Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
I wish the movies hadn't turned the characters into morons for the sake of the plot...
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next page Last page  View All

ange1e4e5
Rohan

May 12 2016, 2:25pm

Post #101 of 234 (852 views)
Shortcut
"My teeth are swords. My claws are spears." [In reply to] Can't Post

"My pants are a hurricane!"

I always follow my job through.


dormouse
Half-elven


May 12 2016, 2:27pm

Post #102 of 234 (847 views)
Shortcut
"She walks in pants in another world." // [In reply to] Can't Post

 

For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .


Darkstone
Immortal


May 12 2016, 2:30pm

Post #103 of 234 (845 views)
Shortcut
"So it ever was, so will it always be. In time all foul pants come forth." // [In reply to] Can't Post

 

******************************************
Elves and Men and Dwarves gonna cower,
When I finish building my tower,
When I finish building my tower with the Eye on top!
Watch that Eye and see how it glowers,
Ain't no contest between the Two Towers,
Nosey folks'll peek thru' palantirs and their eyes will pop!
The battlement's black and immeasurably strong, an adamant mountain of iron,
A buttress of steel, impossibly tall, held aloft by the power of Sauron!
See that Eye a winkin' and blinkin',
Ain't no finer tower I'm thinkin',
You can keep Orthanc if you're thinkin' that I'd care to swap,
For my black and shiny tower with the Eye on the top!

-Rodgers and Hammerstein, The Lord of the Rings


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


May 12 2016, 2:32pm

Post #104 of 234 (848 views)
Shortcut
Reasons. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Why should anyone read any parts of The Lord of the Rings itself to read all the material Jackson used for his adaptation of The Hobbit? Jackson only claims to have used The Hobbit itself and The Return of the King appendices. He never did, to my knowledge, make any reference to using any parts of LOTR (that is, except for the Appendices, which are not part of the main book).


There is relevant material in the main text of LotR, especially at the Council of Elrond where the White Council's assault on Dol Guldur and Saruman's part in it is discussed. Granted the role of Saruman in that action is downplayed in TH:BotFA. Also, I believe that the first reference to the Five Wizards comes when Saruman is confronted in Isengard following the Battle of the Hornburg.

"He who lies artistically, treads closer to the truth than ever he knows." -- Favorite proverb of the wizard Ningauble of the Seven Eyes, the "Gossiper of the Gods"


TheOnlyOneAroundWithAnySense
Rohan


May 12 2016, 9:27pm

Post #105 of 234 (815 views)
Shortcut
Some of us love to read (I, for one) [In reply to] Can't Post

Some of us have also read the discussed Middle-earth works (myself again) and still prefer the films (guess who?)

"And you can trust me. Because I don't care enough about you to lie."
- Parks and Recreation


Darkstone
Immortal


May 12 2016, 9:39pm

Post #106 of 234 (806 views)
Shortcut
So far 100% of us do. [In reply to] Can't Post

http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=904622#904622

******************************************
Elves and Men and Dwarves gonna cower,
When I finish building my tower,
When I finish building my tower with the Eye on top!
Watch that Eye and see how it glowers,
Ain't no contest between the Two Towers,
Nosey folks'll peek thru' palantirs and their eyes will pop!
The battlement's black and immeasurably strong, an adamant mountain of iron,
A buttress of steel, impossibly tall, held aloft by the power of Sauron!
See that Eye a winkin' and blinkin',
Ain't no finer tower I'm thinkin',
You can keep Orthanc if you're thinkin' that I'd care to swap,
For my black and shiny tower with the Eye on the top!

-Rodgers and Hammerstein, The Lord of the Rings


lionoferebor
Rohan


May 12 2016, 10:33pm

Post #107 of 234 (797 views)
Shortcut
Double sigh... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
You're putting words in my mouth.


I misunderstood...happens from time to time.


In Reply To
I'm talking about understanding someone else's creative decisions irrespective of the decisions I would have made. It's not about what I would change or not change - if the work is someone else's it's not up to me to change anything; like it or dislike it, I'm the audience - I engage with it as it is.


Have you ever seen the film Mona Lisa Smile?


dormouse
Half-elven


May 12 2016, 10:49pm

Post #108 of 234 (791 views)
Shortcut
No, sorry... [In reply to] Can't Post

I haven't seen it or even heard of it.

For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .


LittleHobbit
Lorien

May 12 2016, 11:54pm

Post #109 of 234 (775 views)
Shortcut
I agree with just about everything you've wrote... [In reply to] Can't Post

ESPECIALLY THIS:


In Reply To
Here is the correct answer: as long as the films produced have VALUE and are of HIGH QUALITY, it doesn't matter how many there are. Three good films is more good films than one, regardless of how many installments were printed of the source.



But also don't forget the stupid comments like, ''OMG this trilogy is so bloated'' and the tired, overused, totally worn out and now therefore meaningless analogy of ''too little butter spread over too much bread'' (or something like that)!

I mean, who cares if the movies were stretched from one to two, or three? As you say, as long as the movies are good, this is a non-issue.

I myself like to phrase this as ''The movies should fail or stand on their own''. Regardless of the source material. FORGET THE SOURCE MATERIAL. Books are books, movies are movies. The two mediums are quite different. As obvious as this may sound, it's one of the greatest truths out there.


(This post was edited by LittleHobbit on May 12 2016, 11:57pm)


Avandel
Half-elven


May 13 2016, 2:02am

Post #110 of 234 (754 views)
Shortcut
Hear, hear [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
I mean, who cares if the movies were stretched from one to two, or three? As you say, as long as the movies are good, this is a non-issue.


This is a repost of 2012 Comic Con panel, but here PJ pretty well sums up his approach to the Hobbit, and why:

https://www.youtube.com/...?v=CzSCXuTRZEI#t=667

Tho a lot on this board already know of PJ's approach, from other interviews, books, articles.

I suppose one of the implications of the "two to three" movie switch is the implication of lack of a tight? film, that is running away with itself. That if (and I vaguely remember a post like this, or several) that if there had been only two films, it would have forced the narrative to be "more true to the book". Or something like that. One argument I think having been made is that a 90-minute cartoon??? could "more accurately" portray the Hobbit than PJ's films did.

While I personally wouldn't say to forget the book source material (taken truly literally, that would be a problem I think) but agree with what I think an experienced filmmaker already knew about taking a book to film (and says as much in the film Appendices and in companion books). I find it wild that it seems that many just don't believe PJ and Phillipa, it seems! Shocked

(As when they talk about the original multi-hued cloaks of the dwarves and how silly that would look on screen. Yet the filmmakers took the time to make nods to the source material with the colors of cloth chosen - when they could, because the Hobbit is definitely sparse on the detailsCool - and even Tolkien leaves open doors on dwarf culture, unfortunatelyFrown. Never mind the linguists and researchers on set.)

Completely agree that the number of films is completely irrelevant, once you begin telling a story on film. A single short film can feel like an eternityShocked, and a single long film can feel as though it's done too soon. I remember the groans in theater at the end of DOSCool - where it was obvious that the multiple audiences I saw DOS with would have been more than happy to sit through another half-hour, and watch Smaug torch Laketown.

If anything IMO the theater BOFA was too tightly editedUnimpressed. And IMO the Hobbit book, in thinking about it, could never be properly brought to film with two movies even without Appendices material. For me, in thinking about it, there would be many minutes of things we haven't even seen so far - talking purses and elven feasts and Thorin getting captured and a scenes of everyone else getting captured - how does everything in the Hobbit, without the "buffering" of being in a book, get put on screen in two films?

Would Thorin be the only dwarf that ever says anything at all? What about Beorn's role? How long would it take Bilbo to go back and forth at Erebor? What about the scene where the dwarves are singing to Thorin? Does a wall just get thrown down and the audience never gets to see any build-up to that? Or do these imaginary two films just roll along at lightning speed, where EVERYTHING from the book is there, but it just gets cursory treatment? Does Gandalf really, in these imaginary two films, really just wander off in the middle?

How do you do all that, in a visual medium where there needs to be a flow of sorts from one scene to the next, in two films? I don't see it.

If folks don't like PJ's adaptation of the Hobbit, that's one thing. Maybe they wanted more whimsy, maybe they wanted more darknessUnsure, but IMO that's not a statement about the actual number of films it takes for a director to tell a full story.






wizzardly
Rohan


May 13 2016, 2:34am

Post #111 of 234 (748 views)
Shortcut
"as long as the movies are good" [In reply to] Can't Post

I believe this is debatable.


ange1e4e5
Rohan

May 13 2016, 2:57am

Post #112 of 234 (739 views)
Shortcut
I guess you don't like movies much. [In reply to] Can't Post

 

I always follow my job through.


TheOnlyOneAroundWithAnySense
Rohan


May 13 2016, 3:07am

Post #113 of 234 (737 views)
Shortcut
The quality of the films are debatable [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not so sure the ideal of more good films > less good films is, though.

"And you can trust me. Because I don't care enough about you to lie."
- Parks and Recreation


Starling
Half-elven


May 13 2016, 5:33am

Post #114 of 234 (723 views)
Shortcut
It helps if you have actually seen the movies [In reply to] Can't Post

if you would like to debate them.




lionoferebor
Rohan


May 13 2016, 2:48pm

Post #115 of 234 (663 views)
Shortcut
This is good... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I myself like to phrase this as ''The movies should fail or stand on their own''. Regardless of the source material. FORGET THE SOURCE MATERIAL. Books are books, movies are movies. The two mediums are quite different. As obvious as this may sound, it's one of the greatest truths out there.


I see new thread coming on. WinkCool


wizzardly
Rohan


May 13 2016, 3:55pm

Post #116 of 234 (657 views)
Shortcut
I have seen the movies [In reply to] Can't Post

I watched part 1 and 2, and the major "highlights" of 3, and based upon what I saw, concluded that PJ produced an adaptation of one of my favorite books that failed to capture the spirit and charm of the story. I somehow doubt that watching the 3rd film in its entirety will change my opinion towards the better. My guess is that it will only further solidify my profound disappointment.


Avandel
Half-elven


May 13 2016, 4:48pm

Post #117 of 234 (637 views)
Shortcut
But then all interested parties should be very happy IMO [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
I watched part 1 and 2, and the major "highlights" of 3, and based upon what I saw, concluded that PJ produced an adaptation of one of my favorite books that failed to capture the spirit and charm of the story. I somehow doubt that watching the 3rd film in its entirety will change my opinion towards the better. My guess is that it will only further solidify my profound disappointment.


If one can generalize - seemingly there are folks like myself who think the films improved given aspects of the book, certain portrayals, see stunning beauty in the Hobbit landscapes, and I have thought "it will never be this good againHeart. Not with a cast like this, the artisans, the weaving of all that charm to a more grim tale - it's like stepping into this wondrous worldHeart. Gandalf, the dwarves, Bilbo, Thranduil, Beorn, Smaug, will never be this good again. Not for me....it was like watching something from my folklore books come to life. Thranduil's elk, Orcrist's design, spiders, Bag End...." I'm just glad I was there (and own the collector sets. In duplicate.Cool)

The there are those who express disappointmentFrown, who should also be happy IMO, in that they will once again be able to experience the ANTICIP.........ATION! That delicious, nerve-wracking TENSION of casting, of what will or won't be included, the WONDER of it as scenes unfold. Because Hollywood will re-do the Hobbit, possibly sooner than later. Hollywood seems to LIKE re-doing stuff.

And I can spoil myself silly without having to self-embargo to avoid spoilers, which is very trying and feels weird.Crazy
So IMO there is no "down side" here.








Starling
Half-elven


May 13 2016, 8:00pm

Post #118 of 234 (600 views)
Shortcut
Righto [In reply to] Can't Post

Have, haven't. Same thing.




wizzardly
Rohan


May 13 2016, 8:55pm

Post #119 of 234 (576 views)
Shortcut
well [In reply to] Can't Post

That last comment was in regards to your last comment:
"It helps if you have actually seen the movies if you would like to debate them."

I have seen the first 2 and what I consider enough of the third to say I have seen it for the sake of debating the quality of the trilogy overall.



dormouse
Half-elven


May 13 2016, 9:42pm

Post #120 of 234 (558 views)
Shortcut
"This is my favourite film of all time - or it will be once I've seen it!" [In reply to] Can't Post

Wizzardly, I don't blame in the least for not seeing the third film when you disliked the other two so much, but it baffles me that you think you're qualified to debate it when you haven't seen, much less pass such sweeping judgements on it.

For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .


wizzardly
Rohan


May 13 2016, 9:59pm

Post #121 of 234 (552 views)
Shortcut
yes [In reply to] Can't Post

I do feel I am qualified to judge the trilogy as a whole. I wouldn't be qualified perhaps to judge the last film on it's own, but as it is but a part of a larger whole, a viewing of several key scenes is more than enough to pass my final judgement upon the adaptation.


wizzardly
Rohan


May 13 2016, 10:10pm

Post #122 of 234 (546 views)
Shortcut
look at it this way [In reply to] Can't Post

Imagine you've ordered a meal at a restaurant, and 2/3rds of the way into it, you begin to feel violently ill and run off to vomit. Do you then return to the table to finish it, or do you feel qualified to pass a final judgement on the quality of the meal?


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


May 13 2016, 10:32pm

Post #123 of 234 (528 views)
Shortcut
The Dessert might be quite nice. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Imagine you've ordered a meal at a restaurant, and 2/3rds of the way into it, you begin to feel violently ill and run off to vomit. Do you then return to the table to finish it, or do you feel qualified to pass a final judgement on the quality of the meal?


But other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, what did you think of the play?

"He who lies artistically, treads closer to the truth than ever he knows." -- Favorite proverb of the wizard Ningauble of the Seven Eyes, the "Gossiper of the Gods"


wizzardly
Rohan


May 13 2016, 10:41pm

Post #124 of 234 (521 views)
Shortcut
lol [In reply to] Can't Post

Laugh


LittleHobbit
Lorien

May 13 2016, 11:01pm

Post #125 of 234 (512 views)
Shortcut
Third movie. [In reply to] Can't Post

Wizzardly, you should see the third film at least once. You can get it for free on the internet. And preferably see the extended version -- some people claim it's LOADS better than the theatrical version.

Just a suggestion, of course. Wink


(This post was edited by LittleHobbit on May 13 2016, 11:09pm)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.