|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 3:39pm
Post #26 of 58
(2689 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The critics thing always leaves me scratching my head.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I would completely agree. Not only, by my reckoning, did critics not have an issue with Tauriel, for example, but she was frequently picked out for praise. The barrel sequence was similarly highlighted. In AUJ Bag End was heavily criticised and critics most frequently suggested that the film only picked up when it hit the Goblin tunnels ... the examples go on.
I can't see how the two overall positions can be said to be the same (or even similar).
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 3:49pm
Post #27 of 58
(2682 views)
Shortcut
|
Defying of physics, lack of real tension, structure issues, lack of characterization (especially some dwarves), lack of resolution (Arkenstone, Bard, Dain) and some aspects of the overall look of the movie and the use of CGI just to mention some.
They are not the same... I never claimed that. In fact I always pointed at the fact that there are also major differences between many critics and disappointed fans... And even the disappointed fans have sometimes totally different issues . But there are issues that were brought up by people from different corners, not just a niche minority. That was the only point I was trying to make.
Tauriel, btw, may be a topic not brought up by many critics (I myself liked her a lot just not her use in BotFA) but one that must have been mentioned often enough by the "niche minority" to have caught the eyes and ears of PJ and PB.
Some sort of awareness is there... And they are prepared and ready to discuss it in the specials, commentaries and interviews. Which is awesome.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
(This post was edited by Arannir on Aug 26 2015, 3:51pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 4:01pm
Post #28 of 58
(2670 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Perhaps your comment mischaracterised your view.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"A big part of professional critics brought similar issues forward as many fans"
Seems at odds with
"In fact I always pointed at the fact that there are also major differences between many critics and disappointed fans..."
I would still disagree with a number of your "overlaps" mind you. To take one example there is no way that the fate of the Arkenstone was a matter of general concern to critics!
|
|
|
RosieLass
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 4:29pm
Post #29 of 58
(2653 views)
Shortcut
|
|
As one of the "not in the book" complainers...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...I agree with you to a certain extent.
But I would have gotten over it, if they had left her - and Legolas - at the end of DoS and left them at that.
But having their (badly written) plotline completely overshadow the dwarves and Bilbo in the third film was just too much to stomach.
"Being negative only makes a difficult journey more difficult. You may be given a cactus, but you don't have to sit on it."
--Joyce Meyer
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP
--Leonard Nimoy
(This post was edited by RosieLass on Aug 26 2015, 4:31pm)
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 5:01pm
Post #30 of 58
(2631 views)
Shortcut
|
I have no idea how a 9 year old is supposed to feel empowered by Tauriel. Here's a super cool, realistic (in the Middle Earth sense) female character, who is part of the guards of Mirkwood, and who alone is worried about the threat of Dol Guldur and leaves to do something about it... and they spend all of the third movie with her crying about Kili. They couldn't have just had a female character exists in this world without a love story? Why couldn't she just sympathize with the dwarves, did she have to instantly go gaga over the hot one. I don't care that Tauriel was an invention, it is how she's used. I wouldn't mind if she had a butt-load of screentime, it's the fact that they've completely undermined their character with a sappy, undercooked, demeaning love story that sucks the strength out of her.
"Why does it hurt so much?"
...Because it was poorly written!
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 6:19pm
Post #31 of 58
(2614 views)
Shortcut
|
The second statement was meant to...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... complement the first. To show that despite my conviction that there are many overlaps and that the critical points often discussed here are not just a fan niche phenomenon (some of them surely are but many aren't), I am aware and have said so in other discussions that there are also some points (especially the "slow" start of AUJ) that separate professional critics and (many) fans.
Just for clarification. I may not have been clear on that one.
But this really wasn't the main point of this thread for me. The main point for me was actually a pretty positive one - that I really appreciate and love how PJ and Co approach such discussions and that they comment on them if they feel like they can contribute or share their point of view and how their decisions came about. Not to defend themselves or anything like that... Just explaining and sharing their insights. And that there are reasons to believe they will do this for BotFA again if they feel like it.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
(This post was edited by Arannir on Aug 26 2015, 6:23pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 6:31pm
Post #32 of 58
(2600 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes definitely confusing then.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Especially just having the first one, to begin with. But I'm not still not very clear.
The first comment seemed to suggest that the critics' issues were generally similar, the second comment that they were generally dissimilar. I'm not quite sure which you think.
Personally, I think it is very strongly the latter and I wonder how much the overlaps are actually backed up by evidence. The Arkenstone is a good example - though there would be many others.
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 6:55pm
Post #33 of 58
(2590 views)
Shortcut
|
There are IMHO some integral things that were both criticized here and in reviews and some integral ones that weren't .
My original point was simply that there are several topics that were controversially discussed. Not just here but elsewhere too (including reviews). And that it is unlikely that PJ and PB are not aware of them (again, they already showed to have been aware of some of the Tauriel and healing discussions in DoS). And that it is equally unlikely that they would not comment on them in case they want to explain or share their thoughts on them, as they did before (in the case of Alfrid it already happened, actually).
Again, this is not about the filmmakers acknowledging problems. It is the filmmakers being aware of discussions and their willingness to engage in some of these discussions via the EE (and also interviews). Which is IMHO a great thing and what I thought the OP meant when he started the topic.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 7:09pm
Post #34 of 58
(2584 views)
Shortcut
|
They can't be mostly similar and mostly dissimilar. Are you saying it was about 50/50 in your view?
I think you would have to do a fair bit of work to back up the similar argument, including playing some "category games" (e.g. Film length was an issue for both groups - that's true- but one wanted shorter and the other longer).
Certainly the sorts of issues commonly discussed here : Legolas, Tauriel, Alfred, comedy, too much action, too many stunts, funerals, Fili, Arkenstones, Swords, blades, wind lances, Dain etc etc seem completely separate from the critics' reviews, as far as I can see.
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 7:13pm
Post #35 of 58
(2582 views)
Shortcut
|
|
We apparantly read very different reviews then.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Other than that my last post really sums it up for me as far as this thread is concerned.
It is also not just about reviews. IMHO it is simply not right that topics such as Tauriel, the love story, Alfrid and others were just niche discussions among some people here on TORN.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
(This post was edited by Arannir on Aug 26 2015, 7:17pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 7:20pm
Post #36 of 58
(2572 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Which reviews are you thinking of?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Whilst I can't claim to have read all, but I read a fair few. I would be really surprised to learn that I missed a majority, or even a hefty minority, where those things listed were substantial concerns (or even mentioned).
I mean to take the Arkenstone, which you mentioned specifically and I happen to have checked, I've been through the first 10 critics on RT as a non-selected sample, rotten and fresh. None mention it as an issue of any sort and only one mentions it at all.
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 7:32pm
Post #38 of 58
(2566 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Ha, I think we might need more than one to get to a majority.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But feel free to conduct a similar bit of research on RT - maybe do be first 30 and see what proportions we get.
Edit: Well the question of whether "contorversies" were shared by others - in this case a majority of critics, seems fairly straightforwardly connected.
(This post was edited by Spriggan on Aug 26 2015, 7:45pm)
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 7:44pm
Post #39 of 58
(2551 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Oh okay, you're right... what was your point again?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
PJ should only discuss the opinions of the audience majority, who are clearly in love with these movies. Yeah? Okay. Cool story.
I hated when PJ talked about people not liking the stick insect gag in AUJ, it didn't make sense to me because it's such a niche concern and the majority of critics didn't mention it.
(This post was edited by QuackingTroll on Aug 26 2015, 7:45pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 7:51pm
Post #40 of 58
(2545 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No - you can read my point if you scroll up.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
If you are having any difficulty you can also click into "threaded mode" to follow the conversation.
My original point was I hope he doesn't spend too much time talking about the likes and dislikes of a niche group. I think it will be of little interest to those less emotionally linked to such topics. The point here is to see if any of the claims are in fact backed up or have been misremembered.
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 8:10pm
Post #41 of 58
(2534 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Did you even read my last posts?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It is not (just) about reviews. It is about certain topics of these movies that were discussed and might have caught the ears and eyes of the filmmakers as well so that they might comment on them on the EE.
I will not do any kind of research. I have read enough and followed discussions through different mediums and outlets to make my own picture of what was and what wasn't discussed over the last years - and not just by fans. You come to a different conclusion, I accept that.
Seeing what PJ and Co already commented on simply proves that these discussions also reach them... Whether positive ones or negative ones... And that they are ready to engage. That is one of the great things about this team. And that is the point I repeatedly tried to emphasize.
I have no interest in derailing this any further and making it about something this thread wasn't about.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 9:00pm
Post #42 of 58
(2507 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Sure, but I'm responding to the element which interested me
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And continues the thread.
Well, I can't say more than, having gone and actually looked at the reviews by the critics today, I think you may be misremembering which issues were common and which were not.
|
|
|
SafeUnderHill
Rohan
Aug 26 2015, 9:03pm
Post #43 of 58
(2503 views)
Shortcut
|
I know he and Phillipa have hinted at some of the audience unhappiness with the Hobbit trilogy, but he hasn't been as candid with his answers. To be honest it's sounded like he's in denial about the many issues with these films, compared to how willing he was to talk about the flaws in LOTR. So while I'm hoping he brings some of these things up in the BOFA EE commentary, I don't think he'll dish much out. Instead he will focus on how happy he was to include more Legolas stunts and how the addition of Tauriel will make some 9-year old girl feel empowered.
Perhaps one day soon, PJ will get coerced into telling us the honest story of what really happened with the Hobbit films. Whether that's in a Reddit AMA, a Q&A at some convention, or perhaps a magazine/video interview. I am not sure we'll see much of this in the BOFA EE materials.
He has. In an Empire interview for BOTFA, he talked about how he wasn't proud of his job on the first two but applauded the actors.
Also, it's worth pointing out these films have been hugely commercially successful and are loved by many. They just do not have the universal critical acclaim of LOTR.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Aug 26 2015, 10:34pm
Post #44 of 58
(2480 views)
Shortcut
|
I think you have no business to call the man dishonest. What evidence do you have for this? Do you know more about the background to his films than he does himself?
For what it's worth, Peter Jackson and Philippa Boyens have discussed problems with the films and I'm sure they'll continue to do so. But if they don't mention something you want to hear it doesn't mean that they're in denial: It could just be that you're wrong! I find some of the assumptions in your post quite breathtaking. Take this, for example:
"he hasn't been as candid with his answers"
Think about that. You saying that you actually know what his answers should have been?
"Perhaps one day soon, PJ will get coerced into telling us the honest story....."
So, you think he's hiding something you have a right to know? And he needs to be coerced into telling you?
For what it's worth, I'd suggest that anyone reading this who wants to make up their own mind watches Peter Jackson himself speaking in a long interview at Exeter College Oxford linked in a thread on Main - link here. He answers general questions about his film-making and specifics about his Tolkien films. For example, he goes into some detail about why he wanted to change to three films and how it came about. He also has a lot to say about his attitude to making films - how it contrasts with Hollywood. He talks about seeing King Kong after some time and wanting to re-edit it. He has a lot of very interesting things to say - and he doesn't look to me like a man who isn't candid - or one who needs coercing.
|
|
|
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 10:51pm
Post #45 of 58
(2470 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Peter Jackson is probably the most open and candid major filmmaker there is
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The irony is that much of the dissatisfaction that people tend to express comes directly from that openness. it is axiomatic that the more that you give, the more people expect.
I don't agree with all of the filmmaking decisions that he makes (of course, since I am not him!), but I greatly respect his integrity and am vastly grateful for all that he has done, and given.
'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
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Aug 26 2015, 11:06pm
Post #46 of 58
(2474 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I wonder if people would've had a problem if Legolas killed Smaug?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Obviously people would have a problem, but I wonder if the ones that defend Legolas killing Bolg would've minded Legolas killing Smaug?
In the book Smaug is killed by a character that isn't even introduced beforehand. While Bolg is killed by Beorn, who was a developed character who's reintroduced to turn the tide of battle. So surely replacing the character that comes from nowhere in the book with Legolas is less of a sin than replacing Beorn?
And then imagine if they gave Bard just a few seconds in the battle - I'm not sure his involvement in the battle is even mentioned much in the book? He certainly had less influence than Beorn.
(This post was edited by QuackingTroll on Aug 26 2015, 11:09pm)
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 11:38pm
Post #47 of 58
(2456 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Some people probably would not have cared...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Many people don't seem to care that Azog is alive and chasing the group all over Eriador and Rhovanion, and that's not even close to being in the books. Likewise, many also don't seem to care that Beorn was reduced to a cameo role while Legolas and Tauriel were all over the damn films.
Most likely, those same people would've still loved Jackson's version of the story had Bard either been cut or reduced to a tertiary character.
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Aug 26 2015, 11:46pm
Post #48 of 58
(2452 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I often wonder how some defenders of the films...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...would've reacted to hearing how everything was going to turn out BEFORE the films were released. Not all, but some would've laughed and thought "PJ would never do THAT!!"
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Aug 27 2015, 1:08am
Post #49 of 58
(2434 views)
Shortcut
|
But my answer would be simple - I'd judge an adaptation on outputs not inputs. Thus:
1. I would watch the film rather than rely on a third party description
2. I would decide on whether or not the film is good based on its effects - if a better adaptation were created without character X then it's still better, if it's worse, then it's worse.
3. I would decide that on my own assessment, not by how literal it is.
|
|
|
Dipling
Lorien
Aug 27 2015, 6:54am
Post #50 of 58
(2401 views)
Shortcut
|
The irony is that much of the dissatisfaction that people tend to express comes directly from that openness. it is axiomatic that the more that you give, the more people expect.
I don't agree with all of the filmmaking decisions that he makes (of course, since I am not him!), but I greatly respect his integrity and am vastly grateful for all that he has done, and given.
|
|
|
|
|
