|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 17 2015, 11:41pm
Post #1 of 37
(1795 views)
Shortcut
|
I've just watched the second Appendices disk for BotFA, and have realised that much more footage was half composed for Beorn on the battlefield. It looked great and had it made it into the film would have gone some way in giving this character the time it should have had. In the book, the actions of Beorn on the battlefield were a turning point in the battle. Meanwhile the film-makers have said that they didn't have time to finish off his sequence, and that's why it was omitted. It's a great shame that this happened, while various trivia did make it in. Seeing Beorn carry Thorin off the battlefield would also have made my day – and given Beorn's character the importance it merited, completing it sufficiently.
I'm also struck by how people like Boyens talk about a variety of subjects in the Appendices, like Thranduil's gems, and his feelings, yet these things are not made evident in the films themselves. It's simply not good enough for the film-makers to know such things themselves and speak of them outside the films – but not make them clear in the films. Subplots should not have gone nowhere, when they could have been filled out so easily…
|
|
|
AshNazg
Gondor
Dec 18 2015, 12:02am
Post #2 of 37
(1724 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Beorn's character arc could have been so interesting...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
We could have gotten a man/creature that distrusts everyone around him - who loses his people and is tortured by orcs. He doesn't like dwarves, but agrees to help them because of what the orcs did to him (and I assume partly because of respect for Gandalf or Radagast).
Then, when he learns that the very orc responsible for everything that he's lost and been though is marching on Erebor, he charges the battlefield and turns the tide.
And, in the most interesting resolution, he sees Thorin's body and out a new respect for Thorin and for dwarves, he carries Thorin's body from the battlefield.
That could have been such a beautiful addition, tying in with themes of isolationism and of prejudice toward others and dealing with loss.
Instead we get Beorn being persuaded to help out with transport and then turning up for a few seconds in the battle and then vanishing.  Weird.
|
|
|
Dipling
Lorien
Dec 18 2015, 7:03am
Post #3 of 37
(1643 views)
Shortcut
|
My thouths are the same.
Boyens tells such nice things about backstories, but we don't get them explained in the movie.
|
|
|
adt100
Rohan
Dec 18 2015, 9:43am
Post #4 of 37
(1617 views)
Shortcut
|
It's been mentioned time and time again, but it seems apparent that a lack of time is a much to blame for many of these oversights. I can't even begin to imagine how challenging it must be to make such huge films under those conditions, only the experience of PJ and crew from the LOTR seemed to prevent it going off the rails.
It's too easy for us, in hindsight to say 'how could they not have seen this or included this', but when you working 12-14 hours days (or more?) every day and filming so many units, so many actors, so many locations and so many scenes from across all 3 films... it IS forgivable to miss the odd detail. Either that, or as was the case in some instances, film these details but then find in editing that they just don't work as originally envisaged.
The are many faults with the films and I certainly often think 'what if', but I find it hard to be overly critical of the film-makers and find it somewhat churlish on out part to talk of things being 'simply not good enough' when you look at a the time and effort that really was put into these films.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 11:09am
Post #5 of 37
(1595 views)
Shortcut
|
Leaving aside who was responsible for these pretty major errors and omissions (there were none such, for me, when it came to LotR), I do not consider it 'somewhat churlish' to suggest that it was 'simply not good enough' for them to occur.
If not enough time was allowed for the films to be finished properly, then more time (and money) should have been allocated. The films were making enough money for it to be certain that they would not have been loss makers in any way had this been done – in fact, they may have earned more money precisely because they would have been much better for the fixes.
I certainly agree that it must have been extremely challenging to make these (and the LotR) films, but this fact does not take away the pretty serious errors and omissions that were made, which have been commented on by many people. They had a chance to at least fix these things for the EE, but did not do so. Now it's too late.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 12:39pm
Post #7 of 37
(1565 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, I just saw the bit in the Appendices
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
…which got me going again, I'm afraid. 
|
|
|
adt100
Rohan
Dec 18 2015, 3:18pm
Post #9 of 37
(1521 views)
Shortcut
|
The 3 Hobbit films are/were the most expensive film project ever I believe? $100's of millions spent. Film-making is a commercial BUSINESS at the end of the day. Whilst I have many criticisms of WB and their handling of the franchise, I do you you have to understand that they are in the business of making movies and making money like any other studio. Ideally they should have been given another year for preparation, but things were already over budget and long delayed so it's understandable if frustrating that WB didn't want any more delays. It's simply unrealistic and unfair to say they should've been given more time and money.
I personally think all 3 films (especially in the extended form) are good solid films. Not on a par with LOTR, but still on a level with its contemporaries, if not better in very many regards. To say it would have made more money 'for the fixes' is also I think a slightly unrealistic statement. Do you mean 'fixes' of unresolved plots (such as the Morgal blade, the windlance, the white gems) or simply changes that would have made the films closer to the books and/or your vision for the films.
Much as I and we as Tolkien fans may spot these issues and wish for resolution, (and yes in an ideal world they SHOULD have been resolved), I don't think they have very much difference to the casual film-goer.
|
|
|
Lindele
Gondor
Dec 18 2015, 3:41pm
Post #10 of 37
(1503 views)
Shortcut
|
more time and money would have been a very bad investment for WB...would have been great for the minority of fans that we make up...but not from a business standpoint.
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Dec 18 2015, 5:25pm
Post #11 of 37
(1464 views)
Shortcut
|
At least w. me LOL currently not feeling too happy w. the elf presence in BOFA , a side effect of owning the films and being able to watch at leisure - and feelings rise and fall, week to week.
And owning the films and the Appendices, it's a lot to take in; and also it's painful IMO seeing what might have been. No that, of course, I'm not grateful for what is, which wouldn't have exited IMO without PJ & co.
For me tho , it will ALWAYS be inexplicable - time and money have been mentioned, but how much time was spend carefully laying out the battle, trolls, Legolas/Bolg, Tauriel/Kili? IMO if PJ had felt - had WANTED Beorn to be the gamechanger he spoke of in interviews, it would have happened. It would have been a whole chapter in the Appendices, the manifestation of Beorn.
And, I'll never get that , and would really like to have coffee with PJ and ask, in a non-confrontational way - to UNDERSTAND - why PJ wouldn't have been wholly enraptured with the concept of a Beorn (a badass shapeshifter!) and not fall over himself to depict quite a lot of the character. I mean, for me Smaug was the incredible natural force, and the possibilities with Beorn, at the last, arriving like a storm on the mountain, finally able to lay waste to the corruption that destroyed his people....
Guess I will have to keep imagining in my head - also the scene in my head of a great bear-creature, covered in blood and wounds, somehow arriving at Ravenhill, and the first shot we see is an impossibly large bloodsmeared clawed paw next to a frantic Bilbo, and Beorn would have this perfect expression of rage and compassion, and the great paws tenderly lift the dying Thorin, and Thorin gets a last view of the sky as blood is left in a trail on the ice as Beorn carries Thorin away, to some sort of shelter, with Bilbo at his side....*sob*
Well, something like that is what I THOUGHT I was going to see. At least I got more dwarves, tho.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 5:45pm
Post #12 of 37
(1453 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That's beautifully put, Avandel
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Perhaps if the film-makers had devoted less time for things like the completely unnecessary, awful Alfrid and comic-book, zombie-eyed, evil Legolas, they would have been able to fix the plot holes (which have been discussed here and elsewhere numerous times), and to give key needed characters the inclusion that they needed (the criticicism about the lack of Beorn goes far beyond these boards and some 'specialised fan audience').
What a lost opportunity.
NB You are far more diplomatic than I am. 
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
Dec 18 2015, 6:04pm
Post #13 of 37
(1449 views)
Shortcut
|
comic-book, zombie-eyed, evil Legolas, I get that you don't like him but please stop with calling him terrible things. He is not a zombie or evil.
fix the plot holes I stil don't se that many plot hole, one or two maybe but not many.
|
|
|
Thrain II
Lorien
Dec 18 2015, 6:10pm
Post #14 of 37
(1435 views)
Shortcut
|
always share my thoughts on Beorn, one of the biggest disappointments I have with movies.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 6:31pm
Post #15 of 37
(1420 views)
Shortcut
|
comic-book, zombie-eyed, evil Legolas, I get that you don't like him but please stop with calling him terrible things. He is not a zombie or evil.
I'll continue to call him that when I feel like it – because that's precisely how he appeared to me in DoS. He reminds me of something like a cross between an Evil Dead character and a comic-book one, in fact, and he has completely ruined that character in LotR for me – not that I was ever particularly enamoured of him in LotR, either, but was more like indifferent to him. (I don't think much of Bloom's acting. In the words of a Telegraph reviewer: 'The bloom has come off Orlando, though, whose main achievement as Legolas – other than some ridiculous mid-air running up collapsing masonry – is to illustrate perfectly what Joey Tribbiani from Friends called “smell the fart acting”.')
I refuse to censor myself.
(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Dec 18 2015, 6:33pm)
|
|
|
Elessar
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 6:56pm
Post #16 of 37
(1400 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I wouldn't call it censoring yourself
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I think it is well known you didn't care for Legolas in The Hobbit films and he has now ruined the character in LOTR for you. I don't believe you were being asked to not talk about how much you don't like him, but maybe just find a different way to describe the dislike. What they're getting at is they do find it a little rude as they might like what you didn't. It's no fun to have someone call something you like names. Is that a bit on not dealing with it like an adult? I guess that's one way to look at it but I think maybe keeping in mind the feelings of others is something we can surely do.
|
|
|
brotherbeck
Rivendell
Dec 18 2015, 8:03pm
Post #17 of 37
(1369 views)
Shortcut
|
Having watched the extended edition several times now Beorn remains one of the two biggest disappointments of this version of the film to me. Lack of Beorn at the battle and an anti-climactic and odd fight at Dol Guldor are the two things that hurt this specific movie the most. The weird thing is they are both two things that it seemed ahead of time that Peter Jackson would definitely get right with his tendency to go heavy on the epic CGI-assisted action.
I would have loved a more subtle and Bilbo-centric version of this story, especially with such an amazing actor in the title role, but that is not the version of this story that Jackson chose to make. But the version he did make feels lacking and incomplete in many regards.
I realize they were extremely rushed to hit the original theatrical deadline, but there is no excuse for not finishing the shots / sequences an entire year later for the extended edition. AN ENTIRE YEAR.
I understand that Peter Jackson was under an insane amount of pressure and stress with this production, but the guy is an EXTREMELY highly paid professional - simply running out of time due to poor planning explains what happened I guess, but it's not a good enough excuse in my
mind for everyone to just give him a pass and pretend the end of the battle in the film is explained on screen or is satisfying in any way whatsoever.
This same idea plays into things that the filmmakers may have been thinking or intended but are never conveyed to the audience in the actual film. Things like why Galadriel turns green and zombie looking at Dol Guldor or why the dwarves are suddenly wearing no armor when they charge out of Erebor actually have pretty cool explanations or ideas behind them that are in no way whatsoever conveyed to the audience by the film. Both of those things come out of nowhere and don't make any sense at all without more information. In the case of the dwarves with their armor we earlier in the film saw a pretty long sequence of them literally in the armory picking out their armor and gearing up for battle. It plays out like a continuity error.
These are issues that could have been resolved with quick scenes for an extended edition, and are actually the exact type of scenes that pickup shooting is designed for. You realize your film is missing a crucial scene the audience needs to put the pieces together or make the narrative flow properly so you do some pickup shooting and get those shots.
The film should speak for itself. Unfortunately to me the film plays out on screen exactly how you would think a troubled production would. There is a whole lot of great stuff up there on screen but there is also a whole hell of a lot that doesn't make any sense. These films had the potential to be so amazing. Understanding the reasons behind some terrible creative decisions does not magically make them not terrible decisions or make the movie any better in the end.
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
Dec 18 2015, 8:45pm
Post #18 of 37
(1342 views)
Shortcut
|
why the dwarves are suddenly wearing no armor when they charge out of Erebor actually have pretty cool explanations or ideas behind them that are in no way whatsoever conveyed to the audience by the film. Both of those things come out of nowhere and don't make any sense at all without more information. In the case of the dwarves with their armor we earlier in the film saw a pretty long sequence of them literally in the armory picking out their armor and gearing up for battle. It plays out like a continuity error. It is explained in the film. Thorin said they will not fight, so the dwarves take of there armor, you can see the armor with the dwarves when Thorin comes back. It makes perfect sense. So there is no continuity error about the dwarf armor. You don't need to explain it when you can see the reason quite clear.
|
|
|
Hanarr
The Shire
Dec 18 2015, 9:07pm
Post #19 of 37
(1322 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Beorn's diminished role was also a major disappointment for me
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Having watched the extended edition several times now Beorn remains one of the two biggest disappointments of this version of the film to me. Lack of Beorn at the battle and an anti-climactic and odd fight at Dol Guldor are the two things that hurt this specific movie the most. The weird thing is they are both two things that it seemed ahead of time that Peter Jackson would definitely get right with his tendency to go heavy on the epic CGI-assisted action.
From the moment I learned that the Hobbit was being filmed, the two scenes I was most looking forward to in the Battle of the Five Armies were Beorn turning the tide and Fili and Kili falling defending their uncle. Needless to say I was very disappointed.
The small Thorin doll shown on Peter Jackson's Facebook page when he posted during the last day of filming gave me some hope at the time, because it was the right size in scale to Beorn in human form, and so I assumed at least we'd see Beorn carry Thorin from the battlefield. But that didn't happen either.
|
|
|
Brandybuckled
Lorien
Dec 18 2015, 9:43pm
Post #20 of 37
(1315 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I wish to subscribe to your newsletter...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Having watched the extended edition several times now Beorn remains one of the two biggest disappointments of this version of the film to me. Lack of Beorn at the battle and an anti-climactic and odd fight at Dol Guldor are the two things that hurt this specific movie the most. The weird thing is they are both two things that it seemed ahead of time that Peter Jackson would definitely get right with his tendency to go heavy on the epic CGI-assisted action.
I would have loved a more subtle and Bilbo-centric version of this story, especially with such an amazing actor in the title role, but that is not the version of this story that Jackson chose to make. But the version he did make feels lacking and incomplete in many regards.
I realize they were extremely rushed to hit the original theatrical deadline, but there is no excuse for not finishing the shots / sequences an entire year later for the extended edition. AN ENTIRE YEAR.
I understand that Peter Jackson was under an insane amount of pressure and stress with this production, but the guy is an EXTREMELY highly paid professional - simply running out of time due to poor planning explains what happened I guess, but it's not a good enough excuse in my
mind for everyone to just give him a pass and pretend the end of the battle in the film is explained on screen or is satisfying in any way whatsoever.
This same idea plays into things that the filmmakers may have been thinking or intended but are never conveyed to the audience in the actual film. Things like why Galadriel turns green and zombie looking at Dol Guldor or why the dwarves are suddenly wearing no armor when they charge out of Erebor actually have pretty cool explanations or ideas behind them that are in no way whatsoever conveyed to the audience by the film. Both of those things come out of nowhere and don't make any sense at all without more information. In the case of the dwarves with their armor we earlier in the film saw a pretty long sequence of them literally in the armory picking out their armor and gearing up for battle. It plays out like a continuity error.
These are issues that could have been resolved with quick scenes for an extended edition, and are actually the exact type of scenes that pickup shooting is designed for. You realize your film is missing a crucial scene the audience needs to put the pieces together or make the narrative flow properly so you do some pickup shooting and get those shots.
The film should speak for itself. Unfortunately to me the film plays out on screen exactly how you would think a troubled production would. There is a whole lot of great stuff up there on screen but there is also a whole hell of a lot that doesn't make any sense. These films had the potential to be so amazing. Understanding the reasons behind some terrible creative decisions does not magically make them not terrible decisions or make the movie any better in the end.
But failing that, I shall quote every word of your post for emphasis.
NAArP: Not An Ardent purist since Arda was dented
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 11:29pm
Post #22 of 37
(1281 views)
Shortcut
|
Characters I like also get called names, yet I don't take it personally, and would never think of telling someone to refrain from expressing their opinion, however strong it is! I might argue with them, but that's another matter. I certainly don't need to be reprimanded by anyone.
As I said, Legolas reminded me of an Evil Dead zombie in DoS, and his ridiculous actions appeared to be designed to emulate comic-book heroes, hence my description of the character. His portrayal was awful, simply awful, in my view – and since he went a long way to spoiling the films for me, I will keep raising the matter of his inane presence in the films whenever I feel goaded to do so. It's a way of letting off steam for me – there is so much to love about the films, yet they are let down by some really bad decisions that rile many people, not just me (and which I've mentioned ad nauseum). Not everyone can accept the entire films unconditionally, like a few people seem to do.
(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Dec 18 2015, 11:34pm)
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Dec 18 2015, 11:43pm
Post #23 of 37
(1272 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes – I couldn't agree with you more
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Having watched the extended edition several times now Beorn remains one of the two biggest disappointments of this version of the film to me. Lack of Beorn at the battle and an anti-climactic and odd fight at Dol Guldor are the two things that hurt this specific movie the most. The weird thing is they are both two things that it seemed ahead of time that Peter Jackson would definitely get right with his tendency to go heavy on the epic CGI-assisted action.
I would have loved a more subtle and Bilbo-centric version of this story, especially with such an amazing actor in the title role, but that is not the version of this story that Jackson chose to make. But the version he did make feels lacking and incomplete in many regards.
I realize they were extremely rushed to hit the original theatrical deadline, but there is no excuse for not finishing the shots / sequences an entire year later for the extended edition. AN ENTIRE YEAR.
I understand that Peter Jackson was under an insane amount of pressure and stress with this production, but the guy is an EXTREMELY highly paid professional - simply running out of time due to poor planning explains what happened I guess, but it's not a good enough excuse in my mind for everyone to just give him a pass and pretend the end of the battle in the film is explained on screen or is satisfying in any way whatsoever.
This same idea plays into things that the filmmakers may have been thinking or intended but are never conveyed to the audience in the actual film. Things like why Galadriel turns green and zombie looking at Dol Guldor or why the dwarves are suddenly wearing no armor when they charge out of Erebor actually have pretty cool explanations or ideas behind them that are in no way whatsoever conveyed to the audience by the film. Both of those things come out of nowhere and don't make any sense at all without more information. In the case of the dwarves with their armor we earlier in the film saw a pretty long sequence of them literally in the armory picking out their armor and gearing up for battle. It plays out like a continuity error.
These are issues that could have been resolved with quick scenes for an extended edition, and are actually the exact type of scenes that pickup shooting is designed for. You realize your film is missing a crucial scene the audience needs to put the pieces together or make the narrative flow properly so you do some pickup shooting and get those shots.
The film should speak for itself. Unfortunately to me the film plays out on screen exactly how you would think a troubled production would. There is a whole lot of great stuff up there on screen but there is also a whole hell of a lot that doesn't make any sense. These films had the potential to be so amazing. Understanding the reasons behind some terrible creative decisions does not magically make them not terrible decisions or make the movie any better in the end.
These are exactly the issues I have with (especially) BotFA. There is so much that is great there, yet it is let down by a failure to tie up loose ends, and by a poor balance of the material. I don't know – perhaps the film-makers lost track of continuity because there were so many elements to the film, and there were certain 'fun' parts that PJ felt absolutely had to be in and that interested him more than did the loose ends and major characters like Beorn. In any case, it is such a disappointment. I could have lived with the holes in the cinema edition had they fixed the EE properly – which they surely had every opportunity to do. But now it's too late…
P.S. I see Brandybuckled has also quoted your post in full! Great minds think alike.
(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Dec 18 2015, 11:45pm)
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
Dec 18 2015, 11:58pm
Post #24 of 37
(1261 views)
Shortcut
|
don't know – perhaps the film-makers lost track of continuity because there were so many elements to the film, But you never say what plot holes you are talking about. Yes Thranduil is one, I understand that one but I don't see many more. They do know about continuity error but sometimes you just miss them or they fix them like Gandalf's staff in Dale.
|
|
|
Elessar
Valinor
Dec 19 2015, 12:05am
Post #25 of 37
(1257 views)
Shortcut
|
That's not ok in my book either. People should try to express their opinion with a little respect for others. I know this is the Internet and it's easy to fire off at the mouth behind a keyboard, but treating it as if you're having a face to face conversation is the proper approach. Nobody is saying don't express your opinion. You were simply asked to try to express it with a touch more respect. If you express it strong enough you can and should be.
I know all that. I've seen you beat that horse now for a few years. I also expect you to keep letting us know your view everytime the character gets mentioned. Yes some do love every second and have no issues and there are some who act as if PJ has ruined their childhood with these films. Then you have people like me who love them but accept that they have flaws.
|
|
|
|
|
Dont be - Beorn will remain one of these curiosities
[
1
