The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
- Thread starter Scytail
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I found the trilogy sorely lacking in dwarves, good to see this has been rectified.(even if it was lore consistant)
definately looking forward to this.
definately looking forward to this.
Frodo? Saruman? Legolas? Galadriel? Why? Hey, if we're going to detract from the main story line so we can cram in characters from the last three, why not include SAURON. Oh, he's in the movie to. Not a passing reference like in the book, nope, he gets screen time. And lets add even more characters, as if 17 central characters aren't even. You know what everyone likes? Elves! MOAR ELVES PLEASE, Taladrial. And while we're at it, Here's everyones favorite sword, NARSIL.
I'm sorry, but I really wish that Peter Jackson would stop channeling George Lucas, and adding stupid crap that wasn't in the actual story to begin with, just to get more viewers. And one final thing. The entire trailer did not mention ONCE, the ENTIRE REASON FOR THE BOOK. Why are they suddenly 14 dwarves in this Hobbit's house? Why are they fighting trolls? Are they going on some sort of adventure? WHY???
We could have EASILY shown the plot synopsis in 30 seconds. And again, WHY IS GALADRIEL IN THIS???
I have a really bad feeling the whole "Ancient Dragon takes over Dwarf Mountain" is going to take a back seat to "Bilbo finds ring/Dwarves get in really awesome battles with Elves and Orcs". Peter Jackson is a fucking tool, and I'm sick of him destroying the lore.
/end rant
I'm sorry, but I really wish that Peter Jackson would stop channeling George Lucas, and adding stupid crap that wasn't in the actual story to begin with, just to get more viewers. And one final thing. The entire trailer did not mention ONCE, the ENTIRE REASON FOR THE BOOK. Why are they suddenly 14 dwarves in this Hobbit's house? Why are they fighting trolls? Are they going on some sort of adventure? WHY???
We could have EASILY shown the plot synopsis in 30 seconds. And again, WHY IS GALADRIEL IN THIS???
I have a really bad feeling the whole "Ancient Dragon takes over Dwarf Mountain" is going to take a back seat to "Bilbo finds ring/Dwarves get in really awesome battles with Elves and Orcs". Peter Jackson is a fucking tool, and I'm sick of him destroying the lore.
/end rant
u mad, bro?Bradeck said:
Listen, first off, as he did with the Lord of the Rings movies, he's changing a couple things here and there to make it better on film and for people who know nothing about Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit. He's added some characters from Lord of the Rings in order to draw more connections between these movies and that one. It's supposed to be a prequel duo. People should be able to get that from more than just "two of the same characters are on an adventure".
As for why it doesn't explain the story, you strike me as the sort of person that'd ***** about the fact that a trailer reveals everything in a movie so "there's no point in seeing it". If you're not, I apologize, but... do you see my point? Not to mention it's a two parter. Two movies, not one.
You need to chill out and stop acting like this was some personal attack. This is a different version of the lore. Considering how much detail the books had, it's damn near impossible to make a movie without changes. Not to mention there would be so much exposition that it would bore the vast majority of people to death.
EDIT: Right, more to the point, cannot fucking wait for this movie.
Like ZeroMachine said, Jackson is making it more accessible to people who never read The Hobbit or the Lord of the Rings, by having these characters have a little screen time it's a good way to tie in both sets of films.Bradeck said:
And about the trailer not talking about the story? Well it's only a teaser trailer dude, this is just to pique interest from non diehard fans. I'm sure there will be more trailers explaining more as the release date gets nearer
You,uh... mean Peter Jackson... right? (Either way, you put it better than I did. Kudos.)Sleekit said:
It's one of two possible choices for context: either make the movie a self-contained story, or make it an extension to the existing movies.
As set up, the two hobbit movies are somewhere between an expansion pack and a prequel - tied to the trilogy so strongly that there is no chance of viewing them on their own merits. Especially as prequels, which in book form is a nice introduction to the series, but which here will make less sense and be less impactful when not familiar with the trilogy. (yay - done mangling English for a while!)
As set up, the two hobbit movies are somewhere between an expansion pack and a prequel - tied to the trilogy so strongly that there is no chance of viewing them on their own merits. Especially as prequels, which in book form is a nice introduction to the series, but which here will make less sense and be less impactful when not familiar with the trilogy. (yay - done mangling English for a while!)
I found the trailer to be lackluster, but I also didn't expect much since it was regarded as more of a teaser than anything. Once we get closer to the release date, the "bigger and better" trailers will start pouring out, so hopefully I'll be a bit more excited.