The Hobbit Trailer : Othor Games

» Sun May 13, 2012 4:33 pm

Agreed. I love the movies for what they are, but the books are so much more. But just because fifty million screaming fans say it's amazing doesn't mean it's true, it just means the popular consensus is that it's amazing.

Ah, yes, yes. The whole "mainstream" logical way of thinking.

"99% of the world disagrees with me, but I don't like that. I'm right, they're wrong". H'oooookay.

» Sun May 13, 2012 8:23 pm

Ah, yes, yes. The whole "mainstream" logical way of thinking.

"99% of the world disagrees with me, but I don't like that. I'm right, they're wrong". H'oooookay.

I think that's rather missing the point: it's about opinions and subjectivity, not who's right and who's wrong.

Edit: though I think that in this case, Jackson did appear to miss the point too often for my liking.

» Sun May 13, 2012 5:39 pm

I think that's rather missing the point: it's about opinions and subjectivity, not who's right and who's wrong.

Actually, according to most people who use that broken argument, that IS the point. Not saying you are, I was just making a witty reference to something unrelated.

You've still yet to respond to my statements regarding why you probably feel the movies aren't quite like the books.

» Sun May 13, 2012 10:01 pm

I think that's rather missing the point: it's about opinions and subjectivity, not who's right and who's wrong.

Bingo.

Master Chief, I never stated I was right, nor that popular opinion is right. I stated that popular opinion isn't fact. If I stated 'Dean Martin is the best male singer of all time', while it feels like a fact to me, it's a subjective opinion. Just as you believe 'The LOTR movies are amazing' it too is a subjective opinion and not a true fact.

Edit: While I can't speak for her, nor will I claim to. The fact of the matter is LOTR the movies are LIKE the book, but they differentiate in many ways, some in major ways, others in smaller lesser but crucial details.

» Sun May 13, 2012 7:03 am

You've still yet to respond to my statements regarding why you probably feel the movies aren't quite like the books.

The atmosphere's all wrong: simple as that, though it is a rather undefinable quality. I guess the same is true of a lot of what passes for art. That isn't a cop-out, I just don't care for the way the films make Tolkien's world seem. If I had to commit myself, one element I'm not so keen on that there's too much "epic, with added epic": they lack any real subtlety. IMHO, that is.

» Sun May 13, 2012 3:11 pm

I had goosebumps when I watched the trailer----NO OTHER FILM HAS DONE THAT :ahhh:

!!!! I don't like the fact it comes out next December. I just prey nothing happends next year but by the way the worlds economy is looking----next year is looking rather rough.

» Sun May 13, 2012 8:54 pm

There is absolutely nothing in this world that someone can't say is a "subjective personal opinion", so this argument is rather pointless. I didn't mean anything by my statement, it was a joke.

» Sun May 13, 2012 4:52 pm

Master Chief, I never stated I was right, nor that popular opinion is right. I stated that popular opinion isn't fact. If I stated 'Dean Martin is the best male singer of all time', while it feels like a fact to me, it's a subjective opinion. Just as you believe 'The LOTR movies are amazing' it too is a subjective opinion and not a true fact.

Actually, this probably sums up what I'm thinking rather better than my own attempt to do so...

» Sun May 13, 2012 5:18 pm

Also, I see absolutely no insinuation of a romance between Gandalf and Galadriel. More of a friendship moment, IMO. Doesn't seem sixual or romantic whatsoever.

That's what you think. One scene is Gandalf and Galadriel looking eye to eye, the next scene is rough six in the garden.

» Sun May 13, 2012 3:21 pm

That's what you think. One scene is Gandalf and Galadriel looking eye to eye, the next scene is rough six in the garden.

Oh my word LOL.
We're on to you, Jackson.. :shifty:

» Sun May 13, 2012 3:53 pm

That's what you think. One scene is Gandalf and Galadriel looking eye to eye, the next scene is rough six in the garden.

Wrinkled genitalia. DO NOT WANT. :cryvaultboy:

» Sun May 13, 2012 12:21 pm

The atmosphere's all wrong: simple as that, though it is a rather undefinable quality. I guess the same is true of a lot of what passes for art. That isn't a cop-out, I just don't care for the way the films make Tolkien's world seem. If I had to commit myself, one element I'm not so keen on that there's too much "epic, with added epic": they lack any real subtlety. IMHO, that is.

I personally agree with Martyr in saying that all of this is opinion based, including my comments. I just put forward some facts about LotR that I wanted to share with you to show that though this doesn't match with what you feel about LotR, the entire cast and crew genuinely loved the fiction, the world and making the movies. The atmosphere may feel wrong to you, but in my opinion it did exactly what Peter Jackson sought to do. What he wanted was not to make these movies feel like a fantasy, but to make them feel like a history.

My personal opinion is that these three movies are my favourite films I have ever seen and that no one could have made them better.

» Sun May 13, 2012 10:00 am

... The atmosphere may feel wrong to you, but in my opinion it did exactly what Peter Jackson sought to do. What he wanted was not to make these movies feel like a fantasy, but to make them feel like a history.

I think that may be getting closer to one of the main reasons I'm not a fan: Tolkien's motivation to write LotR was a sort of equivalent of the Icelandic Sagas for England, if I remember correctly; whereas Jackson's interpretation really didn't seem like it was doing that at all. I vaguely recall that he did actually comment that this was deliberate, or something to that effect, though I doubt I'll ever find the citation in question.

» Sun May 13, 2012 9:28 am

I don't like that Frodo will have a scene in the Hobbit. The LOTR movies even with 12 hours did not manage to fit the entirety of the books in ending up cutting away a lot of content from the books. So for The Hobbit all 4 hours should be purely from the book with no extra scenes, at least not unless they can do it without cutting content from The Hobbit.

» Sun May 13, 2012 7:40 am

It looks really good. I don't like the alleged romance between Galadriel and Gandalf they're trying to shoehorn in. I'm not Tolkein lore master, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't consider it given the nature of his true being.

Oh, god, I hope Jackson doesn't screw with the plot as much as he did in LOTR :deal:

» Sun May 13, 2012 12:15 pm

The Hobbit is one of my favourite books, so it will be very hard to please me with the film.

Bilbo doesn't look plump enough in the beginning at Bag End. He looks like he's already gone through the transformation from a creature of comfort.

All of the Dwarves look good. Some more than others. Except for Kili who looks so out of place with the others. Just looks like a person. Thorin looks a little off for me as well.

The song the dwarves chant in the beginning is awesome. Not how I have ever imagined it, but I really like it.

I'll see the movie, no doubt about it. But I'm wary of Jackson after some of the out of the blue garbage he pulled in the LOTR. Aragorn being unsure and afraid of his destiny? Arwen at the ford? Aragorn not leaving Rivendell with Anduril? Elves at Helms Deep? Dead men saving the day at Pelinnor?

But worst than any of that, the crap he pulled with Legolas sliding down the stairs on a shield at Helm's deep, swinging onto the horse during the (added) warg attack, and worst of all jumping on the oliphaunt. Those scenes really bother me for whatever reason, they seem so over the top and out of place, and shatter the mood of the situations.

Blah. Overall the films were enjoyable, and I'm sure the Hobbit will be too. But I don't like/trust Jackson not to add a bunch of made up crap, or butcher certain characters

Jackson seems to be in love with special effects - putting extra "stuff" in LOTR just to show off special effects. He doesn't seem to understand that he actually subtracted from the movie with that ridiculous scene with the "oliphants", and the "dead' wave was just silly

edit: my rating of the theater release= "C-",
the Extended DVD= "B-"

» Sun May 13, 2012 9:22 am

How do they feel epic?

Hw are they supposed to feel?

People have different perspectives on how things feel to them.

» Sun May 13, 2012 10:25 am

I think that may be getting closer to one of the main reasons I'm not a fan: Tolkien's motivation to write LotR was a sort of equivalent of the Icelandic Sagas for England, if I remember correctly; whereas Jackson's interpretation really didn't seem like it was doing that at all. I vaguely recall that he did actually comment that this was deliberate, or something to that effect, though I doubt I'll ever find the citation in question.

Tolkien wanted to write LotR because he felt that England didn't have any mythology like Norway or Sweden had and he wanted to create that mythology. Many of the things he wrote about were based on what he went through in WW1, the destruction of nature and the coupled ascent of industrialization and another reason why he wrote it was to come to terms with the experiences he had in WW1.

I think that the first 45 seconds of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQcvvwsz4kU&feature=related show why Peter Jackson removed what he did. As for why he made it seem like a history is because he felt that this is what the LotR deserved. He said that the events that happen in the LotR are just one relatively small story in this massive history that Tolkien made for Middle-Earth.

» Sun May 13, 2012 7:13 pm

If you dislike Peter Jackson's LotR movies, you probably wouldn't like any movie adaptation of it. Anybody else would have cut a lot more content to make the movies shorter.

» Sun May 13, 2012 12:27 pm

I'm cool with them all looking different, as I remember that was supposedly a very early concern doing The Hobbit in the first place. So many tagalongs with no real depth. I just really wish they didn't mess with Thorin as he doesn't fit in that category.

For The Hobbit being my favorite childhood book, I am amazingly unexcited. I think it's because I have to wait 2 years to see the whole thing.

» Sun May 13, 2012 1:26 pm

it's been ages but iirc wasn't it bilbo, gandalf and all dwarves on the journey? I dont remember a elf aragorn being invited to the party. I hope smogg speaks and gandalf uses more magic, the lotr movies didnt do him justice like the books...either way i'm geeked

» Sun May 13, 2012 11:41 am

Having loved both the books and the Peter Jackson films, I'm extremely excited for this. The Hobbit, my first introduction to Middle-Earth, holds a dear place in my heart, and it is just as deserving of a good adaption as the main trilogy. I'm also all for little things to connect it with the main trilogy, as long as they're not too big. If I remember correctly, the Hobbit was written before he Tolkien intended to write the trilogy, and so some bits of the Hobbit seem a bit incongruous with the main trilogy because of this. Things such as Sauron being referred to as 'The Necromancer' and stuff like that. Adding little links in the movie will make it a more seamless experience of watching them all.

» Sun May 13, 2012 9:40 am

So uhhh, lots of important characters showcased, but where's Beorn?

I have a feeling they'll cut the movies in two right around the part where they leave the misty mnts and meet Beorn. Something like Misty Mnts being a big part of part 1 and then Mirkwood being a big part of part 2

» Sun May 13, 2012 8:50 pm

I have zero problem with Jackson adding in the cool CGI scenes. It makes it theatrical and fun.

No, they weren't in the movies, but that doesn't mean that something cannot be added. I've read the books, and it does nothing but add for me. I think they are nice touches. You people need to understand that it's just an idea, a book is an elaborate idea written down on paper. I bet Tolkien had absolutely no idea the following/fandom that it would have, and I bet he honestly wouldn't care at all if these movies were being made. He'd probably really appreciate it. You idolize the books however, and make it seem like it's "official" and just because something is added or taken away, that it's wrong and someone needs to pay and be stoned to death because someone changed that perfect thing you idolize as being so.

/rant

» Sun May 13, 2012 12:53 pm

Weird, I thought Legolas jumping on Gimlis horse during the Worg attack was awesome.