The Hobbit Film Trilogy Thread

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Fool of a Took!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Wojo 2,453]

I like it.

I think they need to find a way to put Arwen there as well.

[Quintus 5,399]

My initial reaction is a desire to hunt Jackson down and throttle him.

But I'm going to digest this news first.

For once I might find myself taking the side of the purists, because I don't like this huge artistic liberty (piss-take) one bit.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[KK 3,307]

Yes, the fact that Cumberbatch is not very well informed or interested in his character is a bit disturbing to me.

On the other hand, this ending better not happen or there will be some blood shed...

Honestly, its absolutely ridiculous. Unfortunately, I don't think its unlikely. When I first saw the appendices, I was mind-blown by the fact that they were considering putting Sauran as the lead of the army at the Black Gate. I was actually furious at the time. Which IDIOT was considering putting that in the movie?!??

I'm seriously hoping they scratch this idea too...its depressing

[Brónach 1,302]

My first reaction is that Cumberbatch is not a Tolkien fan and is calling the whole thing the Five Armies "War" Dol Guldur included. Then he says something we already knew. "He’s not actually in the original Hobbit. It’s something [Peter Jackson]’s taken from Lord Of The Rings that he wants to put in there." He could just be saying, to a fan, that they put Dol Guldur and the Necromancer onscreen.

Plus it doesn't make sense to put our friend the necromancer so close to the ring, or in a shape fit to battle.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's gonna be a long year....

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

I can honestly say that Peter Jackson and co's artistic liberties made the Lord of the Rings trilogy a superior narrative than what Tolkien put to paper. The books are quite frankly a mess from a narrative structure point of view.

So I'm willing to give them a pass on the liberties they take here.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

What is wrong with the structure Blume?

It's actually quite brilliant. Just as things get exiting we move to a different set of characters.

[KK 3,307]

Nothing beats the books my friend

Technically, filming LOTR as written is almost impossible to film, so I understand the alterations in the narrative. But theres a difference between making intelligent changes for the sake of better story telling as a film and making changes to satsify the testosterone driven, mindless action junkies who would probably not understand the reasoning behind the presence of Sauron without seeing him in battle....

Also, as narratives, while being unconventional, they work brilliantly. For instance, for a time in the book, due to the structure of the novels, readers genuinely think Frodo is dead whereas in the film you don't get that twist. There are some weak parts in terms of pacing like the Bombadil chapter (although I understand its purpose), but other than that, the books work excellently as narratives.

But both books and films are epic, its just the former is more so

[Quintus 5,399]

I can honestly say that Peter Jackson and co's artistic liberties made the Lord of the Rings trilogy a superior narrative than what Tolkien put to paper. The books are quite frankly a mess from a narrative structure point of view.

I thought your new year's resolution was to stop talking shite?

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

I can honestly say that Peter Jackson and co's artistic liberties made the Lord of the Rings trilogy a superior narrative than what Tolkien put to paper.

Some do, some don't. They improved some of the characters, at least character-wise. But Sauron isn't a "character" by the time LOTR (or The Hobbit, for that matter, occurs). His entire threat derives from the fact that if you ever actually come close to him/see him, you've lost and he's won. Making him an acting character in the LOTR finale was a horrible (and fortunately scratched) idea, and doing the same with The Hobbit is only marginally less horrible.

[Docteur Qui 1,544]

You'd think after three marvelous adaptations that Jackson would have earned some kind of artistic license in the eyes of Tolkien fans. Apparently not.

[KK 3,307]

Again, its fine to take some artistic liberties with the text as they did in LOTR, but there are some ideas that are just stupid. If you look at the LOTR appendices, they show clips of what they originally intended as the finale for the final film with Sauron appearing in physical form to battle Aragorn. This was filmed and they took it out at the LAST moment (so last minute that they had to take the same footage and replace Sauron with the troll). One would be mortified by the fact that could have been the ending. It didn't make sense in any way and it was horrible.

This new possibility is unfortunately along the same veins, so I think fans have the right to worry about it

[gkgyver 1,645]

You'd think after three marvelous adaptations that Jackson would have earned some kind of artistic license in the eyes of Tolkien fans. Apparently not.

Depends what you define as "marvellous adaptions" and whom you credit them for.

I'm almost certain that a gigantic portion of the powerful lyrical side of these films can be credited to Walsh and Boyens.

It is also suspicious that the ratio of silly moments rises steadily over the course of the three films, and is directly proportional to the rising amount of power Jackson got over the film's shape and content.

Just remind yourself of the PJ commentary track on the ROTK extended version, where he argued with Walsh and Boyens over the fact that he didn't use ANY of the, apparently numerous, additional epilogue scenes because they didn't feel like "fun" to put them back in, and he only used scenes that were "fun to put in".

[KK 3,307]

Regardless, the trilogy is marvellous. '"Silly" moments and all! Peter Jackson did an amazing job with the trilogy (my favourite films). But yes, Boyens and Walsh were absolutely critical to the production, with their excellent writing.

[Henry B 50]

You'd think after three marvelous adaptations that Jackson would have earned some kind of artistic license in the eyes of Tolkien fans. Apparently not.

Depends what you define as "marvellous adaptions" and whom you credit them for.

I'm almost certain that a gigantic portion of the powerful lyrical side of these films can be credited to Walsh and Boyens.

It is also suspicious that the ratio of silly moments rises steadily over the course of the three films, and is directly proportional to the rising amount of power Jackson got over the film's shape and content.

Just remind yourself of the PJ commentary track on the ROTK extended version, where he argued with Walsh and Boyens over the fact that he didn't use ANY of the, apparently numerous, additional epilogue scenes because they didn't feel like "fun" to put them back in, and he only used scenes that were "fun to put in".

Yeah, sure. Peter Jackson is the new George Lucas. Most artists are really clumsy when it comes to discussing their own work. Remember that he's recording a commentary track and tailoring his responses to his assumed audience, not revealing his innermost workings. You don't get to direct three wildly successful, universally beloved films by thinking, "duh, let's put fun stuff in the movies." As for Walsh and Boyens arguing with him and therefore improving the movie... great! Is collaboration such a bad thing?

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

I can honestly say that Peter Jackson and co's artistic liberties made the Lord of the Rings trilogy a superior narrative than what Tolkien put to paper. The books are quite frankly a mess from a narrative structure point of view.

I thought your new year's resolution was to stop talking shite?

Do you even read books?

And I mean the kind with more than 4 or 5 words per page with big colorful pictures.

[Quintus 5,399]

Now he's criticising Alan Lee's iconic illustrations as well!

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

I never once thought Frodo was dead. Isn't it quite clear he's taken into the watchtower at Cirith Ungol alive at the end of Book IV?

I was however quite convinced Pippin had snuffed it at the Black Gate when I finished Book V.

[Richard Penna 3,688]

In what way are the books impossible to film? Technically, you can film anything if you have enough time.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

Now he's criticising Alan Lee's iconic illustrations as well!

Now there's a man (Alan Lee) who probably had an awkward time socializing with women!

But in all seriousness, I think if Tolkien lived in the 21st century, his writing style would be what eBooks SHOULD*** be. Tolkien had to write his ambitious story linearly onto the page, page by page.

*** but unfortunately e-books aren't what they could be, they're just imitations of normal books.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

Don't waste your time trying to make sense of the Lawnmower Man.

[Brónach 1,302]

But in all seriousness, I think if Tolkien lived in the 21st century, his writing style would be what eBooks SHOULD*** be.

??

I think he's talking of using concepts not inherent to "plain text" lliterature such as links (which are used anyway, when sending you to this or that page).

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

In what way are the books impossible to film? Technically, you can film anything if you have enough time.

I take "unfilmable" generally as "hard to film". Some books can be translated more or less directly to film, some take some rearranging, and some need to be completely restructured and partly reinvented. The Hobbit, as has been said above, contains very little actual dialogue (few of the Dwarves have regular speaking parts) and for over half of its length consists mostly of serial, self-contained journey adventures. Those mostly are made up of landscape descriptions and Bilbo's self pity. Directly translated to a movie that would mean 13 similar looking Dwarves and one Hobbit going from A to B to C with some adventures in between and half of the movie being scenes of Bilbo quietly sitting on his pony looking gloomy.

[KK 3,307]

In what way are the books impossible to film? Technically, you can film anything if you have enough time.

Alright. But if you were to take a book LOTR and film as it is word for word (more or less), then it would make a poor film. In that sense, it is more difficult to film and requires more alterations for a better cinematic effect. For instance, keeping the Bombadil scenes or especially the Scouring of the Shire would diminish the cinematic impact of the film. Thats what I meant.

Imagine Jackson filming the Silmarillion (God forbid...). Filming that novel as it is would be quite a poor "film" regardless of how amazing it is as a book.

[Brónach 1,302]

or especially the Scouring of the Shire would diminish the cinematic impact of the film. Thats what I meant.

I found it anticlimatic already on the book.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It is the point of the whole book!

[KK 3,307]

or especially the Scouring of the Shire would diminish the cinematic impact of the film. Thats what I meant.

I found it anticlimatic already on the book.

The scene was absolutely critical to the novel. Its what gets Tolkien's big message across (one of the multitude of well crafted themes in the novels).

[Brónach 1,302]

I was eleven.

[Guest jorgea]

The Hobbit looks like it's going to get the best people to create it. This is good to read here at http://www.jwfan.com

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

What?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[gkgyver 1,645]

Sounds synthy, but makes me want the score so much more.

[KK 3,307]

Georg, you brilliant son of a gun!

How did you find this?!? (wait, don't answer that )

I've heard some really bad medleys, but wow this is actually really well conceived. Taking on some really great developments of the themes heard in the trailer. I love how he takes the Shire variations and melds them together. He doesn't alter the theme as much Shore would do, but this isn't howard shore! I really appreciated how he took the trademark musical style of the LOTR scores and applied them here (the music often hints at some other motifs from the trilogy...not sure if this was done intentionally or just to mimic the same sound). It definitely sounds like he knows his LOTR stuff more than the average listener. Kudos to the guy who did this, really well done.

My only gripes with it (and they are few) is that he sticks with the "trailer" like nature of the "Thorn and Company" theme rather than what Shore would have done in film, but thats not a big issue. Whats the worst part is where the music dangerously borders Zimmer's sharp bass pounding at 0:47. A bit of a big "no no" with Shore's music. And I also felt its a shame he didn't add other themes from the LOTR trilogy that might possibly appear in the film. Like the Lothlorien theme, the Dwarrowdelf theme, etc. But I suppose he was only creating the suite based off of what he saw on the trailer.

I am impressed with this although this only inflames my thirst for Shore's score more.

- KK

[gkgyver 1,645]

I think he tried to cram too many ideas into those six minutes. Should have been longer with more time to breathe.

[KK 3,307]

I think he tried to cram too many ideas into those six minutes. Should have been longer with more time to breathe.

Perhaps. I personally thought he juggled the themes quite well. There's only so much he can do with what is given in the trailer without making the music his own work. I mean, its hard to tell how Shore will use the new theme (and how it will be varied) so I guess he didn't want to be too creative with the main theme (otherwise, people will start complaining). And I think he developed that short new melody for Bilbo quite well, especially by melding it with "A Hobbit's Understanding" and the other Shire themes.

I've heard some really crude, horribly renditions of Shore's work. And some very interesting (I use this word for fear of what else may come out of my mouth) takes and guesses on what the Hobbit music will be like. I've come to learn that Youtube is a very depressing abyss for film score fans (with fanboys roaming around and destroying sanity in film music related matters) but this is something I'm genuinely impressed with.

Its either that, or my mind has learned to be satisfied with anything that resembles Shore's potential score for the Hobbit.

[Incanus 5,714]

Sounds synthy, but makes me want the score so much more.

Indeed.

Although I am not sure if Over the Misty Mountains Cold will be a major theme in itself in the score. It surely had the prominence in the trailer and does kind of depict the Erebor Quest on subtextual level as well, perhaps transformed from the song into the leading motif for the whole adventure.

But the suite certainly made me want to skip to next December to hear the score.

[Jay 37,364]

Sounds synthy, but makes me want the score so much more.

Very cool

[Quintus 5,399]

That dwarven theme is going to be the best theme in years.

[Incanus 5,714]

That dwarven theme is going to be the best theme in years.

We will all be humming this stuff by the end of next December.

[Brónach 1,302]

I walk down the street singing this quest theme. People look at me weirdly.

I wonder if the melody follows with variation or just repeats itself. And if they took the whole song or just portions of it.

[Quintus 5,399]

I walk down the street singing this quest theme. People look at me weirdly.

Don't blame the song just because you look like a freak.

[gkgyver 1,645]

That dwarven theme is going to be the best theme in years.

We will all be humming this stuff by the end of next December.

"Will be humming"?

I'm humming this since the thing came out.