It's not lose lose. Only the die hard fans of the books will be offended by changes (just like with the LOTR movies and changes made there).
That's a tiny part of the market (most fans aren't die hards/fanatics who obsess over changes).
In any case it should be treated as a prequel to the LOTR movies IMO as those made shit tons of money and won awards so that's the audience he should be going after. Not the minority of nerds who'll ***** and moan over every change.
I consider myself a die-hard fan of the books. I didn't obsess over every change, just the ones that drastically altered the flow and tone of the story.
Were as people like me who are only casual fans of the book didn't care at all about the changes and loved every second of the movies and enjoy the movies more than the books. Which was my point. That's the audience he should be going for as that's who made him millions of dollars. Not the die hard fans of the books. And that's the main market for the movie prequels--people who loved the LOTR movies.
No need to cater to the die hards of the books. They'll show up and see it anyway, and will just complain about changes to the tone and flow afterwards.
I agree you don't need to cater to the die hard book fans, but Jackson needs to put more effort on the character direction. What bothered me most about the LotR movies was not the deviation from the book so much as Jackson's inability to get the right feeling of the relationships and comaraderie from the actors. JRRT called the first book Fellowship for a reason and much of his writing builds the actual relationships, feelings and history between the characters. These relationships carried through the trilogy.
Of course some directors are better than others in getting their actors to convey and mesh into the relationships appropriately and unfortunately this isn't Jackson's strength. He's much better at visual details and action scenes and tends to cover up his deficiencies in character direction with cheap tricks like the way he used Gimli as a kind of comedian. Del Toro gets better performances from his actors, so I was more interested in seeing where he would take The Hobbit. I'm sure Jackson will do his best but I bet it will be more focus on the action/adventure and special effects elements of The Hobbit. Still looking forward to it.
Generally speaking, the changes PJ made to the characters in LOTR work for me, except for the relationship between Frodo and Sam, I think he went a bit overboard there hehe... I always imagined the the four hobbits behaving like the Beatles in the early days xD
The Hobbit has a different tone than The LOTR , it was conceived as a children story, although a less dark tone would be appreciated, I hope he PJ doesn't remain too faithful... I mean, c'mon there's elves singing tra la la la la and fa la la la on the book. Imagine if in the movie, when they meet the elves they show up singing like this.
What bothered me most about the LotR movies was not the deviation from the book so much as Jackson's inability to get the right feeling of the relationships and comaraderie from the actors. JRRT called the first book Fellowship for a reason and much of his writing builds the actual relationships, feelings and history between the characters. These relationships carried through the trilogy.
I disagree with that personally. I thought the movies did a good job of illustrating the relationships between the fellowship.
I do agree there was a bit too much comic relief with Gimli and too much action stunts with Legolas--but those were minor and didn't really harm my enjoyment much.
Besides, some of the comedy stuff between those two was in the book--i.e. counting kills and competing during the battle etc. Just some of the silly stuff like "Nobody tosses a dwarf!" I could have done without. But again, just a minuscule nitpick.
Generally speaking, the changes PJ made to the characters in LOTR work for me, except for the relationship between Frodo and Sam, I think he went a bit overboard there hehe...
It wasn't overboard so much as off-kilter. The two had a close relationship in the book; it just didn't resemble what was shown in the movie. Similarly, Legolas and Gimli, Gandalf and Aragorn...it was all very "off". The production values were great. It just lacked that spark in character direction. Hopefully the Hobbit hits closer to the mark.
It wasn't overboard so much as off-kilter. The two had a close relationship in the book; it just didn't resemble what was shown in the movie. Similarly, Legolas and Gimli, Gandalf and Aragorn...it was all very "off". The production values were great. It just lacked that spark in character direction. Hopefully the Hobbit hits closer to the mark.
I think Terry Gilliam would be a better choice to direct the Hobbit...
It wasn't overboard so much as off-kilter. The two had a close relationship in the book; it just didn't resemble what was shown in the movie. Similarly, Legolas and Gimli, Gandalf and Aragorn...it was all very "off". The production values were great. It just lacked that spark in character direction. Hopefully the Hobbit hits closer to the mark.
The same could be said about Merry and Pippin. In the books, they were aware of what Frodo was going through and were determined to go with him and Sam. The movie just made them look like vegetable-stealing, pranksters who set off fireworks in an inappropriate manner.
Ringer Spy Mr. Anderson sends along these exclusive pics of The Hobbit sets being built in Miramar, NZ. If you look closely at some of the pictures, you’ll notice that the architecture seems to resemble that of Moria. I’m sure we can all draw our own conclusions, but could this be a flashforward sequence for Moria? Maybe we are getting a peak into the Lonely Moutain? Or maybe it has nothing to do with Dwarves at all! Share your thoughts and click the ‘continue reading’ below for the full gallery.
Ringer Spy Mr. Anderson sends along these exclusive pics of The Hobbit sets being built in Miramar, NZ. If you look closely at some of the pictures, you’ll notice that the architecture seems to resemble that of Moria. I’m sure we can all draw our own conclusions, but could this be a flashforward sequence for Moria? Maybe we are getting a peak into the Lonely Moutain? Or maybe it has nothing to do with Dwarves at all! Share your thoughts and click the ‘continue reading’ below for the full gallery.
Probably NOT shots of Moria, and Moria doesn't figure into the story (except for a very brief mention in the first chapter), unless they want to expand on the background story of
[Show spoiler]Thror's return to Moria after the dragon occupied the Lonely Mountain
, although this would be stretching a tangent in story full of more important tangents. Their second guess is more likely.
Probably NOT shots of Moria, and Moria doesn't figure into the story (except for a very brief mention in the first chapter), unless they want to expand on the background story of
[Show spoiler]Thror's return to Moria after the dragon occupied the Lonely Mountain
, although this would be stretching a tangent in story full of more important tangents. Their second guess is more likely.
Yea, since both Moria and the Lonely Mountain should share the same type of architecture, those pillar bases do look familiar. However, notice that big log plus tree stump right behind it?
That might just be a mix of set props from different scenes of the film in that one picture.
Ringer Spy Mr. Anderson sends along these exclusive pics of The Hobbit sets being built in Miramar, NZ. If you look closely at some of the pictures, you’ll notice that the architecture seems to resemble that of Moria. I’m sure we can all draw our own conclusions, but could this be a flashforward sequence for Moria? Maybe we are getting a peak into the Lonely Moutain? Or maybe it has nothing to do with Dwarves at all! Share your thoughts and click the ‘continue reading’ below for the full gallery.
A newly translated Russian novel retells Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" from the perspective of the bad guys.
As bad lots go, you can't get much worse than the hordes of Mordor from J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings." Led by an utterly evil disembodied entity who manifests himself as a gigantic, flaming, pitiless eye, and composed of loathsome orcs (or goblins), trolls and foreigners, Mordor's armies are ultimately defeated and wiped out by the virtuous and noble elves, dwarfs, ents and human beings -- aka the "free peoples" -- of Middle-earth. No one sheds a tear over Mordor's downfall, although the hobbit Sam Gamgee does spare a moment to wonder if a dead enemy soldier is truly evil or has simply been misguided or coerced into serving the dark lord Sauron.
Well, there's two sides to every story, or to quote a less banal maxim, history is written by the winners. That's the philosophy behind "The Last Ringbearer," a novel set during and after the end of the War of the Ring (the climactic battle at the end of "The Lord of the Rings") and told from the point of view of the losers. The novel was written by Kirill Yeskov, a Russian paleontologist, and published to acclaim in his homeland in 1999. Translations of the book have also appeared in other European nations, but fear of the vigilant and litigious Tolkien estate has heretofore prevented its publication in English.
That changed late last year when one Yisroel Markov posted his English translation of "The Last Ringbearer" as a free download. Less polished translations of brief passages from the book had been posted earlier on other sites, but Markov's is the "official" version, produced with the cooperation and approval of Yeskov himself. Although the new translation's status as a potential infringement of the Tolkien copyright remains ambiguous, it may be less vulnerable to legal action since no one is seeking to profit from it.
The novel still has some rough edges -- most notably, a confused switching back and forth between past and present tense in the early chapters -- and some readers may be put off by Yeskov's (classically Russian) habit of dropping info-dumps of military and political history into the narrative here and there. For the most part, though, "The Last Ringbearer" is a well-written, energetic adventure yarn that offers an intriguing gloss on what some critics have described as the overly simplistic morality of Tolkien's masterpiece.
In Yeskov's retelling, the wizard Gandalf is a war-monger intent on crushing the scientific and technological initiative of Mordor and its southern allies because science "destroys the harmony of the world and dries up the souls of men!" He's in cahoots with the elves, who aim to become "masters of the world," and turn Middle-earth into a "bad copy" of their magical homeland across the sea. Barad-dur, also known as the Dark Tower and Sauron's citadel, is, by contrast, described as "that amazing city of alchemists and poets, mechanics and astronomers, philosophers and physicians, the heart of the only civilization in Middle-earth to bet on rational knowledge and bravely pitch its barely adolescent technology against ancient magic."
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Linear Mode
