Considering that Tolkien himself tried to do that (the rewrite of The Hobbit ended up being subtle, although the original plan was more ambitious. Plus, there's the Quest of Erebor), it's hard to entirely fault Jackson.
THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release
- Thread starter Skywalker
- Start date
Considering that Tolkien himself tried to do that (the rewrite of The Hobbit ended up being subtle, although the original plan was more ambitious. Plus, there's the Quest of Erebor), it's hard to entirely fault Jackson.
I'm with you brother. I can rip through LOTR like nothing, not so with The Hobbit. I don't know if it is a mental block or what, because I do enjoy the 'story' of The Hobbit. However there is something about the way that it is written, I just can't get into it. Weird! I try and read LOTR every few years but I don't even bother with The Hobbit. With the movie coming out I did re-read it, I was glad to be done with it. My son is always looking for new things for me to read him when he goes to bed, he loves Dragons and fantasy stuff. Was thinking about reading The Hobbit to him, if we share this and maybe I can have a new appreciation for it.
Last edited:
I'm wondering if he meant that he could tell all of story of The Hobbit along with all of the extra LOTR backstory stuff.
I have the same problem with Harry Potter. I never even finished the first novel because I found the writing to be too juvenile.
That's a book series that builds over time and becomes more mature. I really think it works best if you're a kid when you start reading it and then read each book as you get older.
Not that you can do that now
Not that you can do that now
I'm excited for Hobbit Part 2, but I really wish they hadn't decided to make three movies. If you cut out the white orc stuff from the first part, it would have gone from good movie to very good movie. I think the Legolas stuff will be the same way in this.
Also, something i've noticed by watching the trailers, it looks like they've ruined one of my favorite scenes in the book, the barrel escape from the elves. It is not an action scene in the book, and it should not be one
Also, something i've noticed by watching the trailers, it looks like they've ruined one of my favorite scenes in the book, the barrel escape from the elves. It is not an action scene in the book, and it should not be one
Well the first time I read the Hobbit was when I was a child and I adored it. Not only was it a fun almost light adventure story that really captures a grand scope, but it was a gateway to more serious reading, which I think was a good thing for me.
Now, I tried rereading it before the last movie, and I admit I was bored with it, but nevertheless I remain fond of it.
The movies? I like that they're widening it into what's happening in the whole world and not just Thorin and Company's Quest for Erebor. Sure they've taken a lot of liberties, but they haven't really betrayed the feel of the books and the only untrue change they really made was taking away Dain's moment of being the hero in the Goblin/Dwarf war(though that trailer made it seem like he might pop up after all) and merging Azog and Bolg into the same character. Minor things really and only done to make the hero and villain more identifiable.
This next one looks good and I think the Legolas parts will amount to just a cameo really.
Finally saw The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey last night. It was... OK. Way, way over-padded tough, and Sylvester's still rubbish (and Barry Humphries?! WTF?). Too many non-Hobbit bits in the first half just to give cameos to the LOTR cast, and unnecessary flashbacks to CG battles. Basically, exactly what I feared would happen when they announced such a long adaptation of such a short book- over-milking the studio's cash-cow.
That said, the last 90 minutes or so was really good - basically the bits actually adapting chapters from The Hobbit. Ian McKellen and Hugo Weaving were great, most of the Dwarves sort of bland but inoffensive, and Martin Freeman was playing Martin Freeman as usual. (seriously, if you can tell the difference between his Arthur Dent, Bilbo, and character from Blake's Junction 7, you're doing well).
Music was good too - nice to hear Shore keep a lot of the Middle Earth leitmotifs.
Over all... maybe 7/10. Nice to be in a familiar setting for a good-looking epic, but too over-padded. Unless the next two movies are a lot better it's gonna be obvious that they should have done it as two 2-hour movies at most, and I cannot fucking believe they've got the cheek to be bringing out an extended version of something that's so over-extended to start with.
There needs to be a <2-hour "Hobbit Cut" not an extended one...
That said, the last 90 minutes or so was really good - basically the bits actually adapting chapters from The Hobbit. Ian McKellen and Hugo Weaving were great, most of the Dwarves sort of bland but inoffensive, and Martin Freeman was playing Martin Freeman as usual. (seriously, if you can tell the difference between his Arthur Dent, Bilbo, and character from Blake's Junction 7, you're doing well).
Music was good too - nice to hear Shore keep a lot of the Middle Earth leitmotifs.
Over all... maybe 7/10. Nice to be in a familiar setting for a good-looking epic, but too over-padded. Unless the next two movies are a lot better it's gonna be obvious that they should have done it as two 2-hour movies at most, and I cannot fucking believe they've got the cheek to be bringing out an extended version of something that's so over-extended to start with.
There needs to be a <2-hour "Hobbit Cut" not an extended one...
I'm convinced you could shave a substantial portion of time by just cutting the action scenes to make them shorter. That would give the movie quite a bit better flow. I like the name "Hobbit cut," though.
I freakin' loved the first one. No complaints. The second looks even better.
My only question is that if the Hobbit is a third the size of one LotR book, but they expanded it into three three-hour movies, whereas the LotR movies got a little boring at some points due to little action, as though they were just trying to fill space.....
My only question is that if the Hobbit is a third the size of one LotR book, but they expanded it into three three-hour movies, whereas the LotR movies got a little boring at some points due to little action, as though they were just trying to fill space.....
The Lord of the Rings books are filled with description that's fairly slow, which helps explain quite a bit of its length. Things were cut when making the movies and very little added to fill space (things were added to give female characters things to do, though).
The Hobbit is the opposite. The book is very sparse. Entire conversations are represented by a single sentence ("And all the Dwarves agreed that Biblo was brave indeed"). The movie is invariably longer just because of that. Quite often, imo, this is taken to extremes - some of the action scenes are drawn out unnecessarily, imo.
So that's the difference. As far as total plot, the LOTR has more, but it's closer than book length would suggest. But far more was cut from the story to make the movies than was cut from the Hobbit.
The Hobbit is the opposite. The book is very sparse. Entire conversations are represented by a single sentence ("And all the Dwarves agreed that Biblo was brave indeed"). The movie is invariably longer just because of that. Quite often, imo, this is taken to extremes - some of the action scenes are drawn out unnecessarily, imo.
So that's the difference. As far as total plot, the LOTR has more, but it's closer than book length would suggest. But far more was cut from the story to make the movies than was cut from the Hobbit.
TheOneRing.Net has posted images of four Lego sets for The Desolation of Smaug. The of the sets (Dol Guldur related) suggest certain events for the film.
Beorn is present in the Dol Guldur Ambush set while Azog is present in the Dol Guldur Battle set. Their presence in these sets seem to indicate a change in storyline and focus, which also goes against TORN speculation the seige of Dol Guldur doesn't occur until There and Back Again.
I'm less bothered by the lack of presence of the rest of White Council (Galadriel, Elrond, Saruman) because the Lego sets often omit characters from events to limit the number of mini-figures included.
I'm less bothered by the lack of presence of the rest of White Council (Galadriel, Elrond, Saruman) because the Lego sets often omit characters from events to limit the number of mini-figures included.
Wow, I didn't expect yet another trailer so close to the release. Greater emphasis on the stakes for Bard and Laketown in addition to the stakes for Thranduil, Legalos and Tauriel. And, of course, just a little more of Smaug!
But still no shots of Stephen Fry.
But still no shots of Stephen Fry.
Well, seeing AUJ was one of the most unhappy times of my life in a theater. I spent $30 dollars for me and my buddy to see it in HFR 3-D, and my eyes hurt from the get-go. I liked the film (but I thought it was odd that the first line of the book came only after pages of dry exposition) but the theater experience itself was awful.
The new trailer looks pretty good. I plan on seeing it in 2-D, no HFR. What matters is the story, not the bells and whistles. If it's a good film I should be well-absorbed into it on it's own merits.
The new trailer looks pretty good. I plan on seeing it in 2-D, no HFR. What matters is the story, not the bells and whistles. If it's a good film I should be well-absorbed into it on it's own merits.
If only you could opt for black and white and mono sound as well.
So apparently there was a worldwide fan event on Monday that I had absolutely no idea about!
Fortunately Warner Bros. was kind enough to upload the video onto YouTube. It's an hour long, but the first ten minutes is just a static image and a scrolling Twitter feed. Then they replay the recent theatrical trailer, and the actual event starts at around 12:30. It's mostly a Q&A with Peter Jackson and some members of the cast, but the real highlights are the newest production blog, which starts at around 21:00, and a clip from the upcoming Extended Edition of An Unexpected Journey, which starts at around 52:45. The video ends with the three-minute sneak peek that recently came out. Enjoy!
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq6VibJxFFU[/yt]
Fortunately Warner Bros. was kind enough to upload the video onto YouTube. It's an hour long, but the first ten minutes is just a static image and a scrolling Twitter feed. Then they replay the recent theatrical trailer, and the actual event starts at around 12:30. It's mostly a Q&A with Peter Jackson and some members of the cast, but the real highlights are the newest production blog, which starts at around 21:00, and a clip from the upcoming Extended Edition of An Unexpected Journey, which starts at around 52:45. The video ends with the three-minute sneak peek that recently came out. Enjoy!
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zq6VibJxFFU[/yt]
Similar threads
