Well said Stu. And it has been quiet here of late (I'm sure it will pick up again) but lively as over on Forumshire!
Posted 3 months ago
#
Online discussion of Peter Jackson's The Hobbit movies
The Hobbit Movie Forum » Hobbit Movie
Characters needed and not needed from LOTR
(1421 posts)-
-
When it gets quiet the natives get restless around here... well i cant complain anymore Dain has been cast. I'm actually happy about Billy Conolly being cast. he is under rated for his dramatic acting skills. granted most of his stuff has been comedic but I think he'll do a great job. still a bit crabbit about Bolg being overlooked and Roac but they miht be minor players and just not announced yet... I am anxiously waiting to see the first movie before i pass judgement.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Since PJ said that the cast is complete with the addition of Dain, I'm hoping that Azog's role will be (roughly) the same as in the book, and the goblin army at the Battle of Five Armies just won't have a leader. Or at least, they just don't really show the goblin leader. That's still not satisfactory, but it would be better than replacing Bolg with Azog and Azog not having already died. I mean, if Azog isn't dead, then the war between the Dwarves and the Goblins would still be going, without closure. As I understand it, it was the death of Azog (since it was with him that the Dwarves had their grievance) that ended the war. If he's still alive, then Dain and the Dwarves would still be at war with him, and Dain would have had a good reason to not come to the aid of Thorin. PJ and crew need to think these things through.
Posted 3 months ago # -
I would guess that similarly to LOTR a stunt man like lawrence mahory will play Bolg, in which case hes already cast, just not necessarily in that roll just yet... If I remember correctly most of the Gothmog stuff was shot in pickups only so I can see Bolg happening. Also I agree Azog must die just as he did in the book.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Oh and Roac... I'm guess Andy Sirkis... Cheers
Posted 3 months ago # -
Good point Herb... i'm thinking that IF there is a Bolg he will be played by Conan Stevens who is already playing Azog
Posted 2 months ago # -
Hmm...
Like you all, I'm desperately hoping things are true to the Appendices, but...isn't the absence of a Nain just as worrying as anything else?
Without a Nain to die, where's the motive for Dain to behead Azog? And without that motive, don't we lack a reason for Azog to die?
The absence of Nain AND Bolg suggests only one thing, surely? Dain _doesn't_ kill Azog and it's him, not his son, that therefore turns up at Bo5A...
Posted 2 months ago # -
I'm sure Jackson will change a few of the characters to suite his own personal agenda, which at this point I am unsure of whether or not will help or hurt the films. Personally I am NOT overly thrilled about Tauriel, or the lack of Bolg or Roac, bad hairdos, axes in heads, lack of beards and stuff like that. But then there are good things too, I like the darker tone of the films so far, the fact that all the needed actors are back, some of the dwarfs look really cool, actually hearing the song in Bilbo's home was a great thing. I also think the added stuff like the white council is interesting, and if done right will greatly intensify the overall feel of the film. The only concern I have is how much of Sauron they are going to worry about. One of the things I will surely scream about is if they keep pounding the issue of the necromancer being Sauron and making these films more about the ring and dark lord than it is about Bilbo. I'm sorry but I don't need the whole "bigger picture" thing crammed down my throat since I do have some intelligence and can figure out who the necromancer is thru subtle hints.
A tall hunched over hooded figure in rotting tattered robes with traces of the armor he wore in the beginning of FOTR showing underneath, Dirty, worn, and rusted. Something like that is enough they don't need to go into the whole thing of who he was before or showing him as fair or any of that bull crap. I don't need it, all I need of the necromancer is how he interacts with Gandalf while he is at DolGuldur nothing else. I don't give a rats ass about the ring being his, I can see that in the beginning of FOTR so I don't need it in the Hobbit.
Posted 2 months ago # -
I'm glad you brought up some "good things," Todd. We have a tendency here to focus on what we DON'T like about PJ's film version of The Hobbit instead of talking about some things that we DO like.
For example, I like the casting of Martin Freeman as Bilbo. I know that Tolkien described hobbits as being kind of fat, but I never actually thought of them like that while reading the books (possibly due to the LOTR films). Martin seems to fit how I imagined Bilbo.
I'm also stoked about the continuity that they will have with the rest of the casting. It's been more than ten years, and they have many returning actors: Ian McKellen, Ian Holm (is he confirmed as Old Bilbo?), Christopher Lee, Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, etc.
Posted 2 months ago # -
joel, Yes Holm is confirmed as being Old Bilbo... His scene(s) have already been filmed at Pinewood (?) studio in England i think (where they filmed the Bond films anyways)
Posted 2 months ago # -
Thanks!
Posted 2 months ago # -
Np from the way I understand it Old Bilbo and Frodo shot some stuff in England and then Frodo just did some location stuff but all their stuff was shot between the first block and second. Christopher Lee shot all his stuff then too he said he only filmed like 6 hours worth of footage which means Saruman probably wont be in much of the films. but its cool that Lee is coming back.
Still nothing news wise... it gtting slow wheres the damn new year blog PJ promised? LOL
Posted 2 months ago # -
I didn't expect Saruman to be in the movies much - only in the White Council part - but yeah, it is cool that he'll be in it. It might sound bad to say this, but... it's a good thing The Hobbit didn't get pushed back any more; there's no telling how much longer Christopher Lee will live. (Yup, I was right; that sounded really selfish.)
Posted 2 months ago # -
Well with news of Dain being cast I guess I need to find another character to complain about... well I guess he's not a character but Andy Serkis. why do they really need to use him for ALL the mo cap characters? I know he knows how to do it but to have him mo cap all the trolls just seems to me they wouldn't have 3 distinct indevidual personalities. or to have him mo cap say Roac, who is a bird... Why not use a real raven and just digitally enhance the beak for the talking parts. Then the character would be completely unique. I guess its just the fact the Sirkis is doing multiple characters that sooner or later we will start to notice certain personality traits between them instead of being 100% indevidually distinct. Just my opinion though. Whats everyone elses take on Sirkis playing so many characters?
Posted 2 months ago # -
Since when are they mocapping roac? I personally love andy's work, he's by far the best in the biz, but I think it's more of loyalty and friendship thing than it is because he's amazing.
Posted 2 months ago # -
And while I agree Andy is great he still has his quirks. Different actors have different quirks which is what I was getting at. to have one actor play multiple characters of the same species (trolls) they aren't going to be as distinct as having 3 actors play them with only one actor portraying all 3. As far as Roac I don't know he will be mo cap but with the current trend PJ is going it seems he would rather mo cap than use an actual animal for the role.
dont get me wrong I think Andy Sirkis is great too and probably the best at doing what he does but mutiple actors would make the charactrs more unique than just one man doing them all
Posted 2 months ago # -
Sorry to bump this thread - haven't been around for a few days.
Re Andy - as an actor you would expect them to be able to play different types of character and take on those traits. The mo-cap characters will be 'covered' by the CGI 'skin' (dont know the technical terms) and therefore should look and feel quite different.
If Serkis wants his oscar, I think he will need to pull this off and pull it off well. A good actor/actress can portray many different characters and buy you in even though, if you looked from a shallow point of view, it is still the same person.
Is Serkis a Hayden Christensen's Anakin or a Heath Ledger's Joker?
Posted 1 month ago # -
Honestly Lance I wasn't that impressed with Christensen's Anniken, could be I just didn't care for the new trilogy that much. Now I think Ledger took the Joker to a whole.new level, more twisted and phsycotic and I loved what he did with that role.
I realize Andy is good but most of his characters have some sort of tick that distinctifies it as being Sirkis. where different indeviduals who add totally different quirks to each troll. just my take on it though.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Ledgers Joker was just Jack Nickalsons Joker mixed with Christian Slater in Heathers plus smeared makeup. Very over rated.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Well when Ledger took the role he did go to Nicholson to ask him how he should play it. So I agree there was some of Jacks persona there but I still think he took it to a new level. Could have been worse and been more Cesar Romero like Nickolsons was. I was never a big Adam West Batman fan even when I was a kid, it was just a bit TOO campy. But I could definetly see Romero's joker in Jacks performance as well. They say some of the best scenes Ledger did never made it into the film but some might make the new film.
But back on track... I think all the characters have been cast I heard a rumor Bolg has been cast but his role is very small so we shall see. it would be cool to use Conan Stevens since he will already be Azog and Bolg's father. I still would like to see them use a real raven for Roac and do the beak with CG.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Petty... Regardless of his motivations and/or inspirations, his version of the joker was anything but overrated.
Roac definately cg, cant imagine its,very easy to get a bird to do what u want while filming a 3D movie. Bolg will be in the movie, PJ has no problem waiting til the last second and dumpinglots of work on weta, howard shore etc. so he'll prob shoot it late with an actor who's already cast. See treebeard, gothmog, witchking revamp, completely redone oliphant scenes, etc. Most happened very last second. Also PJ loves things like choppin off heads and disembowelment so what better scene to do than choppin some goblin heads off?Posted 1 month ago # -
Herb not really his performance as such I have a problem with as the characterisaition of the Joker- for me the two defining versions of the Joker are in the Killing Joke (with beautiful Bolland line work) and Arkham Asylum by Grant Morrison (with amazing artwork by Mclean). No film version has lived up to either of those reprsentation of the character to me. (And the overrated bit of Ledgers performance is the claims of originality some put to it, when at times its like he is channeling a coked up Christian Slater ala Heathers, even the way he moves).
As to Roac I think CGI is good enough to do it convincingly, the human eye picks up on the slightest discrpency when it comes to human cgi but we are much more naturally forgiving when its not human.
PJ does like doubling up actors, probably cheaper too! But most of the scenes Herb you list as late edition are also some of the worst bits.Posted 1 month ago # -
Oliphant charge was great, if you disagree you're foolin yourself.... Otherwise I agee although I think tree beard coulda been worse.
As far as joker goes, any preconcieved ideas go out the window due to the thousands of different versions. Joker can.and will always be an idea that is open to adjustment, in fact I'm fairly shocked that u aren't very purist as far as the gotham world us concerned.
And again it matters not who or what anyones favorite joker is, fact is it was a gold star performance, regardless of all the hooplaa and everything else. I watched dark knight and some origional series and the burton/keeton flick today to make sure that me and a billion other people werent wrong. Didn't watch heathers, nor will I, but the fact remains... Against much critisism/shoes to fill, and apparently drug use, the aussie delivered and if you think differently, i'll just assume you're the type of cat that dislikes stuff for the sake of disliking it. Or the proverbial "other people liked it, so I obviously can't" idea. But i'd like to think that u are wiser than that. Overrated... Laughable analysis.
A very non tolkien oriented post... ApologiesPosted 1 month ago # -
Heathers is an excellent piece of satire on teenage society and by extension all society- I highly recommend it. And after watching it if you cant see a striking similarity in portrail between Christian Slater and Ledger in the Joker then you must be watching with your eyes closed and I'll eat my hat.
Oliphaunt charge is terrible Tolkien but good cinema- you takes your pick which you want. And its just PJ redoing Hoth in a fantasy film.
Spectacular as it is I could have done without it if had meant having the Pelennor like it is in the book, full of orchards, fields, barns etc and with small scale house to house fighting, Aragorn meeting Eomer on the battle field with the lust of battle on them both, Theoden charging the standard of the Haradrim, and the singular organised assualt on the Mumakil from the book- not as spectacular but I think it would have a deeper effect of keeping the battle grounded and relatable to.
I cant imagine being in the charge on the Oliphaunts, I can't emotionally relate to it even if I can enjoy the spectacle, but the more realistic fighting of the book, the bloody horror that was the Pelennor with his fire pits and smoke and dread and the darkness of Sauron over everything- that I can emotionally be involved in. And for me that is worth a thousand spectacular cgi scenes.
It's also worth remembering that like other writers of his generation who had been in war this sort of heroic writing was a way for Tolkien to write about it indirectly, if it reflected more that experience as the book does the film would probably have resounded more strongly in modern society given the current wars ongoing in the real world.Posted 1 month ago # -
"And its just PJ redoing Hoth in a fantasy film." - Petty
Can you imagine if PJ had the Rohirrim throw spears with ropes attached into the legs of the oliphaunts and then ran circles around them, thus tripping them? And then Legolas comes running past firing three arrows at once into the base of the oliphaunts' skulls? Sorry, that's just what your comparison had me imagining...
And the thing about Tolkien's description of battles is that he served in WWI. He knows a thing or two about how battles go down. PJ does not have that same insight. True, the warfare he experienced was rather different than the kind he writes about, but still, I would think it wise to try to stay as close as possible to Tolkien's account of battles such as Pelennor Fields.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Can you imagine if PJ had the Rohirrim throw spears with ropes attached into the legs of the oliphaunts and then ran circles around them- Joel
What he had Eowyn do in taking down Mumakils, slicing their legs two handed weilding as she rides between etc is not a million miles away sadly! And the way the Mumakil goes down with its front legs buckling and folding under itself is rather AT-ATish!
I agree about the war thing. Tolkien gets away with the fantastical by keeping the rest very real. PJ's Pelennor is all fantasy, its all ridiculous so loses all emotional attachment for me- it has moments which are like the excited rush you get from being on a rollercoaster but I prefer my Tolkien to resound in a less shallow manner.
Posted 1 month ago # -
Oh, yeah, I had forgotten about that part with Eowyn. I mean, the thing had been stuck with spears and arrows out the wazoo, and one little sword swipe on each leg from Eowyn takes it down? Doesn't seem too likely. It'd be like accidentally stabbing yourself with your pencil a bunch of times when writing and thinking, "Oh, well, that's not too bad." But then you get a paper cut and bleed out.
Posted 1 month ago # -
LOL Joel. And now I think about it even Legolas singlehandely taking down a Mumakil is a bit reminiscent of Luke singlehandeldy taking down an AT-AT!
Posted 1 month ago # -
All very true points. I think I mentally blocked most or all of Eowyn from the films out, as well as Meriadoc on Pelannor. All done very wrong. Same as houses of healing, Denethor running a marathon on fire, and the almost complete omission of the level system and how it worked of Minas Tirith(which I really missed) It would have been great to see Pelannor as was written but i'll settle for what they did even though there are strong star wars parallels. Like i've said you ignore the tone of things then it just becomes easier to change everything else mostly for the worse. As far as 'Heathers'... I guess i'll give it a go.
Posted 1 month ago # -
From that list of gripes Herb you might like my purist edits of the films! They are minus quite a lot of that.
Hope you enjoy Heathers, its very 80's in style, biting in its satire and funny too.Posted 1 month ago #
Reply »
You must register or log in to post.
