|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silmaril
Nargothrond
Nov 17 2016, 9:56am
Post #51 of 89
(1745 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I wonder what actors really think about these films?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Except Viggo and maybe Richard Taylor noone criticised PJs movies as far as I know.
|
|
|
dormouse
Gondolin
Nov 17 2016, 3:30pm
Post #52 of 89
(1724 views)
Shortcut
|
|
When did Richard Taylor criticize them?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I've never heard him be anything other than supportive and admiring of PJ's film-making. He talks honestly about the problems and the pressures but the nearest I've heard him come to criticism is a kind of teasing banter between friends - as, for example, when he talks about the expanding size of the Witch-king's mace, which he says ought to be preposterous but works on screen.
I can't see any reason to doubt that what the actors have said about the films is what they really think. Why would it not be?
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
Silmaril
Nargothrond
Nov 17 2016, 4:45pm
Post #53 of 89
(1721 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I remember this interview with Richard Taylor
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I remember this interview where he is not that convinced with cgi and stuff. He describes the difference on working on TH and LOTR. I'm not talking about harsh critics but just some serious opinions...Did everyone only say: "Oh it is sooo amazing...blah blah"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xlq1UBue-Q
(This post was edited by Silmaril on Nov 17 2016, 4:47pm)
|
|
|
dormouse
Gondolin
Nov 17 2016, 5:30pm
Post #54 of 89
(1711 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Thanks for that link, it's an interesting interview....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
What I get from that is not so much criticism of The Hobbit film itself but of filming as a whole and the way things have changed since they made the Lord of the Rings. Richard Taylor's a craftsman - things made by hand and the actual hands-on process of making excites him - so he regrets the fact that time and budget pressures now force them to do more now digitally or with 3D printing. He understands the need for it but still misses the chance to make everything by hand. And he can't help being a bit frustrated when something made by hand - like a prosthetic is replaced digitally - though again, he understands and supports the decision.
Now, who said anything about the actors only saying "Oh, it's so amazing" - 'cos it certainly wasn't me! I think the people involved with the films have always been pretty upfront about problems they've encountered and things they're not sure about. I'm sure the actors are critical of some aspects of the films - I expect PJ is too - creative people are usually critical of their own work. And from the actors' point of view, I bet they're often put out when scenes they've worked on don't appear in the film - things like that. It's just the idea you seemed to be echoing - and I'm sorry if you weren't - that if someone is positive about something there must be more to it - they must be hiding what they 'really' think.
Listening to Richard Taylor, and thinking of the Lord of the Rings films which I'm rewatching just now, I'm inclined to say weren't we lucky that the first trilogy at least was made at a time when they could spend time making every last prosthetic and button and buckle and brick wall by hand? If that level of individual craftsmanship in film isn't possible now, it's wonderful to have the very best that it could be preserved on film for all time.
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
Silmaril
Nargothrond
Nov 18 2016, 8:14am
Post #55 of 89
(1672 views)
Shortcut
|
|
RT: "I personally would prefer to see some characters as prosthetic..."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I agree with most of your comments. Richard is a great guy, I love to hear him talking about LOTR and stuff.
And yes, there was this thing with the "large rabbits", where the production team thought this was a joke...
(This post was edited by Silmaril on Nov 18 2016, 8:16am)
|
|
|
OldestDaughter
Nargothrond
Nov 18 2016, 1:13pm
Post #56 of 89
(1660 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I have no negativity with the films
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yes, they weren't exactly like the book, but neither was LOTR's(even if it was much closer to it.) But I love the Hobbit films, and I appreciate what they have done with them. Might not be the Hobbit film we all wanted, but I think it's a great first story that leads into the LOTR's! I've watched all six films recently(Not in order though) and I notice how each film gives a nod to each other. The Hobbit definitely sets up the LOTR's, but the LOTR's, even if made before the Hobbit, mentions some of the past things from the previous story.(Incident with the dragon, Thorin and Mithril.) And it works!
One thing for sure, I love the Hobbit and LOTR's films, and I had read the Hobbit book before I saw the films, and still enjoyed the movies, no matter what they did with them!
"Keen, heart-piercing was her song as the song of the lark that rises from the gates of night and pours its voice among the dying stars, seeing the sun behind the walls of the world; and the song of Lúthien released the bonds of winter, and the frozen waters spoke, and flowers sprang from the cold earth where her feet had passed."
|
|
|
imin
Doriath
Nov 19 2016, 9:29am
Post #57 of 89
(1616 views)
Shortcut
|
...but it was an inconsistent and flawed one. I also didn't feel it consistently captured the spirit of the book, which is what I used to judge the films. Mentioning the talking purse is beginning to be a straw man in this group and doesn't suggest a genuine interest in the opinions of others, but I will offer mine none the less.
The landscapes were beautiful, but didn't have the same impact on the story as in LOTR. As I mentioned elsewhere, the theme of man vs. Nature was lost as the focus became chase scene...after chase scene...after chase scene. Mirkwood was enchanting...but the company didn't spend enough time there to build that sense of danger and despair.
Also, it is hard to admire the scenery when I am taken out of the story by a poop stained wizard drag racing across the screen on a bunny sled. Yes, a poop stained wizard drag racing across the screen on a bunny sled. I'm sure a lot of work went into creating this scene, but does not improve the movie, it actually makes the movie worse.
The films had some great moments and some of that magic that I felt when watching LOTR. Unfortunately, the lows were very low. Bad decisions that I attributed to the change in both directors and number of films. I give PJ the benefit of the doubt here, figuring he was forced into a difficult situation and did the best he could. The end result of his labors, unfortunately, was not a repeat of his highly successful LOTR trilogy.
All posts are to be taken as my opinion.
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
Nov 19 2016, 2:50pm
Post #58 of 89
(1604 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Actually, it is quite simple...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The OP asked what was the reason behind the negativity towards this adaptation, and I am, (at least on here) one of the few who are truly qualified to give an answer, as the vocal majority see practically no faults with it whatsoever.
Now there are many reasons given (outside of this forum) for disliking these movies. Christopher Tolkien's opinion on how PJ handled the LotR should give anyone a pretty clear idea of what he would think of his Hobbit. This being said, I feel a large majority of the critics of PJ's Hobbit would agree with Christopher's sentiment, myself being one of them.
Additionally, I see PJ's Hobbit as a clumsy attempt at modernizing the classic story in an attempt to appease the widest possible demographic, and in so doing, alienating many of those who love the story as it was written. Those who love the movies will disagree with everything I've said, but most of those with a negative view of them will most likely agree to some degree.
|
|
|
dormouse
Gondolin
Nov 19 2016, 4:02pm
Post #59 of 89
(1591 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, in trying to make it simple....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
....I still feel that you're blurring the issue.
Negativity, of the kind we see here so often, is more than simply not liking. It's more than reasoned criticism. It steamrollers through everything in its path in an attempt to be the truth, the only truth about these films. Consider statements like:
"I am, (at least on here) one of the few who are truly qualified to give an answer..." Put simply no, you're not. You are just one voice among many and the OP's question was open to anyone who cared to answer, no matter what their attitude to the films - or the book. And you don't have any unique authority on this any more than I do.
"the vocal majority see practically no faults with it whatsoever" I've seen very few posts here from people who see no faults in the film whatever. I hesitate to use words like 'majority' because I haven't counted, but I've certainly observed a general tendency among those who enjoy, and even love the films to make a point of qualifying their enthusiasm with 'for all their faults', or 'I know they are not perfect, but....' Speaking for myself, as a keen Tolkien reader of over fifty years standing who also loves the films, I've often commented on the things I don't particularly like in them. So I'm afraid your charge simply doesn't hold water.
I feel a large majority of the critics of PJ's Hobbit would agree with Christopher's sentiment, myself being one of them. Would they, though? What of those who criticise on the grounds that the films are too far removed in style from the Lord of the Rings films, which they love? Those who prefer prosthetics to CGI - those who feel The Hobbit films didn't make sufficient use of the landscape, those who miss the scale models.... What of those who were disappointed in the films because they were hoping for Peter Jackson to go much further than he did in excising the whimsical and fairytale elements of The Hobbit? How can you possibly claim that any of these critics of the films would agree with Christopher Tolkien's view?
"Those who love the movies will disagree with everything I've said..." Er... no, as it happens. I love the films but I won't disagree with eveything you've said, even if you tell me to!. I agree with you that Christopher Tolkien disliked the Lord of the Rings films intensely. I agree that there's a clumsiness in some parts of Peter Jackson's adaptations of both stories. I think there are elements of modernity in both sets of films which, to me, feel out of place. I daresay some of the people who dislike the films will agree with you to some degree, as you say.
We also agree on our feeling about Tolkien and his writing....
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
Silmaril
Nargothrond
Nov 19 2016, 7:10pm
Post #60 of 89
(1574 views)
Shortcut
|
Which is very good too. I understood PJ's arguments in some way but the final movies disappointed me...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcG2GeCAqLA
|
|
|
dormouse
Gondolin
Nov 19 2016, 7:51pm
Post #61 of 89
(1570 views)
Shortcut
|
...another very good interview which I hadn't seen.
As for the disappointment, I take your point. I know a lot of people here felt that way and that is as it is. You can no more help it than I can help the fact that I really enjoy them. I suppose we all look for different things.
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
Nov 19 2016, 8:48pm
Post #62 of 89
(1561 views)
Shortcut
|
the majority of the negative comments I've come across, are usually similar to what Christopher said about the LotR movies. I'm always looking for new reasons to hate PJ's Hobbit and consider myself somewhat of a connoisseur of the bad reviews and therefore an expert in the field.
|
|
|
dormouse
Gondolin
Nov 19 2016, 11:19pm
Post #63 of 89
(1552 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm always looking for new reasons to hate PJ's Hobbit
Thank you - this explains a lot.
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
Nov 20 2016, 12:28am
Post #64 of 89
(1540 views)
Shortcut
|
a bit of tongue in cheek, but admittedly, there's a certain element of fun in reading others critiques.
|
|
|
skyofcoffeebeans
Nargothrond
Nov 20 2016, 3:04am
Post #65 of 89
(1530 views)
Shortcut
|
Sounds a bit like the definition of confirmation bias
|
|
|
mae govannen
Dor-Lomin
Nov 20 2016, 8:58am
Post #66 of 89
(1511 views)
Shortcut
|
Christopher Tolkien is the indisputably ultimate arbiter about those M-e films reflects only the view of those people who, like you, do consider him to be so.
Many others, myself included, when they read at the time his opinion about the LOTR Trilogy (quoted in your first "Simple" post above) found on the contrary this opinion of his so highly surprising, so extremely negative, so totally dismissive of all that had been quite beautifully rendered of the book through those films, that this opinion itself made them put in question the judgement of its author.
And if his opinion was revealed to be incorrect and unjustified even about such great and inspiring films as the LOTR ones, why would people give it any special importance now regarding the adaptation of 'The Hobbit'? I for one certainly didn't look for any opinion from Christopher Tolkien this time around, for he has lost all credibility in my eyes - precisely because of his opinion of the LOTR movies, and also because of two more reasons I explain about in my other post answering your first one.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
mae govannen
Dor-Lomin
Nov 20 2016, 9:06am
Post #67 of 89
(1505 views)
Shortcut
|
you enjoy both those Trilogies, just as I do, and for the same simple reasons as I too do! :-)
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
Nov 20 2016, 12:34pm
Post #68 of 89
(1489 views)
Shortcut
|
I absolutely hold the opinions of Christopher when it comes to matters relating to the works of J.R.R. Tolkien in the highest regard. And, in much the same way as you have written off Christopher's opinion, I have written off PJ's credibility for adapting Tolkien after this adaptation.
But to say that Christopher's opinion was "revealed to be incorrect and unjustified" is not fact, but only the opinion of PJ fans on this particular website, largely.
|
|
|
mae govannen
Dor-Lomin
Nov 20 2016, 1:08pm
Post #69 of 89
(1478 views)
Shortcut
|
|
So it's all a matter of opinion,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and that is the truly simple conclusion we will at least be able to agree on! 
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
OldestDaughter
Nargothrond
Nov 20 2016, 5:25pm
Post #70 of 89
(1442 views)
Shortcut
|
"Keen, heart-piercing was her song as the song of the lark that rises from the gates of night and pours its voice among the dying stars, seeing the sun behind the walls of the world; and the song of Lúthien released the bonds of winter, and the frozen waters spoke, and flowers sprang from the cold earth where her feet had passed."
|
|
|
Eruonen
Gondolin
Nov 22 2016, 4:58pm
Post #71 of 89
(1363 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I like to go back and watch the production Facebook videos and the
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
supplemental discs for doses of feel good positivity.
I certainly have my criticisms of the films - but the extra material really helps to focus on the whole process and puts things into better perspective.
The EE editions were a step in the right direction.
(This post was edited by Eruonen on Nov 22 2016, 4:59pm)
|
|
|
Avandel
Gondolin
Nov 22 2016, 9:47pm
Post #72 of 89
(1343 views)
Shortcut
|
happen to be more or less exactly what I personally would have ordered... except that I hadn't even known what to order, as I didn't like the book much to start with, and only thanks to the movies did I discover quite unexpectedly that the story could be made palatable for my taste - and had indeed been made so. To my utter delight, movie after movie I saw that I had been right to basically trust PJ & C°, and that, except for a few mishaps in my eyes here and there, they had delivered the right goods as far as I was concerned!!! So I can only be ever grateful that this new Trilogy exists at all, for if it didn't I wouldn't even have known what I had almost missed and now cherish so much, as still retaining the full story-line and lighter mood of the original childlike novel, and yet as also providing the enlarged, quite worthy prequel to the LOTR Trilogy that JRRT himself, through related writing of his, inspired to the film makers, and might have liked too, it seems to me... And yes, it is true that the endless care and sheer love put by all into these films just as in the LOTR ones before, do endear them to me even more than just seeing the results, which I am fortunate enough to find almost absolutely to my taste, and I am so glad about it!... Sorry, by the way, for those others who don't find them their cup of coffee...
*Shrug* - I'll also ALWAYS maintain that what PJ did with the Hobbit films is remarkable , in that re the base material you have a whole trilogy where you are spoiled for choice, re what material you want to depict. Even then PJ IMO did some things in LOTR I find pretty questionable, and I flat out don't like.
So folks could say "well, it doesn't match LOTR" but you're not starting with some epic trilogy to begin with. Other folks wanted the whimsy of the Hobbit, but I personally probably wouldn't have bothered going to a theater to see a "children's movie" or to see Bilbo unconscious through a battle and some garden gnomes (can't get Yoda wielding a light saber out of my head, nor Gimli being turned into comic relief when he sure wasn't that in the book LOTR ).
TH may have flaws, as IMO does LOTR, but neither is like sitting through BvS, the last Star Trek, or Alice in Wonderland 2 - all of which I rented via cable, and all of which I wish I could get my money back for. Watching the last Alice my eyes actually drifted mournfully to a Hobbit poster I have on the wall, thinking I could have just re-watched that. And should have *meh*.
|
|
|
mae govannen
Dor-Lomin
Nov 23 2016, 5:35am
Post #73 of 89
(1315 views)
Shortcut
|
to see you around!
I have myself been able to join again in this Hobbit Forum only since a few weeks, but I had already noticed - and that, mournfully too - that you were conpicuously absent from the discussions here... Perhaps you had redirected your attention and energy to some of the other TORn boards? Or, like me, you just couldn't come for a time, for some reason? Anyway, I feel as if I was the one now welcoming you back, instead of the opposite...
I didn't mention in that post of mine (one cannot mention everything everytime!...) that LOTR too had its flaws in my eyes, and some of them serious enough not to get used to and then accepted in the end. Just as you say, "Even then PJ IMO did some things in LOTR I find pretty questionable, and I flat out don't like.", so we are actually in complete agreement also on that.
'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)
|
|
|
Omnigeek
Menegroth
Nov 29 2016, 5:57am
Post #75 of 89
(1182 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Because we saw what he was capable of with LOTR
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
To then get so many deviations and changes in the TH trilogy was truly disappointing. I disliked a lot of the costuming choices but could see the Weta production staff spent a LOT of time on creating the costumes and prosthetics even before taking the tour at the Weta Cave where they talked about detail work they did on the INSIDE of costume armor where it wouldn't even be seen just to get it "right" for the actor's feel.
I must have read different critiques than you because the most overwhelming factor that I recall from most criticisms were the freedoms he took with the book -- unnecessary additions like the Kili-Tauriel-Legolas triangle, cheap humor like Kili's off-color entendres, too much time with Alfrid, etc. (and yes, short- or no-bearded dwarves) -- not "laziness". I don't think anyone could say anyone on the production crew or cast were lazy -- perhaps the comments you are thinking off were about taking a lazy way out on some of the script issues?
|
|
|
|
|
