The Hobbit Film Trilogy Thread

[KK 3,313]

According to TORn, the trailer won't feature Shore music, but Remote Control stuff from Quantum.

Pukeface.

http://www.theonerin...c-from-quantum/

… our edgiest and most modern Live Orchestra and Choir release yet… a combination of Epic Action and Drama making a grand debut as our most unique hybrid orchestral album for film trailers and advertising… loaded with layers of ground breaking sound design accompanied by dark, edgy guitar melodies combined with our signature sound of lush cyclical strings, huge swelling brass, and massive booming drums.

Well, if they're using RCP music, then we might have a very action-oriented trailer, different from the last one. I look forward to it.

[BloodBoal 8,709]

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

No, by people he means KM and Luke Skywalker.

people like us would be sad that they fear old fashioned fim scores so much they are embarrased to show it in the trailers so mainstream people dont get a shock...

[BloodBoal 8,709]

[alicebrallice 134]

According to TORn, the trailer won't feature Shore music, but Remote Control stuff from Quantum.

Pukeface.

honestly, I'm too excited about new footage to really care or get upset about that.

Makes me want to puke, then eat my vomit to puke again! Yes, it's that bad!

[Henry B 51]

Well, this shouldn't come as any surprise. Remember that remixed "Requiem for a Dream" that the Two Towers trailer made famous? So famous that people got upset that it wasn't on Howard Shore's soundtrack? Times have not changed.

[BloodBoal 8,709]

[gkgyver 1,647]

I especially had to laugh at the phrase "our signature sound of cyclical strings".

How unique that is!

This once again proves that you can get away with obvious lies if you just push them hard enough.

[Incanus 5,890]

As unfortunate it is that there won't be new music from Shore in the trailer the first soundtrack will be released in a few months so we don't have to wait for much longer for more Middle Earth music.

P.S. that blurb about the Quantum's trailer music is ridiculously overblown.

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

I wonder if it will be like the ROTK trailer music, or if it will be like TTT's trailer music...

[KK 3,313]

No doubt it'll be the latter

[Brónach 1,330]

Trailer FAIL. Music is one of the appeals of LOTR to the general public. Shore would sell the film better.

[BloodBoal 8,709]

[KK 3,313]

They both have big pounding drums

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Drums are good, me like drums

[BloodBoal 8,709]

I'd rather have electric guitar. Electric guitars are edgy!

[gkgyver 1,647]

Before we know it, Howard Shore will have been replaced with Quantum!

[Incanus 5,890]

So we are being outraged by the use of music in trailers now? It is not like Quantum replaced Shore's score for the films. It is just a trailer.

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

really with so much great written music for LOTR; why dont they use that for the trailers?

better than RC crap anyday of the year.

[Jilal 681]

I have to agree with Luke's posts in the Lincoln thread. The Hobbit is not a prequel or prelude to The Lord of the Rings. Sadly I read that in yesterday's newspaper. Actually they made it seem like it really is a LotR prequel, stating that cast members from the LotR films are back. No mention of Bilbo Baggins or any of the dwarves. (By the way, Orlando Bloom's character name was mentioned as "Legalo" )

[KK 3,313]

really with so much great written music for LOTR; why dont they use that for the trailers?

better than RC crap anyday of the year.

Yes. I don't quite understand it myself. Even if they can't use new music, why not just use the stuff from LotR?

I mean look it at the way. You wouldn't expect a trailer for a new Star Wars movie to use the usual trailer music. You'd expect to hear Star Wars stuff! Not that I'm saying the LotR music is as popular as SW (nor was I attempting to make any comparison between the two sets of scores). But the LotR films is certainly a franchise that is somewhat (keyword here) like Star Wars to the modern generations. You'd expect the new Middle-Earth films to be marketed using its own iconic music.

So we are being outraged by the use of music in trailers now? It is not like Quantum replaced Shore's score for the films. It is just a trailer.

No one was outraged. Its just a bit surprising, that's all. And the over-done praise of Quantum was highly amusing. A few jokes were made, but no one was outraged.

I have to agree with Luke's posts in the Lincoln thread. The Hobbit is not a prequel or prelude to The Lord of the Rings. Sadly I read that in yesterday's newspaper. Actually they made it seem like it really is a LotR prequel, stating that cast members from the LotR films are back. No mention of Bilbo Baggins or any of the dwarves. (By the way, Orlando Bloom's character name was mentioned as "Legalo" )

Your efforts into moving the discussion to where it belongs is appreciated. I doubt it'll work though

[gkgyver 1,647]

A matter I've not seen discussed here is a potential song for the film. If they decide to add one, I hope they go the way of TT and ROTK, and have Shore do it. Not like FOTR, where Shore was only orchestrator for Enya.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,383]

Such whining?

The first trailer have us themes from LOTR and a brand theme song and theme. This one doesn't. Who cares?

[KK 3,313]

A matter I've not seen discussed here is a potential song for the film. If they decide to add one, I hope they go the way of TT and ROTK, and have Shore do it. Not like FOTR, where Shore was only orchestrator for Enya.

The reason it was Enya for FotR is so they could bring more attention to the score. But Shore's built a name for himself now. I have no doubt that if they're going to have a song for the film, it'll be done by Shore.

[Richard P 5,302]

Dump the song and have a nice end credits suite. It's ridiculous that a soundtrack album from a mega-franchise won't appeal to 'normal' people unless they have a song with 'words' after all the tedious instrumental rubbish. Meh.

If Spielberg doesn't need one, LotR shouldn't either.

[Brónach 1,330]

We are getting songs in the body of the score anyway. Either by soloists or characters singing. It's an important part in any Tolkien musical universe.

[Richard P 5,302]

You can't compare Aragorn/Pippin/Eowyn/Arwen singing with an actual pop song.

I just hate songs being tacked on the end in order to sell albums.

[Brónach 1,330]

But the songs at the end of the LOTR scores are classy and LOTR-like, and integrated in the score. They're not "tacked at the end".

I don't think they're there to sell albums (the body of the score is what made them known among the public), and I frankly don't remember them being treated like merchandising like that song in Titanic or the hilarious failed attempt at that in Avatar.

[BloodBoal 8,709]

[MrJosh 1,205]

But the songs at the end of the LOTR scores are classy and LOTR-like, and integrated in the score. They're not "tacked at the end".

I don't think they're there to sell albums (the body of the score is what made them known among the public), and I frankly don't remember them being treated like merchandising like that song in Titanic or the hilarious failed attempt at that in Avatar.

Good points! I agree.

[gkgyver 1,647]

Howard Shore should really give another one to Emiliana Torrini. Her voice in Gollum's Song is mesmerising.

[MrJosh 1,205]

Howard Shore should really give another one to Emiliana Torrini. Her voice in Gollum's Song is mesmerising.

She's my favorite voice of all those used in the lotr trillogy. Mesmerizing indeed!

[BloodBoal 8,709]

[Rachael Foley 10,162]

Howard Shore should really give another one to Emiliana Torrini. Her voice in Gollum's Song is mesmerising.

She's my favorite voice of all those used in the lotr trillogy. Mesmerizing indeed!

I still want the background track to the song....

I mean look it at the way. You wouldn't expect a trailer for a new Star Wars movie to use the usual trailer music. You'd expect to hear Star Wars stuff!

(the bit at the beginning)

[KK 3,313]

I meant the prequels Faleel. Since these Hobbit films to LotR are essentially what the SW prequels were to the originals in terms of expectations (lets hope thats not the case with quality). And as far as I know, all the trailers for the prequels used SW music.

[MrJosh 1,205]

I meant the prequels Faleel. Since these Hobbit films to LotR are essentially what the SW prequels were to the originals in terms of expectations (lets hope thats not the case with quality). And as far as I know, all the trailers for the prequels used SW music.

Yeah all the prequel trailers used star wars music.

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

very efectively i must add.

I have to agree with Luke's posts in the Lincoln thread. The Hobbit is not a prequel or prelude to The Lord of the Rings.

Huh, Luke said exactly the opposite. He said that The Hobbit IS a prequel to The Lord Of The Rings (well, at least, the movie). Obviously, he was wrong and realized that.

he quoted me correctly.

The novel is not a prequel, but he says they are making and marketing the film as one.

Which was my point.

Prequels usually invent stuff and are written after the original. And while PJ and cohorts added a couple of things for their own entertainment, the rest of it existed before LotR was released. Prequels are often made for the sole purpose of telling a backstory, which leads to them trying too hard.

And I would like to add that sometimes I feel some people on JWfan are like Don Quixote. They are fighting non existent enemies, and the issue at hand can't be stupid or obvious enough that they won't find at least one other fool to support their imaginary fight.

you are completely blind to PJ greatness?

The hobbit novel is exactly what you say, not a prequel. i've been saying that several times now.

But the film, appart from adding a 'couple' of things invented by Del toro or Jackson and co., add a lot of LOTR appendices material, which was written after the hobbit, so implementing that material into the hobbit, they are transforming the hobbit into a prequel, and they are trying too hard to make a backstory film for the LOTR trilogy.

this is not a bad thing, since i prefer cohesion and the LOTR 'look' over the 'hobbit' look (childish, talking-walking animals, colored dwarf beards...) but i just can't understand why you are fighting so much against this notion of the FILM being a prequel, when it is rather clear they are marketing it like that...

[Koray Savas 2,260]

It's not being marketed as a prequel, it's being marketed as The Hobbit. It's set in the same universe, and therefore some of the same people reappear. Whether appendix material from The Lord Of The Rings is included is irrelevant, and actually rather supports my point. Tolkien's Middle Earth is massive and carefully constructed.

It's akin to Tarantino's filmic universe, or Kevin Smith's.

[Henry B 51]

The very first shot of the trailer has characters from Lord of the Rings flashing back. That's as prequel-like as it can get.

[Incanus 5,890]

I think marketing doesn't really have to advertise The Hobbit as a prequel. It is pretty much a given. These films tell an independent tale of Bilbo Baggins and the Dwarves and Gandalf but despite this the Hobbit films will clearly be a prequel to Lord of the Rings films. Even though the Hobbit novel works as an independent children's book with a happy ending with no references to anything beyond its own tale, these three films are not meant to exist in isolation even though they have a clean opening and ending. I think it is odd to say that they just happen to be in the same universe as LotR when the same group of characters in a plot line where one trilogy connects to the other has a clear continuum. All that I have heard of these new films points to the philosophy that they mean to foreshadow LotR in these films and the knowledge that there is the LotR trilogy of films is built into these new films. I suspect from the first trailer that the frame story of the Hobbit is Bilbo recounting the full tale of the Hobbit to Frodo so there can't be much debate about connection.

[gkgyver 1,647]

Prequels usually invent backstories to arbitrarily connect it to the original. The Hobbit doesn't need that, it always was connected to lotr.

[Incanus 5,890]

Prequels usually invent backstories to arbitrarily connect it to the original. The Hobbit doesn't need that, it always was connected to lotr.

True, although the filming order of these novels is reversed so The Hobbit is not a true prequel in the sense that it was invented after the fact to fill gaps or foreshadow something chronologically. If that indeed is a definition of a prequel.

But The Hobbit films are a prequel in the sense that they chronologically precede Lord of the Rings films and share common story and plot details relevant to the latter.

I am sure we can debate on this for all eternity though.

[gkgyver 1,647]

Yes.

At least it is not a series of movies whose plots were pulled out of the director's butt hole in 10 minutes 20 years later.

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

Prequels usually invent backstories to arbitrarily connect it to the original. The Hobbit doesn't need that, it always was connected to lotr.

what?

The hobbit was 'retconned' by tolkien himslef after LOTR was published...

It was not connected to LOTR when it was 1st published...

Yes.

At least it is not a series of movies whose plots were pulled out of the director's butt hole in 10 minutes 20 years later.

I suppose you mean Lucas' Prequels. yeah, the fool did things bad.

But the introduction of 1976 'The Star Was, From the adventures of Luke Skywalker' already has a resumé of how palpatine rose to power, very close to the real thing... the prequels just expanded those plots too much.

[Incanus 5,890]

Prequels usually invent backstories to arbitrarily connect it to the original. The Hobbit doesn't need that, it always was connected to lotr.

what?

The hobbit was 'retconned' by tolkien himslef after LOTR was published...

It was not connected to LOTR when it was 1st published...

Luke do you realize how absurd that statement sounds. Of course it was not connected to LotR because it was not yet written. What you probably mean is that Tolkien later made the certain more important passages to the larger plot devices more in line with LotR, which was revision Riddles in the Dark chapter mainly, not some kind of completely new invention.

[Luke Skywalker 2,383]

i may have understand it badly.

Did he said that LOTR was always connected with the Hobbit, or that the Hobbit was always connected with LOTR?

former: of course

latter: debatable... since hobbit was not written with LOTR in mind, i think... (and thus he changed some passages to fit LOTR)

[Incanus 5,890]

I meant that The Hobbit novel could not have been connected to The Lord of the Rings because it was not yet written. But as LotR was a sequel to the Hobbit, more or less, Tolkien had very much the world and story of Bilbo Baggins in mind when he wrote LotR, the previous story obviously affecting the plot of LotR. And Tolkien did make some modifications, but not some kind of whole novel revisions though, for the Hobbit after he had to make some plot points agree in both novels. Most of the changes were to do as I said above with Riddles in the Dark and Gollum.

[Brónach 1,330]

[Jay 46,241]

All this talk about Tolkien and prequel/sequel made up stories whatever aside .......... I think The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is going to be one hell of a fun film

[gkgyver 1,647]

The Hobbit and LotR aren't separate entities, and never were because they are just two stories in the history of Middle Earth, which Tolkien developed his whole life. Looking at The Hobbit and LotR simply as two\four books is way too narrow minded.

The Hobbit is not a prequel, just like LotR wouldn't be a sequel to The Hobbit, had it been made after it. Period.