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:
JRR Tolkien's The Hobbit: an upcoming fanedit
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page Last page  View All

TheHutt
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 2:24pm

Post #76 of 203 (1380 views)
Shortcut
     Precisely! [In reply to]  

That is exactly my point.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Booklet - Custom Booklet Project



Goldeneye
Lorien


Feb 24 2015, 2:31pm

Post #77 of 203 (1379 views)
Shortcut
     to dormouse [In reply to]  

Dormouse, I understand what you're saying completely, however I don't agree with your perspective. Let me explain.

You're of the belief that an artist's work shouldn't be tampered with. Keep it the way it is, you say. If someone were to take a book you wrote and re-organized it, added characters, cut stuff out, changed certain themes and then called it their own work, you say you'd be between livid and devastated. So by that logic...shouldn't you be upset with PETER JACKSON for doing this VERY THING to Tolkien's original Hobbit book?? Because that is EXACTLY what he has done with his film adaptations.

Peter Jackson was clearly not content to make a genuine, faithful adaptation of The Hobbit. Yes, there IS a lot of stuff in that trilogy that IS faithful to the book, it just happens to be wedged between other elements that do NOT belong to the book. Because we have such awesome technological advances in this day and age, and because I am such a fan of Tolkien's work and Jackson's LOTR trilogy, I do NOT feel I should just "get used to things" and accept Jackson's vision(s) for the Hobbit. I will still watch those full versions from time to time, but I am genuinely curious to see how these films would work if all that excess stuff wasn't in there- and I know many other fans feel the same way.

Creative work does deserve to be respected, but not deified.


Magpie
Immortal


Feb 24 2015, 2:39pm

Post #78 of 203 (1380 views)
Shortcut
     such an important point [In reply to]  

QUOTE: And my hope for it is that people will engage with it as it is and try to understand it - as it is.

This is, imo, the 'enlightened' way to approach creative works. And since I'm such an avid fan of storytelling I find this is most applicable to books, movies, and TV shows (as opposed to music, paintings, sculpture, etc.)

This ties in to a number of comments I've made recently about the two aspects of the story and the storyteller.

I'm sure you're right that the art of storytelling doesn't get appreciated as it should and perhaps not even after someone gives it a try (as I suggested in my other post in this thread).

But I would suggest that some of those sorts will never get it. They'll never marvel at why the "Aurochs" in Beasts of the Southern Wild aren't depicted accurately.

All I can offer you is that I do! And maybe a few of us highly enthusiastic fans of good storytelling can make up for those that don't get what the art of storytelling is all about.

I'll still reserve my right to disagree with you about the Hobbit movies. Lol.

:-)


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


Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Feb 24 2015, 2:44pm

Post #79 of 203 (1351 views)
Shortcut
     Good Luck [In reply to]  

What is interesting about your particular fan edit is that conceptually you go in exactly the opposite direction to the film makers choices.

They believed one of the key ways to make these films bigger and grander and draw them closer to the LOTR films was to increase the number of concurrent story lines e.g Thorin/ Azog and Tauriel/Bolg/Kili/Legolas or Bilbo/ Smaug Smaug/Dwarves or Dol Gulder and Gunderbad armies or Bard/LakeTowners in Dale as well as Dain and Thranduil before the gates of Erebor .

What I think you will be able to do is reduce that band width and allow the original story to breath.

What one cannot do with an edit is actually focus on the positive creative answer which is to add depth and interconnectedness so that the story gains the kind of gravitas and weight that JRRT speculated with in the appendices and in the 1960 rewrite. Just one example which I know you will leave out as non book. The central character story of the sub plot is Thrain. His experience envisaged by JRRT provides us with a journey which is almost unique. He is captured by Saurons servants tortured beguiled, has the ring removed from him and witness's all manner of evil in D.G. In the film universe he is real time so could have in a moment of high drama, after being healed, provided in intimate detail the machinations of the necromencer adding weight and depth to the story through providing a unique slice of timely mediation and if it had not been telegraphed in the Azog/Bolg re organisation revealed to the audience and Gandalf what we had all feared.

Unfortunately what Antony Sher was able to reveal lost its impact because we had already got the message for instance about Smaug/Sauron the previous December.

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 24 2015, 2:45pm)


xxxyyy
Rohan

Feb 24 2015, 2:50pm

Post #80 of 203 (1346 views)
Shortcut
     By "healing scene" I just meant the one where Tauriel goes "glowing Arwen". (throwing up while writing) [In reply to]  

Why the worst scene in movie history must be in a Middle Earth movie?!?
Unsure


(This post was edited by xxxyyy on Feb 24 2015, 2:52pm)


BlackFox
Half-elven


Feb 24 2015, 3:05pm

Post #81 of 203 (1338 views)
Shortcut
     Not quite [In reply to]  


In Reply To
You're of the belief that an artist's work shouldn't be tampered with. Keep it the way it is, you say. If someone were to take a book you wrote and re-organized it, added characters, cut stuff out, changed certain themes and then called it their own work, you say you'd be between livid and devastated. So by that logic...shouldn't you be upset with PETER JACKSON for doing this VERY THING to Tolkien's original Hobbit book?? Because that is EXACTLY what he has done with his film adaptations.

There is a difference whether we're talking about an authorized (in this case, Jackson's The Hobbit) or an unauthorized adaptation (fan edits).



Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 3:07pm

Post #82 of 203 (1335 views)
Shortcut
     Jackson created a book? [In reply to]  

I can't speak for Dormouse (and indeed don't share her view on this) but creating a new work based on a story in a different medium is an entirely different proposition to editing something.


dormouse
Half-elven


Feb 24 2015, 3:09pm

Post #83 of 203 (1374 views)
Shortcut
     Absolutely not.... [In reply to]  


Quote
You're of the belief that an artist's work shouldn't be tampered with. Keep it the way it is, you say. If someone were to take a book you wrote and re-organized it, added characters, cut stuff out, changed certain themes and then called it their own work, you say you'd be between livid and devastated. So by that logic...shouldn't you be upset with PETER JACKSON for doing this VERY THING to Tolkien's original Hobbit book?? Because that is EXACTLY what he has done with his film adaptations.

No, it isn't.

Peter Jackson and his co-writers are professional film-makers who produced an adaptation of Tolkien's work with the permission of the rights holders. It was made clear from the outset that this would not be a straight adaptation of The Hobbit alone but would develop the story and would incorporate other material drawn from the LotR Appendices. And that is perfectly within the bounds of screen adaptation.

Irrespective of whether any of us likes or doesn't like the films, these are the facts. A professional adaptation done with the permission of the rights holders is a world away from an amateur effort by someone who feels entitled to do what he likes with other people's work just because he wants to.

You don't have to accept Peter Jackson's vision of The Hobbit. You can criticise it. You can reject it completely. You can say it's the worst film that was ever made. What you can't - or at least shouldn't do - is attempt to rework it and then make your edited version available to other people under another name without permission. Being a fan of Tolkien's work doesn't entitle you or anyone else to do that. If you're a professional film editor as you say then it surprises me that you don't understand the difference.



(This post was edited by dormouse on Feb 24 2015, 3:13pm)


Bombadil
Half-elven


Feb 24 2015, 3:54pm

Post #84 of 203 (1318 views)
Shortcut
     DING, Ding, Ding....Bells go OFF! [In reply to]  

QUOTE:
"If you're a professional film editor as you say
then it surprises me that you don't understand
the difference."....

Case Closed
{Move along.... there is nothing to say here...}

Crazy

www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"


Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea


Feb 24 2015, 3:59pm

Post #85 of 203 (1301 views)
Shortcut
     Wont happen to Cameron with Avatar [In reply to]  

in such way like PJ with the hobbit. Because Cameron has created his own story, while Jackson is adapting a book that already sold milions of copies (the plot worked) so its a tricky area, and both visions are respectable, but Ii understand people who want a close version to the book,and th thing is that life just find its way

The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true

Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer

Hobbit Cinema Marathon Hero



Goldeneye
Lorien


Feb 24 2015, 4:02pm

Post #86 of 203 (1342 views)
Shortcut
     to dormouse [In reply to]  

Many of you here are getting upset over the various legal issues surrounding fanedits. As someone who studied mass communication laws in college and is intimately familiar with Fair Use as it pertains to copyright violations in the US, I can elaborate for you here if you wish.

Fanedits are in a gray area of fair use. The use of the final product should ONLY be for those who own the source material (ie DVD/Bluray), and should never be distributed for personal profit or gain. George Lucas and Lucasfilm have in fact been very supportive of fanedits within the Star Wars community, with the explicit understanding that any derivative works are not made for profit OR commercially conflict with official Lucasfilm products. They have taken legal action when this line has been crossed, but in general they have supported and even encouraged such works in the Star Wars community.

In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, - See more at: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/#sthash.eR7vOBV8.dpuf. There is nothing inherently illegal about taking a Bluray that is purchased legally in a store, ripping it onto your computer and editing it. This is the equivalent of buying a music CD, ripping it to your computer and making a mix CD for yourself to listen to. Where the grey area comes into play is when you decide to SHARE the alternate work with other people.

To be clear, fanedits are legal if:
-They are shared between those who already own the original work(s)
-They are not made in an attempt to make profit or personal gain
-They do not harm the commercial/market value of the original work

I am following these guidelines as they are laid out by US copyright law and Fanedit.org.


(This post was edited by Goldeneye on Feb 24 2015, 4:05pm)


Bofur01
Lorien


Feb 24 2015, 4:05pm

Post #87 of 203 (1312 views)
Shortcut
     There's no law to lay down here, so don't try. [In reply to]  

Fan edits are legal sharing them is not. Now can you all stop derailing the thread? The OP was about discussing ideas for his fan edit. If you don't approve, just don't post! You won't change his mind.

In fact, this (which is practically flaming) reminds me of the way the critics ganged up, and gave the Hobbit trilogy bad press. It's sad, when friendships between peoples can be lost. And for what? Pft.


Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Feb 24 2015, 4:12pm

Post #88 of 203 (1320 views)
Shortcut
     Clarification [In reply to]  

So if I own all three Blue rays in both short and long versions having already purchased them and I asked you to share your version with me in private correspondence outside of One Ring.net and paid for the postage and materials only that would be legal.

If so bring it on.

My Dear Bilbo something is the matter with you! you are not the same hobbit that you were.


Goldeneye
Lorien


Feb 24 2015, 4:18pm

Post #89 of 203 (1307 views)
Shortcut
     Michelle Johnston [In reply to]  

That would have to be a private correspondence outside of TORn, yes.


BlackFox
Half-elven


Feb 24 2015, 4:20pm

Post #90 of 203 (1306 views)
Shortcut
     It comes down to more than just whether something is legal or not [In reply to]  

The moral aspect of it, for example. Surely you wouldn't blame an author for taking offense at someone who has edited their work without their permission, even if no laws are broken in process?

I, like stated above, don't share dormouse's view, but I understand where she (and many others here) are coming from.



(This post was edited by BlackFox on Feb 24 2015, 4:29pm)


Barrow-Wight
Rohan


Feb 24 2015, 4:29pm

Post #91 of 203 (1313 views)
Shortcut
     In my opinion [In reply to]  

I too am working on a fan edit, I avoid this subject though because I know it is frowned upon here, i want to address the reasons why people make fan edits though I can only speak for myself. The reason I'm doing a fan edit is not because of ego or being unhappy with the trilogy because it wasn't the way "I" imagined it to be.

It is simply because I see it as a challenge to advance my skills by taking what will be a 12 hour trilogy and turn it into a 3 or 4 hour film, like Goldeneye said I'm just a "nerdy kid doing a hatchet job on his computer" but Im using this as a means to better my skills similar to how King Kong inspired PJ to be a film maker.

Not only are you learning editing but you are also learning the story you have to have good reasons for getting rid of a scene many of them are simple: pacing issues, timing, redundancy because of an earlier deleted scene. this is basically the same as adapting a movie script from a novel and if I'm not mistaken no one complains about that, the only difference is I'm not a professional film maker with lots of money to put into this project.

look I love the Hobbit trilogy if not for Jackson I would not know about Middle-Earth. I own both the TE and the EE of Unexpected Journey and Desolation Of Smaug, I wouldn't fork over my hard earned money to buy the same movie twice if I didn't lol I am a fan of both Peter Jackson's Hobbit and J.R.R. Tolkiens Hobbit and I want to see a good blending of the two and I want to see if I'm up to the task of doing that.

Goldeneye I'm interested in your version of the Hobbit because I too am into video editing, it fascinates me the many ways you can tell a story, you seem to have a good head on your shoulders when it comes to this topic, I can't wait t see how it all turns out!


Bofur01
Lorien


Feb 24 2015, 4:32pm

Post #92 of 203 (1301 views)
Shortcut
     That's exactly what I mean! Thank you so much :) // [In reply to]  

 


Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Feb 24 2015, 4:36pm

Post #93 of 203 (1319 views)
Shortcut
     Engagement followed by Rejection [In reply to]  

Engaging with an artists idea is more important than imposing your own.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are implying that if people do not like something they are not engaging. I get exactly what Peter Jackson is doing with these movies. I see exactly what you see but whereas you have stated the movies are perfect but for a couple of niggles I see amongst some wonderful sublime moments things, which you think are funny I describe as puerile, things you describe as laden with jeopardy as being entire bereft of any genuine dramatic tension.

The real reason there are fan edits is not out of vanity it is because people do engage with these films and they want to have a wonderful enjoyable journey but the films stumble so badly on occasions that they want to remove elements which are distracting.

What I find odd is I can see those criticisms and why they are made even if I do not agree all you see is near perfection, who is the one really engaging here.

My Dear Bilbo something is the matter with you! you are not the same hobbit that you were.


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Feb 24 2015, 5:02pm

Post #94 of 203 (1274 views)
Shortcut
     Unless Jackson edited the actual book by cutting out pages and inserting his own... [In reply to]  

...and tried passing it off as a "superior version of the book", this is a ridiculously bizarre comparison. Peter Jackson created his own films based on Tolkien's novel. Jackson's films are individual pieces of work that he and countless other artists created.

To equate the adaptation of a published work into a film with cutting up said film and declaring it "improved" is absurd.

"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


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 5:03pm

Post #95 of 203 (1285 views)
Shortcut
     I was with you part of the way. [In reply to]  

But the idea that editing a finished film is pretty much the same as creating the film from its inspiration in the first place, seems completely wrong to me!


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Feb 24 2015, 5:07pm

Post #96 of 203 (1270 views)
Shortcut
     That's because it is. [In reply to]  

And I find it baffling that so many here consider them to be one and the same.

"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


Elessar
Valinor


Feb 24 2015, 5:13pm

Post #97 of 203 (1276 views)
Shortcut
     I'm sorry but [In reply to]  

there is ego involved in this if you're doing it. Sure you may enjoy them or want to see what you can do to maybe enjoy it more. It does start through from a place of I can do it better.



Bofur01
Lorien


Feb 24 2015, 5:16pm

Post #98 of 203 (1246 views)
Shortcut
     I promise you, it doesn't always. [In reply to]  

Of course I know I can never be nearly as good as PJ. But I only edit to test myself, to see how seamless I can make transitions between shifted sections, and so on. I honestly love the films, and promise you that none of what I do, and probably others out there, has nothing to do with ego.


dormouse
Half-elven


Feb 24 2015, 5:19pm

Post #99 of 203 (1285 views)
Shortcut
     *Sigh* [In reply to]  

I've never said that the films are perfect, or that everyone has to like them. I reserve the right to like them myself, that's all, and not have to apologise for it. And while TORn's happy for me to do it I'll go on saying that I like the films, and why I like them. No one has to agree. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, just voicing an angle on this particular question of fan edits which seems to me to be worth saying.

As for this

Quote
You are implying that if people do not like something they are not engaging


No, I'm not, and truly Michelle, if you'd read my post you'll see that I'm not. This is what I said:


Quote

You don't have to accept Peter Jackson's vision of The Hobbit. You can criticise it. You can reject it completely. You can say it's the worst film that was ever made. What you can't - or at least shouldn't do - is attempt to rework it and then make your edited version available to other people under another name without permission.


When Peter Jackson wanted to make a film of Lord of the Rings he had to get the permission of the rights holders. Same for the Hobbit, though of course that was more complicated. But If the answer had been no he wouldn't have made the films. He had permission. This isn't about liking or disliking the films he made, it's about respecting other people's work.


Barrow-Wight
Rohan


Feb 24 2015, 5:26pm

Post #100 of 203 (1257 views)
Shortcut
     what I meant was [In reply to]  

what I meant was it's essentially the same Idea editing a finished movie with adapting a finished novel you have to choose what to keep and what you can get rid of what you can tweak around to get to the same outcome.

also a certain someone comes to mind when it comes to edits and That's George Lucas, he made the Star Wars Movies and people complained when he went back and changed them himself, the same thing would happen with Peter if he decided to do it to TH and LOTR but that's another topic for another time.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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.