The Hobbit Page 49

  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

  • Dirtbox 16 Dec 2013 18:53:47 79,187 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    The only people that worry about crap like that are shareholders.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Moot_Point 16 Dec 2013 19:03:14 4,607 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @Dirtbox Aah, the 2D version then?

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • morriss 16 Dec 2013 20:21:36 71,286 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    With the story Jackson is telling , 3 films is fine.
  • Lukus 16 Dec 2013 20:35:40 19,464 posts
    Seen 37 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Dirtbox wrote:
    I suppose my question should really be - how true to the book is it? The first part was so crammed with filler and unnecessary back story that I barely recognised the few parts that remained of the book.
    Not very is the true answer. But, does that really matter? It's an impression of the book, with lots of embellishments, and it's better than the first due to more variety of characters, scenes and action.

    Paintings & Photographs

  • mrpon 16 Dec 2013 20:54:21 29,562 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    James Nesbitt asked for three films so his ugly wife would leave him.

    Give yourself 5 or gig, you're worth it.

  • morriss 16 Dec 2013 20:57:03 71,286 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It's also the story Tolkien wanted to tell. He wrote many additions in The Unfinished Tales and the LotR Appendices. It's an homage rather than a straight adaptation, imo.

    Edited by morriss at 20:57:46 16-12-2013
  • addyb 16 Dec 2013 21:33:41 1,290 posts
    Seen 36 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I can't wait to watch it. Got premium tickets booked for the IMAX at Manchester for Thursday. I really enjoyed the first one and pretty much everyone I've spoke to who has seen this say its better then an unexpected journey.

    I loved the lotr trilogy so its great to see middle earth again. Plus Evangeline Lilly is divine. :)
  • EMarkM 16 Dec 2013 21:54:17 3,425 posts
    Seen 1 minute ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Bremenacht wrote:
    /Jackson sits down and writes some filler
    /Time passes...
    /Fran says "Hurry up"
    Made me smile :)
  • LeD 17 Dec 2013 09:05:17 6,314 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Seen it. Loved it. Smaug is incredible, Freeman really comes into his character, Bard is fantastic and all the "filler" stuff is great and works well in the context of the broader narrative. Yes there are some silly bits I could have done without, but they don't amount to much screen time so one can quickly raise an eyebrow and then forget about it.

    Don't pass on this fantastic bit of escapism because 'it's not true to the book'. Who gives a fuck - and I write this as someone who's read LotR, The Hobbit, The Simarilion and countless other tidbits many times, and owns a Middle Earth atlas and everything.

    This is as good an interpretation of the whole Tolkien universe as any.
  • LeoliansBro 17 Dec 2013 09:15:56 44,956 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    It isn't that 'it's not true to the book' so much as it's JRR Tolkien's The Hobbit where 75% of the content was made up by other people who've read Tokein as well. It's as good and as bad as Bram Stoker's Dracula.

    That said the second film does sound promising and I'll doubtless catch it over Christmas. Does it have any of the following:

    - Visual comedy gags inc. pratfalling
    - Fight scenes that feel like a fairground ride
    - Entire sequences done through CGI with none of the careful interpolation of Helm's Deep etc
    - Nods to the LOTR films which go beyond gratuitous
    - Cameos from LOTR favourites for no reason

    ?

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Deleted user 17 December 2013 09:22:15
    The Hobbit where 75% of the content was made up by other people who've read Tokein as well
    Yeah, Tokein was a real hack and Tolkien plagiariser. Rotter.
  • beastmaster 17 Dec 2013 09:22:56 11,979 posts
    Seen 17 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    It isn't that 'it's not true to the book' so much as it's JRR Tolkien's The Hobbit where 75% of the content was made up by other people who've read Tokein as well. It's as good and as bad as Bram Stoker's Dracula.

    That said the second film does sound promising and I'll doubtless catch it over Christmas. Does it have any of the following:

    - Visual comedy gags inc. pratfalling
    - Fight scenes that feel like a fairground ride
    - Entire sequences done through CGI with none of the careful interpolation of Helm's Deep etc
    - Nods to the LOTR films which go beyond gratuitous
    - Cameos from LOTR favourites for no reason

    ?
    All of the above. You'll love it :-)

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • LeD 17 Dec 2013 09:29:09 6,314 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    It isn't that 'it's not true to the book' so much as it's JRR Tolkien's The Hobbit where 75% of the content was made up by other people who've read Tokein as well. It's as good and as bad as Bram Stoker's Dracula.

    That said the second film does sound promising and I'll doubtless catch it over Christmas. Does it have any of the following:

    - Visual comedy gags inc. pratfalling
    - Fight scenes that feel like a fairground ride
    - Entire sequences done through CGI with none of the careful interpolation of Helm's Deep etc
    - Nods to the LOTR films which go beyond gratuitous
    - Cameos from LOTR favourites for no reason

    ?
    - Yes
    - No
    - No
    - Yes and no, not really gratuitous
    - Yes I suppose with the inclusion of Legolas who could have easily been another Elf character
  • roz123 17 Dec 2013 09:30:52 7,113 posts
    Seen 1 month ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I'm not spoiling anything by saying Legolas is in it because he is in the trailer. His main role in this film is to (again not really a spoiler) kill lots and lots of orcs with style. I can see why that would annoy people who want the film to be faithful to the books but if you forget about that its quite enjoyable to watch.
  • LeD 17 Dec 2013 09:31:02 6,314 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Deckard1 wrote:
    I'd also like to know that. Basically does it look like LOTR but run through a Nintendo filter?
    Nope, more like a PS4 filter.

    Seriously, the Smaug scenes are worth the price of the ticket alone.

    Can't wait to go see it a second time.
  • Ziz0u 17 Dec 2013 09:32:27 8,648 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Orlando Bloom needed the money to save his marriage.
  • beastmaster 17 Dec 2013 09:33:50 11,979 posts
    Seen 17 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Yep, I'm really looking forward to a second viewing.

    A massive improvement on the first.

    The Resident Evil films. I'm one of the reasons they keep making them.

  • LeD 17 Dec 2013 09:36:09 6,314 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    @roz123 Agreed, I don't understand how people can get annoyed by this or any other thing. Is it entertaining? Yes. Does it work? Yes.

    It's a book adaptation, and PJ and his team make all the right choices in my opinion in dragging it kicking and screaming to the big screen. They are faithful to the letter when they need to be, and talking liberties when they need to to make it work.

    Personally I'd get bored stiff if it was too close to the books. I want to be surprised and thrilled, and that they managed far better that in any of the previous films, LotR included.
  • Steve_Perry 17 Dec 2013 09:36:14 5,200 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I'm counting down to the third one already. Can't wait to see the battle of the five armies. One thing these films have lacked is a bloody massive battle.
  • LeoliansBro 17 Dec 2013 10:00:48 44,956 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Yeah I guess I'm looking forward to this for Smaug alone.

    And I get that a lot of my criticisms are unfair, or maybe that's not the word, biased? I know The Hobbit is a children's book but there is a dark core to it which would have set the tone perfectly as a 'gathering storm' prequel to the all out clusterfuck of LOTR. As it is there's no tonal link, this is just a jolly adventure that happens to take place before LOTR and involves a couple of the same characters.

    It's why it's such a shame GDT dropped out, he has such a grasp of the arcane and the eldritch that he would have taken the otherworldliness in his stride and really had time to flesh out his message. As it is I've seen one film obsessed with pointing out how rich and interesting the world is and neglecting the storyline as a result, more Hollywood tour than adventure.

    And I have no problems with sacrificing parts of the book to enhance the film. Gollum should be physically bigger (he has the damn ring to hunt with) and none of that riddles shit. The dwarves should be ominous, unapproachable, and fierce, not comedy drinking buddies singing songs all the time. Radagast would actually work as comic relief if every other damn thing in the film, from the ogres to the goblin king to the dwarves to Bilbo to even Gollum, wasn't comic relief as well. And don't be a slave to Gandalf and shoehorn him in all the time, he's not the central character he is in LOTR.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • Steve_Perry 17 Dec 2013 11:06:34 5,200 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I'd love to see the Silmarillion made into a TV series. The rise and fall and rise of Sauron. Game of thrones styleeeee. Could work?
  • LeoliansBro 17 Dec 2013 11:13:43 44,956 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Waaaaay too dry. You'd need to invent 90% of the characterisation from scratch, for a start.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • disusedgenius 17 Dec 2013 11:22:59 5,614 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Yeah The Silmarillion is more like reading the Bible - there's a handful of decent half-finished stories in there but mostly it just seems to be about genealogy. At Jackson's rate of output it would probably require about 75 films to do anyway.
  • Dirtbox 17 Dec 2013 12:04:06 79,187 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    So yeah, saw it, and I think only about 10% of it were scenes from the book. It was a lot better than the first film in that the embellished scenes were for the most part fairly entertaining and almost escaped the padded feel from the first. They still felt redundant though.

    The thing that irked me most was the point at which the film ended is only about 10 pages from the end of the book.

    3 hours is way too long to sit in a theatre.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Steve_Perry 17 Dec 2013 12:06:07 5,200 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    They will make the battle in the third film last at least an hour. Then 1 hour 30 of Gandalf and Bilbo laughing like loons while stroking each others hair.

    Then 5 hours of Fellowship of the Ring set up.
  • Feanor 17 Dec 2013 15:03:07 14,185 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Steve_Perry wrote:
    I'd love to see the Silmarillion made into a TV series. The rise and fall and rise of Sauron. Game of thrones styleeeee. Could work?
    I doubt the Tolkien estate would sell the rights.

    Which is a shame because Thranduil is fucking amazing in this movie, and compared to some of the Silmarillion elves he's a nobody.

    Steve_Perry wrote:
    I'd love to see the Silmarillion made into a TV series. The rise and fall and rise of Sauron. Game of thrones styleeeee. Could work?
    Just do Beren & Luthien to start. Or The Children of Hurin.

    Edited by Feanor at 15:10:48 17-12-2013
  • Feanor 17 Dec 2013 15:06:56 14,185 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Dirtbox wrote:
    So yeah, saw it, and I think only about 10% of it were scenes from the book. It was a lot better than the first film in that the embellished scenes were for the most part fairly entertaining and almost escaped the padded feel from the first. They still felt redundant though.
    More like 80% if my memory serves.

    Beorn - from the book
    Getting lost in Mirkwood - from the book
    Fight with talking spiders - from the book
    Imprisoned by elves and rescued by invisiBilbo - from the book
    Escape in barrels - from the book
    Laketown & Bard - from the book, but the details are different I think
    Getting inside the mountain - from the book
    Bilbo and Smaug - from the book

    Forge fight against Smaug - made up
    Tauriel and Kili relationship and - made up
  • LeD 17 Dec 2013 15:38:23 6,314 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Tauriel and Kili is a bit wtf though isn't it? :)
  • Feanor 17 Dec 2013 15:56:42 14,185 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Yeah, I wasn't keen on them redoing the Athelas subplot. We already saw that done in FotR.
  • Page

    of 52 First / Last

Log in or register to reply