Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If I had a choice between vomiting in a toilet, Trainspotting style, and then scooping it out of the bowl and eating it again, or watch the 3 prequel films in one sitting....

Well...I'd really have to think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prequels are a testament to the old wisdom that Hollywood is a town where they gladly give suckers an even break....

Simply ignoring 30 or 40 years of filmmaking progression, they stampede like bushmen tribes charging against any filmmaking virtue western culture has ever produced and it's glaringly obvious that Lucasfilm must be the equivalent of a totalitarian state, where you'll suffer grave consequences if you challenge the all-knowing 'leader', which of course is the emperor without clothes when the reviews from the free-of-his-clutches press come in.

It's fascinating that he obviously choose to ignore that not only one, but two times. Jackson, on the other hand, may not be the most subtle of directors. but in comparison to Lucas, he's an our-era-Van Gogh or Rembrandt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was shot and created in New Zealand, by New Zealanders, with Hollywood money.

Ugh.  Why mess with a great trilogy by making shitty prequels?

Didn't they learn from Lucas?

Erm. There's the big difference that The Hobbit is actually an integral part of the story, and always has been since before LOTR was written (as H was both written and released years before LOTR).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with your statement is that the Prequels are not Hollywood films, they are the most expensive indie-films ever made.

I thought that the most expensive indie film was Joel Shumacher's The Phantom of the Opera.

Rabbit--who doesn't hate the prequels as much as some other people

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hobbit is my least favorite of all of Tolkien's Middle Earth works. It can be dull in some parts, and it's a tad simplistic too because it was written for children. I hope the film version includes the "bigger picture" events in addition to the appropriate stuff from Bilbo's adventure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just didn't think The Hobbit was a great book. I've read LOTR 3 times and The Silmarillion 3 times, but I have no desire to re-read The Hobbit because it's boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's supposed to be a story for CHILDREN for heaven's sake! If I remember correctly, Tolkien gave the finished script to C.S. Lewis' son to get feedback.

His publisher's son, actually. Or his publisher gave it to his son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Hobbit isn't boring, by the way.

I actually enjoyed it more than the LOTR books....which move along slower than a snail

And yes, I loved ewoks growing up and I still like the little buggers. (Shut up.)

I loved them too, but now I just...erm...don't mind them. :)

Burga - who thinks we will probably see a generation who grew up loving Jar Jar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you can't say that Ewoks are worse than Gungans, because if you did, you would be insane. I like Ewoks, but I can't find a valid reason why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jar Jar was the only dumb Gungan. Outside of their dumb language they were human sized and had some technology. Jar Jar was the one who ruined it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just didn't think The Hobbit was a great book.  I've read LOTR 3 times and The Silmarillion 3 times, but I have no desire to re-read The Hobbit because it's boring.

I personally felt that The Hobbit was simply an entirely different kind of book than LoTR. It is an innocent, cheery and fun adventure romp, told from the perspective of someone who sounds like he's talking warmly of a good friend's exploit. LoTR is not innocent, cheery, fun (except for some patches), and is not written about warmly. They are two entirely different kind of books. If I'm looking for a good, entertaining read, I'll go to The Hobbit (Or Tom Clancy's Debt of Honor, whichever I find first). If I'm looking for a serious reading venture, that will most likely occupy my mind for a couple of months, I'll take LoTR (Or some massive biography, like Team of Rivals, a great one which I recently finished about Lincoln and his cabinet, soon to be a Spielberg film).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan is right.

LOTR is great, but it does feel like you are studying ancient history and cryptology instead of reading a work of fiction.

The Hobbit is a plain and simple andventure book with a few wonderfull characters a good story and nothing much more.

It's wonderfull.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.