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:
Could 2 versions of the hobbit have worked?

Avnar
Rohan


Oct 8 2013, 4:55am

Post #1 of 11 (695 views)
Shortcut
Could 2 versions of the hobbit have worked? Can't Post

I quite liked the hobbit in parts and flat out hated it in others. Then I started to think that the parts that really grated on me we were just little scenes thrown in for children...

Then I started to think why they didn't release a childrens version and go nuts with bird poo and burping and songs and crazy dwarf falls down cliffs and punch lines before deaths
Mad

Just several different scene playouts and this film could sit proudly along side the lotr's

As it is I just think it is a mess! Didnt Harry Potter do this with some of their films..


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Oct 8 2013, 5:20am

Post #2 of 11 (363 views)
Shortcut
The only things that really bothered me were Azog, timeline and Council inaccuracies (though I [In reply to] Can't Post

very much enjoyed the inclusion of The Council and some of its members. .. hate that there were not more represented), the changes to Dwarven history, and the ridiculous falls. Okay, and the bird guano and Radagast's eye rolling, yet I did not at all mind, and often even enjoyed Radagast himself.

It needed to keep the children's elements, though I think the burbing and mucus could have been dispensed with and it still would have kept the humour of the trolls and dwarves etc. Those things to me were cheap pit humour, and they were not what made the book charming and funny, nor were they even present in it. When in doubt (or even if he isn't) Peter should stick to Tolkien's humour, not his own.

The songs were fine. Indeed, the Misty Mountain song was one of the BEST moments in the movie. It was iconic, classic, and on par with some of the best scenes in musicals, without feeling staged in the way of many musical numbers. I will set that haunting song and the dwarves movingly solemn rendering of it in the company half of the lofty scenes of Rings, and it would hold its own.

In Reply To
I quite liked the hobbit in parts and flat out hated it in others. Then I started to think that the parts that really grated on me we were just little scenes thrown in for children...

Then I started to think why they didn't release a childrens version and go nuts with bird poo and burping and songs and crazy dwarf falls down cliffs and punch lines before deaths
Mad

Just several different scene playouts and this film could sit proudly along side the lotr's

As it is I just think it is a mess! Didnt Harry Potter do this with some of their films..


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


TheHutt
Gondor


Oct 8 2013, 7:25am

Post #3 of 11 (320 views)
Shortcut
Why there will be 2 versions... [In reply to] Can't Post

The theatrical one and the extended one. Wink

Russian LOTR & Hobbit Site: Henneth-Annun.ru


imin
Valinor


Oct 8 2013, 7:59am

Post #4 of 11 (264 views)
Shortcut
Probably been able to make more than two versions [In reply to] Can't Post

One more adult orientated which would seemingly take it away from the book tonally or one which is more 'childish' which would please certain demographics of the audience.

Personally i don't think the film has the same tone as the book - more looks fair but feels foul - something just not right with how it feels. I know others disagree with me on this before others jump to AUJ's rescue, lol.

For me i still think a 2 film version would have been better as it would have forced PJ et al to tighten the action and script making for a better paced film. They still would have the opportunity for the Tolkien/book references which us fans enjoyed as they did this with the EE versions of LOTR films - which when my parents watched felt were too slow and dragged and which i felt gave the 'real' fans things to get excited about.

The current AUJ theatrical edition kinda gets caught between those two by trying to add in loads of stuff like the EE but also try and keep it interesting for the more casual fan/audience member. Which means there is more filler in my eyes, with more fan fic. Example - tauriel. I hope she is a character done well. I quite like the actress but i don't think she was needed to do a good hobbit film, unless you have 3 films to fill Tongue

I think it comes down to - is your sense of humour the same or similar to PJs? I think when i was a young teen it was pretty much the same, now as i have got a bit older mine seems to have changed a bit where as PJ's remains the same and so things i used to find funny, no longer seem funny to me. All this means i find PJ's attempts at humour to fall flat and seem silly, so in a way i would like a more adult version, or someone else to write the humourous scenes than him.

However if someone likes and gets his sense of humour then they will find it funny and so like what we got. I think we all want to love it but only some of us do because for others the style just doesnt sit with them well. Im really hoping at some point they will get remade in the future, by someone who probably isnt even alive today, so there is another visual interpretation of Tolkien's work which to me, more closely matches the books in terms of feel/tone.

'What's the matter with you?' - J.R.R. Tolkien


Arannir
Valinor


Oct 8 2013, 9:17am

Post #5 of 11 (267 views)
Shortcut
I am glad we do not have that 2 part version... [In reply to] Can't Post

... so far. I will have to see the next two in order to judge what might have been cut, but even with the action trimmed I do not see how AUJ should have reached the barrel's scene without being horribly episodic (AUJ ist still very episodic, but things like the Moria flashback, Gandalf/Thorin conversation before and after the troll scene and later the WC stuff and, even if some will hate me for this, Azog, created quite a good flow). Agreed though that the flow does not work as nicely as in FotR despite a similar road movie style. Especially the Thorin/Bilbo hug do not feel forced to me, but over-emphasized by the wrong kind of music. This is a price PJ and Co paid for the three movie solution. I am ready to get sold on that solution by hoping DoS is the biggy that PJ believes it is.

I am certain no matter what version, the humour would be the same. Some stuff was not particularly my humour, but in my screening it worked for the majority of people judging from the laughter - and those were screenings with almost no children there. Nothing cringeworthy imho, although Bilbo fainting is something I find hard to swallow.

The bird poo is actually something I like about Radagast's design. Yes, it has something deeply odd, but I really liked is that when Gandalf and Saruman discuss Radagast the audience is not necessarily forced to follow Gandalf, but might also a little bit agree with Saruman. questioning whether he is just very natural or maybe has gone too natural already.

Only scene I really disliked is the Stone Giants scene. Always hoped we would just see shadows moving in the mist with one of the dwarves speaking about the old legends.

So it already stands proudly next to LotR to me... I am certain I would not say this about a movie that would have translated TH in both tone and style increbily close to the book on screen. I know this is something some people will find a horrible thing for me as a Tolkien enthusiast to say. But I guess I always saw some aspects of Tolkien's work relatively critical compared to many and did not care much for a movie adaption of TH until PJ and Co expanded it.



ďA dragon is no idle fancy. Whatever may be his origins, in fact or invention, the dragon in legend is a potent creation of menís imagination, richer in significance than his barrow is in gold.Ē J.R.R. Tolkien

Words of wisdom that should be remembered - both by critics, purists and anyone in between.


imin
Valinor


Oct 8 2013, 9:22am

Post #6 of 11 (231 views)
Shortcut
That's fair enough [In reply to] Can't Post

I feel the opposite to yourself about nearly everything, lol, other than the stone giant sequence which i felt was very Michael Bay and though i guess MB has his place i don't think it is in Middle-earth and was boring to me. Like you i would have preferred them off in the mist - which would have cut the time down as well. They could also cut out lots of Radagast time and well i can see loads of places they can but i know you won't agree. :P

For me two films would have been great and i still think they are partly doing it to make more money - cynical maybe but it will make more money and people seem able to cope with filler pretty well so it's all good. (though of course one mans filler is another mans gold :) )

Oh forgot to add - the humour i think would be the same if there were 3 films or 2, totally agree. Just i think if the humour was changed for another style that would give a different feel to the whole movies in my opinion, possibly giving another version? But like i said the humour is what it is, some love, some don't like.

'What's the matter with you?' - J.R.R. Tolkien

(This post was edited by imin on Oct 8 2013, 9:24am)


Arannir
Valinor


Oct 8 2013, 9:31am

Post #7 of 11 (218 views)
Shortcut
Totally agree, it is a taste thing. [In reply to] Can't Post

And I will never have an issue with people like you who argue their opinion, though different from mine, this honestly and politely.

It is the kind of criticism that makes people who like what they saw look like fools, simpletons or un-critical, easy-to-serve-action-loving fanboys that I have an issue with (the same way goes the other way round, I hate when people who like what they saw call critics "haters, cynics or worse").

Thankfully, TORN is one of the few places where those things play almost no role and opinions can be exchanged honestly but in a civilized manner.



ďA dragon is no idle fancy. Whatever may be his origins, in fact or invention, the dragon in legend is a potent creation of menís imagination, richer in significance than his barrow is in gold.Ē J.R.R. Tolkien

Words of wisdom that should be remembered - both by critics, purists and anyone in between.


Salmacis81
Tol Eressea


Oct 8 2013, 12:58pm

Post #8 of 11 (159 views)
Shortcut
I think so... [In reply to] Can't Post

I've been saying for a while that I think a two-part adaptation would have been great. Not that I don't think I'll enjoy the trilogy, but of course I don't yet know the full extent of what Jackson has added to be able to get 3 films out of the story.

Anyway, considering that the Rankin/Bass version of The Hobbit clocked in at a little under 80 minutes, and the only major omission was the chapter "Queer Lodgings", I am convinced that we could have gotten a two-part adaptation that would have covered the entire book, plus condensed (and more accurate) depictions of Dwarven history and the White Council sub-plot. Many scenes from the book would have had to have been scaled back (Bag-End, which I loved every minute of, comes to mind), but I could have lived with that if it meant more accurate depictions of the Appendices material, most of which I feel should have been explained through dialogue and a few well-placed flashbacks rather than being brought into the present timeline. I am okay with Jackson expanding Bard and the Mirkwood elves to an extent, but also could have lived without those being added if it would have meant a tighter, more faithful adaptation.


Elessar
Valinor


Oct 8 2013, 1:10pm

Post #9 of 11 (152 views)
Shortcut
Loving the ride [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
So it already stands proudly next to LotR to me


It does for me as well. I think both are great at being what they are representatives of two great works. I do like that they've made The Hobbit a bit more serious in nature, and added more depth to the characters. Its been a great ride so far.Cool



frodolives
Lorien

Oct 8 2013, 1:43pm

Post #10 of 11 (144 views)
Shortcut
Fan edits [In reply to] Can't Post

Check out any number of high quality fan edits, which get rid of most or all of the stuff that bothers you. I will be making one of my own once the EE comes out.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Oct 8 2013, 11:55pm

Post #11 of 11 (96 views)
Shortcut
Thanks for reminding me about the stone giants. One of the few things I rather disliked [In reply to] Can't Post

, though initially I had been pleased they would be included. The turned out to be too stony and far too large. I ended up wishing they hadn't been there. There were actually only a few things I disliked about An Unexpected. . . unfortunately I really hated some of those things, but they were not abundant. I loved more of the film than I hated.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

 
 

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.