Our Sponsor Sideshow 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

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Chronicling The Hobbit
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 9 2019, 10:03pm

Post #1 of 77 (20785 views)
Shortcut
Chronicling The Hobbit Can't Post

Talk about an Unexpected Journey!

I was going through some Hobbit behind-the-scenes material when the call-sheets seemed to indicate that a scene in the second film, regarding one the subplots, was in fact shot early in principal photography, when only two films were planned.

This got me thinking: how different was the two-film version going to be, anyway? Would it have been any better? Would it have been worse?

Contrary to popular opinion, the choice to split the films into three wasn't the studios', it was Jackson's. He sat down with co-writers Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsh and "worked out enough a structure" to pitch the idea of a trilogy to Warner Brothers, who were previously unaware of the idea. Only when executives came to visit at the end of principal photography, was this idea brought the awareness of the studio, who were "shocked", per Jackson.

An Unexpected Journey
Now, the first film was going to follow the form of An Unexpected Journey very closely indeed. The framind device, prologue and early Hobbiton and Bag End were all part of the script and were shot in principal photography. The Bree scene which ended up at the top of The Desolation of Smaug was concieved of during the writing of the prologue, but wasn't fully realized or photographed until pickups.

The first difference regards Azog. While he was always going to send Orcs after the company, originally his backstory was to be revealed much more gradually. The prologue was to include a quick glimpse into the battle, the scene in the lone-lands was going to include cryptic hints ("Thorin has more cause than most to hate Orcs") and probably establish the death of Thror and disappearance of Thrain. It was extended during a few extra days of shooting performed in late July 2012, mere days after principal photography wrapped.

The brief scenes of Azog on Weathertop and after the trail of the company at the feet of the Misty Mountains were absent. Instead, he would be revealed to have been alive when he confronted Thorin on the mountainside. The full account of the Battle of Moria was to be revealed in Beorn's House, right after Azog is revealed to be in league with the Necromancer.

Otherwise, the story would continue to follow An Unexpected Journey. The Dol Guldur subplot, including the presence of the Nine and the involvement of Radagast were present. The main difference was that the High Fells were going to follow the White Council almost immediately: the Storm clouds which Gandalf sees at the end of that scene were going to be the ones that force the company into shelter on the High Pass.

The setpiece in the Pine Trees was the same, but ended about a minute sooner: right when Thorin was felled by Azog the eagles would swoop in. The carrock was present, and was going to be where Thorin would start developing an appreciation of Bilbo, but the climax of their friendship was to come at the end of the film.

The film would continue through Beorn's House, through Mirkwood and into the Woodland Realm. Tauriel was present, as was her romantic interest in Kili. Legolas, too, was present. Bolg was going to be present, but during principal photography the volume of his involvement was not fully determined.

The barrel scene was designed to be an action climax, during which Kili was to be wounded by a poisonous arrow, sending Tauriel after him, and Legolas after her. The montage of the thrush flying to Erebor was going to figure in here somewhere, before the film ended on a cliffhanger as Bard towered over the company with his bow and arrow.

There and Back Again
The second film was going to open in medias res on Bard's boat. Thorin being ferried to Erebor was to be the end of Act I, and the death of Smaug was to be the midpoint. It was always going to be a dark film. Bard, his family, The Master and Alfrid were as they are on-screen.

The company was going to separate over Kili's injury, with Orcs tracing them to Bard's House, and Tauriel and Legolas killing them, and Tauriel healing Kili (it was Lilly's first scene). Legolas would go off after other Orcs, but his fight with Bolg was a later addition.

In Dol Guldur, Gandalf was going to encounter Thrain (who appears in the first trailer of An Unexpected Journey) but he was going to be killed by Azog, right before Gandalf confronts Sauron.

Bard was going to conceal the Black Arrow from the Master's henchmen, and eventually fire it over Bain's shoulder (Also Luke Evans' first scene).

Inside the Mountain, Bilbo was going to have a shorter encounter with Smaug, where the dragon would become enraged and fly out of the mountain. His confrontation with the Dwarves would amount to him trying to crush them on the mountainside, and them taking shelter within the hidden door.

Thorin's descent into madness was very much the same. Missing scenes include his conflict as to help Bilbo or not (shot in pickups) and his delusions in the Gallery of the Kings: the script had Thorin see his distorted reflection in a golden plate.

Scenes such as the negotiations on the rampants and the crushing of the bridge were part of principal photography. The narrative of the battle and surrounding events wasn't shot during principal photography, but existed in the script, including the Ravenhill skirmish, the death of Kili in front of Tauriel's eyes and Azog dealing Thorin a mortal wound before he died. Dain's involvement, and some of the fighting in the streets of Dale was shot during principal photography.

The rest was done in pickups during May-July 2013, based on script revisions from May or July 2012 and previz work performed in February to May. By the time the extended cut of An Unexpected Journey was completed, most of the additions required to create the trilogy were formed on the page.

I don't think Gundabad figured in the original script, but the idea that conquering Erebor is a strategic move to reclaim Angmar was. Alfrid's role in the battle as the comic relif was also part of the original shoot: the scene where he tells Gandalf off was shot in principal photography.

While the actual coming about of the deaths of Thorin, Fili and Kili was shot in pickups, the funeral and following scenes were part of the original shoot, as was Bilbo's return home and the flash-forward to the framing device.

So...
So, I don't think the two-film version would have been any better. It was probably only going to be that much more overstuffed and undercooked. Splitting the piece into a trilogy meant that Jackson had a whole extra year to come to grips with the last portion of the narrative, which he wasn't fully satisfied with during principal photography.

Yes, some of the subplots which people begrudge would have probably taken up less screentime. But on the flipside their inclusion probably would have felt that much more rushed, to boot.

I especially dislike where the first film was going to end and the second one would have begun. It doesn't sound like a very dramatic ending, because the cliffhanger (Bard) is entirely unrelated to the climax, unlike the Smaug cliffhanger.

Also, in the two film version, The Necromancer was going to be revealed to be Sauron in the first film. Whereas, in the trilogy, I really like that the first film, An Unexpected Journey, is free of the scorge of Sauron, and can therefore be much lighter.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 9 2019, 10:14pm)


skyofcoffeebeans
Rohan

Apr 9 2019, 10:20pm

Post #2 of 77 (20712 views)
Shortcut
It seems important to note [In reply to] Can't Post

that the revelation that the Necromancer of Sauron and the capture of Gandalf was part of Film 1's cliffhanger. Film 2 would first establish the orc army's departure and the White Council's climactic rescue of Gandalf and expulsion of Sauron, all occurring even before Bilbo's confrontation with Smaug.

I think the second film would've fared better than the first, with Smaug as the anchor / pendulum of the entire film, being the instigating force of the first half and the fallout of the second. The first has that carefree energy you describe, but is also a full-scale detective mystery, with all the pieces of Gandalf's subplot in the first two films in place in one single narrative. It would be a different film tonally, largely revolving about the loss of Middle-earth's innocence as opposed to a whole-scale depiction of its innocence before Sauron's return. On the one hand, that gives AUJ's current structure an advantage- on the other, it introduces a major story thread that it completely drops without note or climax until the second film.

I also think Azog's gradual reveal as originally scripted would be more compelling than what AUJ currently gives us– an actual sense of mystery that unfolds. Plus, we know that Azog was originally intended to be an adversary at the Forest River sequence– I wonder what was originally intended to go down between him and Thorin?

The main problem in both the duology and trilogy structures is Tauriel's subplot. Neither version really has the time or space for her love story with Kili, or Legolas' antics. Her sequence in the dungeons with Kili is delightful, but has no room to breathe in either the second film of a trilogy or the third act of the first film of a duology. There simply isn't enough material for her to work with, and it's so far removed from Bilbo as to be irrelevant. There is similar scope of character in Lord of the Rings, but they all connect directly to either Frodo or Aragorn. Tauriel's thread is never explicitly tied to Frodo or Thorin, she never actually does anything of consequence, and is therefore never particularly relevant to the story at hand.

This is not to say that I think Tauriel should have been eliminated– they just never quite figured out what to do with her. And of course when I say Tauriel, I really mean Tauriel, Kili, Legolas, and to a lesser extent, Thranduil (his motivations and actions have a through-line regarding his wife that could have been compelling if made explicit).

I do think this structure would have been stronger than the current state of the trilogy. That is not to say that a duology structure is inherently superior with this material– but I don't think the writers created something better by making three films when they had written and shot material intended for two. With two films, we'd only lose the worst, ugliest aspects of this trilogy, and keep the material in a tighter package. Plus, the tonal progression of the story, as represented via writing, cinematography, lighting, sound, and music would be much more stark and coherent.


(This post was edited by skyofcoffeebeans on Apr 9 2019, 10:28pm)


Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 9 2019, 10:27pm

Post #3 of 77 (20705 views)
Shortcut
Seems fair [In reply to] Can't Post

But yeah, I think Tauriel's inclusion and her romance with Kili would have felt all the more out-of-place in the two film version. Most of her scenes were shot for the two-film version, anyway.

It was an interesting experiment, when you look at something like Legolas and Tauriel killing Orcs in Bard's House and you suddenly see that the call-sheet reads April 2012.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 9 2019, 10:31pm)


skyofcoffeebeans
Rohan

Apr 9 2019, 10:32pm

Post #4 of 77 (20701 views)
Shortcut
Even though I just said I don't think Tauriel should necessarily be eliminated... [In reply to] Can't Post

...I've found that in two-film edits, the better versions flow much better without the baggage that comes with Tauriel's material.

I don't understand how Film 1 could hold Feast of Starlight, given that Gandalf is fast approaching Dol Guldor in this version and the dwarves will quickly confront Azog in the Forest River. I don't understand how Film 2 would have had room for Tauriel's exile, Kili's healing, and their tragic reunion at Ravenhill.

All of this is to say, the three film version doesn't have room for it either. It's too little for a trilogy, whereas it was too much material for two films.


Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 9 2019, 10:57pm

Post #5 of 77 (20695 views)
Shortcut
Meh [In reply to] Can't Post

Its so easy to overstate Legolas and Tauriel's presence. They really don't detract to any real extent from the main story. At worst, I'll skip through a few or her lines and one of Legolas' stunts. It does the job of removing the offending nature of the subplot, without losing more than two or three minutes of the runtime in total. So much for a fan-edit.

Part of this has to do with the editing, especially on The Desolation of Smaug: each subplot plays out in no more than two cutaways from the main action, and each subplot wraps up one after the other before the main storyline concludes: first, the Dol Guldur subplot; second, the Bard subplot; third, the Tauriel/Kili subplot and lastly the Legolas subplot.

This is much better than what you usually see with films that have multiple storylines, where by the time of the climax, all subplots pile up unto each other. The Battle of the Five Armies does cut a bit between Thorin's final showdown and Legolas', but at the very least, after Fili's death, we don't cut from Ravenhill to Bard or Dain or Thranduil, with the exception of a brief glimpse of Beorn.

The existence of multiple storyline allows for some fun transitions. I love the cut from Thrain, holding a sword, to Thorin thrusting one into the ground; and the one from The Master whacking Bard (in POV) to the Hidden Door is the best cut in all six films.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 9 2019, 11:05pm)


lurtz2010
Rohan

Apr 12 2019, 12:19am

Post #6 of 77 (20547 views)
Shortcut
The Tauriel love story was added later wasn’t it? [In reply to] Can't Post

There’s an interview with Evangeline Lilly where she talks about how she took the job as long as she wasn’t in a love triangle then she says when she went back for pick ups the writers said “the studio have decided...” and that’s where the love story was written in. So to me that suggest it wasn’t on the original two film plan and the studio asked PJ to add it.

Also what was said about Smaug attacking the mountain side? I don’t remember anything about that.


Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 12 2019, 7:55am

Post #7 of 77 (20515 views)
Shortcut
Nope [In reply to] Can't Post

If I recall the original interview, it was one with Lilly as well as Peter Jackson and Philippa Boyens. Evangeline Lilly didn't resist the notion of a romance with Kili, which was always in the script and was among the first things Lilly ever shot. She resisted the idea of a love triangle with Legolas, which was introduced in the second block of prinicipal photography.

I have to say, its not much of a triangle, anyway.

As for Smaug attacking the mountainside, its pretty much directly from the book. I saw it on a call-sheet or script page which appeared in behind-the-scenes footage. I'll try to dig up the exact one.

Much of the second half of There and Back Again was still quite raw when filming began. That's why some elements of the battle, including the Ravenhill skirmish, were only shot in pickups. Although they did exist in the script.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 12 2019, 8:05am)


skyofcoffeebeans
Rohan

Apr 12 2019, 2:10pm

Post #8 of 77 (20497 views)
Shortcut
Ravenhill is interesting [In reply to] Can't Post

At one point, there is a large miniature of Ravenhill depicting armies of elves and orcs, and perhaps humans, implying that at one point, Ravenhill was much more complex than Azog vs the Durins.


Solicitr
Gondor

Apr 12 2019, 2:19pm

Post #9 of 77 (20496 views)
Shortcut
God forbid [In reply to] Can't Post

they content themselves with filming the story Tolkien actually wrote


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Apr 12 2019, 4:54pm

Post #10 of 77 (20496 views)
Shortcut
Face it. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
they content themselves with filming the story Tolkien actually wrote


That was off the table the moment it was decided to split the story into two films. Even Guillermo del Toro's version would have likely at least borrowed from The Lord of the Rings and its appendices. Unimpressed

"I reject your reality and substitute my own." - Adam Savage


Solicitr
Gondor

Apr 12 2019, 5:24pm

Post #11 of 77 (20491 views)
Shortcut
Just wondering [In reply to] Can't Post

How much do we know about del Toro's intentions? All we really know is that when PJ took over, he scrapped everything, even the props and costumes. Has there been a leak of even a treatment or plot outline?

At least some questions could be answered by casting dates, if we know them. When were invented roles like Tauriel, Azog, Alfrid and Bard's wife cast? When were Bloom, Blanchett and Lee invited back?


2ndBreffest
Lorien


Apr 12 2019, 6:39pm

Post #12 of 77 (20479 views)
Shortcut
but... [In reply to] Can't Post

then it wouldn't have been "woke" enough for modern audiences.


Solicitr
Gondor

Apr 12 2019, 6:44pm

Post #13 of 77 (20476 views)
Shortcut
That wasn't [In reply to] Can't Post

the problem with the Hobbit fiasco. Pointless invented sub-plots, ridiculous CGI "action" seqeunces, intruded characters both made up and imported from another book, and an overall tone-deafness of writing combined with ham-handed direction were all problems; but for all the viral infections the Hobbit project contracted, political correctness wasn't one. (Including an invented female character doesn't count- not when she's just there as a love interest and occasional Action Grrl).


Fereth
Rivendell


Apr 12 2019, 6:48pm

Post #14 of 77 (20479 views)
Shortcut
GDT was part of Tauriel's creation and character development. [In reply to] Can't Post

Don't know about the rest.

https://www.gamesradar.com/guillermo-del-toro-championed-the-creation-of-she-elf-tauriel-in-the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug/


2ndBreffest
Lorien


Apr 12 2019, 6:49pm

Post #15 of 77 (20472 views)
Shortcut
yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

you might be right now that I think about it more. The "there could be anything down my trousers" line is clearly sexual harassment and not very woke.


Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 12 2019, 9:51pm

Post #16 of 77 (20452 views)
Shortcut
Yeah [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
That was off the table the moment it was decided to split the story into two films. Even Guillermo del Toro's version would have likely at least borrowed from The Lord of the Rings and its appendices. Unimpressed


Yeah. I was looking into the Peter Jackson two-film version, but I'm sure a lot of this stuff was going to be present in Guillermo's version too. Not least because Jackson was still the one writing it.

Dol Guldur, Tauriel, the framing device and I believe Azog - were all going to be present in Del Toro's version.

I don't think an adaptation of The Hobbit as just The Hobbit, uninformed by the context of The Lord of the Rings, was ever possible after The Lord of the Rings was published. Even Rankin/Bass had to put that little glimpse at the end of their TV movie.

Plus, I personaly really like the material in the appendices. I like that its in the films. As long as its Tolkien, I don't see the need to fuss with what part of his writing its taken from.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 12 2019, 9:57pm)


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Apr 13 2019, 1:49pm

Post #17 of 77 (20416 views)
Shortcut
A little, not much. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
How much do we know about del Toro's intentions? All we really know is that when PJ took over, he scrapped everything, even the props and costumes. Has there been a leak of even a treatment or plot outline?

At least some questions could be answered by casting dates, if we know them. When were invented roles like Tauriel, Azog, Alfrid and Bard's wife cast? When were Bloom, Blanchett and Lee invited back?


We know that GdT was also one of the writers, alongside Jackson, Boyens and Walsh.

We know that the early plans were for two films: one would have been a direct adaptation of The Hobbit; the other would have been the so-called 'bridge film'. Those plans morphed into a two-part adaptation of the book.

Early casting calls included the precursor to Tauriel: a young female Wood-elf called ITARIL. This was when it was rumored that Saoirse Ronan was being considered for the role. There was also a call for an ELF WARRIOR (an ELF-LORD OF RIVENDELL) who would have been a romantic interest for ITARIL. Other characters at that time included PRIMULA BRANDYBUCK and DROGO. The original description for BARD described him as "married with a young son".

There was a six-foot tall maquette made of del Toro's version of Smaug. I wold love to get a good look at that!

"I reject your reality and substitute my own." - Adam Savage

(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Apr 13 2019, 2:01pm)


2ndBreffest
Lorien


Apr 13 2019, 2:06pm

Post #18 of 77 (20408 views)
Shortcut
well... [In reply to] Can't Post

the Itaril/Elf-Lord romance would have been way better than the embarrassing Kili/Tauriel/Legolas love triangle they eventually went with. I still can't believe that actually happened.


Noria
Gondor

Apr 13 2019, 2:38pm

Post #19 of 77 (20404 views)
Shortcut
Thanks Chen [In reply to] Can't Post

for drawing all this together in a coherent way. It's interesting to compare the original and final layouts and I agree with your conclusions.

I seem to remember either Jackson or Boyens saying that it was mostly the middle movie of the newly conceived trilogy that benefited from the expansion. You can tell by the physical changes in John Bell as Bain that a lot of stuff was added later to the Laketown story. They were lucky that Mary Nesbitt didn't have a growth spurt as well.

It has always seemed to me that the High Fells scene sat rather awkwardly in DOS and would have been better placed in its original spot right after Rivendell in AUJ. Gandalf seeing the storm clouds that drove the Company into the hands of the goblins would have been cool.

Interesting to learn that Out of the Frying Pan originally ended just before Bilbo's soccer tackle of the Orc. To my mind his heroic and doomed defense of Thorin is more compelling and better earns Thorin's subsequent appreciation.

I agree that ending the original first film with Bard's appearance would be less satisfying. I love the opening of the second movie with Bree and the third with Smaug and Laketown.

All in all I am more than glad that the duology became a trilogy, especially because of the expansion of the Woodland Realm and Laketown stories and the different beginnings, climaxes and endings of DOS and BOTFA.

While I wish that Jackson had had more time to prepare the Hobbit movies before filming had to start, it's hard to know how much that affected the final products. He had much more lead time for LotR and still made a lot of changes, major and minor, during that shoot and later. That's his style.


Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 13 2019, 8:35pm

Post #20 of 77 (20366 views)
Shortcut
Actually, Laketown doesn't seem to have had much expansion [In reply to] Can't Post

Most of it was shot in principal photography: the scenes with The Master and Alfrid, the Dwarves being smuggled in, the encounter with Braga, the Dwarves coming into Bard's house via the toilet, the reveal of the Black Arrow. I believe the chase to conceal the arrow was shot in Principal Photography, but slightly extended during pickups.

Tauriel and Legolas coming to Laketown was also part of principal photography, with Legolas going off after the Orcs. His fight with Bolg was an extension shot during pickups.

If John Bells often looks older in The Desolation of Smaug, that's probably because they reshot some closeups of his. More often than not, shooting pickups is a very technical process of shooting a closeup here, a missing reaction shot there, a beat that the performance of which isn't as good, etc...

It makes sense that Laketown would have been quite leisurely filled with scenes, being that it was going to occupy the entirety of the first act of There and Back Again.

While this means that the introduction of Laketown into The Desolation of Smaug slows down the pace, I always found it imperative. First, as a "deep breath before the plunge" that is the final leg of the journey.

But more importantly, taking the time to introduce Laketown generates a sense of investment there, which is crucial because Bard and the people of Laketown have a central role to play in The Battle of the Five Armies, and because one needs to understand that Thorin is pressing on with the quest in spite of perfectly legitimate concerns that he's putting the people of Laketown at risk - it shines a highlight on his zeal.

Yes, I do think The Desolation of Smaug benefitted the most from the trilogy. It was relieved of the burden of having a conclusion, and could get by with a very economical beginning.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 13 2019, 8:41pm)


Noria
Gondor

Apr 13 2019, 8:49pm

Post #21 of 77 (20360 views)
Shortcut
Before that. [In reply to] Can't Post

Maybe nobody knew it back then but that little film of the little book was off the table from the late 1990's when Jackson and Walsh were not able to carry out their plan to film The Hobbit and then LotR. The inescapable reality is that TH movies were made after the monumental success of the LotR trilogy and that coloured everything about them.

We can argue about the details of how they turned out but it was inevitable from the first that The Hobbit movies were going to be much bigger, much broader in scope than the book. They also had to bookend with Jackson’s LotR and a lot of things that work just fine in the book would not be tenable in movies set in the world of LotR.

As for some of the details, IMO it’s entirely logical for Legolas to appear, since Thranduil was his father and the Woodland Realm was his home.

It makes perfect sense to include the White Council, since Gandalf’s unexplained book absences and reappearances would be ludicrous in a movie, not to mention that the story of the Necromancer and the White Council is a good one.

Tauriel, and to some extent Galadriel and Bard’s daughters, were included because TH book is so male dominated, mostly by crusty middle-aged males at that. The inclusion of female characters, as well as Dwarves of various ages and appearances, added more variety and texture. More importantly, these characters were intended to engage women of all ages, but particularly girls. Before FotR was released, it had been expected that its primary audience would be young men but turned out to contain at least as many women.

The rather awkward love affair itself really took up very little time and the Feast of Starlight scene that began it is beautiful and evocative. The love triangle mostly consisted of Legolas and Kili occasionally glowering at each other. My complaint about the whole thing is that the open minded and outward looking Tauriel started out contrasting with and rebelling against Thranduil’s callousness and isolationism but ended up being all about Kili.

I greatly admire del Toro as a film maker, but whatever he intended in regard to the story (which he was co-writing with Jackson, Walsh and Boyens), visually the movies would have been very different and maybe too outlandish for my taste.

It would be interesting to know what Jackson and Walsh intended for their original version of TH but I don't know how far they got with the planning before it came to a halt.


Chen G.
Gondor

Apr 13 2019, 9:05pm

Post #22 of 77 (20358 views)
Shortcut
Yes [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I greatly admire del Toro as a film maker, but whatever he intended in regard to the story (which he was co-writing with Jackson, Walsh and Boyens), visually the movies would have been very different and maybe too outlandish for my taste.


This.

For all its differences, the core thing that ties The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings is the production design aesthetic. The style of the design feels like Middle Earth.

Del Toro has a very well established style of design, and its much more...hightened than that. His concept art for Thranduil and especially for Smaug are horrible, to my eyes. I love that Peter Jackson landed on a design for Smaug that's really very simple and straightforward, but iconic and elegant.

As for making The Hobbit "bigger", well people seem to forget that its a bloody epic mascarading as a little adventure story. Its a journey that sees the characters cross a distance equivalent to that of continental Europe (from west to east), it has a backstory which goes back centuries and involves a big cast of characters.

In terms of culmination, too, even putting aside the impact it has upon The Lord of the Rings, its an epic quest that results in the re-instating of two nations (Dale and Erebor) and the decimating of another - that of the Orcs of the Misty Mountains.


(This post was edited by Chen G. on Apr 13 2019, 9:10pm)


Solicitr
Gondor

Apr 14 2019, 12:48pm

Post #23 of 77 (20318 views)
Shortcut
I'm sorry [In reply to] Can't Post

But I think that's a big part of what doomed it. It set TH ineluctably on a path to be Lord Of The Rings: The Prequel, and led to both a cod-epic tone that didn't suit the source at all, and the preposterous inclusion of LR-derived nonsense like the Nazgul Tombs balderdash, dragging Blanchett Lee and especially Bloom back in, the morphing of Thorin into Short Aragorn, and attempting even to cast Viggo in a cameo (which, to his credit, he refused).

GdT for better or worse would have presented a vision that stood or fell on its own, and certainly wouldn't have wound up with a pale imitation of a much better set of movies (The LR films were chock-full of flaws, but contain enough good to keep them mostly watchable). And no barrel chase!


Noria
Gondor

Apr 14 2019, 3:04pm

Post #24 of 77 (20299 views)
Shortcut
That’s a matter of opinion, of course [In reply to] Can't Post

The visual design of del Toro’s Hobbit movies would have been a sharp contrast to Jackson’s aesthetic and that the LotR movies. It’s not clear how different the two versions would have been story wise. Del Toro was credited as a co-writer on at least couple of TH movies so he had some input into the final product.

I confess that while I’m a long time fan of TH book, I’m also a fan of the LotR movies and was one of those who wanted more of the same rather as LotR than a small and literal adaptation of the actual book. My mind was changed after I saw AUJ for the first time and realized that PJ had chosen a different approach entirely. He was going for a lighter and more whimsical tone, more in keeping with The Hobbit, but was telling a story set in a Middle-earth that was more like the broader and deeper world of LotR. How well the marriage between an epic story and a light tone that gradually darkens to tragic works depends upon who you ask.

Chen makes the great point that The Hobbit already is an epic story, the book just doesn’t tell it that way. After the arrival in Erebor, the fanciful and amusing book takes a dark turn into mass destruction, war and death. The movies take a similar path, albeit more gradually, moving from the lightness of the Unexpected Party to the tragedy of the Battle of Five Armies.

If Jackson and Walsh had succeeded in filming The Hobbit before they made LotR, I might have liked it very much whether it was epic or small and sweet. (Hopefully it would at least have wiped the memory of the Rankin Bass cartoon from my mind.) I’m not sure that the two movie version of LotR that was to follow would have been as satisfying as the trilogy, but who knows?

Chen, for me the design and execution of Smaug are together one of the greatest achievements in all six movies.


2ndBreffest
Lorien


Apr 14 2019, 4:12pm

Post #25 of 77 (20290 views)
Shortcut
well... [In reply to] Can't Post

for me, PJ's Hobbit made me appreciate Rankin Bass's version all the more.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 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.