|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Feb 24 2016, 4:49am
Post #101 of 118
(746 views)
Shortcut
|
In the books it's melancholy nudity; in the films it's playful, happy nudity. Big difference.
If someone's going to be nude in Middle-earth, then they sure as hell better be upset or contemplating something.
Is that how Avnar feels? Heck, even I thought the fountain scene was less than tasteful, though I wasn't especially offended by it--just a bit disappointed that Jackson felt it necessary to go there.
"Things need not to have happened to be true.
Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure
when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."
- Dream of the Endless
|
|
|
TheOnlyOneAroundWithAnySense
Rohan
Feb 24 2016, 4:59am
Post #102 of 118
(746 views)
Shortcut
|
Except I do sense that he's... angry. A tad. At something.
The moment isn't a favorite of mine, but I don't think it's out of line or character sandwiched between scenes of Thorin's company making a mockery of the Elves food/music and turning the meal into a food fight and burning Elven furniture to keep warm and heat sausages.
Again, I think the nudity control helped with this. All we see is rolls of fat and the backsides of the dwarves from a good 40 feet or so away (for 4 seconds). If I had seen a... different... kind of sausage during this scene, I believe I would definitely have felt it was inappropriate.
"And you can trust me. Because I don't care enough about you to lie."
- Parks and Recreation
(This post was edited by Altaira on Feb 25 2016, 12:19am)
|
|
|
LSF
Gondor
Feb 24 2016, 5:20am
Post #103 of 118
(739 views)
Shortcut
|
I think the shot used naked cgi dwarves to get around the problem of "naked" human to dwarf bodysuits that would be realistic enough and look right. And for a 4 second gag where they're like 50 feet away, it holds up well enough for me.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Feb 24 2016, 8:54am
Post #104 of 118
(718 views)
Shortcut
|
Then it's a difference in perception which I can't explain. I can only say that for me The Hobbit doesn't look worse. In some ways it looks different - partly, I think, that's down to the difference in technology, partly to the effect they wanted to achieve to reflect the different tone of the book. But artistically, visually, I see an absolute continuity between Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, which doesn't surprise me at all since the same team was involved in the creation of both films.
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
Feb 24 2016, 9:06am
Post #105 of 118
(715 views)
Shortcut
|
|
If you watch the appendices you would know
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I imagine there were people working on the set who would have liked to say something but didn't have the nerve. I always wondered what John Howe and Alan Lee thought about all the un-Tolkienlike additions being that they have a far longer history working in Middle-earth. And Christopher Lee who was a lifelong fan of Tolkien. In the appendices you will see how much Alan Lee and John Howe enjoy making this films ( you should just see how glad John is when he is working on Smaug) and you will also see how proud Christopher Lee is for working on the hobbit.
Everyone who was working on the hobbit trilogy had a really good time doing it.
|
|
|
TheOnlyOneAroundWithAnySense
Rohan
Feb 24 2016, 9:33am
Post #106 of 118
(712 views)
Shortcut
|
Rare, for me, I know, but this is what my eyes see when I view the movies.
"And you can trust me. Because I don't care enough about you to lie."
- Parks and Recreation
|
|
|
Noria
Gondor
Feb 24 2016, 2:32pm
Post #107 of 118
(700 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You are right that I was speaking in generalities
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
based on the many statements that I read and heard in the media while TH was in production about Jackson going back to the same well and being out of creative juice etc. There were complaints about the 3D, the HFR, the two and then three movie split. If I had a dollar for every time I heard the "butter scraped over too much bread" thing, well I'd have a lot of dollars.
The FotR movie and its sequels ambushed the world, so to speak. They were made by a little filmmaker from little New Zealand, in New Zealand, with a cast of theatrical or relatively little known actors. It was the fantasy film that finally could, the underdog, the new thing. Tolkien became very trendy, the movies and PJ were hugely successful, box office gold, awards and so on. Inevitably Tolkien became the old thing, and there was the usual backlash. A lot of people became genuine fans because of the movies but for others it was apparently just the latest craze.
Anyone who was paying attention would have seen all this. So The Hobbit movies, regardless of their quality or lack thereof, were released into a different world than LotR had been.
|
|
|
Noria
Gondor
Feb 24 2016, 2:48pm
Post #108 of 118
(689 views)
Shortcut
|
I think the shot used naked cgi dwarves to get around the problem of "naked" human to dwarf bodysuits that would be realistic enough and look right. And for a 4 second gag where they're like 50 feet away, it holds up well enough for me.
AS LSF says, this very short little sequence could only be shot in CGI since the Dwarves do not actually look like that under their clothes.
I think it's an inconsequential and fun little sequence Bathing in the fountain is one of the least offensive things that the Dwarves do in Rivendell.
But what I really like about it are the reactions of Elrond and Lindir.
|
|
|
KW
Rivendell
Feb 24 2016, 4:41pm
Post #109 of 118
(671 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You did not address my objection.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Perhaps I communicated it poorly.
[a]as far as the greater world was concerned, Peter Jackson was repeating himself, “going back to the same well” and had run out of creative juice simply by making these movies. All those things were said in the media before AUJ was released. [c]Why would they reward Peter Jackson for that, even if it was a misperception.
I am reading three separate assertions here.
a)The majority (not "some" mind you) of the population held this opinion.
b) Members of the media expressed this opinion.
c) (implied) this opinion influenced the judgement of the academy.
You are focusing on b but it is actually a and c that I have a problem with. Just because b may be true it does not automatically follow that a and c are true, since the media does not always speak for the public at large or any specific group.
c1)We have no actual insight into the specific thoughts of the Academy regarding this matter (much less it seems than insight into the opinions of Christopher Tolkien- see referenced post)
c2) it is hard to argue that someone is swayed by the weight of public opinion if you haven' adequately proven that was actually the public opinion.
(This post was edited by KW on Feb 24 2016, 4:43pm)
|
|
|
Intergalactic Lawman
Rohan
Feb 24 2016, 9:44pm
Post #110 of 118
(641 views)
Shortcut
|
I'll just cut to the chase here - There is no conspiracy. The Hobbit films are just terrible films! Nothing more nothing less.
"Were released into a different world" Good lord... A good movie is a good movie!
(This post was edited by Avnar on Feb 24 2016, 9:45pm)
|
|
|
wizzardly
Rohan
Feb 24 2016, 11:44pm
Post #111 of 118
(626 views)
Shortcut
|
My own personal issues with this adaptation aside...these movies just weren't on the same level as the LotR. PJ even admitted he "Had no idea what the Hell I was doing", and at one point had to "wing it". Personally, I have to admit I felt a bit of compassion for the man while watching the behind the scenes material where he discussed this. He seemed genuinly exhausted and burned out. But yeah, there was no conspiracy. The movies lacked preparation and they were rushed and under a lot of stress. The truth is the truth, and it just wasn't up to oscar standards.
|
|
|
TheOnlyOneAroundWithAnySense
Rohan
Feb 25 2016, 12:42am
Post #112 of 118
(611 views)
Shortcut
|
|
There seems to be a local conspiracy, at least
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In that, if all of your posts were relocated to different areas of this conversion, it would still read exactly the same. You do not address the points others have made, you type as though you didn't bother to read most of them, you make the same tired, sweeping generalizations that these movies are terrible on some quantitative level because you did not like them and, if that is not the case, and you've meant everything 100% literally, it all gets more disturbing, because you are suggesting only you and those like you know the truth, the rest of us live in willful denial and no one can truthfully enjoy these films. Frankly, that's just a twisted, needlessly convoluted way of approaching differing opinions and a kind of mental gymnastics those of us with common sense would never attempt, starting with the fact that no one could ever truly claim to know what another believes/feels and it's insulting, undermining the intelligence and right of everyone to decide for themselves what they think and how genuine these thoughts are.
Also, the Oscars have no standards, wizzy. Come on now. They're up for the highest bidder who's covering the most politically correct talking points of the culture at any given time.
"And you can trust me. Because I don't care enough about you to lie."
- Parks and Recreation
|
|
|
Intergalactic Lawman
Rohan
Feb 25 2016, 12:43am
Post #113 of 118
(606 views)
Shortcut
|
I definitely felt for the guy - Just don't think Radagast covered in poo, dwarf nudity, lion looking Beorn, snot covered trolls, Alfred covered in pimples and pigs balls were the way to go 
He could easily have cut out all the immature stuff...
(This post was edited by Avnar on Feb 25 2016, 12:44am)
|
|
|
wizzardly
Rohan
Feb 25 2016, 1:03am
Post #114 of 118
(595 views)
Shortcut
|
I mean i get it...del toro left and he didnt know what to do. But seriously, crack open the book and get to it. Instead I think he flipped through a copy of MAD magazine for inspiration.
|
|
|
redgiraffe
Rohan
Feb 25 2016, 7:55am
Post #116 of 118
(567 views)
Shortcut
|
Then it's a difference in perception which I can't explain. I can only say that for me The Hobbit doesn't look worse. In some ways it looks different - partly, I think, that's down to the difference in technology, partly to the effect they wanted to achieve to reflect the different tone of the book. But artistically, visually, I see an absolute continuity between Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, which doesn't surprise me at all since the same team was involved in the creation of both films.
As you and many others have stated before, it all really just comes down to people's different opinions and perceptions. And I agree with that. It's certainly something that none of us can explain. Just looking at you and I, we both had two very different experiences with The Hobbit films, especially over the look and visual effects. And there's really nothing that can explain that except that we both have our own subjective opinions.
Also, after re-reading my post I wanted to make sure that I'm a little more clear to anyone who might be reading it. My last couple of sentences might sound like I was stating an objective fact. When I say things like "the hobbit looks worse," I mean that it looks worse to me. It's completely my subjective opinion. In no way do I want anyone to get the impression that I'm stating this as an objective fact.
There's also another interesting point about your previous post that I wanted to bring up. It's strange to me that I have such a huge issue with the heavy use and look of CGI in The Hobbit. At the same time I'm not bothered by heavy CGI use in other films (like the Marvel movies as just one example). That's something I can't explain.
Anyway, thank you, dormouse, for your post and response. It's always great to read your thoughts and opinions on these boards. I always appreciate to see a different point of view, especially yours. And I appreciate that you are always very civil when discussing the films.
-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle
|
|
|
Noria
Gondor
Feb 25 2016, 2:49pm
Post #117 of 118
(536 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Of course there was no conspiracy.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Let me be more clear and say mainstream entertainment media instead of the world at large or whatever I said to differentiate it from the world of Tolkien and Tolkien movie fandom. Of course I am not talking about the general population giving TH movies a chilly exception. The movies were commercially very successful so a lot of the world’s population liked them enough to return to see each sequel and then buy the movies on home video.
Before December 2012 in the mainstream media I read a number of stories criticizing Peter Jackson in regards to The Hobbit movies before they were even made. I encountered only a few favourable ones, mostly on message boards like this one. I have no knowledge of what is in the minds of Academy Award voters. But they are the Hollywood establishment so I am suggesting that their thinking might not be different from that of the media that is an integral part of their industry, that exists to service that industry. And TheOnlyOneWithAnySense is right that “Also, the Oscars have no standards..... They're up for the highest bidder who's covering the most politically correct talking points of the culture at any given time. “
I’ve been a Tolkien fan for almost fifty years. For most of that time it was basically a solo fandom for every Tolkien book lover unless they were lucky enough to know other people who felt the same. So the upsurge in fans and attention for Tolkien’s works after FotR came out was a big change and really nice. Many new fans came to Tolkien and stayed. But I could see that the huge popularity was temporary because it was trendy. Nothing is deader than old trends. Over my lifetime I’ve seen it happen again and again with various fashions and crazes. Tolkien was hot and then he was not.
So IMO the environment in which The Hobbit movies were released had changed. This has nothing to do with whether The LotR or The Hobbit movies were good or not. It has to do with social trends. You don’t have to agree but in my opinion this is what I witnessed.
I think I said elsewhere that I had all this in mind before AUJ was even released and I remember even writing the draft of a post about it. I wish I had finished and posted it but suspect that I was really hoping I was wrong.
Marvel is planning to make a slew of comic based movies over the next few years. I wonder if that craze will last long enough for the later films to clean up at the box office the way The Avengers etc. have done.
Opinion: The Hobbit movies are crap.
Fact: (Insert name here) doesn’t like them.
Opinion: Noria thinks that the environment in which TH movies were released was not as receptive as the one in which the LotR trilogy appeared.
Fact: Before the films were even released, there were a number of articles in the mainstream media criticizing Peter Jackson for making TH movies at all, for the two/three film split, for the 3D high frame rate decision, for New Zealand's labour troubles and so on.
|
|
|
KW
Rivendell
Feb 25 2016, 9:34pm
Post #118 of 118
(496 views)
Shortcut
|
But OK, you misspoke.
But the problem remains for me. Although I take a dim view of these movies I don't think that the lack of awards proves one thing or the other. Trying to find any meaning in there is an exercise in the sort of confirmation bias that leads to any manner of problematic arguments.
For example, you say you have no knowledge of what is on the minds of Academy voters but then you proceed to speculate and suggest what is on their minds anyway and go so far as to impugn their character. Why even go down that road?
I think I said elsewhere that I had all this in mind before AUJ was even released and I remember even writing the draft of a post about it. I wish I had finished and posted it but suspect that I was really hoping I was wrong.
So your assumption was confirmed by your opinion? I know that at least some people expressed skepticism about HFR and the three film split and other things. I did not much care, personally, but upon seeing the films I believe they were right in anticipating that these were fundamentally poor decisions. So maybe rather than a product of some external environment, fad or changing times Jackson himself created this skepticism and fulfilled it. And maybe if he had made different choices a significant portion of that skepticism would not have existed..Maybe his own past recent performance as a film maker also fueled that skepticism. Maybe if he had made a different film the situation would have been different. Maybe that skepticism did not matter on this occasion anyway or would not matter in another. Maybe I should go watch Fury Road and ponder all this about changing times. Or Attack of the Clones. . There are any number of possibilities and so again I think this is all just imaginary thinking.
Which is fine if that is the sort of conversation people want. I don't know if there is anything wrong with that. I'm just being argumentative, anyway. I have no intention at all of trying to carry a comprehensive critical debate on these movies and so I'm not in any position to decry the lack of one.
|
|
|
|
|
Baaaah! 
