The Hobbit Trilogy Discussion Thread

[Geoff D]

Just got the latest issue of Empire which has been guest edited by Jackson, and I had to laugh at this little tag line at the back of the magazine: "This is Peter's Jackson's guest edit. You're gonna need three issues".

[tob]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Just got the latest issue of Empire which has been guest edited by Jackson, and I had to laugh at this little tag line at the back of the magazine: "This is Peter's Jackson's guest edit. You're gonna need three issues".

Which of the five covers did you get.

[Geoff D]

There are five? I've got the subscriber's cover, this one:

[tob]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

There are five? I've got the subscriber's cover, this one:

http://www.empireonline.com/hobbit/

[Optimus]

The Dwarves have some ****ing cool looking armour.

[Semesa]

The covers are sick! I heard that they will be working on the silmarillion books. Apparently Jackson acquired the rights but I'm not if it was a prank or not.

[Foggy]

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/hobbi...ve-armies-2014

Wow, only two hours and 20 minutes.

[Kryptonic]

Saw a new TV Spot yesterday that had all of the dwarves armored up charging. It was totally badass.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Semesa

The covers are sick! I heard that they will be working on the silmarillion books. Apparently Jackson acquired the rights but I'm not if it was a prank or not.

Let's hope that's not the case.

[djakrse]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

Let's hope that's not the case.

It's not the case. Jackson said so himself, the film rights belong with Tolkien's family, who have no interest in selling the rights.

Peter Jackson On The Possibility Of A Silmarillion Movie

This article says it more definitively. Apparently Tolkien's son hates Jackson's movies, so that pretty much changes the odds from about a 1% chance to none whatsoever.

Will we ever see The Silmarillion on the big screen? (07.10.14 by Pieter Collier)

[Constitution 101]

Originally Posted by djakrse

It's not the case. Jackson said so himself, the film rights belong with Tolkien's family, who have no interest in selling the rights.

Peter Jackson On The Possibility Of A Silmarillion Movie

This article says it more definitively. Apparently Tolkien's son hates Jackson's movies, so that pretty much changes the odds from about a 1% chance to none whatsoever.

Will we ever see The Silmarillion on the big screen? (07.10.14 by Pieter Collier)

So the Tolkien family had no communication w/ Jackson during any of the two trilogies?

[djakrse]

Originally Posted by Constitution 101

So the Tolkien family had no communication w/ Jackson during any of the two trilogies?

That's a good question, but the 2nd article states Tolkien sold the movie rights to the Hobbit and LotR back in the 60s. Jackson and crew didn't have to follow any of C. Tolkien's recommendations, although it's a shame the foremost authority on all things Tolkien and LotR didn't approve of Jackson's adaptation.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by djakrse

It's not the case. Jackson said so himself, the film rights belong with Tolkien's family, who have no interest in selling the rights.

Thanks for the links, I had not seen some of this material. In particular I found this passage interesting:

'Having dedicating most of his life to his father’s work it can hardly come as a surprise that Christopher’s is the most authoritative judgement upon Peter Jackson’s movie adaptations of his father’s works. And what Christopher believes is that Tolkien now has become a monster “…devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time”: “The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away.”

It took a very long time for Christopher Tolkien to finally give us his opinion – which he did in an interview with LeMonde, one of his first in forty years. It is clear that the appalling treatment both the family and Tolkien’s publisher’s have been subjected to over the last decade by the film studios has finally taken its toll. Having carefully avoided the press and never before released an official opinion about Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, Christopher finally burst out: “They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25. And it seems that The Hobbit will be the same kind of film.”

He is probably correct; and most who have loved his works do realize that the movies, a product of today, and all the games that have since followed, are better described as ‘fan fiction’ than ‘based upon the works of J.R.R. Tolkien’. Perhaps Professor Tom Shippey gave us the best summary of the situation in the essay on Peter Jackson films that was added to the third edition of The Road to Middle-Earth. Shippey observes that Jackson “is quicker than Tolkien was to identify evil without qualification, and as a purely outside force… there is the kernel here of a serious challenge to Tolkien’s view of the world, with its insistence on the fallen nature even of the best, and its conviction that while victories are always worthwhile, they are also always temporary. And this could, at last, be a problem not created by any failure to perceive ‘the core of the original’ but a grave and genuine difference between the two different media and their ‘respective cannons of narrative art’.” '

[MechaGodzilla]

New clip, recorded from the live stream of the world premiere:

THE HOBBIT: THE BATTLE OF THE FIVE ARMIES - YouTube

Also, a member on TheOneRing.net forums has seen the film, and posted some big spoilers.

I have to say I don't like the sound of a lot of that stuff, at all...

[Show spoiler]CGI Dain? Beorn only appearing for seconds and not doing anything of significance? Legolas basically getting Beorn's part where he plays a big role in the battle and gets to kill Bolg? Legolas' stunts reaching an even more ridiculous level where in one scene he shoots down Orcs while riding on a bat, and in another runs/jumps along on a "path" of falling rocks? I'm still going to see the movie and hope for the best, but good lord.

[klauswhereareyou]

Are the extended cuts worth watching? Do they add anything, or just stuff that should've stayed out.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Are the extended cuts worth watching? Do they add anything, or just stuff that should've stayed out.

To be honest, I hardly remember anything about the theatrical cuts of the "Hobbit" films, because I only saw them once then waited a year for the Extended Editions. I do know that "An Unexpected Journey" was only given an extra 12 minutes or so, and "Desolation of Smaug" maybe an extra twenty. Overall, they are far shorter than the longer cuts for "Lord of the Rings".

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by Constitution 101

So the Tolkien family had no communication w/ Jackson during any of the two trilogies?

I don't know about direct communication, but I read that Christopher's son Simon actually enjoys Jackson's films, and that difference of opinion caused a huge father-son rift for several years.

[MechaGodzilla]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Are the extended cuts worth watching? Do they add anything, or just stuff that should've stayed out.

I think so, yes. Both are improvements on the theatrical cuts, the second more so. An Unexpected Journey has about 13 minutes of additional footage, which while not a huge difference is still one for the better. The Desolation of Smaug has 26 minutes, and it's a significant improvement. The pacing is much better, characters like Beorn are more fleshed out and I can't say enough about how much better the whole Dol Guldur subplot is.

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

To be honest, I hardly remember anything about the theatrical cuts of the "Hobbit" films, because I only saw them once then waited a year for the Extended Editions. I do know that "An Unexpected Journey" was only given an extra 12 minutes or so, and "Desolation of Smaug" maybe an extra twenty. Overall, they are far shorter than the longer cuts for "Lord of the Rings".

The Lord of the Rings movies overall are longer, sure, but the amount of added footage isn't that different. Well, depending on which movies you compare. The extended cut of Fellowship of the Ring is 30 minutes longer than the theatrical, which isn't much of a difference from Desolation of Smaug's 26 minutes.

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by klauswhereareyou

Are the extended cuts worth watching? Do they add anything, or just stuff that should've stayed out.

The extended cuts are better than the theatrical cuts. Better pacing/editing, more book-related material, just overall a better and more seamless experience. Certainly some different wrinkles as well, but I prefer the extended wrinkles to the theatrical's.

[Pieter V]

Reviews are hitting the internet now.