The Hobbit Page 45

  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

  • Telepathic.Geometry 2 Aug 2013 01:32:10 11,402 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Well, horses for courses I guess.

    || PSN Barrysama || NNID Barrysama ||

  • Mola_Ram 2 Aug 2013 02:04:41 7,682 posts
    Seen 17 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Movies are different from books. If the extra stuff drags the running time out to close to 3 hours, or messes with the pacing, then it becomes a worse movie, regardless of how faithful it is to the source material.
  • Telepathic.Geometry 2 Aug 2013 02:17:06 11,402 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Just with regard to the LotR movies, I loved the first two to pieces, but felt the third one really suffered from poor editing.

    If you look at the deleted scenes from Two Towers for example, they are extremely entertaining and I love 'em all, but they were cut for the sake of the movie's pacing. It's probably really tough to cut those scenes that you love, but it really does make for a better movie.

    Less is more.

    || PSN Barrysama || NNID Barrysama ||

  • Deleted user 2 August 2013 02:46:31
    Kill your darlings, etc.
  • Telepathic.Geometry 2 Aug 2013 03:03:40 11,402 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Yeah, and another related rule I heard on a commentary somewhere was, "If there's no blood on the cutting room floor, you're not doing it right". There's no way you can keep everything you shot. Something has to go.

    || PSN Barrysama || NNID Barrysama ||

  • morriss 2 Aug 2013 04:42:55 71,128 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I'm not a film maker so I can't really comment.

    I enjoyed The Hobbit however and am looking forward to the extended edition and TDoS.
  • Telepathic.Geometry 2 Aug 2013 05:15:51 11,402 posts
    Seen 6 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Well, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't gonna watch it. I've loved the books for well over a quarter of a century. Just don't think I can be arsed to go to the cinema to see it this time...

    || PSN Barrysama || NNID Barrysama ||

  • Deleted user 2 August 2013 08:13:22
    I'm all over the extended cut, major Tolkien boffin right here.

    Must of read the hobbit six times although lotr only once, really need to read it again.

    This extended cut should but well made as I felt the lotr extended releases were the best dvd releases I have bought for quality of extended movie, quality of the two extra discs plus packaging.

    Five discs though?

    Is it disc or disk?
  • Shikasama 2 Aug 2013 08:55:17 6,967 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    The extended editions of the LOTR films are much better films in my opinion, especially The Two Towers.
  • vijay_UK 2 Aug 2013 08:57:44 2,267 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Shikasama wrote:
    The extended editions of the LOTR films are much better films in my opinion, especially The Two Towers.
    +1.
  • RobAnybody 2 Aug 2013 09:04:46 924 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Choppi wrote:
    I'm all over the extended cut, major Tolkien boffin right here.

    Must of read the hobbit six times although lotr only once, really need to read it again.

    How can you be a major Tolkien boffin if you've only read The Hobbit half a dozen times and LotR just once? Come back here when you've read each book at least a dozen times (and The Silmarillion at least 3 times). :)
  • spindle9988 2 Aug 2013 09:22:17 3,621 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I thought the Silmarillon was utter shit compared to LOTR and the hobbit
  • Deleted user 2 August 2013 09:23:13
    Okay so the movie boffin although I love the books more. Just never got to reading the book again. Watching the films is a touch quicker than reading 1300 pages.
  • Alastair 2 Aug 2013 09:35:25 16,051 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    So, as a Tolkein boffin how do you feel about the appearance of Rhadagast in the film compared to his appearances in the books?
  • nickthegun 2 Aug 2013 09:38:56 60,452 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    When you talk about Lord of the Rings, do you accidentally slip into elvish?

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • Deleted user 2 August 2013 10:23:42
    I've never too anal about movie changes from the book, most of the time the director knows what they are doing.

    I didn't like the mouth of sauron though as it was so far from what I'd imagined. Infact that whole scene was different but to be fair in the book it was uncertain as to if frodo was alive where it was obvious in the film.

    Strange anyone would start getting horrible again, I should of said something like huge lotr fan, book and films. I used boffin and the authors name rather than lotr and yet it requires sad abuse?
  • Ziz0u 2 Aug 2013 10:27:13 8,490 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Norks
  • Alastair 2 Aug 2013 10:31:02 16,051 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    morriss wrote:
    After having read Unfinished Tales and other background stuff, I think it's grea that he's trying to cram as much Lore and back-story into the films. It's more an homage to the Tolkein universe than a Hobbit adaptation, imo. All the Sauron Dol Guldur stuff gives me goosebumps. Hopefully we'll get to see the Mirkwood Elves do battle with Dol Guldur and push Sauron back to Mordor.
    I haven't read other background stuff so didn't realise this was where he was getting the extra content from. If it's canon, then I guess that's cool.
    Still not mad keen on the appearance of Rhadagast...
  • Dizzy 2 Aug 2013 10:34:49 2,712 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Alastair wrote:
    morriss wrote:
    After having read Unfinished Tales and other background stuff, I think it's grea that he's trying to cram as much Lore and back-story into the films. It's more an homage to the Tolkein universe than a Hobbit adaptation, imo. All the Sauron Dol Guldur stuff gives me goosebumps. Hopefully we'll get to see the Mirkwood Elves do battle with Dol Guldur and push Sauron back to Mordor.
    I haven't read other background stuff so didn't realise this was where he was getting the extra content from. If it's canon, then I guess that's cool.
    Still not mad keen on the appearance of Rhadagast...
    It is (mostly) canon ofc. The "baddy" in the movie is also canon, but he actually did not survive the battle at Moria, so he is taking canon and changing it a bit for cinematic sake. I am pretty ok with it TBH and I am a big fan of all the books. You have to accept that not everything that works in books, works in movies. Mostly Peter has done a very good job.

    Well Rhadagast is not really described in any of the books, so that is his own interpretation.

    But yeah... the fight at Dol Guldur should be in the movie... it happened at the same time as the Hobbit book.

    Edited by Dizzy at 10:41:20 02-08-2013
  • Alastair 2 Aug 2013 10:36:32 16,051 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I mean the fact that he appears at all.. He is described in the Hobbit and LotR, but never actually makes an appearance.
  • Deleted user 2 August 2013 10:38:04
    graysonavich wrote:
    Yeah, being less full of shit would definitely help. Maybe the next reinvention, fingers crossed eh?
    There has never been a reinventing.
  • Dizzy 2 Aug 2013 10:42:11 2,712 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    @Alastair Well he does appear as the Necromancer in other books during that period... so yeah... we will get to see him :) Probably as some kind of shadow or spirit I guess.

    Edited by Dizzy at 10:42:30 02-08-2013
  • Alastair 2 Aug 2013 10:45:58 16,051 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Dizzy wrote:
    @Alastair Well he does appear as the Necromancer in other books during that period... so yeah... we will get to see him :) Probably as some kind of shadow or spirit I guess.
    Rhadagast the Brown? As the Necromancer?
    My understanding is that the Necromancer as referred to in the Hobbit morphs and develops into Sauron...
  • Deleted user 2 August 2013 10:46:36
    Alastair wrote:
    I mean the fact that he appears at all.. He is described in the Hobbit and LotR, but never actually makes an appearance.
    They have three movies to bulk out.
  • Alastair 2 Aug 2013 10:48:09 16,051 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Choppi wrote:
    Alastair wrote:
    I mean the fact that he appears at all.. He is described in the Hobbit and LotR, but never actually makes an appearance.
    They have three movies to bulk out.
    Quite!
    :)
  • Dizzy 2 Aug 2013 10:54:31 2,712 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    @Alastair Hmmm ok it looks like we were talking about different things here :)

    Obviously I was not talking about Rhadagast :) The Necromancer IS Sauron in a less powerful form yes. Kinda strange that he has a physical presence during that period and then later transforms into just an eye? Well he is a shape changer :)

    They have three movies to bulk out.
    Yes... but you can argue that a lot more happened during that period (of the Hobbit) in the world of ME and that those events are very important in the grand cycle of all the movies.

    Edited by Dizzy at 10:56:39 02-08-2013
  • RedSparrows 2 Aug 2013 11:23:00 23,298 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    With my serious hat on, I'm a big fan of less is more, all the way to minimalist, if I'm being srs bznss.

    With my Tolkien fanboy hat on, I fucking love the obscenely long films. Yes, they get stuff (SERIOUSLY) wrong: Sam being sent away, Faramir being weak, Radaghast being a forest gimp, but for all the shite, they also give you the scenery, the characters and the sheer scope (and Tolkien love) by the absolute bucket-load.

    Is it the best treatment possible of the material? Probably not - I mean that re: Unfinished Tales et al. I love the Silmarillion and UT and the tale of Hurin and Turin and Badambamdurin, and any other 'urins, but does it need to be squeezed in? seriously speaking, perhaps not.

    But if I relax a bit, I let it wash all over me and I feel dirty and good at the same time.
  • nickthegun 2 Aug 2013 11:30:11 60,452 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The necromancer stuff actually give quite good background to Lord of the rings in that it shows the 'fall' of saruman and how the dithering of the white council allowed sauron to mass his forces.

    It will, ultimately, make a very good B-Plot.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

Log in or register to reply