|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
May 22 2015, 7:59pm
Post #26 of 37
(628 views)
Shortcut
|
In the book Bilbo is a bravery machine, killing upwards of a dozen spiders and ultimately developing strategies that saves the whole party. But in a sense it doesn't really matter; after AUJ he is already established as a hero willing to risk life and limb, taking on no less than Azog himself.
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
May 22 2015, 8:16pm
Post #27 of 37
(623 views)
Shortcut
|
If The Hobbit should stand on its on then many LOTR fans would complain more that it is not like LOTR and that is half the fanbase. Many is already comlaining that the story is to light and to many songs and the only good part was Dol guldur.
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
May 22 2015, 8:27pm
Post #28 of 37
(616 views)
Shortcut
|
It's the same director with the same production team doing a Tolkien story in the same world with the same composer and several cast members reprising roles. To not compare the trilogies would be almost bizarre. But the comparisons exist across a wide spectrum that is not limited only to liberties taken with the source material. I enjoyed The Hobbit trilogy a lot, but I don't think it's as good as LOTR. I feel this way for myriad reasons, and it's impossible for me to say if I would feel different if I had seem The Hobbit first. However I had equally high expectations going into each.
|
|
|
squiggle
Rivendell
May 22 2015, 11:29pm
Post #29 of 37
(598 views)
Shortcut
|
For me, the Hobbit Trilogy would be more accurate to ME
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Dis-claimer slightly in that there is still a third of the Hobbit Trilogy to go in a way, as i was slightly luke warm about DOS theatrical but DOS ee could be my fav. episode for example. I thought FoTR was middle earth bought to life, then things get thrown abit upside down in TTT but decently reined back in with RotK ees. So the way i will be looking at it will be that in this version of ME there was less known about the period going from TTT to RotK in the re-tellings, as things were alittle more darker & generally chaotic in ME, so i see it as more of a filling in the blanks based on 'hear say' or 'folk tales' for this period in the series version of events. & that's just what will suit my viewing preferences in giving me the most fun out of the film series
|
|
|
Gandalf the Green
Rivendell
May 23 2015, 8:08am
Post #30 of 37
(570 views)
Shortcut
|
I very much disagree, the LOTR films are MUCH more Tolkien-like, because
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You can't argue with the fact that The Hobbit was far less Tolkien-like than The Lord of the Rings. The "humor" contained within the Hobbit films alone already show that, not just the inaccuracies as an adaptation. Beheadings are presented as things to laugh about, there are some sexual jokes as well which totally don't fit into Tolkien's universe - they don't even fit into the already established Middle-earth universe - there's the "getting high on tobacco" joke with Radagast, the troll snot joke and all the stupid slapstick stuff, and - probably worst of all - Bombur's barrel scene, which was downright ridiculous and an insult to Tolkien AND PJ's LOTR altogether! There is a reason I disregard the Hobbit films as being in the same universe as the LOTR films. It makes me sad how they messed up the Hobbit trilogy like this, it can't be put next to LOTR without noticing severe inconsistencies and degradation of the quality of certain content, which makes you wonder how they even dared to attempt such a thing - testing their fans. The Hobbit films felt like LOTR parodies in some places, which is sad. And I will view them as such - parodies, because they do not deserve to stand beside the LOTR films. They're enjoyable films in their own right, but they're not very great and they simply cannot compare to the LOTR films in any way. I seem to be repeating myself here, but truly, I cannot stand the inconsistencies.
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
May 23 2015, 11:43am
Post #31 of 37
(552 views)
Shortcut
|
Bilbo have more screen time in DOS then Frodo have in Two Towers. And The ring theme only plays 4 time in AUJ, 1 time in DOS and 1 time in BOFA. The difference is, of course, that The Hobbit is about Bilbo. In the book he is the single protagonist; everything that happens in the book happens from his perspective - and he acts as an avatar for the reader. Whereas The Lord of the Rings is about Sauron's war on Middle-earth. It contains multiple protagonists and the events are written from the perspective of "God" overlooking the entirety of the story. So it's perfectly understandable that Frodo gets less screen-time than Bilbo, when you consider he is not really the main character and is not the audience's avatar. What The Hobbit movie has attempted to do is apply The Lord of the Ring's "God" perspective to the story of The Hobbit, shifting the protagonist roles to Thorin, Bard, Legolas and Gandalf in an attempt to add complexity to the story. The problem with doing this is that a lot of rubbish had to be invented, and when people go to see a film based on a book they expect at least the main character to be the same person.
|
|
|
Eleniel
Tol Eressea
May 23 2015, 8:17pm
Post #32 of 37
(521 views)
Shortcut
|
You can't argue with the fact that The Hobbit was far less Tolkien-like than The Lord of the Rings. The "humor" contained within the Hobbit films alone already show that, not just the inaccuracies as an adaptation. Beheadings are presented as things to laugh about, there are some sexual jokes as well which totally don't fit into Tolkien's universe - they don't even fit into the already established Middle-earth universe - there's the "getting high on tobacco" joke with Radagast, the troll snot joke and all the stupid slapstick stuff, and - probably worst of all - Bombur's barrel scene, which was downright ridiculous and an insult to Tolkien AND PJ's LOTR altogether! There is a reason I disregard the Hobbit films as being in the same universe as the LOTR films. It makes me sad how they messed up the Hobbit trilogy like this, it can't be put next to LOTR without noticing severe inconsistencies and degradation of the quality of certain content, which makes you wonder how they even dared to attempt such a thing - testing their fans. The Hobbit films felt like LOTR parodies in some places, which is sad. And I will view them as such - parodies, because they do not deserve to stand beside the LOTR films. They're enjoyable films in their own right, but they're not very great and they simply cannot compare to the LOTR films in any way. I seem to be repeating myself here, but truly, I cannot stand the inconsistencies. . This is one of the problems with the movie adaptation for me, also.... I think a better approach would have been to either do it purely as a book- faithful, child-oriented movie, or play it entirely straight, more in line with LotR - darker, more epic, if you will, whilst including Gandalf's DG subplot, etc. IMO the attempt to combine both approaches, with the resulting inconsistency in tone has ultimately led to the movies feeling like parodies of the original trilogy.
"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened." Ŋ Victoria Monfort
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
May 24 2015, 12:23am
Post #33 of 37
(495 views)
Shortcut
|
I would have preferred the Dol Guldur plot...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
To just be a short sequence, perhaps a flashback, or ideally a prologue. I think it could have been cool to see Gandalf disappear at Mirkwood, and not see him for the rest of the film. Then, prologue to the next film, there he is fighting the Necromancer, discovering it is Sauron. Then title and back to the main story - until Gandalf turns up again and explains where he's been and how Sauron was driven out and then that would be it covered - instead of this weird drawn out "mystery" which everyone knows the answer to and serves no function but to slow down the plot.
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
May 24 2015, 2:42pm
Post #34 of 37
(470 views)
Shortcut
|
It was inevitable that we should get more of the White Council and Dol Guldur in the films than what Tolkien hinted at in The Hobbit. There was no way that Peter Jackson was just going to loose Gandalf for one-third of the story and not show what he was up to. Where I disagreed with Jackson's approach on this was in the details.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
May 24 2015, 2:51pm
Post #35 of 37
(467 views)
Shortcut
|
But my proposition does show...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It just doesn't have that awkward build-up. I think it should have been similar to Gandalf and Saruman in Fellowship of the Ring. We see Gandalf get himself into the situation and get trapped (as a prologue,maybe). Then we meet him later in Dale and Bilbo asks "where were you, why didn't you meet us?" then "I was delayed" and we watch the rest of how he escapes and the big battle with Elrond, Saruman and Galadriel - all as a flashback. I think that carries more tension than a long build up to a plot that the audience has already seen the conclusion for.
(This post was edited by AshNazg on May 24 2015, 2:53pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
May 24 2015, 2:55pm
Post #36 of 37
(463 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't entirely disagree with you.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I just don't think that either a prologue or flashback would have been enough. But, yes, the Necromancer subplot could have been handled differently and better.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
elostirion74
Rohan
May 26 2015, 6:19pm
Post #37 of 37
(405 views)
Shortcut
|
I donīt agree with your assessment of Bard & Thranduil
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In general the Hobbit films portray Bard as a much more idealized character than the figure from the book. One of the major aspects of the Hobbit is how it doesnīt idealize or glorify any of the characters involved in the conflict over the treasure. Some parts of Bardīs character in the films are good uses of relevant parts from the book (or the appendices of LoTR), but much of it is purely invented do-gooder stuff. In the case of Thranduil he is changed from an active and rather pragmatic regional power clearly connected with the plot events in Lake Town to a disdainful and sometimes supposedly tragic isolationist whose storyline is mainly tied to his son and the captain of the guard. I agree that there are also changes to the characters in LoTR. But even the changes in Frodo, which I liked the least, are based on some aspects and observations from the original story. The same isnīt really true of the major secondary characters in the Hobbit.
|
|
|
|
|