The Hobbit Film Trilogy Thread

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bombur looks right for The Hobbit. It doesnt matter if the look would not have worked for LOTR.

Oh, we agree on that, but then don't say it fits very well with LOTR look wise, that's all.

The general look and feel of Middle Earth, the set design do match.

Many character designs have a different, lighter vibe too it.

It works for me.

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Incanus 5,713]

I am a positive guy most of the time but as BB said it is really irritating when some people brand you as a bitching and moaning hater every time you have some critique about the movies in any way. I think it is nice that people have positive attitude but the "we accept and swallow everything without a contrary comment about anything" is equally irritating although I guess I should be glad that these fans and their expectations for the films conincides so perfectly with the film makers' vision and they can accept everything as it is and like it unconditionally.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I agree that all the Dwarrow he saw in LOTR look great, but far too much like each other. Since they are only background characters and Gimli is the only Dwarf with any lines thats fine.

For The Hobbit that would not have worked.

The design of the Hobbit Dwarrow seems mainly concerned in making them look different.

It must be noted that the ones with the most likes are also the ones that look the least like LOTR Dwarrow. (Thorin, Balin, Fili and Kili....that Irish one)

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[chuck 154]

TBH I'm glad their not sticking too much with generic designs

So what? The only alternative to generic designs are starfish hairdos, bunny sleds and orcs with hooks? Surely, there must be some kind of middle ground. I'm well aware the tone of the book is much more lighthearted, but is that a reason to go completely apeshit with crazy hobos with bird poop in their hair? Middle ground, please, middle ground!

There's no need for a middle ground, as it's already set in middle Earth.

These dwarves do look awesome and very authentic, very Tolkien.

But I really couldn't see them all being lead roles in the Hobbit, it seems a bit dull for the tone of the first film. The dwarves really do need distinguishing features especially since many of them had very few lines.

That's because these Dwarves were meant to appear in the prologue for like 10 seconds. They didn't try to give them distinguishable features. But that doesn't mean you can't make Dwarves with long beards that are indistinguishable from one another.

That reminds me of something I honestly don't understand: PJ going all like: "Hey, long beards completely hide the face, you can't see the actor's emotions, blahblahblah". OK, so what about Gimli? Didn't we see Rhys-Davies' face and emotions? What about even Thror in the prologue? As far as I'm concerned, I could see the fear in his eyes during Smaug's attack, his madness when looking at his gold, his joy when walking through his kingdom. But maybe that's just me.

To answer to your question, SafeUnderHill, Thror looked great, Thrain looked a bit bland.

And even the facial hairless elves seem to get acting tips from Kristen Stewart. Except Elrond who has the most humanizing emotions seen on any elf.

[Barnald 365]

I'm looking forward to seeing a lot more of Thrain in the second one. Will be very interesting to see what an actor like Antony Sher does with the character.

[Incanus 5,713]

These dwarves do look awesome and very authentic, very Tolkien.

But I really couldn't see them all being lead roles in the Hobbit, it seems a bit dull for the tone of the first film. The dwarves really do need distinguishing features especially since many of them had very few lines.

That's because these Dwarves were meant to appear in the prologue for like 10 seconds. They didn't try to give them distinguishable features. But that doesn't mean you can't make Dwarves with long beards that are indistinguishable from one another.

That reminds me of something I honestly don't understand: PJ going all like: "Hey, long beards completely hide the face, you can't see the actor's emotions, blahblahblah". OK, so what about Gimli? Didn't we see Rhys-Davies' face and emotions? What about even Thror in the prologue? As far as I'm concerned, I could see the fear in his eyes during Smaug's attack, his madness when looking at his gold, his joy when walking through his kingdom. But maybe that's just me.

To answer to your question, SafeUnderHill, Thror looked great, Thrain looked a bit bland.

And even the facial hairless elves seem to get acting tips from Kristen Stewart. Except Elrond who has the most humanizing emotions seen on any elf.

You know he is Half-Elven, only half as wooden as the rest of them.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Elrond is Spock?

[Incanus 5,713]

Elrond is Spock?

Correction: Spock is Elrond. Except with 100% less emotion.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Reverse-Spock?

[Incanus 5,713]

Dammit Elrond! I'm a wizard, not a xenobiologist! You and your Elven logic!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Incanus 5,713]

Elrond looks a bit annoyed with Bilbo in that picture. Like his is thinking "What is this insignificant little creature doing on my balcony? Not funny. Not funny at all."

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

For some reason, on the Internet, you can't dislike something without being branded as a whining little cunt.

"Don't like starfish hairdo? What a fucking annoying moaner! Get a grip!"

What you fail to see is that it's about consistency. You are consistent: you consistently moan, doom monger and complain. Therefore you're (rightly) deemed a whining c**t!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Consistency is boooring!

The only thing I want to be consistent in my life is my stool....

[Jay 37,323]

High-Res version of the Tauriel/Legolas shot

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

She looks great!

[Jay 37,323]

She looks short

[chuck 154]

She looks Christmas

[Incanus 5,713]

She looks fine.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Incanus 5,713]

Stop that whining you miserable little man! Go cry someplace else! This is a happy place! We don't want your kind around here! All miserable and whiny and bitching and moaning! Shush! Shoo!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[chuck 154]

The Circle of Life...

[Incanus 5,713]

It is just marvellous to see the world unfold in all its beauty like this. Sir David Attenborough should do a documentary on JWFan.

[chuck 154]

Sir David's too old... Better docu filmmaker today would be Sir Michael Moore.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

I nominate Louis Theroux.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT12X-8ZQT8

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Barnald 365]

I'm looking forward to seeing a lot more of Thrain in the second one. Will be very interesting to see what an actor like Antony Sher does with the character.

Was the actor changed or something, I heard something like that?

Yep. He's now being played by renowned Shakespearean actor Sir Antony Sher, who, with all due respect to Mike Mizrahi, should bring more gravitas and skill to the role.

[Jay 37,323]

The fact that Thrain was recast makes definitely think the Film 2 prologue will tell the story of him going mad, and Gandalf getting the map and key from him.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,323]

The question is, where do you think that sequence would have been shown when there were only 2 films?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,323]

Hmmm. What bugged me about Film 1 was that through the entire Theatrical Cut, they make it seem like Gandalf had never been to Dol Goldur before, and even during the White Council he never mentions that he got hte map and key from Thrain there. I hope the EE rectifies that.... but I fear the 2->3 film split means all Thrain stuffed will be in Film 2 instead and that just makes the White Council stuff a little odd to me. I wish PJ put deleted scenes on his blu rays.

[Incanus 5,713]

Hmmm. What bugged me about Film 1 was that through the entire Theatrical Cut, they make it seem like Gandalf had never been to Dol Goldur before, and even during the White Council he never mentions that he got hte map and key from Thrain there. I hope the EE rectifies that.... but I fear the 2->3 film split means all Thrain stuffed will be in Film 2 instead and that just makes the White Council stuff a little odd to me. I wish PJ put deleted scenes on his blu rays.

Yeah Thrain bequeathing the key and the map to Gandalf are a bothersome continuity problem in the film, especially when the wizard keeps so quiet about it and we get the impression that he has not visited in Dol Guldur before.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It is not a continuity problem if it's rectified in film 2.

[Incanus 5,713]

It's about time they got some sense into the fates of Thorin's family in the film. Thror is decapitated by Azog yes but Thrain's diappearance is hushed up entirely.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes....

Because we will see that in the next film.

"It's about time???"

Talk about over dramatic.

[Incanus 5,713]

I was just wondering why was Thrain's disappearance left unmentioned entirely in the first film? If Gandalf found the map and key on dying Thrain (where ever it will happen in the films) why didn't he divulge this to Thorin like he does in the novel? What is the reason not to mention this? If Gandalf has not been to Dol Guldur before (also left hazy in the film) where did he find the dwarf king so he could get those items from him or did he even get those from him?

This also relates to the question of Gandalf's visit to Dol Guldur in the second film and the attack of the ragged looking creature (presumably a dwarf) we have seen in the trailers. The wizard looks like he is holding Glamdring in his hand, which means that this is post troll hoard event, so it won't be a flashback to Gandalf's mysterious yet unmentioned possible first visit to Dol Guldur.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Christ, just wait untill the next film already. You are really spoiling the experience for yourself.

I bet you will go to the cinema with a list "things DoS needs to contain in order to make sense".

TTT and ROTK have HUGE deviations from their books, some work, some dont.

[Incanus 5,713]

Good idea! I'll start compiling that list right away!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I know you are joking, but are you even looking forward to film two?

[Incanus 5,713]

Well to a degree I am looking forward to it. But I also already cringe at the thought of all the bloat PJ will saturate the story with.

I have no problem with adaptation filling in small gaps and using filmic storytelling devices (the Shire opening of FotR is a perfect example of this), where the novel might not be helpful (The Hobbit is even less helpful with characterization and dialogue) or left wanting. But making something like Azog (yes my pet peeve) into a central villain and then needing to explain all sort of things because the writers deviated from the original story is what I don't like.

Again that said I enjoyed large portions of the first film (those most loyal to the novel were the strongest I felt).

[Quintus 5,399]

The way you guys over analyse this stuff to within an inch of its creation before seeing it makes it literally impossible to extract any enjoyment and approval out of the thing anyway. It's no longer an entertainment at that point.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I agree with Lee. I love talking about a film before it's release, speculating, joking etc etc. But what I'm reading in these Hobbit threads is an almost obsessive determination that PJ "must" screw up at some point.

I don't get the feeling at all that the main contributors are looking forward to the film at all, that they will sit in the cinema braced for impact.

I enjoyed the first film, despite it's many flaws. It did have heart, and I felt I was back in PJ's Middle Earth.

I expect the same for DoS.

[Barnald 365]

A recent interview with Jackson on the set of The Hobbit apparently took place inside The Prancing Pony. This correlates with a spy report stating that they were filming on the old Bree set as part of the final shooting block.

This suggests that Thorin's meeting with Gandalf will be in film two. Given that the recent Empire article said the film would start 'somewhere familiar but unexpected', I could see it beginning at Bree. And I think the story will act as a frame by which we learn the fate of Thrain. That way Gandalf could narrate it.

I'm less sure of where this will take place in a chronological sense. Now in the book it took place before the meeting at Bag End, but the film presents problems in this respect. When Gandalf presents the key to Thorin in Bag End, Thorin says "How came you by this?", to which Gandalf replies, "It was given to me by your father Thrain, for safekeeping. It's yours now". Now this would obviously suggest that Gandalf hadn't told Thorin about the key at least. However, it's interesting that Thorin doesn't ask about Thrain. It's also interesting that Balin, when recounting Azanulbizar, says that Thrain "went missing, taken prisoner or killed; we did not know". Now that's not to say they didn't find out after the battle and before Balin recounts this story; just that they did not know at that point in time.

The solution, therefore, would be to have the meeting at Bree set before the events of the first film. Have Gandalf tell Thorin about the fate of Thrain and Thror's map, but, for some admittedly bizarre reason, withhold the information about the key. Otherwise, the alternative would be for the meeting to have taken place on the early stages of their journey, perhaps before the Azanulbizar flashback. All the Dwarves and Bilbo could be sat on the other tables while Thorin and Gandalf talk on another. The conversation would begin with Thorin asking about the key and his father. This way there would be inconsistencies with events at Bag End in AUJ.

This is confusing enough, and could all have been avoided by not having Thorin ask "How came you by this?" - just have another Dwarf ask it instead, but make out like Thorin knows already. And then of course you have the very complex matter of Gandalf's encounter with Thrain. Evidently it can't have taken place in Dol Guldur - not logically anyway. Moria seems a likely bet. Perhaps Gandalf last saw Thrain in Moria, and when he encounters Thrain again at Dol Guldur in the current timeline, Thrain can fill him in on events in between.

My head hurts after that. And for the record I loved the first film, certainly more than most on here. I'm not concerned about this, just intrigued to see how they're going to approach it all given what we know so far.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I really don't see how this is a complication.

Gandalf has kept the key with him for ages. He would not just give it away.

Also in Tolkien's writings, it is stated he didnt even know who the Dwarf in Gol Guldur was.