The Hobbit (& its sequel)

[maneth]

I loved LotR, and even if Denethor was a bit over the top in RotK, I'm not that bothered. My only gripe is the attempt to imply the possibility of a relationship between Aragorn and Eowyn, while I loved the envious yet noble Faramir, who was too unreal to be true in the book - I'd go so far as to say he was the least convincing human character in the book.

I have high hopes of two decent movies with PJ producing.

 

[jnk5y]

Re: The Hobbit (& it's sequel)

Mostly .. it was boring.

Too much weight on the visuals (which were impressive as hell, given) while completely failing to engage me emotionally. The battle at Helm's Deep literally made me fall asleep - so much battling, so little giving-me-a-reason-to-give-a-damn, after the Fellowship.

It was the typical example of a movie that I thought might have been good if it had had a tenth of its budget.

I'm neither a puritan fan of the books, nor am I opposed to battle-heavy movies as a matter of principle (I LOVED Batman Begins) .. but it just completely failed at making me give a shit. It just felt like .. a whole lot of showing off. With New Zealand's majestic landscapes, of the grand orchestra, and of the possibilities special effects had opened. It made me more interested in the size of Peter Jackson's nose than in what was happening with the story.

I agree. At the end of the FOTR I didn't understand why Sam went with Frodo. PJ failed to create the relationship they had in the books. Even in the other films I never felt the special bond those two should have had. The books to me are mainly about Frodo and Sam's love for each other (in a strictly hetero way) and how that got them through the most difficult of times.

So maybe a new director can focus more on the character interactions as opposed to the scenery.

 

[Galahad]

I loved LotR, and even if Denethor was a bit over the top in RotK, I'm not that bothered. My only gripe is the attempt to imply the possibility of a relationship between Aragorn and Eowyn, while I loved the envious yet noble Faramir, who was too unreal to be true in the book - I'd go so far as to say he was the least convincing human character in the book.

I have high hopes of two decent movies with PJ producing.

I really enjoyed the trilogy but I disagree with you on Faramir. I didn't like the way he was presented in TTT. He's far and away my favourite human character in the books and I didn't like what they did with him. Although having said that... the extended edition and Return of the King at least portrayed him more favourably.

One criticism I would have of Peter Jackson was his tendency to play the "auteur" card a little too fervently. Hitchcock was far more a subtle director when it came to that kind of thing. Did anybody else kind of get a happy warm fuzzy feeling when Gimli threw off Legolas' aim and made him kill Bosun Peter Jackson?

 

[hypatia]

Anyone remember hearing something about a movie version of "the Hobbit"?

Update on Movie "Hobbit"

Martin Freeman certainly looks right for the part of Bilbo.

 

[RW7427]

If they made a movie of The Hobbit I'd so go watch it.

 

[hypatia]

I might wait for the DVD to come out. I am a movie wimp for movies over 2 hours.

I noticed that he threatened to move the production from New Zealand to... eastern Europe. And then predicted a pox upon New Zealand for many years to come...

:evil:

 

[RW7427]

I'm normally the "wait until it comes out on DVD person" too, but if the movie looks good enough I'll go to the theater. But it has to be like knock my socks off kind of good for me to want to go...

 

[Demonn]

It's about time they worked out those legal issues... I hope this turns out super awesome if not as well done as LotR.

 

[Galahad]

It's about time they worked out those legal issues... I hope this turns out super awesome if not as well done as LotR.

Um. Last I heard, principal shooting was due to commence in February so I find it a bit odd you are musing over that.

Production start confirmed.

Here's the cast list so far...

• Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins – Attached
• Ian McKellen as Gandalf the Grey[7][8] – Attached
• Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield[9] – Attached
• Graham McTavish as Dwalin[10] – Attached
• Ken Stott as Balin[11] – Attached
• Aidan Turner as Kíli[10][12] – Attached
• Rob Kazinsky as Fíli[10] – Attached
• Mark Hadlow as Dori[10] – Attached
• Jed Brophy as Nori[11] – Attached
• Adam Brown as Ori[13] – Attached
• John Callen as Óin[10] – Attached
• Peter Hambleton as Glóin[10] – Attached
• William Kircher as Bifur[11] – Attached
• James Nesbitt as Bofur[13] – Attached
• Stephen Hunter as Bombur[10] – Attached
• Andy Serkis as Gollum/Sméagol[14] – Attached
• Mikael Persbrandt as Beorn[11] – Attached
• Cate Blanchett as Galadriel[11] – Attached
• Christopher Lee as Saruman the White[15] – Attached
• Sylvester McCoy as Radagast the Brown[16] – Attached
• Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins[17] – Attached
• Jeffrey Thomas as Thrór[18] – Attached
• Mike Mizrahi as Thráin II[19] – Attached
• Ryan Gage as Drogo Baggins[11] – Attached
• Ian Holm as Older Bilbo Baggins[14] – In talks
• Hugo Weaving as Elrond[20] – In talks
• David Tennant as Thranduil[21] – In talks
• Orlando Bloom as Legolas[22] – In talks
• Saoirse Ronan as Unknown[23][24] – In talks

 

[J2M]

I'm normally the "wait until it comes out on DVD person" too, but if the movie looks good enough I'll go to the theater. But it has to be like knock my socks off kind of good for me to want to go...

Exactly. Rarely does a movie seem to me worth going to the theater for - "The Hobbit" is one of them, though. Even at a couple hours +, I'm looking forward to it.

 

[Demonn]

It's about time they worked out those legal issues... I hope this turns out super awesome if not as well done as LotR.

Um. Last I heard, principal shooting was due to commence in February so I find it a bit odd you are musing over that.

Never saw this thread until yesterday... so last I heard or saw they were still squabling over the legal crap.

 

[Demonn]

For those of you that aren't paying attention to such things... or are and want to talk about it. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey comes out December 14th... we've got about a week yet. I'm not as pumped about it as I was LotR. Not a fan of Dwarves I guess. I like Elves, never read the book, but I think there's a battle with Elves and Dwarves against Orcs toward the end.

That part will probably be in The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug though, which comes out next year...

 

[vacantlook]

I don't know but if I had to take a guess, I would imagine that part one is going to end with the dwarves being captured by the elves in Mirkwood, leaving Bilbo all on his own. But that's just a guess as it would be a decent cliffhanger ending for the first film.

 

[RW7427]

I read the book. It wasn't quite up to par with LOTR, but I still enjoyed it. I almost never go to the movies, but I would go see this one.

 

[vacantlook]

I actually like The Hobbit book better than The Lord Of The Rings books. I had to literally make myself finish LOTR; it annoyed me how it could spend a page and a half talking about what day of the month it was but only took a quarter of a page between Gandalf arriving at Helm's Deep to the end of the battle.

 

[RW7427]

I skipped over a lot of the boring parts of LOTR when I was reading it.

 

[vacantlook]

I didn't realize until just now reading about it that they're doing The Hobbit as 3 (three) films. I thought it was two, which I thought was stretching it. But three? How is that going to happen. There's not really enough for three; that's really stretching it beyond my comprehesion.

 

[Sindatur]

I didn't realize until just now reading about it that they're doing The Hobbit as 3 (three) films. I thought it was two, which I thought was stretching it. But three? How is that going to happen. There's not really enough for three; that's really stretching it beyond my comprehesion.

Yea, he was aiming for two, but, found himself in trouble for screen time to get everything in, so, they greenlit a third movie.

I've seen this debate quite a bit. Apparently, The Hobbit has quite a bit in it, but, said with few words, versus The Lord of The Rings, which says it with a boatload of words. So, there's a lot glossed over and mentioned in passing in the book that Jackson will be able to flesh out. Apparently the book doesn't give you much on most of the Dwarves, other than names, if you're gonna have 10 or 12 Dwarves on the screen, you need to flesh them out at least some. Plus the appendices has some stuff too, that is one or two lines, but, could apparently can easily be fleshed out into considerably more screen time than 1 or two lines. The big War is apparently only given a page or two in the book (or half a page), yet, look at how much screen time was given to wars in LotR.

So, those who aren't worried about it being "Stretched out with filler" think it's a good thing that Jackson will be fleshing stuff out better then the book allows for

 

[Demonn]

So... did anybody go see it yet? How was it?

 

[Gul Re'jal]

I did and I liked it. It was long but it didn't feel long or boring to me. Nice soundtrack I read someone complaining in a review about special effects (that they weren't so special), but I didn't notice anything annoying. But then, maybe I just didn't pay attention to the special effects but to the story instead and ignored all imperfections