If I've read it once, I've probably read it fifteen or twenty times. I even spent a whopping $85.00 on a nice leather bound collectors edition ten years or so ago. I can't wait to see it on the big screen along with all the good stuff they've added regarding the Necromancer aka Sauron.
The Hobbit, you ever read it?
- Thread starter DarkPanda XIII
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Give George a few years to create perfect CGI replicas of the original actors and I bet the movies will have nothing original in them.ccggenius12 said:
That is an interesting change in the story. If the Hobbit were a standalone, then I can see why the change would be confusing and irritatingly pointless. But since The Hobbit was later included in the LoTR series, something had to change. At least it wasn't too severe.
The hobbit is the first english book I tried to read, but at the time it proved difficult. (Tried again later, was awesome.)
Regarding the trailer. Martin Freeman? Awesome! And holy crap those are a lot of dwarves, didn't they have brighly colored beards in the book?
Regarding the trailer. Martin Freeman? Awesome! And holy crap those are a lot of dwarves, didn't they have brighly colored beards in the book?
I tried reading it, got several chapters into it, and got bored. Just a long string of walking from one place to another.
I didn't like the Lord of the Rings movies either. Except for about two minutes of CGI army battles, the whole thing stank of someone's vacation home movie. And the wizard, holy crapfest batman, the primary trait of a wizard in intellect and cool zappy stuff. Instead they turned Gandalf into a club-wielder.
I didn't like the Lord of the Rings movies either. Except for about two minutes of CGI army battles, the whole thing stank of someone's vacation home movie. And the wizard, holy crapfest batman, the primary trait of a wizard in intellect and cool zappy stuff. Instead they turned Gandalf into a club-wielder.
I read the book three time back in school. As for the movie. I am no longer interested in watching movies based on books I have read. It's not that I think the book is always better. It just that nothing is really added to my experience by having live actors play out parts of a book I've read on the big screen. Then again, I'm one of those people who would rather listen to a CD than go to a concert.
when i say "origins" i meant the tale of the necromancer, sorry word jumble. Its explains the bit when gandalf leaves for a bit in mirkwood.Andrew_C said:
I loved all the LOTR books, so of course I read The Hobbit. I even read Silmarillion a half year ago (spoiler: don't read it, it is boring as fuck).
The LOTR movies were fantastic movies, but compared to the books, they fucking suck. Since The Hobbit should be some kind of The Hobbit + other stuff hybrid, and I get to see more movie-ified versions of great books, I am enthused, but not wet-my-pants "ZOMG THIS WILL BE THE BEST MOVIE EVER".
If they fuck up the character of Thorin or Balin, THEN I will be pissed.
The LOTR movies were fantastic movies, but compared to the books, they fucking suck. Since The Hobbit should be some kind of The Hobbit + other stuff hybrid, and I get to see more movie-ified versions of great books, I am enthused, but not wet-my-pants "ZOMG THIS WILL BE THE BEST MOVIE EVER".
If they fuck up the character of Thorin or Balin, THEN I will be pissed.
Yes, i've read The Hobbit, even before I read LoTR. And I think as a book "The Hobbit" is far superior. And I actually like the movie version of LoTR more than the book version. I liked that Frodo was young, and I liked that skipped the first 200 pages of shit.DarkPanda XIII said:For those of you that never saw this (which in my mind would be a very few) In December Peter Jackson will be releasing "The Hobbit" Part 1..
Now, there are alot of similarities as well as a whole boatload of differences between it and the Lord of the Rings, including a lack of pretty-face elf who is a huge character in the series...instead you get an army of 13 dwarves with a single hobbit running around with an old gray wizard.
My question is a two parter, mostly because I'm curious...
1) Have you read "The Hobbit"?
2) Whether or not you have read the book, what are your feelings when seeing this trailer?
Personally? I've read the book. It still remains as one of my favorite novels. It's simple, it's adventurous, and it has a bloody dragon at the end. And it doesn't have the excessive amount of detail the Lord of the Rings had...
My feelings on the movie was estatic. I really enjoyed the book and really enjoyed seeing this trailer. I want to see it early, but know fully well I can't. Only major complaint is the actor that plays Thorin Oakenshield is a bit younger than his character (as Thorin was the oldest). But I digress...
Unlike Lord of the Rings, which had to cut a good portion out (Bye bye Tom Bombadil ;., they left the majority of the cast, even adding a few names to the list. A Theory came up that suggested they're combining the original Hobbit with one of the unnamed stories that Tolken left behind, that told us about how Gandalf chose Bilbo to go on an adventure. Because of this, you'll be seeing old, and new faces, maybe even Legolas, though that's not 100% yet.
I read it past month, it was alright. More.. childish than LOTR however. But it was a good book nonetheless.
1. Yes, of course.
2. I'm glad they're staying fairly true. I didn't mind the bits in the LOTR films that diverged from the books because they were so well done. I just hope Jackson doesn't go for the Big Fight Scene Fantasy Epic thing again because the book really isn't like that.
2. I'm glad they're staying fairly true. I didn't mind the bits in the LOTR films that diverged from the books because they were so well done. I just hope Jackson doesn't go for the Big Fight Scene Fantasy Epic thing again because the book really isn't like that.
My teacher in 5th grade, Mr. Murray, read it to the class. He was also an artist, so we helped him draw a big Hobbit mural on the class wall. That was way back in '85, so my recollection of the book is spotty at best.
