Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_Shane
That character has a loyal niche following among Tolkien readers. They have always imagined fleshed-out scenarios that JRRT may or may not have envisioned for RtB, and I for one am glad to see him get more screen time than the books call for. Jackson has certainly gotten a performance true to the implied character of the fellow.
As for those who complain that the first third of the film drags somewhat, that is not an invalid perception based on a non-reader's perspective. However, JRRT took his good time establishing the character of the dwarves and Bilbo's reluctance to join them, and the movie simply follows suit.
Look at it this way; if PJ had condensed those opening scenes (say by having all 13 dwarves arrive at once and exhibit only briefly their individual personality quirks) would we be as involved with them as real characters? Or would they only be a collective with no distinctiveness or depth?
Walt Disney's storymen could take shortcuts with only half as many dwarves (or dwarfs, in his case) by giving them descriptive names. And most of us can name all 7. Would that be true of all 13 dwarves in THE HOBBIT if Jackson had not taken the time to give them each their own piece of screen? I know I have a much greater feel for the dwarves as individuals now, and I have read THE HOBBIT many times (particularly Bombur -- when you see the film you will know what I mean). If we are going to care what happens to the dwarves they have to seem real to us, not just a glob of extras.
|
I've read the Hobbit and seen the movie... and I still couldn't name them all. Damn Tolkien for wanting them all to sound exactly the same... well, mostly.