Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 10

[matrix_ghost]

So i just returned from watching Hobbit ....in HFR.
It was my first viewing and honestly i wasn't bothered by it.
Does it have issues...? Yes. But it's nowhere near as bad as people make it out to be.
When the movie started it was weird seeing Ian Holm look like he's moving faster but once the proloque starts , my eyes got used to the frame rate.
Yes the realism is bumped up a notch but IMO i just could watch the movie fine.
While the majority of the CG shots looked great , especially the work on Gollum and the Goblim king was exceptional , there were definately moments which looked "off". The first Warg attack for some reason didn't flow well. The movements of the WARGS against the landscpaes just didn't work. Ditto Azog which while detailed just didn't sell me in terms of movement and detail the way Gollum and the Goblin king worked.
It possibly that WETA didn't have enough time to work on the shots considering the last minute change. Hopefully they'll add more detail because he looked too "clean" .

 

[redhawk23]

My deal with Azog is that while he looked mostly ok, he actually didn't look that much different or more expressive than the Engineers from Prometheus which were practical.

 

[Pink Ranger]

SNL had a pretty funny fake Hobbit trailer (for the 18 upcoming Hobbit movies) last night.

 

[superkong 500]

I'm worried about thorins role on part 2, what will he be doing, will he fight orcs besides the part with the spiders and the elves near the beginning? cos I'm pretty sure he won't be in the battle of dol guldur speaking of which who will be in it? galadriel for sure, elrond, gandalf, radaghast, maybe gandalf will convince Thranduil to join in since it takes place in mirkwood and it concerns the elven king and the future of his realm. But meanwhile Thorin bilbo and co will be where? I was kinda disappointed that thorin got his ass handed to him by azog making the end anticlimactic, I hope he kicks mayor ass in the next two films,specially since he

Spoiler

dies at the end of part 3

I wanna see him shine.

 

[Airwings]

Why Saruman's dislike for Radagast? It is really a bad thing to live in tune with nature?

 

[redhawk23]

He just doesn't fit with Saruman's view of the class expected of a wizard.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Why Saruman's dislike for Radagast? It is really a bad thing to live in tune with nature?

Saruman is a symbol of the industrial machine that overruns nature. This is clear from his treatment of Fangorn Forest and the Ents. Finding an alliance with nature "foolish" is pretty in keeping with his character, as is looking down on small things like the Hobbits as being of any real use.

 

[Airwings]

Saruman also seems blind for what's happening, ignoring small signs. Either he's full of himself and his status as the main wizard, or he was corrupted already then.
Why would he else claim that the [BLACKOUT]Necromancer is nothing but a mortal human[/BLACKOUT]? To keep things secret as long as possible?

 

[Scarecrow_King]

Yeah, I was curious as to whether Saruman had been corrupted yet. It was ambiguous. I liked it that way, though.

 

[ThePhantasm]

In the book he isn't corrupted yet. In fact, in the book Radagast doesn't discover the NEcromancer like that... the White Council has in fact known of the Necromancer's existence for some time and have been keeping an eye on the problem in secret. They think for a long time that the Necromancer is one of the Nine Wraiths but at the time of the Hobbit they discover that it is in fact Sauron and drive him out of Dol Guldur.

In the movie it is more ambiguous as to Saruman's allegiances... but I felt they made Saruman look really childish in the Hobbit movie instead of very wise. Compare Gandalf's weary closing of the eyes at Saruman's entrance in the Hobbit film to his insistence to Frodo that "The Head of my Order is very wise. He'll know what to do!" in FOTR. The whole WC scene in the Hobbit movie was off key and out of character, I felt.

 

[Schlosser85]

Yea, I was side-eyeing Saruman while he was being so dismissive of the Necromancer.

 

[Airwings]

Maybe Saruman shares some personality traits with the Malfoy family. All that "pure bloods", what a real wizard should do to keep the dignity etc. To him, dealing with animals and plant life is the same thing as befriending muggles (lower level of existence).

 

[Marvolo]

In the book he isn't corrupted yet. In fact, in the book Radagast doesn't discover the NEcromancer like that... the White Council has in fact known of the Necromancer's existence for some time and have been keeping an eye on the problem in secret. They think for a long time that the Necromancer is one of the Nine Wraiths but at the time of the Hobbit they discover that it is in fact Sauron and drive him out of Dol Guldur.

In the movie it is more ambiguous as to Saruman's allegiances... but I felt they made Saruman look really childish in the Hobbit movie instead of very wise. Compare Gandalf's weary closing of the eyes at Saruman's entrance in the Hobbit film to his insistence to Frodo that "The Head of my Order is very wise. He'll know what to do!" in FOTR. The whole WC scene in the Hobbit movie was off key and out of character, I felt.

Sauraman was much too dickish in this film. He should have been wise and somewhat kind in the Hobbit, because in FOTR we should have no inclination of his true allegiance until it is revealed. In Part 1 he comes off as a dick and a bit racist. And a racist dick in Middle Earth is no good.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Sauraman was much too dickish in this film. He should have been wise and somewhat kind in the Hobbit, because in FOTR we should have no inclination of his true allegiance until it is revealed. In Part 1 he comes off as a dick and a bit racist. And a racist dick in Middle Earth is no good.

I agree. Having him be good and wise would have properly established Gandalf's respect for him in FOTR and would have also made his fall into evilness more poignant. Instead they just made him a *****e who rattled on about Radagast's brown teeth in the background while Gandalf and Galadriel talked telepathically.

 

[Victarion]

Perhaps Saruman should've acted concerned about Radagast's news, then set up an ambush for the group that heads to Dol-Guldur?

Edit: That's a good question, TP.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Why would Saruman protect Sauron when he wants the ring all for himself?

 

[Pink Ranger]

Sauraman was much too dickish in this film. He should have been wise and somewhat kind in the Hobbit, because in FOTR we should have no inclination of his true allegiance until it is revealed. In Part 1 he comes off as a dick and a bit racist. And a racist dick in Middle Earth is no good.

Yeah, there is only room for one racist dick on Middle Earth, and his name is J.R.R. Tolkien. t:

 

[ThePhantasm]

Yeah, there is only room for one racist dick on Middle Earth, and his name is J.R.R. Tolkien. t:

Are you being serious?

 

[Pink Ranger]

Are you being serious?

Well, let me put it this way. I loved the LOTR movies, and loved reading The Hobbit when I was younger. And as a person of Chinese descent, I know that the United Kingdom has had a fairly dim view of people that look like me right up until the 1960s, and Tolkien is just a product of his time.

So I can overlook stuff, but I can still laugh at it and have fun with it, or take it too seriously. It's been discussed often enough with reference to Tolkien's work that I'm not coming out of left field with it.

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Racism_in_Tolkien's_Works

 

[ThePhantasm]

Tolkien loved different languages and cultures, and there's no real sign of racism in his books. The orcs are the most commonly brought up example but it should be made clear that they are not a race per se, they are the corruption of elves and men. They are good creatures gone bad, basically.

I think the article you linked has good arguments in it for why Tolkien's works aren't racist.

I know you said it doesn't bother you, but I'd hate for someone to be offended by "racism" in Tolkien's works that isn't actually even there.

 

[regwec]

You are not being "left field", you are rehearsing a hackneyed and erroneous viewpoint.

Racism is a relative concept. Tolkien certainly wasn't a racist in his time and place.

 

[Pink Ranger]

Tolkien loved different languages and cultures, and there's no real sign of racism in his books. The orcs are the most commonly brought up example but it should be made clear that they are not a race per se, they are the corruption of elves and men. They are good creatures gone bad, basically.

I think the article you linked has good arguments in it for why Tolkien's works aren't racist.

I know you said it doesn't bother you, but I'd hate for someone to be offended by "racism" in Tolkien's works that isn't actually even there.

I think the article makes good points for both sides, and is well balanced in that respect.

Frankly, I've worn out my DVD of Cats by now and it contains the phrase "heathen Chinese" more often than I'd like. And even though I can overlook things like that, it doesn't mean it's not worth discussing.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I don't think it is really worth discussing. To me its like charging Tolkien's books with sexism in spite of Eowyn's heroism.

Charging Tolkien with racism completely ignores the beautiful importance of Legolas and Gimli's friendship, and the lessons we all can learn from that, for example.

 

[Marvolo]

I don't think it is really worth discussing. To me its like charging Tolkien's books with sexism in spite of Eowyn's heroism.

Charging Tolkien with racism completely ignores the beautiful importance of Legolas and Gimli's friendship, and the lessons we all can learn from that, for example.

Yeah, Tolkien pretty much told racism to "**** off" with the Gimli/Legolas friendship. Granted, Tolkien was an old white fuddydud in Britain at the height of British whiteness, but he wasn't racist.

 

[jmc]

As awesome as it was seeing Christopher Lee back as Saruman, I gotta say he presence was completely wasted, as was Cate Blanchette and to a lesser extent Hugo Weaving.