BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,367 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 Right but if you cut LOTR together into one long film, why would you suddenly go from Gollum saying "perhaps she will take care of them" and them traipsing down the hill, to that backstory out of nowhere.it was scripted and filmed to be shown during The Dead Marshes which is why there is that one shot that lingers on Gollum's face, but it was cut for time to keep TTT under 2 hours, which is also why the scene of Arwen deciding to turn around and not go to Valinar was also moved from TTT to ROTK. I think at one point Saruman's final scene was also in TTT! They really gave into excess in TTT didn't they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I never thought of the Hobbit- Saruman as being uncorrupted. The way he is presented, especially with the menacing Isengard theme underneath, the implications are clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 That flashback is a magnificent opening for the third film. In fact they opened the four marvelously and if they ever adaot the novel again they'll have to think hard another way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,367 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 I never thought of the Hobbit- Saruman as being uncorrupted. The way he is presented, especially with the menacing Isengard theme underneath, the implications are clear.There's no denying that his line delivery has sinister undertones, and he certainly DOES dissuade the Council from entering Dol Guldur or thinking anyone is there other than a human using magic, that's for sure. But still, his true motivations are simply not shown in Film 1. You can infer all you want, but if Film 2 shows him as being clueless as to what is going on in Dol Guldur you can't say it would contradict Film 1.Besides, if the Isengard theme is a theme for the place and not the man, then it makes sense because Saruman is living there at the time of The Hobbit That flashback is a magnificent opening for the third film. In fact they opened the four marvelously and if they ever adaot the novel again they'll have to think hard another way.I do agree that all 4 prologues we have so far are terrific, but if you cut each trilogy into one long film, 2 of the prologues from each trilogy have to be moved somewhere, you can't argue with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I never thought of the Hobbit- Saruman as being uncorrupted. The way he is presented, especially with the menacing Isengard theme underneath, the implications are clear.Well to me, he just seemed annoyed. Is he a bit of a prick? Yes. But the thought of Sauron seems to have not even crossed his mind.Besides, how much did they actually film with Lee anyways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,367 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 Well to me, he just seemed annoyed. Is he a bit of a prick? Yes. He was either simply annoyed, or acting to protect Sauron. It remains to be seen.But the thought of Sauron seems to have not even crossed his mind.Which is exactly what he would want to you think if he was already in league with Sauron Besides, how much did they actually film with Lee anyways?I get the impression that Lee's health was such a concern that the only thing they filmed was him sitting in a chair on a green screen set to be inserted into the White Council. He certainly won't be shown taking part of the expulsion of Sauron from Dol Guldur, that much is certain.We'll have to see if he pops up in teasers for Film 2. Maybe we've seen the only scene they filmed for him, who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Right but if you cut LOTR together into one long film, why would you suddenly go from Gollum saying "perhaps she will take care of them" and them traipsing down the hill, to that backstory out of nowhere.Well, yes. I forgot that your edit included merging all the films into just one day-long film.One long film sounds like a nightmare to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I think they only filmed one scene with Saruman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I get the impression that Lee's health was such a concern that the only thing they filmed was him sitting in a chair on a green screen set to be inserted into the White Council. He certainly won't be shown taking part of the expulsion of Sauron from Dol Guldur, that much is certain.We'll have to see if he pops up in teasers for Film 2. Maybe we've seen the only scene they filmed for him, who knows.I have a feeling the White Council scene is it. We've probably seen the last of Saruman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 And you call yourself a Tolkien fan! Get the hell out of here!I'm a Tolkien fan and a fan of film. And the idea of putting it all in one does not sound like a very good film And heck even Tolkien wouldn't be able to sit through all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Or perhaps, they could still take a body double, and just put Lee's face on it. That wouldn't be the first time they'd do that.No, what we need is a Radagast with dignity that can take the role of "the other wizard". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Of course, they had to fuck it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,367 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 One long film sounds like a nightmare to me Well there would still be disc breaks! Since they got ROTK:TE onto a single blu ray disc I guess that means you can have 3 hours and 20 minutes of movie per disc in great quality, so LOTR would be spread over at least 4 discs in this new cut.You could make sure each disc has its own climax and denoument I suppose - Disc 1 opening through departing Lorien (Khazud Doom is the big action scene), Disc 2 Parth Galen through Warg Attack (bookended by 2 action scenes), Disc 3 Helm's Deep prep through siege at Osgiliath, Disc 4 Siege of Minas Tirith / Pellenor Fields Battle and Finale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Once 605 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 We'll have to see if he pops up in teasers for Film 2. Maybe we've seen the only scene they filmed for him, who knows.I have a feeling the White Council scene is it. We've probably seen the last of Saruman.Christopher Lee spend 4 or 5 days filming the Hobbit, that is much longer than just that scene. Especially when they didn't even need to change location or sets.Did anyone else notice the Star Wars prequel similarity in regards to what a hobbit is? What I mean is, the first Star Wars movie that came out had a nice scene where Obi Wan Kenobi tells Luke and therefore us the audience what The Force is and how it works. Years later when GL made the prequel trilogy, he has the characters talk about The Force to each other thoughout as if the audience already knows what it is. So if you actually watch them in GL's supposed intended order, you don't actually learn what The Force is until the fourth movie you watch. We have a similar thing here in The Hobbit/LOTR, where in the first film released (in the Extended Edition anyway), there's a nice scene where Bilbo Baggins tells the audience what a Hobbit is. These new films just assume the audience knows what a Hobbit is even though if you eventually watch them all in "order", it won't be until the fourth film that you get the explanation. Of course, this is kinda side-stepped by the fact that this film actually takes place during the beginning of FOTR, although it technically does take place before he writes his Concerning Hobbits chapter. Anyway.Even though it's unlikely, since the Hobbit explanation was not part of the theatrical cut of FotR it's still possible it will be part of the extended edition of An Unexpected Adventure.Something confused me about the Radagast/Witch King scene. Well OK many things did, but I'll talk about one for now: He manages to fend of the Witch-King, and pick up his Morgul Blade, which he gives to Gandalf, which he gives to the White Council, etc. However, The Witch-King uses that blade to stab Frodo at Weathertop in FOTR. How does he get it back?I'm sure that will be explained in the upcoming films. Like Radagast owning Gandalf's staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Once 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 That would just make Gandalf's return from the dead all the more convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm gonna see it Thursday in HFR 3D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Like Radagast owning Gandalf's staff.We all know what that means... Bye bye Radgy!What's this business about Radagast and Gandalf's staff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 They are going to kill Radagast and they're going to have a plot hole about wizards returning from the dead just when it's dramatically convenient. Not that this situation didn't exist before though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm gonna see it Thursday in HFR 3DYou probably won't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faleel 5,350 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Saw the film, loved it, some weak spots (Crochet "Balls", Goblin King) but it was pretty solid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Radgy's staff looks suspiciously like Gandalf's staff in FOTR...Similar yes. But they're probably still different staffs. I doubt Gandalf somehow gets ahold of Radgy's staff. More fan-fiction theories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Hmm....you got me there.Urgh, wizards switching staffs, Orc Shamans and Zombies, Nazgul Tombs, Bunnies of Doom....doesn't even sound like Middle-Earth anymore! Sounds like some fantasy hybrid written by Christopher Paolini! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 KK 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm fed up with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm gonna see it Thursday in HFR 3DYou probably won't like it.It's the "intended version" so that's how you have to see it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm fed up with this.Fanboy speculation? Fanboy cursing? Or Jackson excess?I'm gonna see it Thursday in HFR 3DYou probably won't like it.It's the "intended version" so that's how you have to see itNo, I'm talking about the film itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 oh well, I'm expecting it to be a bit boring and long so I hope I'm surprised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm fed up with this.Fanboy speculation? Fanboy cursing? Or Jackson excess?Fanboy speculation, missed opportunities in film, crappy interpretations of some of Tolkien, stretched films, everything riddled somehow with filmic brilliance here and there. It's difficult to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I'm fed up with this.Fanboy speculation? Fanboy cursing? Or Jackson excess?Everything riddled somehow with filmic brilliance here and there.This is my big problem. There's a lot of brilliant moments in the film, but as a whole it just doesn't stand. I think I would be less frustrated if this was TPM level bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I just want to ignore the existence of this film for a while and then see it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Of course KM won't like it. He's watching the film so he can throw at us how similar it supposedly is the the SW prequels.Some people speculated that Radgy would turn into the moth, thus explaining his absence in LOTR. But since the moth appeared in AUJ, then that rules that idea out.Shame, since I liked the idea.You liked the idea?You are the one inventing the term "bunnies of doom", right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brónach 1,302 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 The Hobbit type of failure is an entirely different type of failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KK 3,307 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 He liked the idea so we could have the Moths of Doom too.The Hobbit type of failure is an entirely different type of failure.One that is more crushing I suppose.But I think it's quite possible to go in there and still have some fun with it (if you can put your mind at ease with disappointment). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gkgyver 1,645 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I don't think I would ever call An Unexpected Journey a failure. Is it as good as it could have been? No. But that doesn't make it a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incanus 5,715 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Something confused me about the Radagast/Witch King scene. Well OK many things did, but I'll talk about one for now: He manages to fend of the Witch-King, and pick up his Morgul Blade, which he gives to Gandalf, which he gives to the White Council, etc. However, The Witch-King uses that blade to stab Frodo at Weathertop in FOTR. How does he get it back?I'm sure that will be explained in the upcoming films. Like Radagast owning Gandalf's staff.Morgul blades are not a unique artefacts I think but rather ensorcelled blades given to all the Nazgûl. Even the name by literal translation is Dark Sorcery Blade. Actually another victim of a Morgul blade is mentioned in the Appendices, a Steward of Gondor, who by happenstance is also named Boromir, so this leads me to suspect there were many more of these weapons than just one or two. They are indeed rather disposable weapons as the tip is designed to break off and lodge into the wound. And I can't quite believe Frodo was made of such stern stuff that a blade would break just by twisting it in the wound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Skywalker 1,795 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Some people speculated that Radgy would turn into the moth, thus explaining his absence in LOTR. But since the moth appeared in AUJ, then that rules that idea out.Shame, since I liked the idea.it's not a moth in AUJ, but a butterfly. By the least it is not the same moth species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,367 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 Another thing I noticed on my second viewing I somehow missed on the first: the company actually ends up on the knees of the stone giants, which is why they swing around so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jilal 569 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I would have enjoyed the cave scene from the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodBoal 7,538 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,367 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 There wasn't really anything from the first 6 chapters of the book missing in the film other than talking purses and talking eagles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now