|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Feb 3 2015, 12:47pm
Post #51 of 86
(1662 views)
Shortcut
|
Oh please do type those dreaded words!...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
For I will certainly second you on that... 
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Feb 3 2015, 1:00pm
Post #52 of 86
(1658 views)
Shortcut
|
I have been impressed throughout by your artful step by step introduction of your point. Admirably done indeed! 
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
Riven Delve
Tol Eressea
Feb 3 2015, 1:57pm
Post #53 of 86
(1649 views)
Shortcut
|
|
There's never all I want to see in the EEs
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
so I try to keep my expectations kind of low, but the fact that there even are EEs has got me totally spoiled. 
“Tollers,” Lewis said to Tolkien, “there is too little of what we really like in stories. I am afraid we shall have to try and write some ourselves.”
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Feb 3 2015, 2:12pm
Post #54 of 86
(1667 views)
Shortcut
|
|
After the various answers to this post of yours,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
perhaps you still don't like the film, but at least I hope you find it less dumb than you thought at first? Most of the things you listed out as dumb have been explained by those answers, and can't be seen any longer as dumb, I'd say.
Regarding Fili and Kili's deaths, it has to be realized that in the book it was easy for Tolkien to kill the two of them away as he does, in just two lines, as they had never truly existed in the story to the point of any reader becoming deeply attached to them emotionally.
In the movies it has been quite different, the audience has come to really love those two brothers and to care about them, they both will deserve to have their own memorable death, and to be mourned as themselves; and yet a way had to be found that their deaths wouldn't be so completely together with that of Thorin as to eclipse his death, or numb the audience to it by happening too closely before it.
I think the way they did it in the film was quite all right actually, for it still showed that Fili and Kili did die for Thorin and the Company, entering Ravenhill as scouts on Thorin's own command in order to protect and prepare his own entry there later on.
After Fili gets killed first in that way, it is straight against Azog his murderer that horrified Kili himself springs forth immediately; trying to protect Tauriel when he sees she is being attacked too is only Kili's secondary motivation, which doesn't detract from his primary one: he is simply interrupted in his rushing up towards Azog, by this new circumstance, requiring even more urgently his intervention: the vicious attack of Tauriel by Bolg.
So he ends up being killed himself by Bolg, and while defending Tauriel, but only because this is the way the situation has quite unexpectedly evolved on the spot - and it will lead to Bolg being in turn killed by Legolas, as should be, so that when later on Thorin finally kills Azog as well, both the Orc leaders are missing, and their armies can't rally any more around them against Beorn's and the Eagles' sudden onslaught.
One may like or not this way of getting those things done, but it is certainly not a dumb way of doing it, and it has its advantages.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Tol Eressea
Feb 3 2015, 2:17pm
Post #55 of 86
(1634 views)
Shortcut
|
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
Hobbity Hobbit
Lorien
Feb 4 2015, 3:11am
Post #56 of 86
(1662 views)
Shortcut
|
I think honestly, that anybody who would give this movie lower then a 6 has never seen a good movie before. The thought put into all Middle-earth films is great, especially how Galadriel appears like a Water Nymph, she did look like a water-y/drowning figure, which made sense because of Nenya. They explored JRR Tolkien's world, and they did what JRR Tolkien wanted to do. JRR Tolkien wanted to rewrite The Hobbit (correct me if I'm wrong), but got turned down my publishers because they didn't see it like "The Hobbit."
This movie is great, the acting, is amazing. This was character-driven like any movie should be, and had a clear moral. Music, films, and books were made to do one thing-to teach lessons, which most movies don't use it for. But this is also because of JRR Tolkien. This movie was more as book-accurate AUJ, and it was similar to AUJ too. You could compare Tauriel and Legolas with Azog at Weathertop, and Tauriel and Kili with the Into the Fire scene. It did what it was suppose to be, and turned out the way it was suppose to be. Since they had a lot more time and a lot of difficultly making The Hobbit, I was surprised it turned out so great. A lot of people loved it, I know good friends who didn't even watch AUJ and DOS, and loved BotFA. Some of my family members don't like fantasy, and now love Middle-earth because of BotFA. DOS wasn't my favorite, but the DOS EE, was amazing. I really liked AUJ, and I thought the DOS EE was even better than AUJ.
Alfrid was okay, he wasn't my favorite, but it wasn't wrong to put him there. You can tell that this was originally shot when they wanted the more, funny, child-like tone, which is why I like AUJ. I think the reason why people got mad with the trilogy was because it wasn't LOTR, it was in fact The Hobbit. It was child-like and funny, like the beginning of The Hobbit. And as you got farther into the story, it got darker, and darker, it was what JRR Tolkien wrote. And even though things in Dol Guldur weren't exactly correct, it made sense as it would be very hard to pull off that Sauron was already revealed. And I think it was great what they did, even putting Smaug in the beginning of BotFA, instead of DOS. The world was once happy and funny, but because of greed, the world grew darker, and because people are blinded by power and greed, they can no longer see the fun they used to have. Looking at when the crazy dwarves invaded Bilbo's house, and then when 3 of them die, and there is no happiness, and I left the theater, the feeling dragged along with me. And it did what it should of done, made me care.
"As the snowflakes cover my fallen brothers,
I will say this last goodbye."-from "The Last Goodbye"
"If more of us valued food and cheer and song above gold, the world would be a merrier place."-BotFA/The Hobbit
|
|
|
RabidWolverine
Registered User
Feb 8 2015, 4:53am
Post #58 of 86
(1594 views)
Shortcut
|
BOTFA was one of the best war movies I've ever seen.
Think for a second.... How did WW1 begin? Most people cannot answer that question beyond (maybe) a cursory, uhhh, an arch-duke was assassinated. WW2 is probably a little easier to explain, but it's still fairly complicated and most people can only provide garbled answers.
BOTFA lays it out the reasons, step-by-step, in simple human terms, how the parties got into an impasse with blinkered and delusional self-interest.
BOFTA then shows the battle, which is thrilling.
BOFTA then underlines how after this exciting rush of battle that thre is only loss and deprivation as a result. The war is over, yet there is not a triumphant victory procession, but rather carnage, shame, and relief that the stupid war of greed is over. People die, and war changes the survivors.
Amazing performances & interaction by Armitage, Freeman and Luke Evans really underscore the emotional depth and confusion, stupidity and voices talking past each other on the march to war. I really did love this film.
|
|
|
grammaboodawg
Immortal
Feb 8 2015, 6:00am
Post #59 of 86
(1642 views)
Shortcut
|
It's hard to believe this is the last review. I'm so emotionally attached to Jackson, Walsh & Boyens' storytelling of Tolkien's works that it's difficult to let go... of never having what has always felt like discovering another layer of Middle-earth. I have never experienced anything that transports me to a place that feels like home... especially when I see Gandalf, Bilbo and Bag End. Jackson's characters, lands, storytelling and music are a part of my makeup now. I have always loved the books, but now the films breathe life into the characters and their stories.
The first time I saw TBotFA, I left feeling half a beat off. Each time I left the first viewings of LotR and the other Hobbit movies, I had that incredible feeling of stepping back from that other world. But this was different. It felt incomplete. I am usually very successful at keeping my expectations and familiarity with the story in check; but Fili and Kili's deaths threw me off. I hoped my viewing the next day would help settle my mind on how I felt about this adaptation... and it did!!! Now that I knew what to expect, I could let the story wash over me, and I feel in love with it more and more over the 27 times I went there.
For me, this story is not about the devastating battle, but the deep friendships and family bonds that carried the characters through the war and how those bonds endured. Gandalf and Galadriel; Bard and Bain; Bilbo and Thorin; Thorin and the Dwarves; Gandalf and Bilbo; Tauriel and Legolas/Kili... so many relationships.
The opening of TBotFA felt like the opening of TT as we joined Gandalf fighting the Balrog. We were brought straight-away into the heart of the story where we left off in the DOS and Smaug's attack on Lake-town. Bard and Bain's courage as they confronted the diabolical Smaug with such complete trust and sensitivity was astounding. That was the first time I was absorbed into this film... the first of many. Jaw-dropping brilliant!
While it seemed like there wasn't as much of Bilbo in this story, looking at it again proved that his role was the catalyst for most of the major events. Keeping the Arkenstone from Thorin to stay his fall into madness (according to Balin's fears); convincing Thranduil not to begin the war with the Dwarves by taking the Arkenstone to Bard/Thranduil as settlement and incentive; admitting to Thorin he took the Arkenstone and finally making the Dwarves see how far he'd fallen as he threatened to kill Bilbo; putting on the Ring and racing to Ravenhill to warn Thorin and the others of Azog's trap... Bilbo affected it all.
But it was the quiet moments in this war-TORn story that captured my heart and placed this last film firmly with all the others. The sensitive moments between Balin and Bilbo as Bilbo wondered if it would help if the Arkenstone was found; between Thorin and Bilbo with Beorn's acorn; Galadriel with the wounded Gandalf at Dol Guldur; but most of all, Bilbo with Thorin as he lay dying... followed by the beautiful, silent moment with a shocked Bilbo sitting next to Gandalf as the wizard drew him back with the simplest diversion of cleaning his pipe. So endearing that Gandalf knew how to bring our Hobbit back from his despair.
Returning to the Shire with Gandalf after saying good-bye to the Dwarves began the hard part for me. Our last time with Gandalf the Grey... who I feel is the heart of the entire 6-film odyssey. His presence is staggering, and McKellen's beautiful portrayal is magical. I love this man and this character most of all.
Coming home to Bag End with Bilbo down from the door where it began, and ultimately with him greeting his "very old friend" at the door completes the journey with Peter Jackson and his filmic family as it could only be. Home. It's hard to see it end.
Hobbit: BotFA Geeky Observation List draft #5 1/30/15
6th draft of TH:AUJ Geeky Observations List - November 28, 2013
4th draft of TH:DOS Geeky Observations List - May 15, 2014
"There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West."
I'm SO HAPPY these new films take me back to that magical world!!
TIME Google Calendar
TORn's Geeky Observations Lists for LotR and The Hobbit
(This post was edited by grammaboodawg on Feb 8 2015, 6:05am)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Feb 8 2015, 4:12pm
Post #60 of 86
(1664 views)
Shortcut
|
Don't forget, gramma, you will also have to share your impressions of the BotFA-EE once it is released.
"The Great Scaly One protects us from alien invaders and ourselves with his fiery atomic love. It can be a tough love - the “folly of man” and all that - but Godzilla is a fair god.
"Godzilla is totally accepting of all people and faiths. For it is written that liberal or conservative, Christian or Muslim or Jew, straight or gay, all people sound pretty much the identical as they are crushed beneath his mighty feet." - Tony Isabella, The First Church of Godzilla (Reform)
|
|
|
Riven Delve
Tol Eressea
Feb 19 2015, 7:25pm
Post #61 of 86
(1523 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I understand a little bit about how you're feeling, gramma
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I saw this movie probably for the last time in a theater today (the heat wasn't working, BTW, and it's 15 degrees F outside...but it cost me $3.50 to see it in 3D, so you get what you pay for!). I think the fact that it's probably the last time made it more emotional for me. I actually teared up when Thorin died this time, which I had never done before--not because Thorin was dying, but because I finally felt Bilbo's grief as my own as he tried to say "The Eagles" three separate times...
It's not the movie "going away" that makes me sad. It's knowing that I'll never see a new Peter Jackson Middle-earth location or culture or costumed actor. It's knowing that there's not all that much more to anticipate, and that era of excitement and wondering is over (except for the EE! ). It's knowing that I'll probably never be going into the theater to see Middle-earth again, shivering with excitement over the visual banquet I'm going to be served.
Generally I'm not really sentimental, so this sadness coming over me is a bit surprising. My consolation, I think, will be that I relate to Bilbo as he sits and remembers...and suddenly, at the door is a very old friend...like popping in the DVD, and reliving the times with beloved friends again.
“Tollers,” Lewis said to Tolkien, “there is too little of what we really like in stories. I am afraid we shall have to try and write some ourselves.”
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Feb 19 2015, 11:07pm
Post #62 of 86
(1561 views)
Shortcut
|
... and as it's some time now since the film left theatres here it hit me hard to learn that we have to wait another whole month for the DVD here - April instead of March - I so want to see it again, and again, and....
I've shared that same sense of wonder you describe as each successive film unfolded - the emotional attachment and the discovery. It sounds overstated but these aren't just films to me. Over the years I've seen so many films I've enjoyed; these are something different.
We still have the EE to look forward to, and the films to re-watch, and the friendships needn't end. But this has been the most amazing, magical time ever...
Thanks for the review, gramma
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Mar 1 2015, 10:49pm
Post #63 of 86
(1432 views)
Shortcut
|
They explored JRR Tolkien's world, and they did what JRR Tolkien wanted to do. JRR Tolkien wanted to rewrite The Hobbit (correct me if I'm wrong), but got turned down my publishers because they didn't see it like "The Hobbit."
That is incorrect as far as I read the evidence, at least as far as Tolkien's publishers necessarily being involved in rejecting this version. Tolkien began a rewrite of The Hobbit -- now called the 1960 Hobbit -- but abandoned it very early.
That's what is known.
What is speculated is that he possibly was swayed in some measure by someone's opinion. The identity of this person is not known so far. Again this seems to be one possible explanation, but I don't recall even this much being characterized as a certainty. JDR writes (History of The Hobbit):
"According to Christopher Tolkien, when his father had reached this point in the recasting he loaned the material to a friend to get and outside opinion on it. We do not know this person's identity, but apparently her response was something along the lines of "this is wonderful but it's not The Hobbit." She must have been someone whose judgement Tolkien respected, for he abandoned the work and decided to let The Hobbit retain its own autonomy and voice rather than completely incorprate it into The Lord of the Rings as a lesser "prelude" to the greater work."
Quite possible, yes, but we don't really have Tolkien's own explanation here. For example, for all we know he could have been leaning the same way already, and thus gave the revision to someone to confirm his own doubts.
In any case, if this description is on the mark, then it was JRR Tolkien who agreed to abandon the new version.
And not that you said otherwise, but even a major rewrite need not mean that Tolkien's theoretical new Hobbit was going to echo what the filmmakers produced in any notable measure. What there is of this rewrite can be read in JD Rateliff's The History of The Hobbit, where JDR notes that Tolkien decided to make a detailed revision... "... and fully reconcile it to the later story in chonology, geography, and style."
For example, one problem of the geography and chronology included Bilbo's journey to Rivendell compared to Aragorn's (how to reconcile this). Other issues seemed problematic: like how could Gandalf not read the runes on the swords (Tolkien introduced dried blood on them). And with respect to style for instance, Tolkien seems to have wanted to cut out various asides to the reader.
In any case Tolkien revised The Hobbit twice: once before the "1960 Hobbit" (the second edition), and once after the 1960 Hobbit was abandoned, this later new revision published as the Third Edition, in reaction to the Ace Books controversy.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Mar 1 2015, 11:04pm)
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Mar 1 2015, 11:07pm
Post #64 of 86
(1417 views)
Shortcut
|
While I generally agree with you, I also think that the 1960 rewrite simply did not go far enough to judge what it really would have been like had Tolkien actually completed it. I also would note that when Tolkien did do revisions in response to the ACE controversy, he found the book to be very poor and wanted to start from scratch, but was unable to locate his previous notes, which Rateliff assumes (and I agree) was the 1960 rewrite.
In any event, I feel pretty confident that Tauriel would not have found her way into the book in any imaginable circumstance. Nor a resuscitated Azog.
'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
Mar 1 2015, 11:22pm
Post #65 of 86
(1412 views)
Shortcut
|
But, now that I think of it, minions of Sauron seeking to hinder the company en route wouldn't have been unfeasible following on from the comments in UT and the general direction of travel of the "revisions" in LOTR/ the appendices.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Mar 1 2015, 11:33pm
Post #66 of 86
(1420 views)
Shortcut
|
... and that is why I say "need not" with respect to the general picture. I can't judge either, but to post that the filmmakers "did what Tolkien wanted to do" (not that you said this Voronwe) calls for a bit of a closer look in my opinion.
With respect to the missing notes and the Third Edition, while I haven't looked at the amount of time Tolkien might have had at this point to rewrite The Hobbit "in time" (which might assume too much about his personal life even given Hammond and Scull's amazing Chronology), I would only add that it wasn't like The 1960 Hobbit had gone very far...
... it might have given him a quicker start, but I guess I'm saying that this lack alone need not mean Tolkien could not have rewritten The Hobbit more fully at this time. If he actually had time, perhaps he restrained himself for the very reasons Rateliff mentions, or then again, what did Tolkien mean by very poor, and how did he intend to make it "unpoor" in the 1960s...
... again, only meaning that his new theoretical version need not have echoed the film additions or alterations in any notable measure. So in my opinion it's only a very general thing to say that the filmmakers did what Tolkien wanted to do, and at some point in time, but ultimately did not do: notably rewrite The Hobbit his way.
My "guess list" (with respect to finding a way into the revised story, or not finding a way in) also starts with: Tauriel (Kili)... Azog... bunny sleds...
(This post was edited by Elthir on Mar 1 2015, 11:45pm)
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Mar 1 2015, 11:53pm
Post #67 of 86
(1425 views)
Shortcut
|
While obviously we can't say for sure, there is no indication that Tolkien ever had any intention to add the Dol Guldur storyline. On the contrary, the very specific comments that he made in some letters of the importance of Gandalf's disappearances being so that Bilbo can grow and the Dwarves can learn to rely on him suggest that he would not have done so.
'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
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Mar 2 2015, 12:06am
Post #68 of 86
(1403 views)
Shortcut
|
I was wondering if there were any arguable hints in the notes to the 1960 Hobbit that could be raised about that, but you spoke to the matter from another source. Although I guess Gandalf could still have been absent from Bilbo and the Dwarves even if we read some of what he (Gandalf) was doing.
Anyway I really should read the 1960 Hobbit texts again... I can't even recall if Tolkien actually solved a problem with the phases of the Moon or not... or even worse, I'm not sure there was one!
Seemingly there needs to be "more Galadriel" involved for me to easily recall something
I think there was a problem with the Moon though.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Mar 2 2015, 12:17am)
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Mar 2 2015, 1:57am
Post #69 of 86
(1383 views)
Shortcut
|
I just went and looked again, to make sure (although I was pretty confident about it even before I looked). Even in the timelines and such there is nothing at all. And while this is perhaps irrelevant, I will note that even in John's speculation of what might have been included had the revision been included, he makes no mention of anything about Dol Guldur, the White Council, or where Gandalf disappears to. And John is never shy at what he speculates about! (He speculates about the possible inclusions of the ten-year-old Aragorn in Rivendell, Radagast, more about Beorn's "enchantment", Legolas Greenleaf at the Battle of the Five Armies, Balin's potential trip to Moria, and a more sinister Ring.)
'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
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Mar 2 2015, 4:01am
Post #70 of 86
(1392 views)
Shortcut
|
|
In a sense, the Dol Guldur storyline was always there.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
While obviously we can't say for sure, there is no indication that Tolkien ever had any intention to add the Dol Guldur storyline. On the contrary, the very specific comments that he made in some letters of the importance of Gandalf's disappearances being so that Bilbo can grow and the Dwarves can learn to rely on him suggest that he would not have done so.
The Dol Guldur plot-thread was already present, it just took place behind-the-scenes. If nothing else, Tolkien probably would have changed Gandalf's "council of white wizards" to the White Council and might have clarified Elrond's role in the whole thing.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Mar 2 2015, 4:18am
Post #71 of 86
(1399 views)
Shortcut
|
I've always found it odd that he didn't clean up such an obvious detail in the 1967 revisions.
As for the Dol Guldur story being present in the background, of course it is. My point is that it seems unlikely that he ever considered bringing it into the foreground, as the filmmakers have done.
'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
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Mar 2 2015, 3:03pm
Post #72 of 86
(1367 views)
Shortcut
|
As for the Dol Guldur story being present in the background, of course it is. My point is that it seems unlikely that he ever considered bringing it into the foreground, as the filmmakers have done.
I suspect that you're right. Unfortunately, barring finding any lost notes or correspondence that sheds light on the subject, we will probably never know.
I've long considered the idea that Tolkien never placed Elrond at Dol Guldur when the White Council assaulted the forces of Sauron as the Necromancer. The Peredhil may have remained in Rivendell as a precaution, but might have sent representatives from Imladris (such as Glorfindel and/or Elladan & Elrohir) in his stead.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Mar 2 2015, 4:12pm
Post #73 of 86
(1364 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Although the idea that Elrond wasn't there doesn't seem certain to me.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It seems to me only one interpretation of the quote in TH and the reverse is suggested by the rest of the quotes on DG (unless there is other evidence I'm forgetting).
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Mar 2 2015, 4:23pm
Post #74 of 86
(1348 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It is implied by the dialogue.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It seems to me only one interpretation of the quote in TH and the reverse is suggested by the rest of the quotes on DG (unless there is other evidence I'm forgetting).
Gandalf and Elrond's conversation implies that Elrond remained in Rivendell, else he would not have had to have been told of the results. The rest of the conversation makes it clear that Elrond knows of the Necromancer (including, probably, his true identity), but does not suggest his presence at Dol Guldur. What make you think otherwise?
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Mar 2 2015, 5:00pm
Post #75 of 86
(1342 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That is, of course, one reading but
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The quote doesn't actually state what was said and, more importantly, that Gandalf is revealing new knowledge to Elrond (only that it was new knowledge to Bilbo). All we know is that he spoke words to Elrond on the subject, but these could be words of discussion/ reflection rather than information.
I think it is more open than just the reading you mention.
|
|
|
|
|
