The Hobbit Film Trilogy Thread

[Delorean90 47]

Same here.

[Red 75]

John speaks the truth yet again.

I appreciate Jackson and co. monumental work, but I recognize the trilogy's flaws (and wish they were better).

[gkgyver 1,647]

And the endless hugging and re-hugging

You're a little bitter, aren't you?

Most of what has seen the light of day on the last two pages (one begins to wonder whether people have nothing better to do on the Christmas days than re-heating LotR discussions, including the fabulously absurd and old discussion whether the Scouring of the Shire would have fitted these films) won't bear repetition and closer examination here because it's pointless;

like ramming one's head against a brick wall.

However, I feel like I need to say a few things, some of which may cause your fingers to itch. Know this: I don't care.

First of all, Sam's wedding lasts all but 30 seconds. If you really think cutting that tiny bit instead of using it to connect FotR with RotK and make a point about Sam makes the ending so much better, you're either a little deranged, or most likely one of these people who don't care much for LotR in the first place and wouldn't bother taking a secod look if everybody wasn't talking about it.

Secondly, heaven forbid we get a world where movies consist of nothing but plot-relevant scenes! Any film based on the bible would have to be considered a long, excruciating bore with pretty landscapes on that theory. Ben-Hur, El Cid wouldn't be classics.

A film becomes worthwhile when it takes its time to flesh out its settings and characters, and has a staff of talented people to accomplish it.

A plot is nothing without good character development and cinematography. In good movies, you don't intentionally pay attention to the plot because it flows naturally between characters and settings.

In that light, saying a scene like Sam's wedding is "totally unnecessary" smells of (intentional) incompetence. If you think the technical integration of that moment is questionable, so be it, but it has to appear like nitpicking considering the other, pretty watchable six hundred- something minutes.

I'm sorry if some are a little peeved, but if you complain about, what, nine endings in RotK, you never understood LotR in the first place. It's about Frodo, and Frodo alone. His story doesn't end until his ship leaves the havens.

If you watch LotR for some eye candy and the occasional adrenaline rush, and want it to end as quickly as possible when that's over, then it's just not for you.

But that's not the movie's problem, it's yours.

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

Im amazed with most LOTR fans. They chopped the books sometimes, books stablished for 40-50 years. And they dont have a single complaint!

Oh, I have my share of complaints. Some minor, some major. Many of them I can understand and often support. On the other hand, there are a couple of moments, particularly in ROTK, that are truly awful. Gandalf hitting Denethor should be unforgiveable. And yet the overall quality and faith to the books (and - very important - not just the bits that were directly expressed in the LOTR novel itself) makes me easily forgive them in the big picture. I seriously think that the movies are much better than one could, even optimistically, have expected. (Not that I'd mind to see someone else have a try at new LOTR movies during my lifetime)

Regarding the fadeouts at the end of ROTK - I honestly never even thought about them until people started complaining, and I still don't see the problem with them.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

And the endless hugging and re-hugging

You're a little bitter, aren't you?

No, not really. And you do have a point regarding plot relevant scenes bit. However, the lasting impression I have of ROTK is the torturous finale. Its probably even worse for viewers who arent familiar with the books (believe me, there are such people). While I still think that ending at the coronation would be great (Hollywood as it is and extreme as it seems to purists), I would more than happily settle for a better executed finale. I think Morlock has said all there needs to be said regarding that.

[Ollie 1,375]

I don't think we are going to manage a successful conclusion to this discussion.

I didn't care that they dropped the shire bit from ROTK. It wasn't needed.

[Henry B 51]

Its probably even worse for viewers who arent familiar with the books (believe me, there are such people).

Really? No!

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Its probably even worse for viewers who arent familiar with the books (believe me, there are such people).

Really? No!

There are also people who hate E.T...

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

I'm sorry if some are a little peeved, but if you complain about, what, nine endings in RotK, you never understood LotR in the first place. It's about Frodo, and Frodo alone. His story doesn't end until his ship leaves the havens.

I'm not sure we have seen the same version then.

Because the one i have seen, has a new fadeout, slow mo scene of Sam returning to his home and family.

As i said the ending better edited and without slow motion, could well have laster several minutes less without deleting any relevant material.

[Elmo Lewis 7]

There are also people who hate E.T...

Those are not people.

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

Because the one i have seen, has a new fadeout, slow mo scene of Sam returning to his home and family.

Sam is the last person to be seen, as in the book - just like he's the first main character to appear, as in the book (in the EE at least).

[Elmo Lewis 7]

Why? His role is supporting the main characters at best.

[Delorean90 47]

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

Why? His role is supporting the main characters at best.

I don't share the view (although I do believe that some of the reasoning makes sense to an extent), but there are those people who claim that Sam is the main character of the book.

[gkgyver 1,647]

Those are not people.

At last I know what's wrong with me.

[Romão 2,473]

Why? His role is supporting the main characters at best.

I don't share the view (although I do believe that some of the reasoning makes sense to an extent), but there are those people who claim that Sam is the main character of the book.

He ha some of the worst and most cringe inducing dialogue in the films.

[gkgyver 1,647]

At least no lines about sand and how it gets into your pants.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

At least no lines about sand and how it gets into your pants.

Does it always to be SW?

Sam and frodo's relationship is, like Tolkien would say 'queer'. But with the nowadays meaning of the word...

Marion, so the film has to be like the book (sam being the first and last character seen)?

I still dont see why some things MUST be like the book, and others dont. And everything is fine...

[gkgyver 1,647]

Does it always to be SW?

Funny *you* should ask.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

Does it always to be SW?

Funny *you* should ask.

that IS why i ask it.

I was fingerpointed as the only one to do that.

The fact is many people do this by instinct.

[Red 75]

I don't share the view (although I do believe that some of the reasoning makes sense to an extent), but there are those people who claim that Sam is the main character of the book.

Sam isn't the main character, but he is possibly the true hero of the story. Frodo would have failed without him.

[Henry B 51]

Its probably even worse for viewers who arent familiar with the books (believe me, there are such people).

Really? No!

There are also people who hate E.T...

Uh... never mind.

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

Sam and frodo's relationship is, like Tolkien would say 'queer'. But with the nowadays meaning of the word...

Ah yes, the persistent rumours...

Marion, so the film has to be like the book (sam being the first and last character seen)?

No. But I don't think it's a coincidence.

I still dont see why some things MUST be like the book, and others dont. And everything is fine...

Some do because a faithful adaption should stay true to the core aspects of the story. And among the most important ones are the Grey Havens, with transcience (?) being the central theme to the whole book (and many of Tolkien's other writings), in my opinion. You can't just drop that for the comfort of a happy ending, because the whole point is that it can't be that happy.

[John Crichton 4]

I don't share the view (although I do believe that some of the reasoning makes sense to an extent), but there are those people who claim that Sam is the main character of the book.

Sam isn't the main character, but he is possibly the true hero of the story. Frodo would have failed without him.

Dead on right. And Sam is my favorite character in the book. In the movies less so.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

I still dont see why some things MUST be like the book, and others dont. And everything is fine...

Some do because a faithful adaption should stay true to the core aspects of the story.

i would call the tomb bomabill scenes and scouring of the shire important scenes...In fact they last a chapter, like the whole Helm's deep and Pelennor fields battles.

Sam's story after the ring is destroyed though...

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

Bombadil has no ties to the rest of the story whatsoever. The Scouring is important, and I was disappointed to see them drop it (though I don't know how they could have included it in the film - especially with people complaining about multiple endings already).

And Sam's story lasts way into the appendices, though length really isn't the important factor.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

Bombadil has no ties to the rest of the story whatsoever.

Of course not, since its boromir who gives the hobbits his weapons, and they arrive to bree on their own..

[Quintus 6,496]

Boromir?

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

Boromir?

Oopps Aragorn i meant. Mind slip with Boromir training them using the weapons.

[Quintus 6,496]

Bah! Get back to your Star Wars universe! Leave Middle-Earth to the proper fans

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387]

I very much agree with Marian, even though Sam is not the first person seen in the film, or even the first hobbit.

Dropping Bombadil make sense, because of it's abstract nature and lack of connection to the rest of the film.

The Scouring is a very important part of the book because it shows that Hobbits, with good leadership can cope with a crisis after their own measure. But as Marc indicated, the nature of films in general would just not allow such a scene, which would easily add another 20 to 25 minutes to an already long film.

I believe the much debated wedding of sam takes less then a minute of screen time. While it shows one of the main characters in blissfull matrimony, it also shows how Frodo, even in this happiest of times cannot truly leave behind the suffering that he endured.

I would have actually loved to see them film the appendices.

I know it's pretty much impossible, but I would have liked to see an older Samwise, after the death of his Rosie, give the Red Book of Westmarch to Elanor and depart over the Great Sea to the West that is now forgotten.

[Mr. Breathmask 624]

I think they did film some of that. At least some of the travels of Gimli and Legolas that are mentioned in the appendices.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387]

Ah, Gimli as the Lord of the Glittering Caves. That would make up for a lot of comic relief.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

Special extended edition i tell ya

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387]

Bring it on Pepe!

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

The Scouring is a very important part of the book because it shows that Hobbits, with good leadership can cope with a crisis after their own measure.

More importantly, it makes the point that even the Shire was affected by the Ring War.

I believe the much debated wedding of sam takes less then a minute of screen time. While it shows one of the main characters in blissfull matrimony, it also shows how Frodo, even in this happiest of times cannot truly leave behind the suffering that he endured.

Yes, I'd say the whole thing is about how one character can go back to his previous life and continue it, and the other cannot. It's related to the whole Elvish obsession of preserving everything in the same state forever.

I would have actually loved to see them film the appendices.

They did a good job of putting as much of it as possible into the actual story though. All those people claiming that Arwen's role was blown up far beyond what Tolkien wrote about her and that she should have been dropped from the movies just annoys me. They did go overboard with some of the drama in her story, but most of the rest is quite essential.

[John Crichton 4]

I would have actually loved to see them film the appendices.

They did a good job of putting as much of it as possible into the actual story though. All those people claiming that Arwen's role was blown up far beyond what Tolkien wrote about her and that she should have been dropped from the movies just annoys me. They did go overboard with some of the drama in her story, but most of the rest is quite essential.

Yes, quite a bit of that was taken from the Appendices. The only Arwen change that annoyed me was her "illness" in RotK, just transparent "extra motivation" for Aragorn who didn't need any. And obviously having her at Helm's Deep would have been beyond stupid, but fortunately they realized that before it was too late.

[Marian Schedenig 11,695]

Her actually leaving for the Grey Havens and only changing her mind underway (with that vision of her son) was also invented and partly annoying. I don't mind the glimpse into the future (a nice bit of appendix story put in the movie), but the circumstances are less than ideal.

[Mr. Breathmask 624]

Well, at least we got another bit of Figwit out of it...

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387]

Geek-alert!

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

I think people got annoyed by arwen because the 1st time she appeared was glorfindel travestized.

Norolin Asfaloth, norolin! (or whatever is the written form )

[tpigeon 3]

By the way, has anyone else hear the rumor that Guillermo Del Toro may be offered The Hobbit? I could not think of a better director other than Peter Jackson. He's one of the finest fantasy/action/horror directors working today.

Ted

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387]

Hmmm...that would actually be a very interesting choice.

[Quintus 6,496]

Well he'd better get a move on, since he'll probably be doing Potter 7 soon after.

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

Guillermo del toro could make an interesting choice for both HP7 and the hobbit.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,387]

Del Toro Does The Hobbit.

[Morlock 12]

At least the shameless money-grubbing should be interesting.

Morlock- who really doesnt care to expend the energy to get excited by this until something actually happens

Morlock 2- who doubts that it will happen

[Ollie 1,375]

As long as Howard Shore returns I don't care who directs.

[tpigeon 3]

Del Toro is the best possible director they could have chosen to direct these films. He's a visionary. I'm arguably more excited for his two films than I was for Jackson's three.

Ted

[Luke Skywalker 2,385]

After Pan's Labyrinth, i have no doubt that Del toro can pull it nicely. And it will be consistent with the LOTR movies because the crew will be the same

Will drew struzan make the poster art this time, though?

Mmmm Howard shore or javier navarrete? j/k