THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release
- Thread starter Skywalker
- Start date
Love the trailer. Looks like lots of fun.
And yeah, the casting for Bard is ... distracting.
And yeah, the casting for Bard is ... distracting.
The question is, does Bard look grim enough? I seem to recall that Tolkien was very big on his grimmity-grimness, and apparently didn't own a thesaurus.
You know, I've taken for granted the casting PJ has done for LOTR and The Hobbit. There aren't too many decisions even worth quibbling over. Bard just might be the exception - visually, at least. It's not a huge problem at this point, but it'll be interesting to see if the performance sheds the Orlando Bloom/Will Turner similarities.
He's not in the first movie, though.
Oh
...There was someone in the first movie with dark hair I thought was Bloom for a half a second, I thought? Unless it was a previous teaser or something? OK, obviously I need to watch the first one a second time 
The trailer didn't really excite me. I like the first Hobbit, but its more annoying parts were a lot of the obvious additions (the albino orc being especially annoying). This looks like it gets more crazy with the additions, and even screws up scenes. The barrel scene in the book did not need to be another action scene, but the trailer is making it look like they're fighting in the barrels as they're going down the river (which is both stupid and probably physically impossible) and there looks to be atleast one uneeded, new action scene with Legolas and the stupid brand new elf. this is what happens when you stretch a book over three movies when it doesn't have nearly enough material. The people making these movies are good, but they are not Tolkien when it comes to this series. They are definately not improving the story by only losely adapting the book (and at this point it is just a loose adaptation). Almost every addition annoyed me in the first one, and not because I'm obsessed with a movie not making any changes from the book. They were just mostly bad (or pointless) changes. I'm not saying Hobbit 2 will be bad, I'll probably like it about as much as I did the first Hobbit, but all of these changes are just dragging the original story down.
Oh
There was at least one production still of Bard that came out close to the release of AUJ - maybe they got blended into the film as well?
The Barrels out of Bond scene (I won't use the acronym for that one), was always intended to be an extended action sequence, even when The Hobbit was meant to be two films. I doubt that it's been significantly padded since the announcement for three films. Adding Legolas, particularly his line about killing a dwarf, strikes me as a stroke of genius. Now, when watching all six films together, his eventual bond with Gimli (son of Glóin) is all the more special and important. However, as much as I enjoy her presence in the trailer, I'll reserve judgment on Tauriel until I see the full film. I think her character is going to be awesome - especially based on her lines in the trailer - but there's not yet enough info to say for certain.
He wouldn't really have fit anywhere in the film. I don't recall seeing him.
Yeah, we don't want to get the fanboys THAT excited.
You're right, Bard certainly wasn't a part of AUJ. But I only meant that there's the possibility that, seeing the production still so close to the release of the first film, it's possible (and not unreasonable) that a person's memory incorporated the two (still and film) together.
I'm a pretty huge Tolkien purist, and I greatly enjoyed the last movie despite its inaccuracies. As an adaptation it suffers because it isn't really The Hobbit.
The Hobbit is a very light and very whimiscal fairytale. The first book I ever loved and an irreplacable treasure for me.
These films are much bigger in scope and intention. Parts of the book that were whimsical and silly were played entirely straight in the last film and it felt very odd. Still, it worked and it was a joy to spend a few more hours in Middle Earth. I bring on this next installment, even if I'm slightly skeptical of Tauriel and Legolas's presence.
The Hobbit is a very light and very whimiscal fairytale. The first book I ever loved and an irreplacable treasure for me.
These films are much bigger in scope and intention. Parts of the book that were whimsical and silly were played entirely straight in the last film and it felt very odd. Still, it worked and it was a joy to spend a few more hours in Middle Earth. I bring on this next installment, even if I'm slightly skeptical of Tauriel and Legolas's presence.
Looks exciting. I've quit worrying about the book and what they've added. It's a rather long adaptation, but it's Middle Earth. I'm just rolling with it.
So you're moving on from "Man of Steel" to the "Hobbit"?
Did you watch the "Hobbit" Did you see the dwarves tossing CGI plates like they were nothing?
How about the dwarves sliding down a ledge on a rickety piece of wooden platform?
Or hanging on to a falling tree and everyone surviving. Not to mention giant eagles swooping in.
"Stupid" and "physically impossible" come with the territory of these movies.
So if they can fight in barrels going down a river then they can because it's fantasy epic.
We still haven't seen a clear shot of Smaug, sorry, but it's just his head. We've not seen his neck, body itself with the jewels platting his underside and his wings and tail. To be honest, I'm not surprised we saw so "little" of him in the trailer.
As for the Trailer itself, it looks good, of course Jackson has changed a few things, especially the Barrels scene, but roll on the 13th December.
Similar threads
