|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
moreorless
Gondor
Feb 11 2015, 5:58pm
Post #51 of 58
(236 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm afraid I really can't see the Hobbit working without Bagend/The Shire...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
For me the introduction of Bilbo in Bagend really is essential for the story because his character is so clearly tied to that location, I really cannot see jumping into the story at Rivendell being as effective in establishing it.Beyond that as well I think Bilbo's strong link to the Shire and Bagend really sets the scene for what is a major theme though out the Hobbit story, that is the importance of home and how it drives characters/peoples actions.
Going back to the original point I would say again that my feeling is that the issue is more than just runtime. As with LOTR each of the Hobbit films follow your standard three act structure and having that repeated three times rather than two fundamentally changes the way material builds, even the same exact scene in that context can potentially have a very different effect.
|
|
|
Michelle Johnston
Rohan
Feb 11 2015, 7:24pm
Post #52 of 58
(226 views)
Shortcut
|
Three things:-
1) These films are set as pre equals to the LOTR we all know where Bilbo comes from its simply a delight as deep fans to see him make that decision to go.
2) However a global audience reacts to character and Martin freeman would have been quite capable of indicating the notion of home without being there. Indeed even in the film home might have become Rivendell he still wasn't sure about going forward.
3) It would all be in the EE for you and me and then the global audience and critics who panned AUJ would get a well crafted taut first film which actually told a good part of the story before stopping after having hardly got going. Expostion 110 minutes story 50 minutes is what we ended up with.
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 Feb 11 2015, 7:25pm)
|
|
|
Michelle Johnston
Rohan
Feb 11 2015, 7:27pm
Post #53 of 58
(223 views)
Shortcut
|
I should have said I thought your idea of the three films is an artificial construct to fit an argument. The screen writers walked around for 2 years providing actors with a logical two film script.
My Dear Bilbo something is the matter with you! you are not the same hobbit that you were.
|
|
|
moreorless
Gondor
Feb 11 2015, 7:51pm
Post #54 of 58
(224 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm sure he could have done something but..
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Three things:-
1) These films are set as pre equals to the LOTR we all know where Bilbo comes from its simply a delight as deep fans to see him make that decision to go.
2) However a global audience reacts to character and Martin freeman would have been quite capable of indicating the notion of home without being there. Indeed even in the film home might have become Rivendell he still wasn't sure about going forward.
3) It would all be in the EE for you and me and then the global audience and critics who panned AUJ would get a well crafted taut first film which actually told a good part of the story before stopping after having hardly got going. Expostion 110 minutes story 50 minutes is what we ended up with.
I'm sure they/freeman could have done something to suggest his connection to home but I just don't see it being as effective. Its not of course just bagend itself either but the fact we see Bilbo introduced to these strange new characters within it that reveals so much about him.
We have seen Ian Holm's Bilbo before but your talking a much older Bilbo after his adventure which clearly changes him.
|
|
|
moreorless
Gondor
Feb 11 2015, 8:18pm
Post #55 of 58
(217 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm sure a two film script would have "worked" to some degree
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I should have said I thought your idea of the three films is an artificial construct to fit an argument. The screen writers walked around for 2 years providing actors with a logical two film script.
I'm sure a two film Hobbit would have "worked" as a piece of cinema given that Jackson and co seem to be competent script writers but that doesn't preclude three films changing things for the better.
As I said I think its very possible for the exact same material placed at different points with new material around it to have a very different effect. My guess would be that part of the choice to switch to three films was based on looking back at what had already been filmed and thinking it could be more effective in a three film structure.
A big example of that for me would be the material in the first hour or so of DOS. Bilbo still features a lot in this material of course but I think the focus naturally shifts more onto Thorin because Bilbo has "earnt" his place already and because we see similar faults build in Thorin afterwards.
I think theres a natural potential for these scenes to be bent in that direction as well that isn't there previously in the material within AUJ. Thorin is a bit prideful in the 1st film and ha s abit of a prickly relationship with Gandalf and Elrond but none of the "good guys" show active dislike of him. Beorn on the other hand has an active dislike of the Dwarves that's used to hint at the faults in Thorin we see latter and with Thranduil theres obviously history there that can be played off.
By having these scenes at the start of DOS rather than the end of AUJ(with no DOS) I think they became the first hints that something is more seriously wrong with Thorins character which we see built on at Laketown and then at Erebor.
|
|
|
Michelle Johnston
Rohan
Feb 12 2015, 4:36am
Post #56 of 58
(207 views)
Shortcut
|
When I saw AUj the one quality which surprised me and a long term fan of Tolkien whom I have seen each film with in Wellington is the film felt like it had a real heart created by the Bilbo/Thorin and Gandalf axis.
DOS is a quite different film it has more pace and focus but the heart of the movie the triangulation between Thorin,Gandalf and Bilbo is lost for two reasons :-
1) Gandalf leaves the company.
2) Bilbo and Thorin appear to have reached some kind of non verbal implied workmanlike agreement following their rapprochement at the Carrock.
What actually happens between Beorn and the Post Barrels scene is the Dwarves are "reduced" and Bilbo grows but because the film has become a road move by then their is no growth or dynamic in the Bilbo/Dwaven relationship. The Dwarves flounder and Bilbo gets on with his more resolute nature until the spiders intervene and by then Bilbo enters another relationship - with the ring.
If the movie had begun in Rivendell with the audience becoming aquanted with the company through Elrond and Bilbo through Gandalf, Elrond and then Bofur the Dwaven/Bilbo dynamic could have stayed in place post barrels and got them to Lake Town.
Bilbo is unaware of the Thranduil/Thorin stand off ,which is another topic for discussion itself, but that later rapprochement would have linked beautifully with his new relationship with Thorin when he vouchs for Thorins promise to the people of Lake Town which he brilliantly holds him to at Erebor.
Put simply `i think the early rapprochement with the 3 film structure creates a vacuum in their relationship. it kind of goes off piste and disappears. It would have been lovely to see rapprochement and vouching connected and then the final dynamic when they enter Erebor.
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 Feb 12 2015, 4:42am)
|
|
|
Michelle Johnston
Rohan
Feb 12 2015, 6:15am
Post #57 of 58
(198 views)
Shortcut
|
These kind of debates enable me to get to the root of what is the issue.
I have talked prevoiusly about keeping the hierarchy of importance right in terms of character, icons and the geo politics of the story. However for me the key conclusion I come to is very simple.
Now i have nearly 8 hours in front of me is the relationship between investment and pay off correct. Is the minimum amount of time taken to establish a character so we come to know them and then take their journey and see it conclude in away that draws a satisfactory conclusion.
I know the answer to that question across a range of characters and in my view there are occasions where the set up and pay off are not in balance. The result of that is a smaller story taking in general terms the same length of time to be told as a huge story.
Forgive me if I see this as a concluding observation and thanks for your comradely interaction.
My Dear Bilbo something is the matter with you! you are not the same hobbit that you were.
|
|
|
moreorless
Gondor
Feb 12 2015, 8:25am
Post #58 of 58
(205 views)
Shortcut
|
|
What I think we see is a shift in focus...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
What I think we see in DOS is a shift in focus from Bilbo in AUJ towards Thorin with the characters effectively switching roles. Bilbo remains a big character in the story but now its Thorin playing off of him rather than the other way around as in AUJ. I don't think its a coincidence that we get a flashback to Thorin at the very start of DOS.
Its an interesting debate which story elements "hold over" from one film to another most effectively. Personally my feeling would be that events like Beorn's comment on the Dwarves and Thorin's fued with Thranduil really did need to be in the same film as there coming to a head to be most effective. In DOS they really become our introduction into the possibility of Thorin not merely being prickly but his pride and judge holding potentially being dangerous. The confrontation with Bard and then Smaug being loosed on laketown are IMHO more effective if we've had that slower buildup.
I would argue that these larger events hold over into BOT5A more effectively simply because they are much more obvious climax's in the story. The end of DOS surely makes it VERY clear to everyone that Bard was correct and that Thorin was acting in a questionable fashion not taking into account the danger of his actions for others.
I think the story benefits as well from the more complete buildup of Thorin's character(the weaknesses and the strengths) BEFORE the Dragon sickness becomes a big issue. The issue with "magical temptation" is that it risks burying the moral weight of the character arc, showing Thorin's faults brought to a head at the end of DOS makes it more a case of the dragon sickness latching onto and amplifying them.
(This post was edited by moreorless on Feb 12 2015, 8:27am)
|
|
|
|
|
