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:
"All Good Stories Deserve A Little Embellishment"
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


Jan 10 2013, 1:55am

Post #26 of 39 (405 views)
Good post [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree with a good number of them, infact looking at them again nearly all.

For a film audience the changes certainly helped.

the only one i dont really agree with is Azog but that's because i dont feel he would have been needed if they stuck to a 2 part series rather than 3 part. In the trilogy they went for they need some kind of tension otherwise it would be more dull, plus the masses love a good chase and fight!

Not to mention it does genuinely increase the amount of revenge people will feel later in the movies.

Ave Moria

Jan 10 2013, 2:03am

Post #27 of 39 (411 views)
I don't want to bicker [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, we have differing opinions, but I am confused as to where you are getting 20 pages.

Appendices A-F all feature material that falls in the timelines that concern the Hobbit and the Ring's overall destiny, which spans all of the books, and there is close to 200 pages, yes. Something like 160-ish, though I could be off. It's closer to 200 than it isn't.

Anyway, your opinion is your own. Mine is mine.

-In the Darkness, a torch we hold-

(This post was edited by Ave Moria on Jan 10 2013, 2:06am)


Jan 10 2013, 2:17am

Post #28 of 39 (392 views)
lots of that is not related to the hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post

a poster on here created a thread of all the things which were even remotely related to the hobbit from the appendices, it was very thorough and well done.

It doesnt come to 200 or 160 pages though, sorry. Many pages are on writing and family histories, kings of rohan etc. These dont have much to do with the hobbit other than this particular member of the took family was alive at the time of the hobbit.

It is nothing more than a bare framework on which one can get a sense of a larger history but that is things accounting for the first age and second age such as appendix A.

There is nothing in there that says things like the changes that were made in the film so dont pretend that there are. It is a framework for the time frame of the hobbit nothing more. Seriously it doesnt all involve the hobbit just because it is about ME, lol.

Unfinished tales would have been more useful for the film makers in my opinion.

So at the end of it, there is less than 160 pages, maybe more than 20 (i just thought u had perhaps mis typed the 200) but certainly less than 160, sorry, that was more just some PR by PJ et al.

My original point was if they had stuck to a two film format they wouldnt need the chase scenes and azog being annoyed on top of weathertop as they simply wouldnt have had time to do so.

This was the format they had been working on for a long time, when they changed it they realised they had shot lots of film and PJ felt they could make it work as three films - some scenes which would have ended up on the cutting room floor then made it in as the film couldnt just be the same length as the two film version would have been minus any parts of the movie after a certain point (carrock), people would have felt its a right rip off for doing that. So they had to expand the story from what they originally had intended, for me i take that to be padding it out - you can take it however you like, the fact is they had to add scenes to the movie to get it to length, otherwise as two films they would have been about 5 hours long each.

It comes down to you thinking Azog is a good character and is to the betterment of the story where as i think if they had just stuck to two films the series would have been better - though as i said in my original post now it is three films (obviously, lol) i do think they needed some created tension as they had to take longer to get places - something which in the hobbit doesnt happen - its from one place to the next.


Jan 10 2013, 3:31am

Post #29 of 39 (381 views)
Wouldn't Azog have been in it with two movies, anyway? [In reply to] Can't Post

They started out with two movies, and presumably Azog was in them, then. They announced the expansion to three this past summer, so do you think they added more Azog with three? I would have thought they would have added more BoFA.


Jan 10 2013, 3:34am

Post #30 of 39 (387 views)
Yeah he most likely would have been in it anyway [In reply to] Can't Post

I cant see it all being a last minute kinda thing.

I just dont think he would be needed at all if there was a two film adaptation. But obviously we have the one we have so he is there, lol.

I think there will also be more BOFA than previously and probably a little more of everything in between :P


Jan 10 2013, 5:06am

Post #31 of 39 (381 views)
Most EXCELLENT post!!!!!! // [In reply to] Can't Post


Black Breathalizer

Jan 10 2013, 6:22pm

Post #32 of 39 (339 views)
Time to flesh out Tolkien's themes [In reply to] Can't Post

imin wrote: If they had kept it to two films they wouldn't have needed to add invented tension.

Jackson is telling his own version of The Hobbit story. What's wrong with adding tension to the journey to Rivendell? Interestingly, you point to the 'added tension' as a reason for NOT expanding the story to three films, while I would point to all of the story enhancements this thread has highlighted as amble evidence why the three film decision was a darn good idea.

One of my initial reactions to watching AUJ was, "Good gracious, how in the world did Jackson, Walsh, and Boyens ever imagine they could tell this rich of a tale in only two movies to begin with." It was well-known that the original ending was slated to be the barrel ride to Lake Town. That means the original AUJ would have included: 1) meeting and staying with Beorn, 2) Gandalf's departure, 3) the journey through Mirkwood, 4) the spider attack, 5) losing Thorin, 6) getting lost, 7) the capture by the elves, 8) Thorin's confrontation with the Elvenking, 9) the imprisonment of the dwarves, 10) barrels out of bondage, 11) and finally, the trip down the river in the barrels. All of these things (plus Jackson's film additions) would have added AT LEAST an hour and a half to a movie that ran nearly three hours without it. So just imagine all the scenes that would have been cut from the version we watched if an hour+ of footage would have had to have been cut out.

How much of the riddle game would have survived? How much
the beautiful Bag End sequence would have survived? One of the special film moments for me was how the screenwriters courageously gave Bilbo some quiet time to survey his hobbit hole and reflect on staying home and leaving the opportunity for an adventurous life behind. In a version that would have required heavy editing--would this special film moment have survived? I seriously doubt it.

Jackson is not telling Tolkien's original children's tale the same way the Professor did. But IMHO, he's doing a wonderful job of highlighting (in his own unique style) all of the themes of the story that were so near and dear to Tolkien's heart.

(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Jan 10 2013, 6:30pm)


Jan 10 2013, 10:25pm

Post #33 of 39 (314 views)
I think those scenes could have survived in a two film series [In reply to] Can't Post

I never felt the film should have been split at the arrival of laketown for the two film split - to me that is too much for film one in comparison to the second film.

Obviously this is not what PJ was intending to do either, lol.

I think if you get rid of radagast, and azog, the chase scenes, the way overly drawn out goblin town then you could add those other moments without detracting from the better ones - the moments at the start.

I realise why he did it - people in general found the start boring and liked it when action happened - opposite can be said for tolkien fans in general. Alas they are not making it for fans but the general public.

Also the survey his hobbit hole - you know how long that was - 1 minute in screen time - take out 1 min of goblin town and you have that back,

It could of course of been done, lots of the scenes could have had fat trimmed off them and scenes as i pointed out above completely removed.

Though as you say ultimately PJ is making his own movie based on the hobbit rather than trying to make the hobbit. Personally i just really would love to see what a two film movie looked like, fantastic i imagine.

Michelle Johnston

Jan 11 2013, 2:37am

Post #34 of 39 (311 views)
A beautiful positioning [In reply to] Can't Post

Thank you so much for your post because this is exactly how I approached the movie. How would Bilbo retell the "real" tale from the adult perspective of the LOTR rather than the charming small book JRRT wrote for his children.

I agree with all of your observations. Particularly the remarkably straight forward solution to how would a mighty Dwarf Lord enter Bag End.

Here are a my own.


Radagast's special concerns are for the fauna and flauna of middle earth. He lives most closely to Dol Gulder it is therefore logical that he would discover the first symtoms of evil and uncover the re gathering of Sauron's spirit rather than Gandalf. If there are five wizards and one of them live in the Greenwood then this is in my mind the truth revealed. Tolkien wrote up the back story in the appendices to explain logically Gandalf's actions leading up to the Quest for Erebor. They made sense from that perspective alone, but they overlooked Radagast who is referred to in the Hobbit.

Radagast never had a settled tradition though he clearly existed in the sub created world, these films provide a tradition based on the inherant potential of the Brown. One matter Tolkien never entirely clarified was whether Radagast fell into a person of trivalities rather than maintain his high purpose. Given Radagast warned Gandalf of the nine and he ultimately enabled his escape from Orthanc the literary evidence is he retained his higher purpose but these movies will show from a kind of Falstaffian humble place squaring the circle. This is now realised on screen reminding us once again the seemingly humble, who the outwardly powerful dismiss at their peril, can step forward and make a difference.


When I reread the Hobbit last summer several matters really jarred one was the fay manner in which the refugees of Imladris welcomed the Dwarfs. For the Dwarfs to arrive in Rivendell with its sense of quiet unhurried Templer granduer worked well. The humour then came from the Dwarves who proved you can take the person out of the pub but you can not take the pub out of the person.

I tried to save the shire , and it has been but not for me.

(This post was edited by Michelle Johnston on Jan 11 2013, 2:39am)

Black Breathalizer

Jan 11 2013, 3:48pm

Post #35 of 39 (297 views)
Radagast represents Tolkien's conservation theme. [In reply to] Can't Post

Michelle Johnston wrote: Radagast's special concerns are for the fauna and flauna of middle earth.

Great post. I loved the way that the film makers portrayed Radagast by vividly illustrating his concern for the birds, animals and plants of Greenwood. Some fans some have commented about the wizard's odd look and odder ways and compared him to George Lucas' annoying Jar Jar Binks. But I strongly suspect that Tolkien's own vision of Radagast would be fairly close to the character we saw in the film (minus the bird poop.) Smile For those who would disagree, imagine how the character of Tom Bombadil would have appeared on the big screen if Jackson presented the Tom we got in Tolkien's story. Non-book fans would have had the same complaints about Tom Bombadil that we've heard directed at the character of Radagast.

Some fans have also expressed angst over the compressed timeline for Greenwood Forest's evolution into Mirkwood. But the beauty of showing the audience the growing evil through Radagast's eyes is that we get a strong sense of his deep love and passionate concern for all the little creatures of the forest. Given Radagast's intense focus, we have a understanding of his character and realize he doesn't care about how he is perceived by humans, elves, dwarves, or even his fellow Istari because he's rarely "in their world."
Except for Radagast's reaction to a puff of "Old Tobey," there is nothing about his portrayal that doesn't ring true to the spirit of Tolkien (given what he gave us of the Brown Wizard.)

For the record, I don't mind the pipeweed jokes. They pay homage to the LOTR's first wave of American fans

(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Jan 11 2013, 3:49pm)


Jan 11 2013, 11:19pm

Post #36 of 39 (274 views)
Wonderful post [In reply to] Can't Post

The Appearance of the Dwarves at Bag End. I thought it was a major enhancement to Thorinís character to have him appear AFTER the dwarves have had their fun and games. Thorinís appearance immediately changed the tone and set the stage for Ďdark business.í

You will have noticed how beautifully laid out the table was for Thorin and I thought the plate of scones/cakes(six or seven) placed strategically next to Thorin was epic. Second only to Thorin's knock at the door for tension. Cool


Jan 11 2013, 11:36pm

Post #37 of 39 (263 views)
And to Gandalf's "He's here." [In reply to] Can't Post

One would think they were expecting a nazgul.

In Reply To
You will have noticed how beautifully laid out the table was for Thorin and I thought the plate of scones/cakes(six or seven) placed strategically next to Thorin was epic. Second only to Thorin's knock at the door for tension. Cool


Jan 14 2013, 8:03am

Post #38 of 39 (246 views)
Sound effects [In reply to] Can't Post

I also thought sounds made a difference. The thrush cracking the snail against the rock at Erebor was worth a mention. As the cameras draw the audience down into the mountain you notice the treasure but become more aware of the vast emptiness and desolaton.

Just totally opposite to what the audience see and hear in the early scenes of Erebor. Clinking of hammers and chisels.


Jan 18 2013, 1:27pm

Post #39 of 39 (271 views)
**I've Gathered Geeky List Info from this post :) THANKS ALL! // [In reply to] Can't Post


gramma's The Hobbit: Unexpected Journey Line Party Report & Review
and first draught of TH:AUJ Geeky Observation List


I'm SO HAPPY these new films take me back to that magical world!!

TORn's Observations Lists
Unused Scenes

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.