Jump to content
Jay

An Unexpected Journey SPOILERS ALLOWED Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One long film sounds like a nightmare to me :P

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fed up with this.

Fanboy speculation? Fanboy cursing? Or Jackson excess?

I'm gonna see it Thursday in HFR 3D

You probably won't like it.

It's the "intended version" so that's how you have to see it

No, I'm talking about the film itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There wasn't really anything from the first 6 chapters of the book missing in the film other than talking purses and talking eagles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...