[tiam]

I watched the Hobbit again recently and it was so meh. This one looks alot better and the pacing will be good, as in not almost an hour of Dwarves washing up dishes. I really liked the Mirkwood above the trees scene we see with Bilbo as I really liked that bit in the book along with the dwarves cursing him for having had a bit of a breeze at the top of the tree. A small bit but still.

Also its been a while since I read the Hobbit but im sure Legolas isnt in it. Is it just a filmicly placed cameo for the sake of shoehorning him in?

[Studious Lock]

 Jean-Claude Van tiam, on 14 June 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

I watched the Hobbit again recently and it was so meh. This one looks alot better and the pacing will be good, as in not almost an hour of Dwarves washing up dishes. I really liked the Mirkwood above the trees scene we see with Bilbo as I really liked that bit in the book along with the dwarves cursing him for having had a bit of a breeze at the top of the tree. A small bit but still.

Also its been a while since I read the Hobbit but im sure Legolas isnt in it. Is it just a filmicly placed cameo for the sake of shoehorning him in?

he isnt. they're just putting him in because he would of been alive at the time... and you know, to bring in some of the less die hard fans i guess?

[QuickTidal]

 Jean-Claude Van tiam, on 14 June 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

I watched the Hobbit again recently and it was so meh. This one looks alot better and the pacing will be good, as in not almost an hour of Dwarves washing up dishes. I really liked the Mirkwood above the trees scene we see with Bilbo as I really liked that bit in the book along with the dwarves cursing him for having had a bit of a breeze at the top of the tree. A small bit but still.

Also its been a while since I read the Hobbit but im sure Legolas isnt in it. Is it just a filmicly placed cameo for the sake of shoehorning him in?

Yeah, what SL said. Legolas would have been alive, and his father IS Thranduil (who Is heavily involved in the Hobbit), so it actually makes more sense for him to be present than not.

And yeah, die hard fans love Legolas...like me!

[McLovin]

Will be hard to see Legolas without thinking about that line from THE AVENGERS...

[Salt-Man Z]

 QuickTidal, on 22 December 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

 Tristan Jay, on 21 December 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

 Salt-Man Z, on 21 December 2012 - 10:03 PM, said:

 Macros, on 20 December 2012 - 06:19 PM, said:

Its pulling in some stuff from the silmarion as well as expanding oj some stuff only aluded to in the book.

No, Jackson only has movie rights for The Hobbit and LotR; Tolkien's estate won't give him The Silmarillion. The extra stuff would come from LotR, either stuff mentioned in-story, or from the appendices of RotK.

I got the impression that this is the reason why Gandalf can't remember the names of the two Blue Wizards...

I think you are right, I'm pretty sure they are only mentioned in THE SILMARILLION and UNFINISHED TALES...so that would make sense.

Late reply, I know, but: I flipped through the books just after seeing THE HOBBIT for the first time (last month? April? I forget. It was okay. Anyway.) the blue wizards are only named in UNFINISHED TALES once in a fragment, and at all other times were treated as if their names had been forgotten. I think there's even a quote from Tolkien at one point saying he didn't know their names. So that was (amusingly) actually true to the source material.

[QuickTidal]

Yeah, I only recently made my way through UNFINISHED TALES and they do only get that very small mention (though it amuses me that they are the subject on the Harper Collins cover)...kind of like how some of the wives and husbands of the Valar are mentioned once and forgotten forevermore in the SILMARILLION.

Though I think the Blue Wizards were also named in the BOOK OF LOST TALES (either I or II)...but I think that's where it was pulled for UNFINISHED TALES...so yeah, one mention.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 14 June 2013 - 04:40 PM

[Studious Lock]

wait, they are given names in unfinished tales? i see a reread coming...

[Salt-Man Z]

 Studious Lock, on 14 June 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

wait, they are given names in unfinished tales? i see a reread coming...

Yup: http://en.wikipedia....ki/Blue_Wizards

[worry]

They're called Rod and Todd.

[Salt-Man Z]

 worry, on 14 June 2013 - 07:47 PM, said:

They're called Rod and Todd.

That's what they named their staffs. (Staves?)

[Kruppe's snacky cakes]

 worry, on 14 June 2013 - 07:47 PM, said:

They're called Rod and Todd.

I don't know about that, but I think one of them is this guy:

 250px-Portly_wizard.png (115.03K)
Number of downloads: 0

[QuickTidal]

New Full Length trailer for the 2nd film.

http://youtu.be/OPVWy1tFXuc

[Traveller]

I was looking forward to this... until I read some of Jackson's comments. Like how they've introduced the female, 'ninja-like' elf to add a female character (when it's a blatant excuse for a female Legoland.)

And how he's 'jazzed up' the barrel scene (which means it will now be roughly 3 times as long as it should be, and likely resemble a theme park ride) and not forgetting his comments regarding the addition of new characters - 'it's great to make up new characters, as you can take the story where you like. The book has the Battle of Five Armies...by the time we're done, there might be 5,6, who knows?'

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

[QuickTidal]

 Traveller, on 01 October 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

I was looking forward to this... until I read some of Jackson's comments. Like how they've introduced the female, 'ninja-like' elf to add a female character (when it's a blatant excuse for a female Legoland.)

In his defense, the lack of female characters in both LOTR and THE HOBBIT don't read well to female audiences (see: Arwen's beefed up role in the LOTR trilogy)...especially considering how many females are present and fornt-and-center in THE SILMARILLION...so I don't think that adding a beefed up female Elven warrior is a bad idea at all...especially because it's not hard to imagine that one or more of the Elven guards in Thranduil's hidden city would have been female...so having one present and in the forefront of this version of the tale allows not only a balancing of a pretty male-centric story, but also it appears (VIA what looks like a forbidden relationship between Legolas and Tauriel) that her presence is such that it will help visually illustrate Thranduil's phobia of the outside world encroaching on what he's built and secured. He can't have someone upsetting that balance by distracting his son from what I assume will be his drive to see Legolas succeed him in the King role.

 Traveller, on 01 October 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

And how he's 'jazzed up' the barrel scene (which means it will now be roughly 3 times as long as it should be, and likely resemble a theme park ride) and not forgetting his comments regarding the addition of new characters - 'it's great to make up new characters, as you can take the story where you like. The book has the Battle of Five Armies...by the time we're done, there might be 5,6, who knows?'

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

From a filmmaker POV, "jazzing up" scene's like the barrel sequence are key to being "action setpieces" in films like this which have a lot of walking and exposition. Without them, the pace drops because these are yarnspinner stories. On paper, you don't necessarily need that pacing, cause you are already "reading". In the visual medium though, you need this sort of thing to keep things clicking for the casual viewer, who isn't a die-hard Tolkien fan and will be there solely for the dialogue.

Again, film is a totally different medium, that requires a whole different set of tools to bring to life. If that means adding armies, or characters, then that's how it is.

As to my opinion, I absolutely ADORE the addition of Tauriel...simply because some of my fave characters from Tolkien's work are female elves, Galadriel being the best of those. She's arguably the strongest character in the entire story, and I think is the eldest (barring possibly Cirdan).

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 01 October 2013 - 04:54 PM

[Aptorian]

Watched the first minute and a half then closed the window in frustration. I feel like I just watched half a movie. Why does Hollywood continue to make these trailers that function more as a synopsis than an appetiser???

[QuickTidal]

 Crustaceous Apt, on 01 October 2013 - 06:34 PM, said:

Watched the first minute and a half then closed the window in frustration. I feel like I just watched half a movie. Why does Hollywood continue to make these trailers that function more as a synopsis than an appetiser???

You're never read THE HOBBIT?

[Aptorian]

I have like 15 years ago but that is besides the point. A lot of the stuff about a movie is not the knowledge of what happens next but the presentation of those events. Some films are made by the impact you feel when you first see that "scene", etc.

Hollywood trailers have this annoying tendency now a days to just pick the 20 very best scenes in a film, usually crucial story beats, string them along with some narrative and call that a trailer.

I want to go back to the days when we just had a narrator telling us about "A world where cannabalistic motorcycle gangs fight to use your blood as fuel for their gruesome death engines" accompanied by a couple fight montages and an electric guitar.

[worry]

You're right, Apt. Which is why the first Hobbit trailer with just the tiny teaser of Gollum was so refreshing.

[QuickTidal]

 Crustaceous Apt, on 01 October 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

I have like 15 years ago but that is besides the point. A lot of the stuff about a movie is not the knowledge of what happens next but the presentation of those events. Some films are made by the impact you feel when you first see that "scene", etc.

Hollywood trailers have this annoying tendency now a days to just pick the 20 very best scenes in a film, usually crucial story beats, string them along with some narrative and call that a trailer.

I want to go back to the days when we just had a narrator telling us about "A world where cannabalistic motorcycle gangs fight to use your blood as fuel for their gruesome death engines" accompanied by a couple fight montages and an electric guitar.

While I feel this is different cause it's Jackson, and Tolkien (AKA attempting to please fans with the trailer, and thus include lots of footage) I will agree with you by saying this: ALL the trailers for GRAVITY so far (having seen the film myself at TIFF) contain 90% of the footage from only the first 7-9 minutes of the finished piece, the rest of it being unseen until you sit down in the theatre. That was a cool thing, to sit in the theatre and have NO idea where the film went after those initial 7-9 minutes of footage from the trailers.

So you've got a point. I just think it works less with the HOBBIT as the material is fairly well known.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 01 October 2013 - 07:34 PM

[Traveller]

 QuickTidal, on 01 October 2013 - 04:51 PM, said:

 Traveller, on 01 October 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

I was looking forward to this... until I read some of Jackson's comments. Like how they've introduced the female, 'ninja-like' elf to add a female character (when it's a blatant excuse for a female Legoland.)

In his defense, the lack of female characters in both LOTR and THE HOBBIT don't read well to female audiences (see: Arwen's beefed up role in the LOTR trilogy)...especially considering how many females are present and fornt-and-center in THE SILMARILLION...so I don't think that adding a beefed up female Elven warrior is a bad idea at all...especially because it's not hard to imagine that one or more of the Elven guards in Thranduil's hidden city would have been female...so having one present and in the forefront of this version of the tale allows not only a balancing of a pretty male-centric story, but also it appears (VIA what looks like a forbidden relationship between Legolas and Tauriel) that her presence is such that it will help visually illustrate Thranduil's phobia of the outside world encroaching on what he's built and secured. He can't have someone upsetting that balance by distracting his son from what I assume will be his drive to see Legolas succeed him in the King role.

 Traveller, on 01 October 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

And how he's 'jazzed up' the barrel scene (which means it will now be roughly 3 times as long as it should be, and likely resemble a theme park ride) and not forgetting his comments regarding the addition of new characters - 'it's great to make up new characters, as you can take the story where you like. The book has the Battle of Five Armies...by the time we're done, there might be 5,6, who knows?'

This does NOT fill me with confidence.

From a filmmaker POV, "jazzing up" scene's like the barrel sequence are key to being "action setpieces" in films like this which have a lot of walking and exposition. Without them, the pace drops because these are yarnspinner stories. On paper, you don't necessarily need that pacing, cause you are already "reading". In the visual medium though, you need this sort of thing to keep things clicking for the casual viewer, who isn't a die-hard Tolkien fan and will be there solely for the dialogue.

Again, film is a totally different medium, that requires a whole different set of tools to bring to life. If that means adding armies, or characters, then that's how it is.

As to my opinion, I absolutely ADORE the addition of Tauriel...simply because some of my fave characters from Tolkien's work are female elves, Galadriel being the best of those. She's arguably the strongest character in the entire story, and I think is the eldest (barring possibly Cirdan).

You don't have to explain why they make these changes ('Film is a totally different medium?' Really?!) I understand why they make them in the translation from book to film, or rather why they think they need to. Jackson just takes it too far, which is unecessary with a classic like The Hobbit. What, they think that if they stick to the book, no-one will watch it? They think 'women won't like it because there aren't any girls in it?' That's bullshit. They know how marketable these new characters will be, and take full advantage of the 'gaps' in the story to fill it with their own material - most of which stands out, as they (Jackson and Walsh) aren't actually very good at it. Seems like you're their perfect target market to me - someone who liked the movie version of Legolas in the first films, and want more of the same, which they are more than happy to do.

I just think the films suffer from this self indulgence, which is a shame as the book itself is good enough without any major alteration.

(Other filmmakers don't feel this need for balancing out the genders - you don't look at something like 'Apocalypse Now' and say, hell, this is crap, women are really poorly represented in this, if at all. It's a film based on a classic novel, set in a warzone, with a bunch of male soldiers. Coppola didn't read Heart of Darkness and decide that what it really lacked was women, and invent some female characters to attract or satisfy a female audience..he changed it, yes, but he kept the tone and theme of the book.)

I generally liked what they did with the first Hobbit film; making the mountain giants scene from just one or two lines in the book was great, and the dwarven song was really nice. But the goblin cave turned into a farce (admit it), the rabbit sledge scene was hardly needed, and Bilbo suddenly stabbing an Orc to death was totally out of character. He's just going the same route with this next installment - heading further away from the content and tone of the book, to try to appeal to a wider market, and because he can.

Plus... Tolkien's Elves are a mix of the tragic and carefree, because of their long lives in comparison to mortals. I don't know why Jackson portrays most of them as snobby, aloof, condecending, slightly camp, and for the most, quite unlikable.

Fine, if he wants to make films with ninja Elves and extended action sequences, he can make them - just don't call it the Hobbit, because it really isn't anymore.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 01 October 2013 - 09:11 PM