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:
Storybook Spoilers - "Hunter Orcs"
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Nov 7 2012, 9:06pm

Post #51 of 60 (99 views)
Shortcut
That is one of the few things that works well in FOTR [In reply to] Can't Post

And makes Middle Earth seem like a vast world, rather than a place where everyone and everything is connected to one bad guy, and a few good guys.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Nov 7 2012, 9:07pm

Post #52 of 60 (96 views)
Shortcut
There have been numerous confirmations [In reply to] Can't Post

That the warg riders, and the hunter orcs, are from Dol Guldur. Just don't remember where those came from! Smile


Macfeast
Rohan


Nov 7 2012, 9:56pm

Post #53 of 60 (91 views)
Shortcut
Did it actually hurt the film? [In reply to] Can't Post

This is the first time, ever, I've heard it suggested that the episodic, and non-personal nature of the monster battles of FOTR, had a negative impact upon the film.

I say, the inclusion of monsters without a direct relation to Sauron worked perfectly fine in FOTR; No reason it couldn't have worked equally well in AUJ. There's still going to be plenty of time left for connecting the dwarves' storyline with the Necromancer; Establishing it this early almost seems like rushing it.


(This post was edited by Macfeast on Nov 7 2012, 10:03pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Nov 7 2012, 10:51pm

Post #54 of 60 (73 views)
Shortcut
Agreed 100% [In reply to] Can't Post

And it worries me greatly that PJ recently stated that nothing at all in a film should seem random. This obsession with neatly connecting everything might even be what's responsible for the lengthy running time...


starlesswinter
Lorien

Nov 7 2012, 11:46pm

Post #55 of 60 (83 views)
Shortcut
Yes, I believe it does SLIGHTLY hurt the film [In reply to] Can't Post

But I'm looking at it in terms of structure and pace, not as a reflection of Middle-Earth seeming real. FOTR has the benefit of being linear in nature, but it is also very repetitive in parts:

New location (Weathertop) --> New monster battle (Nazgul)
Next location (Moria gate) --> New monster battle (Watcher)
Next location (Balin's tomb) --> New monster battle (Moria orcs)
Next location (Bridge of Khazad-Dum) --> New monster battle (Balrog)
And so on...

It's very much a pattern of introducing a new awe-inspiring location where the music swells and then some new creature eventually attacks, whereas TTT and ROTK are far more intimate with battles that have more of an actual effect on the members of the Fellowship. FOTR acts more as a series of vignettes, which is not a bad thing itself, but my point is that the battles/villains in the next two films feel more poignant because there's more invested in them. I believe the Rotten Tomatoes "consensus" of FOTR even states something similar, or did at one point. Not that Rotten Tomatoes is the definitive review of the film, but at least it shows that other people have noticed something along these lines.


starlesswinter
Lorien

Nov 8 2012, 12:14am

Post #56 of 60 (76 views)
Shortcut
Re: Random [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't know about the need for nothing to seem random, but there are plenty of things in the LOTR films and, I'm sure, in the Hobbit films that suggest a vast world. Look at the attention to detail that WETA puts into the costumes, armor, weaponry, sets....lots of things that are never mentioned onscreen are implied about the cultures and their history. It just takes effort on the part of the audience to look into that.

But with regard to actual narrative, I would tend to agree with Peter that nothing should be random. When you're dealing with a filmic adaptation of a book, you often have to streamline the story. Making connections and giving a significance to events in your story is simply good writing. With LOTR, the basic throughline was "Frodo takes the Ring to Mordor," which is why an episode like Tom Bombadil was taken out. It's random and doesn't have any impact on the quest. If the filmmakers decide to give some greater significance to the trolls, for example, then that's fine with me. It's funny how Tolkien himself can thrown in something as random as a talking purse and no one bats an eyelash, but the filmmakers can create a perfectly reasonable elf character and it's an unforgivable sin...

There are plenty of things about films in general that are not like reality, and they shouldn't be. This is an art form, not a documentary. Every bit of it's about manipulating an audience to have an experience while watching, and you need every second to tell your story.


Macfeast
Rohan


Nov 8 2012, 12:32am

Post #57 of 60 (64 views)
Shortcut
If that's how you feel, then obviously I can't say you're wrong. [In reply to] Can't Post

I was just a bit surprised, that's all. I've never seen that point raised before in regards to FOTR, and thought that a testament to the strength of the story, the story being so good that people didn't even think to question it's episodic nature and non-personal conflicts, nor it's diverging from some of the common storytelling truths.

Either way, in my eyes, a group of random events would just add to the initially whimsical tone of the Hobbit. Incorporating the dwarves' storyline into something bigger runs a real risk of undoing that. If the tie-in is deemed necessary, then it could at least been done a little later; It happening this early, is basically a plot-twist incorporated before the inital plot has even had a chance to sink in.


starlesswinter
Lorien

Nov 8 2012, 12:51am

Post #58 of 60 (59 views)
Shortcut
The film IS great! [In reply to] Can't Post

Oh, I agree that the film's story is great...it's just a bit of minor annoyance I've noticed over the years.

But yes, if they do tie the orcs to Sauron, they shouldn't reveal it right away.


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Nov 8 2012, 2:49am

Post #59 of 60 (53 views)
Shortcut
Many thanks [In reply to] Can't Post

Attacked it is then!

LR


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Nov 8 2012, 2:54am

Post #60 of 60 (88 views)
Shortcut
Not modern, 100 years in the past. [In reply to] Can't Post

Orcs and wargs from the Necromancer tracking a dwarf across Eriador is established considerably prior to the time of TH. In that sense this is not a change at all.

LR

First page Previous page 1 2 3 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.