The Hobbit Movie Forum » Hobbit Movie

91. azriel
    Member

    I feel I agree with you RCA,mainly cos its of a book Im so fond of! If I didnt care about The hobbit or any other piece of work by Tolkien,I wouldnt bother.We are really no different,than say "Star Wars" adore-ees, They are passionate about what THEY love, yet SOME people try to put them down or take the pee.Take the pee outa me if you like, but I wont change my mind.PJ has gone mentally over board, spoilt the adaptation by a 1000 miles,deluded himself to the point of needing psychiatric help,..Hang on..sounds like a "cult" to me ? Is David Ike about ? or David Koresh ? Heeeeeeeelp me !!

    Posted 5 months ago #
92. Recoveryanonymous
    Member

    "We are really no different,than say "Star Wars" adore-ees,"

    The difference between George Lucas and Peter Jackson is that at least George Lucas screwed up his own universe; Jackson has a responsibility here to Tolkien.
    Jackson is a competent director though, I'll give him that. It's weird how many parallels there are now though.

    A beloved movie trilogy overcoming all the odds to be made, A devoted a fan-base, the original trilogies use puppets and miniature and real actors instead of cgi, a long time between next set of movies, way too much hype, a prequel trilogy, overuse of cgi, an annoying Jar Jar type character, over emphasis on the main bad guy, and so on.

    It's really odd.

    Posted 5 months ago #
93. Hillbilly
    Member

    Stu-I'm not saying americans aren't dumber than they were a generation ago, my point is that I do not believe it is a trait unique to this country. Also, never worry about offending me, I like most of you, but once in a while I will defend my idiot countrymen.

    Petty-You made a comment something about people aren't dumber, but they are fed information as if they are. I will disagree with that statement, and prove it by going out for a drink if ever we meet. I'll pay the old bartender, you pay the young one, and we'll see who gets the correct change.

    I'm not trying to anger young posters. Many youth are far more skilled in new technology, and they seem to be pushing upper level math at a younger age. But, as a personal example, my hillbilly grandfather only attended school until eighth grade (about 13), but was still able to build his own house, plus install the wiring and plumbing (when it became available). Every teenager here can send a text or download to their smartphone, but some would starve to death if their food didn't come in a wrapper.

    So the point is, of course they are making films for a broader audience. People who read books and do not appreciate toilet humor are going to be disappointed in a lot of movies, especially when it comes to their favorite author. The movies can still be good, just not what we wanted.

    Posted 5 months ago #
94. halfwise
    Member

    I taught high school physics for a while. At the beginning of every class I made them do estimates and calculations, no calculators allowed. I didn't even allow calculators during classroom calculations until we got to quadratic equations: they had to round appropriately and the math had to pass through their noggin enroute to their pencil. Usually on parents night when I told them calculators would be banned for the first three months, I got a cheer. The students hated it at first but later most of them thanked me.

    Anyway, if you feed people information as if they are dumber, they become dumber for lack of intellectual exercise.

    Posted 5 months ago #
95. Hillbilly
    Member

    That's fine, but I don't think teenagers are going to the movies for an education. As an educator you were paid to educate, which it seems you did well. P.J. gets paid based on how many people come to see the movie. Right or wrong, he made changes to increase that probability.

    Posted 5 months ago #
96. pettytyrant
    Member

    And therein Hillbilly lies an interesting question. Why did PJ want to make it in the first place?
    If it was love of the book and language his films have an odd way of showing it.
    If it was an attempt to make a live action version of the Bakshi film he fared better.
    Was it just becuase he thought Tolkiens name would give him an instant audience?
    But why try to make LotR's if PJ believed it has to be so dumbed down for the masses?
    If it were me and I thought the only way it could be done succesfully would be to make it appeal as broadly as possible by making it as simple as possible and changing all the dialogue, then I would not consider it worth doing at all.

    Posted 5 months ago #
97. azriel
    Member

    Thats what Ive always wondered, WHY?,Maybe,to begin with,PJ thought it was an interesting topic, thought he could do better than Bakshi, PJ did admit to only reading it once. So he couldnt have loved it THAT much could he? If you love a book,(or film or music or whatever) you enjoy it again & again.But PJ didnt. He had to have help adapting it to film. Thats where he brought in "the Coven" & others,to help him. Boyens talks a bucket load of mega shit, this we know, But,PJ might have thought,"hey,she knows her stuff, shes been a teacher after all, thats all we need, shew must have read Tolkien?", Then,little by little, between The Coven & big film companies pressurising PJ to come up with a salable product,with a well known story name,by a well known author,that could pick the industry up outa the doll drums plus have money spinning potential via merchandise, Then ok,go ahead,but do pep it up old boy! We need bums on seats,We're up against Marvel comics & their bendy toys & sticker books!.Easy to get side tracked & blinded ? well YES, if you dont stay TRUE to the original idea.You need strength & tenacity & determination to see your dreams full filled. I dont think PJ really did have a "dream",not in the sense we expected.His dream was never really about Tolkiens LOTRs OR The Hobbit,That dream somewhere vanished in the mist.

    Posted 5 months ago #
98. Gandalf the wise
    Member

    The reason i say we should accept it, is because theres nothing else we can do, we cant change how the films are going to be so to enjoy them we have to accpet them. We could watch every film there is and say - shudda, wudda, cudda but it is what it is.

    To reitterate im not condoling everything PJ has done. There are a fair few things i am scratching my head at too, but i guess im trying not to let them ruin the film and experience for me and to low and behold enjoy the film for what it is.

    Posted 5 months ago #
99. figgsbane
    Member

    and this is where I have to disagree. I believe PJ did not nor is not dumbing down Tolkien for the masses. He is not guilty of this, I firmly and utterly believe he is very invested in making the best films he can. No he is not perfect, but he is better than most, and I trust his judgement. I think its an utter falacy to say LOTR was dumb or not true to the book, I found it very faithful on all levels, astoundingly faithful. The Hobbit may have a few nods to popular culture, as did LOTR, but the story of Bilbo will be intact. I dont understand all the antagonism towards PJ, I think his heart is in the right place, and has got the very best people in the industry for the job.

    Posted 5 months ago #
100. Joel Becker
     Member

     On a related note , has anyone seen the movie Idiocracy?

     Posted 5 months ago #
101. Gandalf the wise
     Member

     here here figgsbane

     Posted 5 months ago #
102. lance
     Member

     Figgsbane - Not sure how the astoudingly faithful can be at all justified. You only have to look at the commentaries to see their own admissions that things were changed to make it more filmic or that things were not done properly as they didnt have time etc.

     I do think that PJ attempted in the most part to do a faithful job on LotRs. From what I have read so for about the Hobbit films, that is up for debate this time around.

     Will let you know my official verdict once I have seen TH:AUE on Friday night.

     Posted 5 months ago #
103. stuart Carrier
     Moderator

     Ayup All...

     It seems now that the 48FPS Debacle HAS hit a nerve as PJ and Co are Positively out there on the stump,trying to convince the wider audience that the new Technology is best, and here to stay. PJ also says that to an extent he makes his films to please himself, not terribly Unusual or unreasonable i'd guess, but for me, there's a smack of 'Like it or lump it' which I don't like.

     He uses the analogy of Vinyl versus Digital music, and says that 'The world has moved on' which is something I disagree with. most of us have Indeed tried Digital, and have come back to the conclusion that Vinyl is better. There's no 'warmth' in a Digital recording, IMO. what's annoying about about all this, is that the Digital/3D/48FPS thing is being shoved down our necks, and we're being Ignored, which I find very annoying. Mind you, by this time tomorrow, Ishall be wedged in my seat, ready for it all to Kick off... Woohoo !

     Posted 5 months ago #
104. figgsbane
     Member

     we at least have the choice of how we see the films, so its not like we are being forced to accept 48fps. Most of us will probably have to see it in 24fps as not all cinemas will be showing it in 48.

     Posted 5 months ago #
105. Naughtygirlz
     Member

     Thanks for share link,...

     http://goo.gl/KTnZ8

     http://goo.gl/KTnZ8

     http://goo.gl/KTnZ8

     http://goo.gl/KTnZ8

     Posted 5 months ago #
106. stuart Carrier
     Moderator

     fook Of Spammerz Go buy a ticket like everyone else !

     Posted 5 months ago #
107. AnOldTroll
     Member

     I just booked my tickets for the 48fps version. I don't go the cinema that often but my major complaint is always that the frame rate is too slow for the size of the screen and the field of view. Looking forward to seeing how PJ handles it.

     Posted 5 months ago #
108. Sinister 71
     Moderator

     well in just about an hour I should begin my Hobbit journey and be able to judge for myself good bad or indifferent. I'll post some reviews tomorrow.

     Posted 5 months ago #
109. clayton_berg
     Member

     Just bumping away to move these ridiculous spammmers down.

     Posted 5 months ago #
110. Hillbilly
     Member

     Helping clayton and Stu eliminate spam.

     Posted 5 months ago #
111. stuart Carrier
     Moderator

     Ayup All..

     The fight against us 'Old fans' cntinues on this sites front page and Torn and elsewhere, by boasting of record attendances to the Hobbit. I say, so what ? Just because many people have gone to see a film than a previous record on an opening weekend, doesnt mean that its a 'good' film, does it ? and the Majority of 'Fans'(or rather Cinemagoers) wont have read the book either. No disrespect to those new posters recently joined who have reviewed the film, but many of them have NOT read the book by their own admission. so how can they compare the film to what its supposed to represent ? they can't possibly know what they're commenting on. I sorta liked the film AS a piece of Fantasy film, but it wasn't the BOOK was it ?

     Posted 5 months ago #
112. machboxpodcast
     Member

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MlT8Pqqn5E

     I think people wanted to hate the Hobbit because of how good LOTR was. They need another Star Wars. In time people will realise it is an amazing film. What do you lot think?

     Posted 5 months ago #
113. pettytyrant
     Member

     No I think it was because it was a particularly poor adaptation of the source material that was neither the childrens tale of the book nor the epic of LotR's that PJ wanted it to be and he therefore screwed it up completely.
     Add some of the usual PJ vices- over long action scenes, spectacle for its own sake but serving no narrative purpose, a terrible made up villian with no presence as he's only cgi, a convient forgeting of all geography, time and distances, shoehorned cameos by popular characters from a previouis success and a complete bastardisation of everything Tolkien wrote about the history of the period and you might have one or two clues as to why it its so poor.
     Just saying.

     Posted 5 months ago #
114. Sinister 71
     Moderator

     I think if I just compare the film to itself it was a great film but knowing Tolkien the way I do I did find little things, that the ignorant general movie goer would just forgive as this being an entertaining film, annoying and out of place.

     I'll go on record as saying I liked the film, BUT it could have been better and truer to Tolkien and been just as good.

     Petty I agree the CGI Azog was horrible and felt about as dangerous as a box full of kittens in the scheme of the films. He looked way too video gamish, and fake IMO. Who framed Rodger Rabbit in middle earth... An actor in a suit, using prosthetics and practical effects, would have looked much better, and felt more real and dangerous. Maybe that's why Peter Jackson should get the story right first OR just follow what Tolkien already wrote, instead of constantly changing it to fit the mood he is in for that day.

     Posted 5 months ago #
115. GollumLover
     Member

     How could anyone call this film a "purist's delight".

     PJ has added and pasted and changed things which just aren't in the original book at all or even meant to be in there.

     Posted 5 months ago #
116. Anonymous
     

     Because lots of people who cant/dont enjoy reading find the opening hour or so to be a total bore because of how pure they tried to be for the first half. Yes, they added a few things that are not in the book,but most of it is still Tolkien.
     I would say The Hobbit is closer to a purist film than the LotR films were. At least there were very few things left out. Just tweeked a bit.

     Posted 5 months ago #
117. Sinister 71
     Moderator

     the situations were there but the execution and dialogue were different SO many times. I wish they had kept more of flow of the book and kept more of the dialogue and didn't make up so much of their own.

     Posted 5 months ago #
118. GollumLover
     Member

     I don't think you can call it "TWEEKED" when they added entire scenes and characters and plot devices that weren't in the book at all.

     That isn't tweeking, its meddling.

     Posted 5 months ago #
119. stuart Carrier
     Moderator

     Ayup All...

     Smokescreen Alert, Smokescreen Alert !

     Seems like details of Smaug and Gandy at Dol Guldur are being leaked to boost the Morale of the PJ 'Fans' over those of us 'septics', LOL. The Dragons Face doesn't look particularly Awesome does it ? and looks somewhat Generic to me. Almost Bakshi ?

     Still, if we get to get hints of the next Film... ;)

     Posted 5 months ago #
120. Sinister 71
     Moderator

     Where Stu?

     Posted 5 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must register or log in to post.