Not at all. Tolkien movies are 80% boring filler with 20% action featuring characters I have no interest in or attachment to, and thus cannot really enjoy.
How excited for you are for the Hobbit?
- Thread starter Sean Hollyman
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Fine then, it was my first book that needed a higher reading level than the Mr. Men series.charge52 said:
1. Not really an issue with me.Lovely Mixture said:
2. Would have liked, as a massive Tolkien nerd, to have seen Glorfindel here as this is his only appearance in the book and I also thought it was kind of ridiculous that we were supposed to buy Arwen as some kind of warrior woman, yet she does nothing from this point on.
3. Not an issue with me though they never resolve his fate in the theatrical cut. The death he gets in the Extended Edition is kind of lame and abrupt but at least it was something and gave a nod towards his fate in the book.
4. This one did actually bother me. It was supposed to be showing Aragorn's leadership as he rallied all the southern fiefs of Gondor that had been under siege by the pirate fleet to come to the defense of the city. Once he arrives it kicks off an epic running battle all across the Pelennor Fields that lasts all day. Instead the ghosts are basically a Deus ex Machina moment that instantly end the siege.
4.1 Why wasn't it dark during the Siege of Minas Tirith when so much is made in the books of how Sauron is blacking out the sky to sap the morale of the defenders? Why did he not have Gandalf face down the Witch King alone at the gates just before the Riders arrive? What happened to the fact the whole first circle of the city was supposed to be set on fire, lighting up the battle with a hellish glow? Basically he took out a great deal of the atmosphere that made the siege such a pleasure to read and so very epic. I also felt the confrontation between the Witch King and Eowyn was sloppy and not very believable as was the way Merry got the drop on him.
4.2. He made Denethor an arrogant, cruel moron rather than a wise, intelligent, but ultimately flawed ruler who tries to do the best for his people but is slowly beaten down by his grief for Boromir and his despair over not having any hope of victory against Sauron.
Other changes that he had reasons for that I understand, but didn't need to happen:
1. Having the elves show up at Helms Deep and making it seem necessary by greatly reducing the number of defenders from the number in the book (book: roughly 2000, movie: 300).
2. Making Gimli comic relief most of the time. Kind of irritating and forced.
3. Not making it clear that Sauron is not just a giant eye. Makes people not take him seriously as a villain and turned him into a bit of a joke. It is implied in the books that he has a sort of shadow form, but never leaves his fortress of Baradur and governs through terror alone rather than any physical force.
The controversial one:
Elijah Wood/the writing/direction ruined Frodo. Sorry, it's true. I love the character in the book, but can only tolerate him in the movie. He makes him seem weak and pathetic rather than admirable. What makes Frodo exceptional in the book is his inner strength, his will to go on, to survive and accomplish his mission. EW's performance was whiny and annoying much of the time and is completely overshadowed by how perfect Sean Astin is as Sam. Everyone I know who hasn't read the book and have only seen the movies, think that Frodo is weak and useless and don't get why we are supposed to like him.
I'll be honest and say that I could barely remember him. But now that I do remember him, I feel his inclusion would have greatly enhanced the view of the elf rulers as more than just watchers (Elrond and Galadriel just kind of sit by until their core moments). It's a shame they cut him.mojopin87 said:
Ditto, they should have at least kept the confrontation with him and Gandalf (who just laughs at him)mojopin87 said:
The most ironic thing I find about this, is that read Jackson didn't want to use them because he thought they were deus ex machina.....Yet his use of them only extended their use as deus ex machina rather than use them as a metaphor for Aragorn's leadership (as you say).mojopin87 said:
As much as I like that scene in the movie, I agree. It is really silly.mojopin87 said:
I really disliked this actually. After reading the books, Gimli was closest to my favorite character.mojopin87 said:
mojopin87 said:
Also this. He is so overdone in the films, he's scarier in the book from description alone. The movies make him laughable.
I feel you. It's exactly how I feel with Toby McGuire as Spider-Man. People see the movie and instantly assume that's the true incarnation of Spider-Man.mojopin87 said:
Well blast. You've gone and reminded me, after I'd managed to put it out of my head. Now I'll have the dwarves' song going through my head on a loop 'til Thursday, giving me chills.
Yeah, pretty darn excited.
At the same time, I'm well aware of how much room there is for problems. The tone and length of the book are vastly different from what a 3-part Jackson Films prequel would require, so they'll have to cut a fair bit from a book shorter than any of the THREE that made the previous trilogy, and manage to make 3 films out of that. They'll pull in stuff from other sources, but there's the strong possibility it won't be as coherent and well-structured as the original trilogy.
But they faced these problems before and delivered beyond anyone's expectations, so I have faith they'll pull it off. I had a lot of trepidation going into The Dark Knight Rises, and was proved right, but for the Hobbit I don't have worries, and hope to be proved right again.
Yeah, pretty darn excited.
At the same time, I'm well aware of how much room there is for problems. The tone and length of the book are vastly different from what a 3-part Jackson Films prequel would require, so they'll have to cut a fair bit from a book shorter than any of the THREE that made the previous trilogy, and manage to make 3 films out of that. They'll pull in stuff from other sources, but there's the strong possibility it won't be as coherent and well-structured as the original trilogy.
But they faced these problems before and delivered beyond anyone's expectations, so I have faith they'll pull it off. I had a lot of trepidation going into The Dark Knight Rises, and was proved right, but for the Hobbit I don't have worries, and hope to be proved right again.
