20 2015, 11:00pm)


frodolives
Lorien

Jan 20 2015, 11:02pm

Post #12 of 109 (1281 views)
Shortcut
Just one small point [In reply to] Can't Post

You said that "You don't emerge with anything more than a film with bits cut out." The best fan edits rearrange scenes and shots, often completely changing the pacing and even the meaning of some passages. I re-edited the LOTR films (for fun, not because I didn't like them), and changed many things to give different points of emphasis. For example, I edited TTT to make it look like Treebeard knew about the destruction wrought by Saruman before the entmoot. I also edited the entmoot so that the ents agree to go to war without being 'tricked' by Pippin. In FOTR, I gave Aragorn his reforged sword in Rivendell. You can do a lot more than just excise parts you don't like.


(This post was edited by frodolives on Jan 20 2015, 11:06pm)


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Jan 20 2015, 11:38pm

Post #13 of 109 (1235 views)
Shortcut
Of course. [In reply to] Can't Post

I didn't mean to imply it was all in the same order, and apologies if I did.

But it's still, to my mind, a film with bits cut out.

In the same way I could take pages from a book, throw some away and reorder others. I'm not sure I would see any great purpose to it.

But equally, as I say, if people enjoy it, it's no skin off my nose!


Glorfindela
Valinor


Jan 20 2015, 11:48pm

Post #14 of 109 (1231 views)
Shortcut
Yes – I agree [In reply to] Can't Post

Especially since you cannot insert new material that might really improve it, and are simply cutting things to achieve what you think are better results for yourself. Pointless, but if people want to do it for themselves, let them have fun.


In Reply To
In the same way I could take pages from a book, throw some away and reorder others. I'm not sure I would see any great purpose to it.



Bumblingidiot
Rohan

Jan 21 2015, 12:28am

Post #15 of 109 (1214 views)
Shortcut
Creative people like to have food and housing. [In reply to] Can't Post

There's a very good reason why some people own the rights to adapt Tolkien's work. It's not arbitrary; Tolkien sold the rights and attached whatever conditions were in the sales agreement. Copyright is the mechanism by which creators of original works can actually have a small chance of earning a living from their hard work and talent. Most do not manage to do this and even successful authors these days are lucky to earn an average wage for their writing, due to the current structure of publishing.

When you create something, you have a limited time available during which you and your descendants can control what what is done with it, and earn money from it. After that time, you or your descendants cease to have ownership and it moves to the public domain. That seems fair enough to me, at least in a society where we believe in paying people for their contributions.

[reply And in this way I really see absolutely no reason why there are a seemingly arbitrary set of people who are said to 'own the rights' to creating artwork from Tolkien's work while the rest of us can only choose to participate or not participate in the people's work. Of course, in many ways I have benefited from this reality because people feel confident investing large amounts of money in creating movies because they know someone else will not create a competing movie from the same story, and thus there are even huge, excellent films from which to morph. To me, ownership or control over the ME property is out of anyone's hands.


"Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear."


Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea


Jan 21 2015, 12:45am

Post #16 of 109 (1219 views)
Shortcut
I trimed a three hour cut of the three theatricall releases [In reply to] Can't Post

exat three hour with milimetric precision to get rid of all non Tolkien material. And then even getting rid a bit of Tolkien matterial too to get more rythm but it wasnt too much,,,and,,,

what a film!

Incredible and intense ride that you can watch in a row (this is the important fact) because you can see the scope better

I love the movies, the three of them and waiting for the EE I have all DVDs till now and I just did this for myself, for fun, and it is worthy

if you want me to detail the plot I will gladly:)

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true

Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer

Hobbit Cinema Marathon Hero



balbo biggins
Rohan


Jan 21 2015, 12:59am

Post #17 of 109 (1212 views)
Shortcut
here here [In reply to] Can't Post

art is all about reinterpreting ideas, im pretty sure PJ if he was a kid now would have made fan trailers and such in his bedroom.

also alot of old master paintings only exist now because people copied them for their own use.

i think people really attached to this movie tolkien fandom just take it a bit to heart that someone wants to muck around with the edit. its really all just for fun.


balbo biggins
Rohan


Jan 21 2015, 2:26am

Post #18 of 109 (1154 views)
Shortcut
to add... [In reply to] Can't Post

also if youve ever seen a shakespeare play, its undoubtedly an edited version from the original play


WholeUnderGround
Registered User

Jan 21 2015, 3:33am

Post #19 of 109 (1132 views)
Shortcut
Of course [In reply to] Can't Post

'Arbitrary' definitely wasn't the right word, I sort of thought that when I was writing it. I did state that I understand it has its benefits in that one can invest and make money more easily/safely with such laws in place. I certainly didn't mean that an author or other creator shouldn't profit off of their work. What I meant was meant to address, I suppose, the idea that unless you own the rights to adapting a piece of work you simply cannot or shouldn't be able to adapt the piece of work at all. Of course we have many creative people adapting their own pieces of the work, and some of them do profit slightly (even if not financially), but I don't think many would deny they are vibrant additions to the world of Middle-Earth. And it is PJ, undoubtedly a huge Tolkien geek, who has had the privilege in being the 'owner' of adapting the text of both novels into movies, despite he himself not actually buying the rights. Does that mean he hasn't worked like crazy and had to sacrifice many things himself, or had it easy? Or that he can or should be viewed as the same as any Tolkien fan? Of course not, that would be an absurd notion. Those who own the rights have helped the original creative person(s) profit from their work, and play a key role in fostering the creative work, but to me it does not mean they are the only people allowed to dabble into creating things based off of the original creator's work (insofar as they do not profit financially or feign themselves nor their work being 'official').


mangotree
The Shire

Jan 21 2015, 3:55am

Post #20 of 109 (1125 views)
Shortcut
Totally agree with you! [In reply to] Can't Post

 


cartermoulton
Bree


Jan 21 2015, 5:37am

Post #21 of 109 (1108 views)
Shortcut
would love to see this edit! PM me some cut info? [In reply to] Can't Post

i'm going to embark on editing it down to two 2.5 hour films (as originally intended). I'm being patient and watching some other work (checkout the Arkenstone Edition for a nice version of AUJ and "Into the Fire" for DOS) Soon, I will go ahead and get started on the first one (although I'm going to wait for BotFA EE before working on the second one).

For most of you who said you've made an edit, what program did you use? Final Cut/Premiere or something simpler?

Also, I know of one fan-edit that tried to re-incorporate Howard Shore's original score (it's pretty fantastic work). How would one go about doing this? Must be 5.1 audio with certain channels having only dialogue?

"the road goes ever on and on..."


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Jan 21 2015, 7:29am

Post #22 of 109 (1127 views)
Shortcut
Not interested [In reply to] Can't Post

I won't go so far as to criticize those who want to watch these "fan" edits (though their distribution - and subsequent downloading and viewing - is unlawful), but I don't approve of them personally. The films are what they are, and PJ had his final cut and signed off on his films. I don't have to like everything about them, but it's not my place to say "oh, this is how he should have done this..." or to chop up his piece of work to suit my preferences.

If I want the book, it's sitting on my shelf and can be grabbed at a moment's notice (I'm reading it currently, as a matter of fact).

"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 Jan 21 2015, 7:34am)


dormouse
Half-elven


Jan 21 2015, 8:32am

Post #23 of 109 (1068 views)
Shortcut
I'd just like to cheer this post! // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


moreorless
Gondor

Jan 21 2015, 11:14am

Post #24 of 109 (1048 views)
Shortcut
I would agree and disagree with elements of this... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I know fan edits are a controversial topic on these boards, with some people on here thinking they are downright wrong and immoral and other people thinking they are a great way to salvage what is great about these films, but I had some thoughts after coming across a recent one on a different website.

Making a film is a huge and collaborative effort. Hundreds if not thousands of people all have to work together towards a single goal. It is also a ridiculously expensive endeavor. Having watched and read a lot of behind-the-scenes material on films and filmmaking for these films as well as others, I've come to see that compromise plays a huge role in filmmaking as well. I don't mean merely one person compromising with another, or someone compromising their creative vision to appease the suits at the studio - I mean it in the sense of usually there is simply a limited amount of time and money and other resources when making a film. Often there simply isn't time to shoot a scene the way it may have been intended, or the weather isn't cooperating, or an actor is sick, or myriad other logistical problems that can arise when hundreds of people are doing something together. A creative solution has to be found.

Jaws turned out the way it did because they couldn't get the mechanical shark to work and a young Steven Spielberg had to come up with creative ways to still make his film work. The scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark were Indiana Jones simply pulls out his revolver and shoots the huge sword-wielding foe who outmatches him in every way was a result of Harrison Ford not feeling well that day and not wanting to go trough an elaborate fight scene. That ended up being an iconic scene. Those are just two examples, and I know they're both Spielberg, by they are the two examples that stick out in my mind the most.

With this trilogy of Hobbit films Peter Jackson really has had an almost unprecedented level of creative control. Yes, large movie studios ultimately footed the bill at the end of the day, but during the actual shooting PJ was largely free to shoot however he wanted. Most of the physical shooting for the actual Battle of Five armies wasn't even done in the original shooting block. This is a very unique situation and not one most that filmmakers find themselves in.

Having watched the three films now, it is apparent that their solution to almost any situation that came up during filming was to fix it with CGI in post, and usually by inserting a lot of action that carries on for a long time. When they felt they needed a climax for DoS they came up with the battle in the forges sequence rather than writing and shooting new scenes involving actors with drama that advance the plot.

The behind-the-scenes material for TTT showed that they originally envisioned a much longer battle between Gandalf and The Balrog, one that showed what happened between when they plunged into the water down in the depths of the world and when they battled up high in the Misty Mountains. The waterlogged Balrog was going to look like a big slippery steamy snake. Gandalf was going to have trouble holding onto it. The scene would have presumably carried on for a long time.

This scene was ultimately cut for budget reasons, a decision which I think turned out entirely for the better. That scene plays perfectly as it is already. That fight may have looked cool in the end, but the film did not need it at all and it would have actually hurt the film.

That much longer version of the fight between Gandalf and the Balrog which never actually came to be represents to me where PJ went wrong with The Hobbit trilogy. On this trilogy, those types of scenes were not cut for budget reasons or any other reasons. They were shot and filmed and completed and allowed to play out in all of their excessive glory, and in my opinion it severely hurt the films. I actually remember the fight between Gandalf and The Balrog vividly. It was tense and dramatic and it contained a couple of absolutely iconic shots. I don't think the fifteen minute long, action packed, completely CGI'd version of that scene would stand out in my mind quite the same way.

The fan edits that I have watched and enjoyed don't aim to take what PJ has made and chop all of the non-Tolkien material out - they simply try to rein in some of the excesses that take over these films from time to time and approximate what they would have looked like had they been made in the same manner as the LOTR trilogy. Changes are still made to Tolkien's original story, huge changes in some cases, but the goal is to keep the focus on the story being told and to try to keep the respect for the material that was shown in the first trilogy.


I do definitely feel LOTR benefited from Jackson being kept on a tighter leash in terms of budget meaning action sequences couldn't be pushed "too far" as did happen at points in both Kong and the Hobbit films.

That said I would disagree with the idea that Jackson threw out meaningless action in order to provide a climax for each of the Hobbit films. I think the Azog/Thorin climax in AUJ was clearly built towards in terms of story and character across much of the film as was I would say the Smaug showdown.

Obviously these sequences added action not in the book but I do not think you can say they added action without character. For me its more the likes of Goblin Town and the Barrel escape(or the sauropod chase in Kong) that are offenders, dragging out action without really having the drama to sustain it.


AshNazg
Gondor


Jan 21 2015, 1:34pm

Post #25 of 109 (1072 views)
Shortcut
For those who don't like the idea of a fan edit... [In reply to] Can't Post

...I just want to say I also had some reservations, but I've now watched a 4 hour edit and you can no longer make any arguments, the edit IS superior to the theatrical release. It's a far more enjoyable viewing experience and has much more focus and better pacing. You ACTUALLY care about the characters because you're not constantly being distracted from them. Also Bilbo feels much more a part of the story, he becomes much more central and doesn't feel drowned out by bloated and unnecessary exposition.

You can say what you like about how you think PJs version should be left as it is. But if a fan edit can improve it this much then your argument doesn't hold much weight. There are scenes that I previously thought were necessary, but then watching it without them you realise the story makes perfect sense without them. I think it will actually be a chore to sit through those scenes if I were to watch the theatrical versions again, knowing now how unnecessary they are.

In comparison to the fan version the theatrical version spends far too much time pointing out the obvious and repeating information, when it should just be moving things forward.

The edit I saw was also done very well, clearly by someone who knew what they were doing, and doesn't feel amateurish or cut up at all, it could easily have been released in cinemas and no-one would notice a thing. I think in future I may turn to the fan edit, providing they put in Beorn and Thorin's funeral after the EE release.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 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.