The Hobbit greenit.

Your general non-gaming entertainment thread.
User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:18 am

Agreed. The new material that was added to pad out the movie was at the best superflous and at worst degraded the source material. I really could have done without all of the material added about the cowardly man from Laketown. Should have been two movies. The last movie ended in a really weird spot, and this one began in a weird spot with the dragon being killed within the first few minutes. Weird way to pace a movie.

User avatar
Sonic#
Pao Tribe Chieftain
Posts: 4552
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 3:27 am
Location: Here, there, everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Sonic# » Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:56 pm

I love Tolkien. I also love the latest film and the trilogy as a whole. There was only one change that bothered me some, whereas most of the changes were either alright or added to my experience - like the White Council in Dol Guldur.
Sonic#

"Than seyde Merlion, "Whethir lyke ye bettir the swerde othir the scawberde?" "I lyke bettir the swerde," seyde Arthure. "Ye ar the more unwyse, for the scawberde ys worth ten of the swerde; for whyles ye have the scawberde uppon you, ye shall lose no blood, be ye never so sore wounded. Therefore kepe well the scawberde allweyes with you." --- Le Morte Darthur, Sir Thomas Malory

"Just as you touch the energy of every life form you meet, so, too, will will their energy strengthen you. Fail to live up to your potential, and you will never win. " --- The Old Man at the End of Time

User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Mon Dec 29, 2014 2:30 am

I am ambivalent towards Tolkien. I think he was amazing at creating mythology and world building, but his prose in LotR bogged the book down too much. On the other hand, I loved The Hobbit as a book when I read through it the first time.

I don't really think Jackson's vision of The Hobbit meshes with my vision due to tone and pacing. The tone is too similar to his LotR movies. The Hobbit is a lighter book with a very fast pace. The Hobbit film trilogy moves very slowly. It took me longer to watch the Hobbit movies than to read the book, and I am a very slow reader so that says a lot.

I think it would have worked a lot better as two movies. Some of the tone issues wouldn't have been as obvious in two movies since the movie was stretched out to feel more epic.

As is often the case, the Onion captures my feelings perfectly. http://www.theonion.com/articles/the-ho ... lbo,30727/

But who am I kidding? I'll watch all 6 of the inevitable Silmarillion movies.

User avatar
Kizyr
Keeper of Knowledge (probationary)
Posts: 8066
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 7:36 am
Location: Marius Zone
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Kizyr » Tue Dec 30, 2014 2:36 am

Yeah... I can't say I entirely disagree with LunarRaptor or Werefrog here. I practically saw Part 3 out of obligation and just wanting to finish the story (I'm never going to read the books, really, and I don't want to make Jenner explain everything to me).

Part 3 was really the worst of the lot in terms of obviously superfluous material. Several characters (I really liked Bard's expansion, but... why the hell were there so many scenes involving that weasel guy? He's not remotely interesting; he's basically a cartoonish villain that didn't merit more than 2 minutes on-screen.) several scenes (like 90% battles -- I like battles but like the 2nd Matrix movie sometimes too much is too much), and, well, just more stuff that was clearly padding for length. And how many times did someone just narrowly get saved by an off-screen character? By the 4th or 5th time it wasn't a surprise any longer... it was just cliched.

That being said, meh, I still wanted to watch it knowing that this would probably be the case. I think I would've much rather it only have been one epic movie, or maybe a two-parter at a stretch.

Jenner was about ready to just walk out once Smaug got killed. KF
~Kizyr
Image

User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Tue Dec 30, 2014 4:49 pm

The weasel guy was the worst! Every time that he was on screen I was hoping it would be the last. When I was discussing tone, I thought that the inclusion of this character (is he based on a character in the book?) could be seen as an example of the movie attempting to preserve the light tone of the original. But... he didn't really lighten the mood. He was always doing something despicable in a cartoonish way. If he was doing something heroic in a cartoonish way (like say defending the children from some minor goblins), I think it would have provided levity. The way he was presented, just served as an annoyance that interrupted the important stuff.

When I first finished The Hobbit and started reading LotR (gave up after Fellowship due to not liking Tolkien's style of prose), I got into an argument with a group of friends about whether the Necromancer was Sauron. I guess this movie answers that definitively at least. The scene involving the Necromancer were the best added material. Weasel guy and Legolas were the worst.

My original statements may be hyperbolic. I can understand why you like it, Sonic#. Just not the way I would have liked it done. Having Jackson make it into another LotR trilogy just seems like a cash grab to me.

You know... the one area that the movie neglected to pad out would have been the most interesting to me. I would have liked to hear Bilbo talk a little more to Frodo about his time after his initial holiday. We know that Bilbo was forever changed after the trip. I would have liked to have seen maybe so more about Bilbo's return into Hobbit society vs. his desire for continued adventures. Y'know... things that wouldn't require adding on more and more battle scenes.

The most interesting part to me about the original Hobbit movie is that it was a story being told to Frodo. That narrative device is completely dropped in the second and third movie, right? It makes sense to return to the device at least as the story closes.

User avatar
Sonic#
Pao Tribe Chieftain
Posts: 4552
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 3:27 am
Location: Here, there, everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Sonic# » Tue Dec 30, 2014 6:05 pm

The Necromancer/Sauron parts were some of my favorite.

The way the Hobbit is written, it's a tale of adventure, but laced right around it are the trappings of epic and high fantasy. The novel can afford to be an adventure because it limits itself to Bilbo's perceptions. A film almost by necessity is external to Bilbo's perceptions. The moment that any visual director propose moving even a little outwards, these epic threads appear, whether it is any extensive showing of the resolution of the battle (which Bilbo was unconscious for) or what Gandalf is doing during this time, or how any of these armies decide to move to the Lonely Mountain. Doing any of these additional contexts as The Hobbit did it would be very difficult, as a fifteen-minute Gandalf voice-over describing all of the awesome things that had happened likely wouldn't make for good pacing. So it makes sense to me that the tone would both be expanded and more epic.

That also goes for a lot of points that you and others label as "padding." I find it difficult to isolate the motive for profit from the intentions of the filmmaker and the effect of the film. I'm also quite used to digressive turns in the kinds of stories I read and study. So often the scenes that people label as padding I see as rather stock functions of epic and (non-modern) romance. They're almost by definition less exciting, but they connect the battles and chief conflicts to many of the smaller threads going on. It's competent interlacement.

Alfrid (the Weasel guy) is an unnamed character in the books, one of the Master's counselors. I felt like his part was one of the weaker ones. He's an extension of the greed and decadence of leadership against which Bard looked better. I'm fine with him as that, as a comic relief, and even as a character who allows the film to highlight what the women are doing during battle, but he has one too many scenes for me. I might have also preferred someone more like Unferth (from Beowulf) than Malbecco (from The Faerie Queene) - boastful, proud, and arrogant, but not a fop. That's one thing I liked more about one of Alfrid's potential counterparts in LOTR, Denethor. If he had been competent but misguided, it would have fit the spirit of the Laketown leadership better for me.

Tauriel doesn't bother me much. Her inclusion is understandable, since there aren't many prominent women at the forefront in Tolkien's books. At the same time, I don't know that it helps much: they invented or greatly expanded on the role of a woman in both trilogies, but even then neither trilogy passes the Bechdel test. So she (and Legolas) mainly provide a more personal side to the elven struggle between remaining self-focused and helping their neighbors.

Two things bothered me:
Fili and Kili don't die together. I think the downside of the Tauriel scenes is that the affection between the two is downplayed, and so rather than their dying together being a sad thing (emphasizing fraternal love, bonds in combat, and what not), it becomes more about Tauriel and unrequitable love. I would have to check to see how much this is emphasized in the novel, but it's definitely something I looked for in the film.

I admit to rolling my eyes when Thranduil told Legolas to go out and look for "Strider." I'm not immune to frowning and saying, "That didn't happen."
Sonic#

"Than seyde Merlion, "Whethir lyke ye bettir the swerde othir the scawberde?" "I lyke bettir the swerde," seyde Arthure. "Ye ar the more unwyse, for the scawberde ys worth ten of the swerde; for whyles ye have the scawberde uppon you, ye shall lose no blood, be ye never so sore wounded. Therefore kepe well the scawberde allweyes with you." --- Le Morte Darthur, Sir Thomas Malory

"Just as you touch the energy of every life form you meet, so, too, will will their energy strengthen you. Fail to live up to your potential, and you will never win. " --- The Old Man at the End of Time

User avatar
Kizyr
Keeper of Knowledge (probationary)
Posts: 8066
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 7:36 am
Location: Marius Zone
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Kizyr » Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:42 am

Werefrog wrote:You know... the one area that the movie neglected to pad out would have been the most interesting to me. I would have liked to hear Bilbo talk a little more to Frodo about his time after his initial holiday. We know that Bilbo was forever changed after the trip. I would have liked to have seen maybe so more about Bilbo's return into Hobbit society vs. his desire for continued adventures. Y'know... things that wouldn't require adding on more and more battle scenes.

The main reason I wouldn't mind having more scenes like this (I did really love the opening to the first Hobbit for that reason) is mostly because I liked having Elijah Wood back in the movie, at least in a minor role. Sort of like how it's great seeing Leonard Nimoy crop up in a few episodes of Star Trek TNG.

Sonic# wrote:That also goes for a lot of points that you and others label as "padding." I find it difficult to isolate the motive for profit from the intentions of the filmmaker and the effect of the film. I'm also quite used to digressive turns in the kinds of stories I read and study. So often the scenes that people label as padding I see as rather stock functions of epic and (non-modern) romance. They're almost by definition less exciting, but they connect the battles and chief conflicts to many of the smaller threads going on. It's competent interlacement.

I do think some folks are too quick to label some things padding -- for me, it's not just when a scene isn't in the books (besides the fact that I haven't read the book, I know that movies are a different medium than books, so I'm 100% fine with any change that helps the narrative and doesn't actually mess up the story -- Hunger Games has good examples, World War Z has all poor examples). But anyway, padding is superfluous when it gets to the point of the same repetitive motions that make the story seem like it's simply going in circles... I felt about half the time spent on the battle scenes in the third movie (unlike, I think, the fights in the first/second movies) just repeated the same things. They didn't add to the epic feel of it (by that point it'd already been accomplished), so well into the movie I started getting pretty... bored.

Sonic# wrote:Tauriel doesn't bother me much. Her inclusion is understandable, since there aren't many prominent women at the forefront in Tolkien's books. At the same time, I don't know that it helps much: they invented or greatly expanded on the role of a woman in both trilogies, but even then neither trilogy passes the Bechdel test. So she (and Legolas) mainly provide a more personal side to the elven struggle between remaining self-focused and helping their neighbors.

I did really like the addition and/or expanded role of nearly every character, with the sole exception of Alfrid. Tauriel is perhaps my favorite, despite even my misgivings about elves.

Anyway, Sonic# brings up good points, so I don't fully disagree with anyone. The main thing I felt walking out of the theater was just that it was 2-3 hours of very little happening around the same limited set. I mean, with the first movie you were reintroduced to the entire world of Middle Earth. With the second movie you got to see Laketown, Lothlorien (was it Lothlorien?), and the Lonely Mountain; you got much more background on Thorin, Azog, the Nazgul, and then some; lastly, you had fascinating characters in Radagast and Smaug (...come to thing of it, I think now the second was the best of the three). The third just felt... lacking in any of the elements that made the first two enjoyable. KF

(EDIT: Am I rambling? Sorry if I'm rambling...)
~Kizyr
Image

User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:50 pm

If they were adding stuff, they should have added a sub-plot with Tom Bombadil. That would have made me happy.

Edit: That would have made me and only me happy. Everyone else would be confused or angry.

User avatar
Sonic#
Pao Tribe Chieftain
Posts: 4552
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 3:27 am
Location: Here, there, everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Sonic# » Fri Jan 02, 2015 11:05 pm

Kizyr, if you weren't rambling, I still certainly was. XD Thank you for explaining the way you see padding. You're getting at the definition of how narratives often worked before writers like Alexander Dumas made the novel. In romance, the narratives often are circular, though in the better examples each circle adds something. (There's a good reason you'll never read most of them.) I agree that in a tighter format like film, scenes had better be adding something interesting.

And I second anything including Tom Bombadil.
Sonic#

"Than seyde Merlion, "Whethir lyke ye bettir the swerde othir the scawberde?" "I lyke bettir the swerde," seyde Arthure. "Ye ar the more unwyse, for the scawberde ys worth ten of the swerde; for whyles ye have the scawberde uppon you, ye shall lose no blood, be ye never so sore wounded. Therefore kepe well the scawberde allweyes with you." --- Le Morte Darthur, Sir Thomas Malory

"Just as you touch the energy of every life form you meet, so, too, will will their energy strengthen you. Fail to live up to your potential, and you will never win. " --- The Old Man at the End of Time

User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:22 pm

Have you read the silly theory about how Tom Bombadil is some great evil? He only lets the hobbits pass to kill Sauron so his reign can begin after the elves return to their realm. The person who wrote the theory admits that it's silly. But it kinda makes sense.

User avatar
Alunissage
Goddess
Posts: 7009
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:31 am
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Alunissage » Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:25 pm

I'm just posting to say that four years after this thread was originally started, I finally figured out that "greelit" was supposed to be "greenlit" rather than some odd Tolkienesque nonword. I kept trying to read it as some sort of greeting or something, but never read the thread before.

User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:46 pm

Alunissage wrote:I'm just posting to say that four years after this thread was originally started, I finally figured out that "greelit" was supposed to be "greenlit" rather than some odd Tolkienesque nonword. I kept trying to read it as some sort of greeting or something, but never read the thread before.


You mean it's not high elvish? I was just thinking that some moderator must have fixed the title of this thread. But after you pointed it out, it's clear that my brain was just fixing the error. Looking back through the thread reveals that my opinion remained consistent throughout the production of the movie. I always wanted a different director for this movie. (I like looking through threads to see how my opinions change. One time Jenner did this for me, by pointing out that my optimism towards live action The Last Airbender was misplaced. Still haven't watched that one though, so the jokes on you guys who did!)

User avatar
Alunissage
Goddess
Posts: 7009
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:31 am
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Alunissage » Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:53 pm

I also only noticed just now reading your response that your Godot avatar is animated. Now I can't stop looking at it.

User avatar
Jenner
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2285
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 1:24 am
Location: Happily ever after
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Jenner » Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:09 am

Werefrog wrote:Have you read the silly theory about how Tom Bombadil is some great evil? He only lets the hobbits pass to kill Sauron so his reign can begin after the elves return to their realm. The person who wrote the theory admits that it's silly. But it kinda makes sense.

JFC, I would watch this if they made this canon and a movie.

But Tom's one of Tolkien's Marty Stus sooo... :roll:


I just wanna say, I remember so little about the books. I don't remember Bard really being in the book at all until he shows up and killsteals the dragon. I remember the book ending shortly after Smaug was killed. Maybe I should reread the books...

HAHAHAHAHA, no. :lol:
Image
The Infamous Jenner!
Maker of Lists.
RIP Coley...
Image
still adore you Kiz.

User avatar
Werefrog
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2047
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:58 pm
Location: Loch Tess, Winters
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Werefrog » Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:27 am

Jenner wrote:JFC, I would watch this if they made this canon and a movie.


Who cares about canon?? I just want an entertaining movie! They should do it! Wasn't Tom Bombadil a character invented for the bed time stories he read to his children? Or am I getting that confused with the Hobbit?

User avatar
Jenner
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2285
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 1:24 am
Location: Happily ever after
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Jenner » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:29 am

IMHO Tom's a self-insert character that no one likes except you.
Image
The Infamous Jenner!
Maker of Lists.
RIP Coley...
Image
still adore you Kiz.

User avatar
Sonic#
Pao Tribe Chieftain
Posts: 4552
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 3:27 am
Location: Here, there, everywhere
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Sonic# » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:41 am

I like Tom Bombadil. Who else comes around the corner singing and makes the trees and barrow-wights behave?
Sonic#

"Than seyde Merlion, "Whethir lyke ye bettir the swerde othir the scawberde?" "I lyke bettir the swerde," seyde Arthure. "Ye ar the more unwyse, for the scawberde ys worth ten of the swerde; for whyles ye have the scawberde uppon you, ye shall lose no blood, be ye never so sore wounded. Therefore kepe well the scawberde allweyes with you." --- Le Morte Darthur, Sir Thomas Malory

"Just as you touch the energy of every life form you meet, so, too, will will their energy strengthen you. Fail to live up to your potential, and you will never win. " --- The Old Man at the End of Time

User avatar
Kizyr
Keeper of Knowledge (probationary)
Posts: 8066
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 7:36 am
Location: Marius Zone
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Kizyr » Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:53 pm

Sonic# wrote:I agree that in a tighter format like film, scenes had better be adding something interesting.

And I second anything including Tom Bombadil.

I... you... ...these two statements cannot coexist together... KF
~Kizyr
Image

User avatar
Jenner
Dragonmaster
Posts: 2285
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 1:24 am
Location: Happily ever after
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit greelit.

Postby Jenner » Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:37 pm

Every time someone says, "They should have added Tom" all I'm hearing is, "I have terrible taste and wanted a terrible movie to happen."

Or, "I'm here to troll people who like this thing by pointing out one of the worst things about it."
Image
The Infamous Jenner!
Maker of Lists.
RIP Coley...
Image
still adore you Kiz.

User avatar
Kizyr
Keeper of Knowledge (probationary)
Posts: 8066
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2002 7:36 am
Location: Marius Zone
Contact:

Re: The Hobbit geenlit.

Postby Kizyr » Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:43 pm

Alunissage wrote:I'm just posting to say that four years after this thread was originally started, I finally figured out that "greelit" was supposed to be "greenlit" rather than some odd Tolkienesque nonword. I kept trying to read it as some sort of greeting or something, but never read the thread before.

I fixed the title to make it clearer. KF
~Kizyr
Image


Return to “Anime, Music, TV/Movies, and Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests