|
The Hobbit trilogy exists as a vehicle for developing new film technologies, and I liked all of those, so it's good.
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I'm surprised that you're bringing up this in particular, but not the extremely long and boring sequence at the end of the second movie where they literally smother Smaug in liquid gold and it does absolutely nothing. I mean, not only does it not hurt him, but the entire sequence could be cut from the movie and it would make no difference. The character limit in these post boxes is simply not big enough to list every boring over the top 3d sequence in the Hobbit movies. I also don't care.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
computer parts posted:...It's ok if you don't like it for being less personal than the book, but it's important to realize that they weren't trying to make a personal story like the book... Which raises the question, why make it at all? The book is a personal story. He clearly wasn't interested in making an adaption of the Hobbit so much as wanking himself over film tech and wiping up with the appendices.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Because they owned the film rights and the movies made 3 billion or whatever and are decently entertaining.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
sunday at work posted:Which raises the question, why make it at all? The book is a personal story. He clearly wasn't interested in making an adaption of the Hobbit so much as wanking himself over film tech and wiping up with the appendices. That's why.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Because they owned the film rights and the movies made 3 billion or whatever and are decently entertaining. THey also get to make video games and other derivative works based on the movie versions, which I suspect is an additional incentive to add even more CGI battle scenes. The forty minute barrel scene might be wholly gratuitous from any narrative perspective, but it's great raw meat for a video game tie in.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
sunday at work posted:Which raises the question, why make it at all? The book is a personal story. He clearly wasn't interested in making an adaption of the Hobbit so much as wanking himself over film tech and wiping up with the appendices. Because people wanted more movies like Lord of the Rings. Hieronymous Alloy posted:THey also get to make video games and other derivative works based on the movie versions, which I suspect is an additional incentive to add even more CGI battle scenes. The forty minute barrel scene might be wholly gratuitous from any narrative perspective, but it's great raw meat for a video game tie in. Video game makers have done that sort of stuff for ages without needing justification from the films.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The three films together appear to have made just shy of $3bn dollars. That is to say, $3,000,000,000. Budget: $745 million Box office: $2.932 billion ROI: ~300%, before merchandising, DVD sales, etc. That's some pretty good money, right there.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 06:59
|
|
|
Good money, yes, shame about the bad films.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
Making a single Silm movie would be a waste of time (even doing it as a ten, eleven-hour arthouse picture would run headlong into the story stopping and restarting multiple times), and there's no chance in hell you could make a good series of Silmarillion films as long as Chris Tolkien or anyone with his inclinations holds the film rights to the material. Because Tolkien never wrote more than fragments of some of the critical stories (the exile of the Noldor, the story of Tuor), you'd have to make a whole lot up. It's simply too overstuffed with detail- you need to go into a lot of depth even to make a miniseries or whatever showing off the decline and fall of the Feanorians, which otherwise could be a fairly tight and powerful story.
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
The only part of The Silmarillion that could possibly make a good movie is the story of Turin. It was easily the most "personal" story in The Sil as it chronicled more of his life and his feelings than any other character. Probably why Tolkien also went and wrote The Children of Hurin. But thank God Chris Tolkien is alive to prevent that from happening. I was curious, can he put a stipulation in his will or something that whoever gets the rights to The Silmarillion after his death cannot ever sell them to filmmakers?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 08:31
|
|
|
ACES CURE PLANES posted:Good money, yes, shame about the bad films. Yeah, that's what I was getting at. They aren't good action films, they aren't good character films, and they aren't good adaptions of The Hobbit.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:The only part of The Silmarillion that could possibly make a good movie is the story of Turin. It was easily the most "personal" story in The Sil as it chronicled more of his life and his feelings than any other character. Probably why Tolkien also went and wrote The Children of Hurin. 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 14:47
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:The only part of The Silmarillion that could possibly make a good movie is the story of Turin. It was easily the most "personal" story in The Sil as it chronicled more of his life and his feelings than any other character. Probably why Tolkien also went and wrote The Children of Hurin. The copyright will inevitably expire at some point. It's what, Author's death plus 75 years in the US? And Tolkien died in 1977 I think? Runcible Cat posted:The Ainulindale could make a nice trippy Fantasia-type sequence with the right music and art - Evan Palmer's comic version is good; I particularly like his Melkor. And an animated version of Beren and Luthien could really work well, done by a studio like Ghibli. Though if Disney did it I guess there's a built-in musical number when Luthien sings Morgoth to sleep... Someone mentioned it above but Beren and Luthien could theoretically be a not-bad opera.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:02
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:The copyright will inevitably expire at some point. It's what, Author's death plus 75 years in the US? And Tolkien died in 1977 I think? The Silm will enter the public domain in Europe in 2043 with the LOTR and Hobbit, but all derivative works are protected by trademarks held by the Tolkien Estate Ltd and trademarks can be renewed indefinitely so long as they continue to use it.
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
sunday at work posted:Yeah, that's what I was getting at. They aren't good action films, they aren't good character films, and they aren't good adaptions of The Hobbit. Actually, they are good.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
Beren and Luthien would make a kickin' rad animated film.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
I think the Lay of Leithian would be better served as two films, with the first one covering everything up to the aftermath of Tol-in-Gaurhoth and the second one going up to the return of Beren and Luthien from Valinor.
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
I guess I'm in the minority here. I was so pleased with LotR, even though I was shocked at the time that the guy who made DeadAlive got to direct it. And I was really excited to see the Hobbit, even liked that it was being stretched into three movies. I thought, heck, that means more time in the Middle-Earth! How could things go wrong? But the endless padding, non-stop videogame battles, and excruciating overuse of CG really turned me off. Enough that I didn't even bother to see the third movie in theaters. I don't know, maybe it's just the people I'm around, but it's strange to see people actually liking the movies. Though, it did well enough that hella people had to have gone to see it. Maybe the third one is a masterpiece that redeems the first two, who knows? And this coming from a guy who really enjoyed PJ's King Kong.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Actually, they are good. It's cool you liked them. I sure didn't. Because I love Jackson's lotr movies I was actually pretty saddened by the fact that I found the Hobbit: part 1 to be a boring, bloated, ungainly mess of a film that I couldn't even finish.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Beren and Luthien would make a kickin' rad animated film. 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
a kitten posted:It's cool you liked them. I sure didn't. Because I love Jackson's lotr movies I was actually pretty saddened by the fact that I found the Hobbit: part 1 to be a boring, bloated, ungainly mess of a film that I couldn't even finish. You should probably try rewatching it.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
Narzack posted:I guess I'm in the minority here. I was so pleased with LotR, even though I was shocked at the time that the guy who made DeadAlive got to direct it. And I was really excited to see the Hobbit, even liked that it was being stretched into three movies. I thought, heck, that means more time in the Middle-Earth! How could things go wrong? But the endless padding, non-stop videogame battles, and excruciating overuse of CG really turned me off. Enough that I didn't even bother to see the third movie in theaters. I don't know, maybe it's just the people I'm around, but it's strange to see people actually liking the movies. I wouldn't go so far to say it was worth it, but the Riddles in the Dark scene was spectacular, I thought.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
I wonder if the Hobbit would have been stronger had it been made before LotR. Then, all the incessant references and callbacks wouldn't seem so frustratingly like PJ repeating himself, but cool foreshadowing. But, I definitely wish he hadn't been so obvious as to the identity of the Necromancer. I remember reading the books for the first time when I was a young lad, and the reveal that the Necromancer was actually Sauron was totally rad. That, and having Saruman so cartoonishly evil from the start really bothered me. I was hoping that they would show him as one of the good guys, as head of the White Council, so that the contrast to his fall would be stronger. So it goes. In the end, it doesn't change what was written, and not even the worst adaptation can take away from the greatness of Tolkien's work. computer parts posted:You should probably try rewatching it. Rewatched both Extended Editions on blu-ray. Still didn't like them.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
One thing that struck me when I was rereading The Fall of Gondolin recently is that, given that it was inspired by Tolkien's experiences at the Somme, it casts the British as the bad guys. The Somme was where the British first used the tank, and Melko's forces notoriously use tanks. Glorfindel kills his Balrog with a headbutt from his spiked helmet- a pickelhaube. It's fascinating, along with the War of Wrath as an exaggerated Western Front where the host of the Valar takes a week to advance a mile.
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:I wouldn't go so far to say it was worth it, but the Riddles in the Dark scene was spectacular, I thought. True. Now imagine a movie or two of well shot character moments like that actually telling the story of The Hobbit instead of 10 hours of turgid CGI video game cutscenes and emo dwarves.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
hahaha.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
Dwarves who tell each other jokes about Baptists on bridges.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
Pretty entertaining action blockbuster movies Do not convey the themes and ideas of the novel 'The Hobbit' very well
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 05:57
|
|
|
Expectation is the source of disappointment in adaptations. Seek to escape Samsara and attain Nerdvana.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
Some of us are so nerdy we're still mad at all the movie changes to LOTR. The Hobbit movies haven't sunk in yet.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 09:50
|
|
|
RIP Glorfindel II AND WHAT HAPPENED TO BOROMIR'S GIANT BEARD AND HORNED HELMET 
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 12:45
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:RIP Glorfindel II Sean Bean gets a pass because, well, Sean Bean.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Still pissed about Haldir and the Lorien elves showing up at Helm's Deep.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 13:46
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Still pissed about Haldir and the Lorien elves showing up at Helm's Deep. Still grateful they replaced Arwen with Haldir.  I liked the LotR movies a lot, and only had angst about the treatment of Faramir and Treebeard. Admittedly, both are difficult characters to portray well in a movie. If the LotR movies were action movies with some horror elements, they at least had enough drama and characterization behind them to have a story behind the scenery. I don't feel that the Hobbit movies had that same depth, in spite of all of the backstory stuff. The first movie in particular was just one long, drawn-out chase scene. I think the length alone could have worked, but the pacing was all wrong. There are ways to create tension and the sense of always being chased, without showing characters physically running around constantly. See: The Fellowship of the Ring (the book).
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 13:51
|
|
|
The first Hobbit movie at least seems like it couldn't find a balance between the comedic moments, the dramatic moments, and everything else. Even though Gimili, Merry, and Pippin were pretty much treated as comedy relief in the LOTR movies, it at least fit in pretty well with everything else that was going on. The Hobbit never seemed to quite fit together. Also the dwarves look too much like handsome humans with beards (well, some of them anyways...I know they're supposed to be young but they didn't really look like what we think of as Middle Earth dwarves IMO)
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
gimli is also supposed to be a young dwarf in lotr, isn't he?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:09
|
|
|
Hobbit is one of those things where I really enjoyed it when I watched it, but have no interest in watching it again. I do think that Billy Connolly turning up riding a pig into battle is one of the cinematic highlights of my life though.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
Edit Wrong thread haha. euphronius fucked around with this message at 14:36 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:37 |
|
|
Levitate posted:Also the dwarves look too much like handsome humans with beards (well, some of them anyways...I know they're supposed to be young but they didn't really look like what we think of as Middle Earth dwarves IMO) Thorin's line being amazingly handsome but short humans and then everyone else being various states of ugly and old was pretty hilarious.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 16:01
|
|
