The Hobbit

etchazz_sl said:

i think they should have just made this 2 movies. there's just not enough material in "the hobbit" for three, three hour movies. they could have chopped several hours of all this filler crap out of the movies and it would have made them much better. i think the problem is that peter jackson is too focused on connecting these movies with the LOTR, when it would have been a better idea to just make these a stand alone movie. people know that the ring that bilbo finds winds up being the one true ring. even if you never read the books, if you watched the original LOTR trilogy you know the ring's true source and its significance. that's one of the biggest problems with director's nowadays; they treat the audience like they're retarded. sure, some of them really are, but most can comprehend what's going on. you don't need to hand hold them through the entire plot.

Click to expand...

I think this movie will be the worst of the three as far as filler goes. There's EASILY 2+ hours of non-filler in the third movie. Which was probably the problem: Make two 3 1/2 movies and cut a bunch of filler and leave out some less important side things or just turn it into 3 movies and come up with a little more filler.

Does the Bear guy come back for the war?

The last time I read the hobbit was easily 15 years ago.

In the cartoon the Eagles fight in the war, but they also talk which they do not in the live action version.

Beorn definitely whoops ass during the war.

Doesn't... erm... everyone die in the war unless mentioned in Lord of the Rings? xD

Xeldar_sl said:

Real problem: The tone of the writing in The Hobbit and LOTR are completely different. The Hobbit is primarily an adventure book (and not a very good one) - Hardy Brothers, Huck Finn. Ole' Frodo and his magical ring get Thorin and the boys out of some real pickles! But they shot Hobbit in the same LOTR solemn graveness. It's off-putting. About a quarter of the way through the movie, I started rooting for the orcs. Those fuckers have balls. Ass-door assaulting Mirkwood and Rivertown. If The hobbit was re-shot to be about the orcs hunting Frodo, it'd be an awesome movie. With HD movies, I can completely notice how movie propish their makeup is, their costumes are, that boulder is, that tree is.

I enjoyed Smaug and Frodo talking and everything in Rivertown. Overall, it's a very meh movie.

Click to expand...

STOP FUCKING TROLLING!

Amzin_sl said:

I think this movie will be the worst of the three as far as filler goes. There's EASILY 2+ hours of non-filler in the third movie. Which was probably the problem: Make two 3 1/2 movies and cut a bunch of filler and leave out some less important side things or just turn it into 3 movies and come up with a little more filler.

Click to expand...

If you haven't seen the extended edition of the first, I recommend a watch. I think it did for Hobbit part 1 what the EE did for TTT. Purists won't be happy either way as they weren't with bits of TTT, but it does weave a better yarn. All in all, I enjoyed it better than the book but I've long not liked the Hobbit (or any of CS Lewis' stuff).

Amzin_sl said:

I think this movie will be the worst of the three as far as filler goes. There's EASILY 2+ hours of non-filler in the third movie. Which was probably the problem: Make two 3 1/2 movies and cut a bunch of filler and leave out some less important side things or just turn it into 3 movies and come up with a little more filler.

Click to expand...

see, i disagree with this. i think the third movie will probably be the worst as far as filler goes, because all that's left is the killing of smaug and the war of the five armies. there really isn't anything else going on. so if the third movie is a 2 hour long war, that shit's going to get really boring, really fast. i mean, the first battle in "braveheart" is probably the best action sequence of all time, and it was what, less than ten minutes long? would it have been as dramatic if that scene was an hour and a half?

etchazz_sl said:

see, i disagree with this. i think the third movie will probably be the worst as far as filler goes, because all that's left is the killing of smaug and the war of the five armies. there really isn't anything else going on. so if the third movie is a 2 hour long war, that shit's going to get really boring, really fast. i mean, the first battle in "braveheart" is probably the best action sequence of all time, and it was what, less than ten minutes long? would it have been as dramatic if that scene was an hour and a half?

Click to expand...

They will also probably film the defeat of the Necromancer and Mirkwood cleanup that is only mentioned in the appendices. Maybe even a short bridge linking up to LotR.

It's unclear (to me, anyway) if War of 5 and Dol Guldur are separate events or not in the movie version, but add in Smaug and you have up to three long set pieces. It certainly seems like they will do something with Mirkwood, given the Legolas and Tauriel stuff 'invented' for this movie.

/insert joke about "And 60 minutes of goodbyes!" here.

Tolkien might have continually retconned, but he sure as shit wasn't retconning to add in pointless romance so more women would read his books.

Honestly though, I wouldn't even have that much of a problem if it didn't take up so much fucking screen time and was so terribly cheesy and overacted. Yes, we get it. You like the dwarf. It's not allowed. Please, go bang and have magic hairy pointy eared offspring and let me see some dragon, or the thrush story, or really anything other than this cheeseball overdone stupid shit.

I'm in equal parts optimistic and terrified about the third movie. I'm optimistic in that I think the majority of screen real estate will get occupied by the battle and the aftermath, and this will overshadow any other shit they try to cram in for the sake of filler. Return of the King seemed to be more like that, with so many things going on at once and so much of the story consumed by Frodo/Sam and the battle for Pelennor Fields that even in 4 hours they couldn't cram in more than 20 minutes of anything made up.

I'm terrified because of the way they crammed stupid nonsensical shit in to make this a trilogy, and that they did it very badly. It really does show. The difference between the quality of screen time between the actual source material from Tolkien and the screenwriter's elf wet dream are astounding. I'm not certain they actually will have enough material now to fill out a full length third movie, and I know they'll solve that shit with an hour of hilariously bad writing and acting. The fact that the elves are present at the battle only makes this more of a prospect.

And yes, I am fixated on the presence of Tauriel. I do realize without her there wouldn't be a single female character in the entire trilogy aside from Galadriel, and I wouldn't be so frustrated with the film if it weren't for just how cliche and awkward they made her. I'd honestly prefer Gandalf banging Galadriel if they needed a love arc, but that probably wouldn't get crotches wet enough to sell tickets. But still, at least those two know how to act a scene without gushing trash performances.

Did you Wakandans learn nothing from Pelennor Fields? Jackson could make a 3 hour movie that was nothing but the Battle of Five Armies and I would eat that shit up. It's gonna be a long ass battle.

etchazz_sl said:

see, i disagree with this. i think the third movie will probably be the worst as far as filler goes, because all that's left is the killing of smaug and the war of the five armies. there really isn't anything else going on. so if the third movie is a 2 hour long war, that shit's going to get really boring, really fast. i mean, the first battle in "braveheart" is probably the best action sequence of all time, and it was what, less than ten minutes long? would it have been as dramatic if that scene was an hour and a half?

Click to expand...

Sure, if you open with Smaug flying right into Laketown, gets shot down, then cut to five armies fighting, that's not filling up much time. But the Smaug/Laketown is going to take a while because dialogue, the lead-up to the five armies is going to take a LOT longer in the movie because dialogue, we still have the Gandalf situation to resolve (which is half filler and half Tolkien stuff from other sources), plus the post-army resolutions (mo' dialogue). For actual filler, there'll probably be extra political stuff in Laketown, extra political stuff in Murkwood Elfville, and maybe some extra stuff with Gandalf and the council that obviously didn't happen in the Hobbit but may be pulled from other sources.

Needless_sl said:

I read the book again right before the first hobbit movie and i can honestly say i don't even remember this battle of five armies other than bilbo seeing goblins and the eagles coming... this all took place while he was knocked out or some shit right?

Click to expand...

That's right, which makes me very hopeful. This means that Jackson has lots of freedom with how to portray the battle of 5 armies, because it's left relatively vague in the book. I'm extremely excited and optimistic that it will get enough screen time and be done well.

Without getting to in-depth.... just the summaries of the war would suggest the movies has a good chance to be awesome. I'm going to read The Hobbit again over Christmas break just to get everything back into context.

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Battle_of_Five_Armies

The way I see it is the Necro/Dol Goldur is combined with War of the 5 Armies.

Azog is leading the Army of Sauron, and they said several times in the scenes that Saurons eye is on the Mountain to be the first spot of the new war. No way they have two giant battles.

What will happen is that basically the War of the 5 Armies will be edited that the Orcs/Goblins are being directed by Sauron and Azog. Azog will be killed by Thorin. Elves, Dwarfs, Men, Beorn and Eagles will defeat the evil army of Sauron and save the world.

Yea they showed the Orc host marching out of Dol Goldur in this one so there's no reason to think they won't be part of the five armies.

Originally in the book the Goblins army had nothing to do with Sauron so thats a change. It was also hinted during development that there might be a White Council vs Sauron battle AND the 5 armies, but that is all combined.

Gunnar_sl said:

Originally in the book the Goblins army had nothing to do with Sauron so thats a change. It was also hinted during development that there might be a White Council vs Sauron battle AND the 5 armies, but that is all combined.

Click to expand...

Given the events of this movie, I imagine that during the battle of 5 armies members of the White Council will show up to assist Gandalf and have a showdown with Sauron. He sent Radaghast to inform them about Sauron being present in Dol Guldur, so I'm sure they'll turn up there. They'll take advantage of Sauron's orc army being gone to throw him out of Dol Guldur.

After that, I think Gandalf will be the one to muster the eagles and fly to Erebor to aid the elves, dwarves, and men in the battle which will be ongoing at that point.