|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DainPig
Gondor
Jul 29 2015, 1:55am
Post #1 of 13
(1795 views)
Shortcut
|
AUJ is quite different to the another movies
|
Can't Post
|
|
I donot know if there's another thread about this.... but I realized it alone: An Unexpected Journey is so... different from Dos and BOTFA. The last two movies are very similar, but AUJ is kind of alone... Take a look at these videos for comparasion: This video is from AUJ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aH2dlh2uPLQ This video is from BOTFA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gleorTAQ3AM As you can see, the atmosphere of the movies are completly different In AUJ we have not Legolas, Tauriel, Bolg, Bard, Master/Alfrid, Beorn, Dain and Smaug, we yet for discover 8 characters! Is the same for The Fellowship of the Ring: in the first movie we have not Theoden, Denethor, Faramir, Gollum, Eowyn, Eomer and Grima - 7 characters! Is not just the characters: the song Misty Moutains is not played in Desolation of Smaug and Five Armies. My solution to destroy this disconnection: remove Misty Moutains Cold theme, Legolas, Tauriel and Lake town in the prologue or a flashback. Something with Bolg and Beorn's mention. (sorry for the bad english)
How aaaaaaaaaaaaaare you all??? Hey guys, my blog is: dainpigblog.blogspot.com
(This post was edited by DainPig on Jul 29 2015, 2:03am)
|
|
|
Hobbity Hobbit
Lorien
Jul 29 2015, 2:02am
Post #2 of 13
(1755 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm sorry I am a bit confused. You want to get rid of all the characters that weren't in AUJ? Also I believe that it was said that the Misty Mountains Theme was written by Plan 9 and Warner Brothers didn't renew the rights, so they only had it for one movie??? I'm not sure, I just know it wasn't written by Howard Shore. But I still am confused, all the Mirkwood Themes, Laketown Themes, and more are all not in AUJ. If you take everything that wasn't in AUJ away then you practically don't have a movie. I'm sorry I might of misunderstood you, I know English isn't your first language. The only different from AUJ from the others for me is that AUJ is more dwarf-centered, but it has a lot of character moments in it.
"Obviously the idea of being human is a very human idea." -Dominic Monaghan
(This post was edited by Hobbity Hobbit on Jul 29 2015, 2:04am)
|
|
|
Hobbity Hobbit
Lorien
Jul 29 2015, 2:02am
Post #3 of 13
(1752 views)
Shortcut
|
Woops, double post. Mods please delete!
"Obviously the idea of being human is a very human idea." -Dominic Monaghan
(This post was edited by Hobbity Hobbit on Jul 29 2015, 2:03am)
|
|
|
DainPig
Gondor
Jul 29 2015, 2:06am
Post #4 of 13
(1742 views)
Shortcut
|
I am not the english guy, sorry
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but I think would be better if the first movie ended with the dwarves entering Mirkwood, because we would have Bolg and Beorn!
How aaaaaaaaaaaaaare you all??? Hey guys, my blog is: dainpigblog.blogspot.com
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jul 29 2015, 3:43am
Post #5 of 13
(1706 views)
Shortcut
|
Don't remove the "Misty Mountains" theme, it's beautiful. I am actually sorry that it isn't played in the others, but yeah I've heard that thing about Plan 9 before. As for the disconnect, I do think the tone of AUJ is a little more childlike, which makes sense considering the source material. The movies, like the book, get darker in tone as they progress. I'm pretty sure that the original two movie plan called for the first movie to end after the barrel escape with Bard. That original plan would have met your criteria. I haven't watched the videos, but I know that BOT5A seems grey & less colorful to me. I don't know if it's because of the CGI, or if PJ was trying to create a sense of doom with the background colors, or because there were far fewer on location shots. I don't know if that's what you're referring to. Laketown was in the book, so it wouldn't be right to remove it, and I thought the set was awesome anyway - particularly Smaug's attack, really was worth the cost of admission IMO.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 29 2015, 4:39am
Post #6 of 13
(1688 views)
Shortcut
|
Actually, we DO get a name-check for Dain (who was also theoretically at the Battle of Moria, even though we don't see him) and Smaug does get a brief appearance in the prologue. There are characters who we don't meet yet simply because the company hasn't gotten far enough yet to encounter them; that is not a reason to drop them from the later films. I would rather have the "Misty Mountains" theme added to the later films than remove it from AUJ. Not that that will happen either.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Mooseboy018
Grey Havens
Jul 29 2015, 5:14am
Post #7 of 13
(1673 views)
Shortcut
|
Isn't introducing new characters and places along the way one of the points of an adventure story?
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 29 2015, 7:40am
Post #8 of 13
(1626 views)
Shortcut
|
No it isn't - it's just the beginning of the story....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And as with many beginnings to many stories, the atmosphere is lighter and the mood more relaxed because the drama is only just beginning to unfold. We're seeing the world Bilbo comes from before we see where he's going. We have a long way to go - and in any long story involving a journey there will be characters to meet on the way. In AUJ we have a hobbit, thirteen dwarves and a wizard to get to know. I'd say there is no disconnection to destroy - nothing that needs solving.
|
|
|
Shagrat
Gondor
Jul 29 2015, 8:18am
Post #9 of 13
(1597 views)
Shortcut
|
It's all the better for not having those additional elements, especially Legolas and Tauriel. For me it is by far the best of the trilogy, a wonderful film that gets better every time I watch it.
|
|
|
Gandalf the Green
Rivendell
Jul 30 2015, 8:03am
Post #10 of 13
(1254 views)
Shortcut
|
It's not the fact they met new characters, it's the fact that those new characters began replacing the ones we started this journey with. And please, don't twist things around and tell me that's not the case, because it is, whether some folks are willing to admit it or not. The vast majority of the dwarves got zero character development (or even more than one or two character moments) in any way, because what could've been their screentime was instead given to Bard's children, as well as Alfrid, Legolas & Tauriel. Alfrid was useless - he was fine in DOS as a nasty advisor who served Lake-Town's master, but that was the last movie he should've been in. His gags in BOTFA were annoying and destroyed the more serious tone for me. Got a serious scene with Bard giving a speech to the people of Lake-Town, a scene that could've been a great moment in the movie? Here, add some Alfrid, we'll fix that... Got an epic scene of Thorin & co charging into a dangerous battle? Here, have Alfrid show up wearing a corset around that time... Maybe, you know, right after that epic scene? The Kili and Tauriel love story added nothing to the plot, it only distracted from it. 'The Hobbit' never needed a cliched love story, so why add it in when, again, it does nothing to advance the plot in any way? In this case, it robbed Fili's screentime. We should've seen character moments between Kili and Fili, not Kili and Tauriel! Most of the time, the only things Kili did was yell his brother's name every now and then. Legolas should've been just a cameo, he stole Beorn's screentime and added another level of ridiculousness to both DOS and BOTFA... PJ really doesn't know when to stop... Whenever Bard's children were there, they were constantly yelling either each other's names or their dad's. They also made it apparent that everything in this film must be 'on demand'. Bard's looking for his children, where are they? Oh, there's a woman who shouldn't have been able to hear him, telling him just where she saw Bard's children... she knows... oh, coincidentally, a man comes running by telling him about the dangerous situation in exactly that location... gee, Middle-Earth's news channels and feeds sure are very specific and updated by the second. Those scenes with Bard's kids were bad attempts at adding suspension to the film, and added nothing to the overall plot. Hey, Bard's looking for his kids, maybe PJ could've had a cameo in that same scene looking for the original cast of characters that this story should actually be all about... There is a reason I like AUJ but don't like DOS and BOTFA. AUJ was far from perfect, but the focus was actually on Bilbo and the dwarves, NOT on those other characters who should've had no more than a few seconds of screentime. It all became far too cluttered - there was too much content added in to be able to properly develop what was there. On top of that, I also by far preferred the feel and atmosphere of AUJ, and the way they handled things there. Sure, they kinda messed up with the goblin-town fight scene, and several other things including the overabundance of CGI, etc., but in the midst of all things, it at least managed to feel like a movie that was about a group of little people going on an adventure in a larger Middle-Earth, instead of like an inferior carbon-copy of The Lord of the Rings with too much fan service, like the final two Hobbit films seemed to be for sure.
(This post was edited by Gandalf the Green on Jul 30 2015, 8:10am)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 30 2015, 11:41am
Post #11 of 13
(1216 views)
Shortcut
|
Well, first off, DainPig's post is very ambiguous. It is hard to tell exactly what he is advocating. On reflection, I think that he wants the characters who are introduced in the later films to instead get an introduction in An Unexpected Journey. Except that there is absolutely no need to do that in most cases. We meet them when it is appropriate in the narrative for us to meet them.
It's not the fact they met new characters, it's the fact that those new characters began replacing the ones we started this journey with. And please, don't twist things around and tell me that's not the case, because it is, whether some folks are willing to admit it or not. The vast majority of the dwarves got zero character development (or even more than one or two character moments) in any way, because what could've been their screentime was instead given to Bard's children, as well as Alfrid, Legolas & Tauriel. Most of the supporting characters either are already in the book or at least are already a part of Tolkien's legendarium. The only reason that Legolas is not in The Hobbit is because Tolkien did not invent the character until he wrote The Lord of the Rings (the same is true of Galadriel and Saruman). Radagast does not appear in The Hobbit, but he is named. Bain (and any other children that Bard might have sired) was probably not born at the time of The Hobbit; however, we do not know that with absolute certainty. To be fair to Peter Jackson, the majority of the Dwarves of Thorin's company are underdeveloped in the book as well. It is not like they are being neglected any more than they had been originally. Personally, I am glad that Bard was more developed, but I would have preferred that he was written another way than he was in the films. I could also have done without the Kili/Tauriel side story, or at least wish that it had been handled with more subtlety and grace. Alfrid worked as the Master's henchman, but once the Master of Lake-town was killed he became a poor--and grating--substitute. I am glad that Jackson dropped the sequence that would have shown Beorn captured and tortured in Dol Guldur; it would have been too much when added to Gandalf's attempted rescue of Thrain. I do wish that Beorn's role in the Battle of Five Armies was better in the film. Perhaps the extended edition will address that.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Mooseboy018
Grey Havens
Jul 30 2015, 6:27pm
Post #12 of 13
(1147 views)
Shortcut
|
I agree. That's the difference between AUJ and DoS/BotFA. And it shows LotR's strength in that regard because while introducing so many new characters after FotR, the main cast weren't pushed to the side in the process.
|
|
|
lionoferebor
Rohan
Jul 31 2015, 1:45am
Post #13 of 13
(1107 views)
Shortcut
|
It's not the fact they met new characters, it's the fact that those new characters began replacing the ones we started this journey with. And please, don't twist things around and tell me that's not the case, because it is, whether some folks are willing to admit it or not. The vast majority of the dwarves got zero character development (or even more than one or two character moments) in any way, because what could've been their screentime was instead given to Bard's children, as well as Alfrid, Legolas & Tauriel. I also agree with this, though I think you meant Fili yelled his brother's name most of the time.
The Kili and Tauriel love story added nothing to the plot, it only distracted from it. 'The Hobbit' never needed a cliched love story, so why add it in when, again, it does nothing to advance the plot in any way? In this case, it robbed Fili's screentime. We should've seen character moments between Kili and Fili, not Kili and Tauriel! Most of the time, the only things Kili did was yell his brother's name every now and then. Legolas should've been just a cameo, he stole Beorn's screentime and added another level of ridiculousness to both DOS and BOTFA...
Hey, Bard's looking for his kids, maybe PJ could've had a cameo in that same scene looking for the original cast of characters that this story should actually be all about... ROFLOL And I agree with this.
AUJ was far from perfect, but the focus was actually on Bilbo and the dwarves, NOT on those other characters who should've had no more than a few seconds of screentime. Sure, they kinda messed up with the goblin-town fight scene, and several other things including the overabundance of CGI, etc., but in the midst of all things, it at least managed to feel like a movie that was about a group of little people going on an adventure in a larger Middle-Earth,
|
|
|
|
|