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: Reading Room:
Are you worried about The Hobbit films straying from the book?
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

imin
Valinor


Jun 29 2012, 12:00am

Post #26 of 49 (246 views)
Shortcut
A very small amount let you [In reply to] Can't Post

They have to apply for a license to sell alcohol - at least from what i am aware of. I don't think i have been to a cinema that lets you drink beer, though i guess you could sneak one in a bag or something.

I wouldn't want to drink an American 'beer' anywhere though. And let the American vs British beer fight begin Tongue


Yngwulff
Gondor


Jun 29 2012, 12:11am

Post #27 of 49 (240 views)
Shortcut
Canadian beer is better [In reply to] Can't Post

But with al the micro breweries in the US now its a tough call


Take this Brother May it Serve you Well
Vote for Pedro!


Aunt Dora Baggins
Half-elven


Jun 29 2012, 12:31am

Post #28 of 49 (272 views)
Shortcut
I'm not that invested. [In reply to] Can't Post

I was very invested in FotR, because I'd waited 30 years for a live-action LotR and was so disappointed in Bakshi's version. Like you, I was bothered by the differences from the books in TT and RotK, though I enjoyed them for what they were. And I enjoyed the extended editions more than the theatrical versions (especially seeing Old Man Willow make a very belated appearance). But they feel like their own things, and don't match my own visions of the books at all.

The Hobbit was never as important to me as LotR, though I usually tried to begin my annual reading of LotR with The Hobbit. And I've seen other versions I've enjoyed, including a great stage play that had a Smaug whose head filled the stage. And as my grown kids say, "Why do they need to make a Hobbit movie when the cartoon is already perfect?" I wouldn't go quite that far, but I've loved that cartoon for decades.

I really hope PJ can make his elves a little more engaging this time, and less lugubrious. I want to hear some Tra-la-la-lally, doggone it! And I'd really, really love to see a cameo by a ten-year-old Estel in Rivendell. But other than that I'm not worried one way or the other.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondence, with love from Bilbo; on a large wastebasket. Dora was Drogo's sister, and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"A Chance Meeting at Rivendell" and other stories

leleni at hotmail dot com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



Curious
Half-elven


Jun 29 2012, 1:32am

Post #29 of 49 (268 views)
Shortcut
I wasn't a big fan of the Rankin Bass cartoon, but [In reply to] Can't Post

at least it was appropriate for little kids, and had some of the magic of the book. I'm afraid Jackson's version is aimed at an older audience.


batik
Tol Eressea


Jun 29 2012, 3:13am

Post #30 of 49 (257 views)
Shortcut
No, but... [In reply to] Can't Post

I will avoid a re-read until after both films are released. Less risk of picking up on tiny details that I might take note of , you know?
Oh--the bliss of being a movie-firster! I will miss that with The Hobbit.


Ongyage
The Shire


Jun 29 2012, 8:49am

Post #31 of 49 (241 views)
Shortcut
no need [In reply to] Can't Post

Just wait to see these films, no need any worries.

The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.

(This post was edited by Ongyage on Jun 29 2012, 8:49am)


sador
Half-elven


Jun 29 2012, 12:59pm

Post #32 of 49 (228 views)
Shortcut
Hey! [In reply to] Can't Post

Were have you been hiding lately? We've missed you!


imin
Valinor


Jun 29 2012, 1:16pm

Post #33 of 49 (231 views)
Shortcut
You liked being a movie-firster? [In reply to] Can't Post

That's a first!


dormouse
Half-elven


Jun 29 2012, 1:37pm

Post #34 of 49 (229 views)
Shortcut
Same here. [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't like all the illustrated versions - or the illustrations that come without versions, if you see what I mean - but I still like the fact that they exist. I enjoy seeing them and seeing how different people's visions of it all can be. The Cor Block illustrations don't appeal to me at all, though I can see why they would appeal. There's a strength and a simplicity about them. Pauline Baynes work I love and it 'feels' right for Tolkien, probably because I grew up with the Pauline Baynes Narnia illustrations and used to have Pauline Baynes' Tolkien posters on the wall. With Ted Nasmith's work, sometimes when he hits the right note I think his illustrations are breathtaking - like the Kinslaying at Alqualonde. And his landscapes and skies too - I love the Last Sight of Hobbiton, on this page.

But the one whose illustrations appeal most to me is Alan Lee, and that pre-dates the films by more than a decade. After 'Faeries' I used to collect books with his illustrations. I was over the moon when I first saw the centenary edition of Lord of the Rings - especially as I had a large book token with me at the time (though I wasn't intending to spend it). That's another thing that drew me to the previous films and makes me look forward to The Hobbit. There's so much of Alan Lee's work in the look of LotR and I'm hoping there will be in The Hobbit too.

But, just as a footnote to this, I never read the centenary edition. I love the illustrations and often look at them but when I read the story it has to be the old, un-illustrated edition that I started with.


imin
Valinor


Jun 29 2012, 3:11pm

Post #35 of 49 (216 views)
Shortcut
Ted Nasmith, favourite of mine. [In reply to] Can't Post

Though like you i also like Alan Lee, John Howe, the one painting by Ruth Lacon that i have as my avatar and Pauline Baynes.

Some of my favourites by Nasmith are Kingslaying at alqualonde like yourself, also the end of the age, tol brandir (i have this as a limited print along with barad dur) and turin discovers neinor.

Would love to one day have my own original created by Ted, John or Alan.

Like you i am hoping for lots of Alan Lee's artwork and design to be incorporated into the design of TH movies.


dreamflower
Lorien

Jun 29 2012, 9:51pm

Post #36 of 49 (199 views)
Shortcut
Not at all worried [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't at all expect it to be "like the book", but then I also had lower expectations and more worry for LotR. (Having been burned by Bakshi, I did not expect PJ's version to be as good as it was.) But I consider PJ's LotR to be a fanwork, and an AU fanwork at that; I have come to the same mindset in advance for TH. I do expect that the "book parts" will be more like the "book parts" of LotR simply because TH is a shorter book with less to cut out.

I expect to enjoy PJ's version of TH. I also expect to find things to complain about. I will thoroughly enjoy the movie, but I will have a lot of fun picking nits later. There are things in the book I will miss that I already know will be left out, such as the Dwarve's multicolored cloaks in Bilbo's front hall. There are things I already know are in the movie from the trailer (the Dwarves singing Misty Mountains for one thing) that I expect to love. I also expect to find a few elements in the movie that I can incorporate into my vision of Bilbo and the story without conflicting with the book-- such as that lovely dressing gown he wears in one screen-cap.

I look forward to seeing PJ's fanfic about the White Council and the attack on Dol Goldur, and also of the Battle of Five Armies, and discovering how it differs from the dozens of fanfics about those events that I have already read. (He'll have to go some to beat the versions by Canafinwe, daw the minstrel, Nilmandra, Jael or Thundera Tiger.) I very much look forward to Howard Shore's amazing music, and to seeing an on-camera appearance by Radagast the Brown.

We will see what we will see. I don't expect PJ to let me down, both in giving me a great movie, and in giving me some nits to pick. I'm rubbing my hands in anticipation.
'


dreamflower
Lorien

Jun 29 2012, 9:59pm

Post #37 of 49 (201 views)
Shortcut
I also avoided a re-read of LotR and am of TH [In reply to] Can't Post

During the year before and each year that LotR was coming out, I avoided re-reading LotR. I did spend some of that time re-reading TH and the Silm, but I wanted to not have too many details fresh in my mind. As soon as I'd seen RotK, I started re-reading, and it was awesome to get back to it all fired up by having seen the movies in between.

My last complete re-read of TH was a year and a half ago, though I have re-read bits and pieces now and then for specific reasons. I don't expect to do another complete re-read until after I've seen both movies.


sam90
Lorien

Jun 29 2012, 10:59pm

Post #38 of 49 (210 views)
Shortcut
The Hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post

Since I didn't saw PJ's LOTR trilogy in theater but after it's DVD release I cannot really make the point to The Hobbit's release. Taken apart however, I wouldn't say that I am 'worry' for there are things of more importance in life that keeps me worry enough but I am rather concern of how it will turn out to be since I do like the book as many people here obviously. Though I should say that to me, the fate of the book and the movie are not bound together in any way there are only about the same subject that is all. I think that splitting the story in two films doesn't look like a bad idea though it may seem a good way to make more money. I guess it'll allow PJ and his team to really give more importance at many things in the book and so unfold the story without neglecting or forsake too much.


(This post was edited by sam90 on Jun 29 2012, 11:03pm)


Undome
Bree


Jul 1 2012, 4:22am

Post #39 of 49 (174 views)
Shortcut
Yes. [In reply to] Can't Post

In fact, I think I am more worried about the film version of The Hobbit than I was about LOTR. Why? Even though I agree with you that LOTR is the greater and more complex literary work, I think that The Hobbit is in some ways more difficult to adapt to film. With LOTR you can take the high road and make a mostly serious dramatic action-adventure film saga that is still relatively close to the tone and structure of the books. But I'm having a hard time visualizing (even after seeing the trailer) how you can stay true to the "tone" of The Hobbit and not have it come across as totally corn-ball on film (unless you were willing to have it not be continuous with the LOTR films). In other words, the tone of The Hobbit (book) is so different from the tone of LOTR (books) that you can't unify them on the big screen without being untrue to one or the other of the original texts.


"It is gone forever, and now all is dark and empty."
- Frodo Baggins




Undome
Bree


Jul 1 2012, 4:31am

Post #40 of 49 (170 views)
Shortcut
Right on. [In reply to] Can't Post

I think it's always better to read the books after seeing the movies. Since the original texts are usually far better than their film adaptations, you will likely be disappointed by the decrease in quality experienced by reading the book and then seeing the movie. Vice-versa: you will likely be pleased by the richer experience of reading a great book after having seen an inferior movie adaptation. Put simply, always save the best (which is usually the book) for last.


"It is gone forever, and now all is dark and empty."
- Frodo Baggins




imin
Valinor


Jul 1 2012, 9:09am

Post #41 of 49 (186 views)
Shortcut
I look at this in a totally different way. [In reply to] Can't Post

For me if i can i will always read the book first. I have found no matter how much i try to, if i have watched a movie first then read the book. the characters will look either exactly like or close to what the actors do from the films - hindering my imagination.

I find its better to create the world as my imagination will allow it and then go and see the film. I do agree that almost always a film adaptation is not as good as the book but i dont think thats a reason to go see the movie first.

I think it depends though, if you can completely forget the images seen from the movie and create your own new characters then i guess it doesnt matter - i have a visual memory so its hard for me to get rid of the actors face/scences.

I also think because they are not as good or in most cases as in depth, they kind of just spoil the book as you know the basic plot of the story.

For me i am really glad i have read both the hobbit and lord of the rings before the movies. I do think some people if they read the hobbit say a week before seeing the film would almost go in with a check list of things they want to see and if not will make a mental note - taking them out of the film experience but then others - such as myself - at the time of watching i basically will let anything be in the film and just suspend my disbelief pretty well entirely.

But its interesting i didnt really know anyone preferred the movie then book approach Tongue


Curious
Half-elven


Jul 1 2012, 3:07pm

Post #42 of 49 (159 views)
Shortcut
Maybe that's why I've stopped worrying. [In reply to] Can't Post

I already figure it won't be anything like the books, so I stand little chance of being disappointed. On the other hand, I'm also having a hard time working up enthusiasm for the movie. I'm more enthusiastic about more Tolkien fans visiting the Reading Room.


sador
Half-elven


Jul 1 2012, 4:42pm

Post #43 of 49 (164 views)
Shortcut
Definitely more! [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, I'm not that worried, but I can hardly be less than I was back then...

I didn't even see Jackson's LotR in the theatre; I'm not a big film-goer, my wife wasn't interested in going with me (rightly so - we once watched the DVD together, and she dropped off before Fellowship was finished), and I didn't want to go alone.

This time I will probably need to go, and take my son with me. So there is the worry of his being disappointed, the possible vibe of the theatre atmosphere, and the last five years on TORn in which I met so many nice people who really care about the coming films, and have shared both news and their anticipations and anxieties. I'm sure by the time I get to the films most will have seen it already, and their reactions will spill over (even if I will manage to avoid the Hobbit movie-board until I see it myself, which I do intend to).

So 'worried' is a strong word; but I am both interested and concerened that my son might be disappointed, which I wasn't really eleven years ago.

Nevertheless, I did end up enjoying Jackson's version of LotR - so I expect I will enjoy The Hobbit as well.


batik
Tol Eressea


Jul 2 2012, 2:03am

Post #44 of 49 (151 views)
Shortcut
Hey Sador... [In reply to] Can't Post

just doing alot more lurking than posting here. *cough* Barliman's chat *cough*
Glad to see all is well in my favorite Reading Room Smile


batik
Tol Eressea


Jul 2 2012, 2:08am

Post #45 of 49 (145 views)
Shortcut
Yeah, the order of my Tolkien experience... [In reply to] Can't Post

has worked well for me. One of my comparisons is something like....oh, LotR....movies....3 course meal...oh...LotR as written by Tolkien....7 course meal. Both enjoyable....able to linger a little longer over the 2nd one.
Added bonus: no basis for comparison when the first film was released=no grumbling.


Otaku-sempai
Half-elven


Jul 2 2012, 2:08am

Post #46 of 49 (155 views)
Shortcut
I'm just hoping for films that are faithful to the book in spirit. [In reply to] Can't Post

And that whatever changes and additions are made aren't actually insulting to most fans of Tolkien and the book. Then I will be (mostly) content.

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house." - Aragorn


PhantomS
Rohan


Jul 2 2012, 3:08pm

Post #47 of 49 (136 views)
Shortcut
there is only one thing I never like [In reply to] Can't Post

and that is when new characters not named in the books or given a reason to exist ('Mardil' in RoTK could be any Ranger and is therefore OK) become plot points. There is already an Elf named 'Tauriel' somewhere in current information, which already clashes with the book which names no Elf apart from Elrond. I just hope she's a very secondary character, because the Hobbit already has a lot of secondary players that add a lot of colour- the Elvenking, Gollum, Beorn etc are more than enough.

I'm sure the movies will give the book the portrayal it deserves- it even gives us all the Dwarves where a typical screenplay would omit some. The film's literature does add some personality quirks to the Dwarves, which might not match Tolkien's writing but will give them lines at least. Fili and Kili not being so colourful is a very small minus for me.


Otaku-sempai
Half-elven


Jul 2 2012, 5:28pm

Post #48 of 49 (133 views)
Shortcut
Lord Elrond isn't even named as an Elf. [In reply to] Can't Post

Instead, he is noted to be an 'Elf-friend', one of those with Elvish blood in his line. The only full-blooded Elf to be named in The Hobbit is Galion, wine servant to the Elvenking. Still, there is nothing inherently wrong with inventing and naming a new character as long as she (in the case of Tauriel) serves a valid function in the story that doesn't take away from the pre-existing characters.

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house." - Aragorn


Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Jul 2 2012, 9:24pm

Post #49 of 49 (263 views)
Shortcut
Slightly worried, but only slightly [In reply to] Can't Post

Most of changes that PJ made were for time's sake (e.g. emitting Tom Bombadil), and could be easily forgiven. Others (Such as choosing to kill off Saruman at Isengard rather than in The Shire) were actually improvements in terms of how the film played out. However, there were a few changes (such as Aragorn's fake "death" scene in The Two Towers) which were cringeworthy to say the least. On the whole though, the films were brilliant.

What worries me is the addition of characters that don't exist (such as Tauriel and Alfrid). It is totally unnecessary. But I trust PJ. If in doubt, I just watch the trailer, which restores my faith completely. It really does look fantastic.

"A Wizard is never late, Frodo Baggins. Nor is he early: he arrives precisely when he means to!"-Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring.

(This post was edited by Radagast-Aiwendil on Jul 2 2012, 9:26pm)

First page Previous page 1 2 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.