Poll: Dwarf

  1. #381
    Scarab Lord Frontenac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Québec, Québec
    Posts
    4,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Northy View Post
    Have you not read Tolien? There's so much content in LotR, Hobbit, appendices... He could make fifty movies.
    I've read Tolkien. The movie is called The Hobbit, and the story is following Bilbo, mainly. I agree with the addition of the battle at Dol Guldur, because it relates to what happens during that adventure and LotR. However, when the Battle of Five Armies is over and Bilbo is back home, there is no need to tell us what happens after that. That story begins and ends with Bilbo, it's about him. Now if Jackson wants to make another movie about what happened during the 60 years between The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Rings, it's his call. But it should not be called The Hobbit, part 3. Though I don't think it would be much interesting, because not much happens during this. No, I'm wrong. A lot happens but each of these stories are not related to each other, or the outcome is not interesting, so it would not make a good movie.

  2. #382
    Merely a Setback Adam Jensen's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sarif Industries, Detroit
    Posts
    29,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzzie View Post
    Not all of that content would make for a very good film however. They did include some of it in LOTR but left out some as well. I think their best bet would be to leave it after these two films. Using something from Unfinished Tales or the Silmarillion could go poorly.
    Agreed. LotR was long enough without the chapter on Faramir and Eowyn's courtship, or the Scouring of the Shire, or Tom Bombadil, or the Fog on the Barrow-Downs, or the hobbits meeting the Elves just outside of the Shire, or the lengthy Council of Elrond (the real council was long as fuck and recounted Aragorn's attempt to catch Gollum, among other things.) I could go on. PJ did a good job, I think, condensing it into 3 films. If he stayed true to the books, there'd be easily ten movies.
    Putin khuliyo

  3. #383
    Scarab Lord Frontenac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Québec, Québec
    Posts
    4,154
    Other topic : Does anyone find it strange to see Dale so much populated in the production video? Isn't this city supposed to be abandonned since Smaug's coming, and all the survivors founded Esgaroth or Laketown?

  4. #384
    Quote Originally Posted by Frontenac View Post
    Other topic : Does anyone find it strange to see Dale so much populated in the production video? Isn't this city supposed to be abandonned since Smaug's coming, and all the survivors founded Esgaroth or Laketown?

    I don't remember but I don't think so. Pretty sure theres people.

  5. #385
    Mechagnome
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    749
    One of the first movies I can say I read the book to! I saw the previews in theaters, took them long enough. They've been talking about it for years and years, I never forgot! A bit surprised it's spread out into two movies, but as long as they don't skip entire parts of the book it will be well worth it. The book was far more involved than the trilogy and far better as far as I'm concerned.

    Looking forward to it.

  6. #386
    Field Marshal
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    63
    I'm freaking way stoked to see this!

  7. #387

    The Hobbit will now be a trilogy! *Official*

    Peter Jackson and Ian McKellen have confirmed officially that "The Hobbit" will be three films, instead of two, to accommodate Toliken's notes at the end of 'Return of the King". So, what do you guys think? I am personally for this, but I know that a lot of people are against it.
    Last edited by Garots; 2012-07-30 at 06:04 PM.

  8. #388
    LOAD"*",8,1 Fuzzzie's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Legion of Doom Headquarters
    Posts
    20,245
    Here's some more info:
    http://www.slashfilm.com/hobbit-film...ential-titles/

    Also, merging with the actual Hobbit article.

  9. #389
    Deleted
    Three parts? ME GUSTA!

  10. #390
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzzie View Post
    Here's some more info:
    http://www.slashfilm.com/hobbit-film...ential-titles/

    Also, merging with the actual Hobbit article.
    "The Hobbit: Riddles in the Dark" sounds REALLY cool.

  11. #391
    Deleted
    Okay, I'm a big fan of Lord of the Rings and I can't wait for the Hobbit... but this doesn't seem right.

    I could understand making it two movies, since there is so much happening. Making it only one movie would have meant a lot got skipped and we'd get a hasty story.
    But three movies? That just seems like they're milking it now. I really hope it doesn't take away from the excitement by stretching it.

    Though I guess it could work, they got lots of appendixes to work from as well. There's so much they could throw in.

    It's just that last time I heard people say that splitting a movie into two parts was a good idea was with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. And I thought part 1 sucked horribly, it could have been completely skipped. I don't want that to happen to the Hobbit, then again... This isn't lame ass harry potter we're talking about. And Peter Jackson has done an awesome job on the first trilogy, so who knows... I guess we just have to trust him.

  12. #392
    LOAD"*",8,1 Fuzzzie's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Legion of Doom Headquarters
    Posts
    20,245
    Meh. Fine by it. If they have 3 films they want to show then that's good. It's only 8$ ticket so i'm not worried about the money.

  13. #393
    I feel like there was no need on making it a trilogy, and that even two movies are a stretch.

    But they'll make a shit load of money so hey, it's not all that surprising.

  14. #394
    Old God Kathranis's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    10,074
    It's fine by me, I think. Their original intent was to do all of The Hobbit as a single movie with an original story as the sequel, acting as a bridge between The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, which I assume is basically going to be what happens here.

    They'll do The Hobbit as two movies, round it out with a third film that includes some of Tolkien's additional appendix materials and bridges The Hobbit with Lord of the Rings.

  15. #395
    Scarab Lord xylophone's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,625
    Quote Originally Posted by orissa View Post
    Agreed. LotR was long enough without the chapter on Faramir and Eowyn's courtship, or the Scouring of the Shire, or Tom Bombadil, or the Fog on the Barrow-Downs, or the hobbits meeting the Elves just outside of the Shire, or the lengthy Council of Elrond (the real council was long as fuck and recounted Aragorn's attempt to catch Gollum, among other things.) I could go on. PJ did a good job, I think, condensing it into 3 films. If he stayed true to the books, there'd be easily ten movies.
    Bolded the parts that I was disappointed at being left out.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Lets say you have a two 3 inch lines. One is all red and the other is 48% red and 52% blue. Does that mean there's a 50-50 chance they're both red or is the second line matching the all red line by 48%?
    ^^^ Wells using an analogy

  16. #396
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzzie View Post
    Here's some more info:
    http://www.slashfilm.com/hobbit-film...ential-titles/

    Also, merging with the actual Hobbit article.
    Usually I hate it when film makers split movies into multiple parts.....But this is the Hobbit we are talking about, plus over 100 pages of notes of backstory Tolkien had written that I have never heard of, meaning.

    THIS IS GOING TO BE AMAZING!

    This means we will have two epic trilogies, The Hobbit Trilogy, and the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.

    I am also really happy because now I can expect at least one excellent movie every year now until it ends.
    Last edited by Markluzz; 2012-07-30 at 07:50 PM.

  17. #397
    Scarab Lord xylophone's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Hardstyler01 View Post
    Okay, I'm a big fan of Lord of the Rings and I can't wait for the Hobbit... but this doesn't seem right.

    I could understand making it two movies, since there is so much happening. Making it only one movie would have meant a lot got skipped and we'd get a hasty story.
    But three movies? That just seems like they're milking it now. I really hope it doesn't take away from the excitement by stretching it.

    Though I guess it could work, they got lots of appendixes to work from as well. There's so much they could throw in.

    It's just that last time I heard people say that splitting a movie into two parts was a good idea was with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. And I thought part 1 sucked horribly, it could have been completely skipped. I don't want that to happen to the Hobbit, then again... This isn't lame ass harry potter we're talking about. And Peter Jackson has done an awesome job on the first trilogy, so who knows... I guess we just have to trust him.
    Personally, I have no problems with them milking it. As long as the production quality stays where it is and they stick to the Tolkien lore. He wrote enough to make movies after for years.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Lets say you have a two 3 inch lines. One is all red and the other is 48% red and 52% blue. Does that mean there's a 50-50 chance they're both red or is the second line matching the all red line by 48%?
    ^^^ Wells using an analogy

  18. #398
    Also, considering that The Hobbit is a children's book, I fully expect the movies to have a lighthearted tone.

    From what I've seen some of the dwarves already look a little silly.

  19. #399
    Scarab Lord xylophone's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    4,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Eternal Champion View Post
    Also, considering that The Hobbit is a children's book, I fully expect the movies to have a lighthearted tone.

    From what I've seen some of the dwarves already look a little silly.
    I think that has more to do with trying to make them look unique instead of having 12 Gimli look-a-likes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Lets say you have a two 3 inch lines. One is all red and the other is 48% red and 52% blue. Does that mean there's a 50-50 chance they're both red or is the second line matching the all red line by 48%?
    ^^^ Wells using an analogy

  20. #400
    Also, keep in mind that there were somewhere between 112-113 pages of notes at the end of RotK that shed more light on plot holes that Tolkien wanted to fix. He was already going to rewrite the story after rings, but he never had any time to, unfortunately. I think if they pace the films right, and tell the FULL story (They have to now), it is going to be beautiful.
    Last edited by Garots; 2012-07-30 at 08:22 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •