• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

The hobbit, and anything tolkien related thread

#41
pasting what I put on fb, because I'm lazy (minor spoilers maybe, but then you shouldn't be opening this thread):









I liked the Hobbit a lot...at least as much as Fellowship I think. The musical numbers in the beginning had me worried, but I thought Fellowship spent way too long dinking around in the Shire (and Return of the King spent too long ending the thing). Back to the Hobbit, I *really* liked the Gandalf/Saruman/Galadriel dynamic as a set up for LOTR. I also just like Bilbo more than Frodo, but I'm biased as The Hobbit is my favorite (having read them all including Simarillon). The orc battle was unnecessarily over the top, but I didn't mind the added bad guy for effect. I didn't think having it 3d added anything; if I'm lucky enough to see it in a theatre again, it'll be 2d. I'm glad it's going to be another trilogy...love this stuff.
 
#44
OK, saw the movie this weekend. On the whole, I thought it was uneven. The problem is that Tolkien wrote the Hobbit as a whimsical children's story with cute bumbling dwarves and monsters who might be scary but were also kind of folksy, elves who were light-hearted pixies, etc. In the movie they kept some elements of that but kept trying to make it compatible with the world of LOTR, with all its grandeur and tragedy. It just doesn't fit. The biggest clashing moment was when the Goblin King opened his mouth and was practically talking Cockney. There were other moments like that too. Also, they weave in lots of material from the appendices to LOTR, about the Necromancer and the White Council, which are interesting but don't really belong to the plot line of the Hobbit and I felt were padding to justify a movie trilogy rather than really essential to telling a good story.

In the end, sure, I enjoyed myself, but it's not going to go down as a great movie for me.
 
#47
I have read the book numerous times - the trilogy as well. Saw the movie last week, and was VERY happy with the way they did it. No disappointment at all! I can't wait for the other two pix to come out.

And if you haven't read the book, you should do so before the next movie comes out. Then you will understand a number of nuances in the script that otherwise won't be clear to you. It might also be a good idea to read a few articles about WHY they added material to the movie, and where that material was sourced - which is pretty much all found within the appendices of the trilogy, which adds a great deal of detail about people and occurrences referred to in few words in The Hobbit.
 
#48
BlacksHole said:
I loved the books, LOTR and the new Hobbit movie. I thought it moved well enough and since I knew going in that it was a long movie, I was a little surprised that it seemed to end so soon as it didn't feel like I was sitting there that long.
Click to expand...

Me too...didn't feel too long at all to me. Definitely getting the dvd of this one.
 
#49
I really enjoyed it. I've read all the books numerous times. It's been awhile since I've read The Hobbit, but I don't remember a Brown, mushroom eating wizard, and the stone giant battle was kind of over the top. Still entertaining though. I don't remember the testicle chin orc king either, come to think of it. But the key parts of the book, the trolls (I love how, despite their bumbling, are like chefs squabbling over different recipes), Rivendale, and the scene where Bilbo encounters Gollum are masterfully done, IMO. I didn't want the movie to end.
 
#51
Pilgrim said:
And if you haven't read the book, you should do so before the next movie comes out. Then you will understand a number of nuances in the script that otherwise won't be clear to you. It might also be a good idea to read a few articles about WHY they added material to the movie, and where that material was sourced - which is pretty much all found within the appendices of the trilogy, which adds a great deal of detail about people and occurrences referred to in few words in The Hobbit.
Click to expand...

MakiSupaStar said:
I really enjoyed it. I've read all the books numerous times. It's been awhile since I've read The Hobbit, but I don't remember a Brown, mushroom eating wizard, and the stone giant battle was kind of over the top. Still entertaining though. I don't remember the testicle chin orc king either, come to think of it. But the key parts of the book, the trolls (I love how, despite their bumbling, are like chefs squabbling over different recipes), Rivendale, and the scene where Bilbo encounters Gollum are masterfully done, IMO. I didn't want the movie to end.
Click to expand...

Radagast the Brown makes a very brief appearance in the LOTR books (actually, just that Gandalf tells the hobbits about how he got a message via Radagast). The movie amplified his role hugely. The Hobbit does mention the stone giants throwing boulders at each other and the dwarves being terrified, but one has the impression it's more the giants' idea of a fun game of catch. The goblin king is in the book of the Hobbit and has that kind of folksiness to him, but the movie makes him actually goofier than in the book even while it's making everything else more dramatic and epic. That's what I mean about the unevenness of it.

This is the kind of thing that makes me feel torn about Peter Jackson. On the one hand, kudos to him for bringing the books to the screen when nobody else could. In the final analysis, the movies are enjoyable. On the other hand, though, I don't think he's very good at the fundamentals of crafting a tight, cohesive story line or a believable world for the film.

Sure, a lot of hippies loved the Tolkien fantasies, but making the mushroom and pipe references into obvious drug jokes is too ham-handed, unnecessary, and jarringly misplaced. He can make battle scenes very exciting but can also make scenes just overblown and overdone, like the stone giants' battle - a moment which does nothing to advance the plot. Tolkien knew it didn't advance the plot and gave it only a couple of sentences for atmosphere. Jackson has a long sequence with entire boulders falling on people and stone cliffs with people clinging to them smashing into each other, yet none of the people get so much as a sprained ankle out of it.

Tolkien would write that a shadow passed over a character's face or their eyes seemed to glow as they spoke; Jackson turns that into an entire pyrotechnics display (I HATE HATE HATE how Jackson mangled Galadriel's monologue in LOTR, when Frodo offers her the Ring). The book of the Hobbit allows the whole matter of the White Council and the Necromancer to float in hints in the background; the audience doesn't need to have it all spelled out for us, distracting from the central plot. It's enough to get the hints that reveal Bilbo's adventure is a little thread in a bigger, grander world. It's all a matter of having a touch for plot, for pacing, and knowing when to be subtle.
 
#52
I thought the movie was pretty good. What I found that is very cool for Tolkien fans is the 75th anniversary edition of The Hobbit that has been enhanced with additional, rare illustrations, forward comments from Tolkien's son and audio/music files of JRR singing some of the songs.

If you are interested in reading / rereading The Hobbit, I recommend this e-edition. It's available from most on-line stores. Here is the link to the book in Google Play:

https://play.google.com/store/books...t=W251bGwsMSwxLDEsImJvb2stekVLMGV3eVJNbjRDIl0.
 
#53
Well, just got in from seeing it in 3D. Absolutely loved it. A sheer joy. Let the fanboys pull it to pieces...doesn't make a blind bit of difference.

As soon as I heard that score and saw the 'Wingnut Productions' title frame, I knew we were in for a treat.

My 8 year old daughter sat riveted through the whole thing. Having met Daleks and Cybermen in real life, a few CGI monsters were of no concern :)

Can't believe we've got to wait 12 months to see part 2.

Yep...Jackson has nailed it again. I think I'll dig out my copy of Bad Taste to celebrate.
 
#54
I saw it the other day read the books as a kid and have always loved it. I saw the movie in the new HFR 3D format and was very disappointed the 3D is so clear it looks like you're watching a play or you are sitting right behind the camera watching the actors read their lines it makes the blending of the CGI difficult in my opinion it was very difficult for me to immerse myself into the world. I plan on seeing it again soon in regular 3D.
 
#55
I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and though I've read the Hobbit and the LoTR trilogy I couldn't care less if the movie follows it or not. I just enjoyed the movie as its own thing.

I look forward to the next two.

bc
 
#56
I had misgivings, but wanted to give the 48-frames-per-second thing a shot. And actually, I kind of liked it. I think it may be a while before filmmakers figure out the tricks to sell all the visuals in that kind of clarity, but I left with the impression that we're going to be seeing a lot more of this kind of thing. It's how our grandchildren will know a movie is old: it's so blurry and soft! And that leaves us to choose between "get off my lawn" and "ok, I'll go along with it."

As far as the writing team taking liberties, incorporating material from Tolkien's other works, I'm fine with it. These guys have shown themselves to be pretty good with this material. It's not as whimsical and "fairy-story" as I'd like, personally, but Jackson has a vision and he carries it out pretty well.

One personal disappointment, though. I really, really liked how Gandalf tricked the trolls in the book. Was there no way to do that on film? Why change it?
 
#57
I have re-read The Hobbit and Lord Of The Rings almost every year since 1977.
There are things about the movie that I was a bit disappointed about, but overall I loved it. I hope to see it in the higher framerate version and I look forward to the DVD extended editions.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back