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

Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 8:29pm

Post #126 of 203 (1095 views)
Shortcut
     Right [In reply to]  

But you don't have an opinion on it either way? Do you think it's immoral? Foolish? Does it have value or purpose or no?

I'm not trying to put you on the spot, it's just we've discussed fan edits quite a bit and you seem to be genuinely perplexed by the idea that anyone would ever want to do one for any reason. You really don't have a position on this example?


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 8:40pm

Post #127 of 203 (1097 views)
Shortcut
     Im not sure that's quite my position! [In reply to]  

But for clarity I don't think any fan edits are immoral (with the mild exception of those with pirated material).

However, it's not the sort of thing I would feel moved to be involved with myself or that I would take an interest in watching.

I don't think it would have any artistic merit as an activity, if that's the question, any more than a reconstruction on Crimewatch.

Is that the sort of thing you meant?


Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 8:49pm

Post #128 of 203 (1083 views)
Shortcut
     Huh, ok! [In reply to]  


Quote
I don't think it would have any artistic merit as an activity, if that's the question, any more than a reconstruction on Crimewatch


A reconstruction of crimewatch? How is that in any way analogous to reconstructing an iconic blockbuster feature film as it was presented in the theater that is in no way available to the public?



Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 8:59pm

Post #129 of 203 (1081 views)
Shortcut
     It's a reconstruction for historical interest. [In reply to]  

But we could have casting a replica of a smashed vase or some such if you prefer?

Or more closely we could dig into HOME and create a version of LOTR as it stood in, say, 1950.


(This post was edited by Spriggan on Feb 24 2015, 9:00pm)


Gianna
Rohan


Feb 24 2015, 10:05pm

Post #130 of 203 (1069 views)
Shortcut
     Ah, okay -- sounds good! // [In reply to]  

 

~There's some good left in this world. And it's worth fighting for.~


Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 10:12pm

Post #131 of 203 (1050 views)
Shortcut
     I guess [In reply to]  

Though there isn't some artist holding the originals for ransom.


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 10:34pm

Post #132 of 203 (1037 views)
Shortcut
     Well that's quite a specific element [In reply to]  

But I'm not sure it's particularly pertinent to the reconstruction element being an act of artistic merit.

Perhaps the Hobbit first edition is a reasonable example (still currently out of print, I think, unless those planned folio editions are out now). If we take a word doc of TH current edition and edit it to reconstruct the first edition surely we would be hard pressed to say that was an act of artistic merit, wouldn't we?


Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 10:59pm

Post #133 of 203 (1018 views)
Shortcut
     Why? [In reply to]  


Quote
If we take a word doc of TH current edition and edit it to reconstruct the first edition surely we would be hard pressed to say that was an act of artistic merit, wouldn't we




Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 11:08pm

Post #134 of 203 (1016 views)
Shortcut
     Why would it be? [In reply to]  

All I've done is taken a word doc of someone else's book and typed back in/deleted the phrases so that it matches an earlier edition of their book.


TheHutt
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 11:18pm

Post #135 of 203 (1021 views)
Shortcut
     Basically.. [In reply to]  

...it doesn't. After all, all the changes are well-documented. It would be just a copy+paste job.

It's a bit different if the original version is lost and needs to be reconstructed - like when museum restorators restore parts of a damaged painting. Still, they are not credited for this work and remain anonymous.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Booklet - Custom Booklet Project



Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 11:27pm

Post #136 of 203 (986 views)
Shortcut
     Yes, a work of significance. [In reply to]  

If you wanna make the case that reconstructing joe shmoes self distributed bio is not worth it, that's fine. But I completely disagree with you when it pertains to an important work.


(This post was edited by Bishop on Feb 24 2015, 11:27pm)


Glorfindela
Valinor


Feb 24 2015, 11:29pm

Post #137 of 203 (1013 views)
Shortcut
     I'd go one step further [In reply to]  

It's not what I would call 'editing'. It is merely cutting things from someone's creative work, then crowing about what a marvellous work you've 'created' and gagging for the appreciation of others by shouting 'look at me' online.

Vanity projects with no originality…


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!



Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 11:32pm

Post #138 of 203 (990 views)
Shortcut
     It's not just a copy and paste job [In reply to]  

Going back to the example I gave regarding Lucas, it takes extremely skilled people to reassemble, edit, work the audio, color correct, etc etc etc, into a form that reproduces the theatrical release. I will never understand this bizarre notion that people who edit fan films are talentless hacks who do nothing but chop things up. It shows a complete lack of understanding of the art form of film editing.


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 11:40pm

Post #139 of 203 (986 views)
Shortcut
     I'm not sure what the importance of the work has to do with the question. [In reply to]  

But my example was The Hobbit. I assume you also feel this is an important work so am doubly confused.

If I paint a rubbish painting then I'm still creating some (not very good) art. If I pick up a ripped print of the Mona Lisa and sellotape it back together then I am not.

The act is the pertinent factor, not the importance of the work.


skyofcoffeebeans
Rivendell

Feb 24 2015, 11:42pm

Post #140 of 203 (993 views)
Shortcut
     Read Bishop's post one more time, Glorfindela [In reply to]  

Because not only have most of your comments read as incredibly hateful, you really don't seem to know what you're talking about.


Bishop
Gondor


Feb 24 2015, 11:45pm

Post #141 of 203 (978 views)
Shortcut
     No offense [In reply to]  

But your analogies are terrible! Saying that adding text to a PDF document to replicate an out of print book is the same as editing picture, sound design, and color correction shows a deep misunderstanding of the craft.


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 24 2015, 11:54pm

Post #142 of 203 (986 views)
Shortcut
     No offence taken. [In reply to]  

I think the problem is more that you tend not to accept any analogy at all! Presumably because they do an effective job of argument.

Instead, we roam around tangential circumstances, in a most inconsistent manner.

Let's try it this way round. What analogy would you accept?


guitarzankansasfan
Lorien


Feb 25 2015, 12:02am

Post #143 of 203 (987 views)
Shortcut
     Maybe Jackson will get bored and do his own 1-film edit [In reply to]  

And then WB would release it as the ultimate double-dip on the franchise. I bet it could make a few hundred million at least.


Bishop
Gondor


Feb 25 2015, 12:13am

Post #144 of 203 (985 views)
Shortcut
     I would accept plenty of analogies [In reply to]  

A good place to start might be providing an analogy in which the crafts involved required similar skills or artistry.

Your analogies tend to drift towards things that simply don't hold the same weight. For example.

Me: Film fan edits can have artistic value
You: No, because after all, is there any artistic value in adding some preexisting sentences back into a book in microsoft word?

Those are just bad comparisons. Besides, why always analogies? Can't we just talk about film fan edits?


(This post was edited by Bishop on Feb 25 2015, 12:14am)


Mooseboy018
Grey Havens


Feb 25 2015, 12:19am

Post #145 of 203 (955 views)
Shortcut
     eagles [In reply to]  

I think leaving out the eagles is a mistake. I've seen a version of that scene without the Azog and Thorin confrontation, and it was pretty seamless.


Spriggan
Tol Eressea

Feb 25 2015, 12:25am

Post #146 of 203 (983 views)
Shortcut
     Such as? [In reply to]  

I'm off to bed now but have a think. I've provided many - ever more specific. First not just an edit but a recreation, then an edit recreation of something out of print, then an edit recreation of something out of print and suitably important.

That wasn't the conversation we had but no, to talk about putting back together this fan edit of Star Wars which simply recreates a prior version, I can't see that has any artistic merit.

Lots of things require skill and craft and don't produce art - I'm sure some examples will occur to you!


Bombadil
Half-elven


Feb 25 2015, 1:34am

Post #147 of 203 (938 views)
Shortcut
     DITTO..Double "Ditto"// [In reply to]  

Bom votes with "The Old Foogiezz"

VERSUS

The New YOUNG TURKS..?

Crazy

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

(This post was edited by Bombadil on Feb 25 2015, 1:40am)


Bladerunner
Gondor


Feb 25 2015, 2:09am

Post #148 of 203 (955 views)
Shortcut
     A suggestion.... [In reply to]  

....I'm wondering if a clip of Bilbo asking Gandalf during their return journey why he had left the company so abruptly will be included in the extended edition of "The Battle of the Five Armies."

If so that may be a good spot to insert a a flashback clip from the White Council attack on Dol Guldur.

Just a thought...

And I agree with you regarding the handling of the "Into the Fire" scene.
I found that scene to be excruciating in almost every way possible, including: Azog; the wargs biting the trees; the trees falling into one another; the change in music; the moth; the cliched cliffhanger moment; Thorin being ineffective against Azog; Bilbo joining the fight; Dori hanging onto Gandalf' staff....



In Reply To
....
  • No Necromancer/Dol Guldur subplot. It distracts from the main quest and was poorly conceived and executed anyways. As it was in the book, it is only briefly hinted at now.
    ....
  • The tree fight/eagle rescue sequence is gone. This is another book scene I had to cut due to Jackson’s mishandling. It was obviously beefed up late in production in order to have a more “action-packed” climax for AUJ......



  • Bombadil
    Half-elven


    Feb 25 2015, 2:29am

    Post #149 of 203 (940 views)
    Shortcut
         This OLD TolkienFREAK got a College Degree in 1972.. [In reply to]  

    "RADIO, TELEVISION, FILM"

    {Film Emphasis}

    Shot 16mm..Film as a TV NEWS Cameraman for years...
    Before Video TAPE..In the Field?

    BUT?
    Bom wouldn't EVER THINK of MESSing w/ PJ's Films

    READ Bom's BIO..here
    IF you have the Time..?
    Crazy

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

    (This post was edited by Bombadil on Feb 25 2015, 2:32am)


    Bishop
    Gondor


    Feb 25 2015, 2:58am

    Post #150 of 203 (932 views)
    Shortcut
         Well there it is! [In reply to]  


    Quote
    this fan edit of Star Wars which simply recreates a prior version, I can't see that has any artistic merit


    And it is there that we can agree to disagree.


    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.