Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - - Part 16

[redhawk23]

I'm rewatching An Unexpected Journey right now, and if you can set aside the need to compare and contrast it with regards to how accurate or inaccurate it is in relation to the source material upon which it is based, it's actually quite a good movie. It might fall short in places when it comes to being strictly faithful to its source, but it tells a very well-structured tale that handles its large ensemble cast very well and has the perfect balance of action, humor, exposition, and mystery.

It also sets up the wider arcs of all of its sequels' stories very well, which is all you can ask for from the opening chapter of a trilogy or Saga.

I've definitely warmed quite a bit to the first film. The second though, I will never be able to get behind.

 

[redhawk23]

That "leisurely pace" is what makes the world seem so realistic. The real world isn't an action movie. Things like World War II don't just pop up out of nowhere, they take decades and decades to develop. Tolkien isn't interesting in rushing the story along for an instant-gratification "we just want to see Legolas fight some orcs" generation. He writes the narrative so there is a lot of cunning, secrecy, plotting, and so forth going on. The shadow builds gradually, as does the dread - we hear of a possible ring wraith visiting Dain at Erebor, Gollum leaves his hiding place, rumors emerge from the East...
.

...long interludes with Tom Bombadil.

 

[Victarion]

That "leisurely pace" is what makes the world seem so realistic. The real world isn't an action movie. Things like World War II don't just pop up out of nowhere, they take decades and decades to develop. Tolkien isn't interesting in rushing the story along for an instant-gratification "we just want to see Legolas fight some orcs" generation. He writes the narrative so there is a lot of cunning, secrecy, plotting, and so forth going on. The shadow builds gradually, as does the dread - we hear of a possible ring wraith visiting Dain at Erebor, Gollum leaves his hiding place, rumors emerge from the East...

Jackson's absurd and sometimes continuity-breaking pacing makes Middle-Earth seem like a very small place.

Should have opened with an enfilade of dragonfire from dragon=riding ringwraiths coming to liberate the working-class hobbits from the petit bourgeoisie of Bilbo and the other older hobbits. Aragorn should have led the orcs in a massacre of the racist elves. I have more in the spirit of Tolkien.

 

[Boom]

Except it’s not. The only magic rings that I know of that are even mentioned in the books are the Rings of Power. If you know of others, please present them. I’d certainly expect that there are, of course, but they aren’t “an established part of the lore.” Other rings of importance, sure; but not magic rings.

"The lesser rings were only essays of the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles..."

-Gandalf, Fellowship of the Rings, Shadow of the Past

 

[redhawk23]

Actually, Boom, the Necromancer and Dol Goldur are mentioned in the Hobbit, and Gandalf says that's the reason he's been absent...

but I agree with your broader point.

EDIT: Sorry, misread your post. I think the Necromancer is mentioned once in FOTR. I may be mistaken, however.

Mentioned yes, and it could have been a mention in the film as well.

 

[Boom]

"In Eregion long ago many Elven-rings were made, magic rings as you call them, and they were, of course, of various kinds: some more potent and some less. The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles - yet still to my mind dangerous for mortals. But the Great Rings, the Rings of Power, they were perilous."

There's the full quote from the third chapter of Lord of the Rings. Magic rings are most certainly within the lore.

It's perfectly within reason for Gandalf, assured by Saruman of the One Ring's loss out to sea, to surmise that Bilbo's ring was just one of the many lesser Elven-rings. He admits that these rings can be dangerous, but Bilbo didn't begin displaying any genuine causes for concern until many years later, being a hobbit and therefore resilient toward such mechanisms. Gandalf, being confined to the mind and body of an old man, is not infallible. That hardly makes him an idiot. When you've got Sauron basically in hiding, the head of your Order (and an expert in ring lore) telling you not to worry, and Bilbo finding this thing in a random cave, what's the cause for paranoia at that point in time?

 

[regwec]

I have more in the spirit of Tolkien.

Last night, I awoke under the silence of an English winter's moon. A weightless figure was sat, weeping, at my feet.

It was The Spirit of Tolkien. He lamented, quietly, of all the empty sound and fury that had been written in his name. Then he faded to nothing, on a chill breeze.

The words "don't expect an extended edition" lingered gently in my empty room.

 

[CapedCrusader14]

Last night, I awoke under the silence of an English winter's moon. A weightless figure was sat, weeping, at my feet.

It was The Spirit of Tolkien. He lamented, quietly, of all the empty sound and fury that had been written in his name. Then he faded to nothing, on a chill breeze.

The words "don't expect an extended edition" lingered gently in my empty room.

 

[Boom]

Part of my frustrations come from the fact that The Hobbit, as a book, is capable of existing on its own. One could be entirely ignorant to The Lord of the Rings without rendering The Hobbit an incomplete experience.

The Lord of the Rings is a sequel to The Hobbit. By framing this trilogy as more of a Lord of the Rings prequel, that's where I feel Jackson and company have made a grievous misstep.

If there was ever a time where I came close to walking out of Desolation of Smaug, it was when Bilbo went ape**** on that spider-crab for grazing the Ring. Basically spelling out for the audience right there that something is definitely wrong with this thing. It diminishes the impact of learning later on that this magic trinket ends up being the very thing that could bring the entire world to ruin. Then by setting up other characters and storylines that don't come into play until a trilogy later, you're taking away from the story being told now.

It's going to be interesting watching these six films together. Where it stands now, I have no idea what it's going to be like watching the Hobbit films first. I almost question if it's even possible. So much about these films screams "coming after Lord of the Rings."

You have Bilbo displaying uncharacteristic behavior mere days after possessing the Ring (more violent than even Frodo was when he first came into possession of it), yet we are to accept that he then went on to live sixty more years relatively fine without succumbing to it.

We have the Necromancer and Dol Guldur episode that goes on to getting absolutely no mention in the LoTR films. So it's just there with no pay-off in the subsequent narrative.

I could go on. It's just a convoluted mess. Many of us have seen LoTR. We know what's coming. You might as well let The Hobbit be its own thing instead of a glorified three-film commercial that nobody needs. Then those audiences who haven't seen any of these films can have the unique privilege of going into The Hobbit first without all this baggage of things to come.

 

[Victarion]

"In Eregion long ago many Elven-rings were made, magic rings as you call them, and they were, of course, of various kinds: some more potent and some less. The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles - yet still to my mind dangerous for mortals. But the Great Rings, the Rings of Power, they were perilous."

There's the full quote from the third chapter of Lord of the Rings. Magic rings are most certainly within the lore.

It's perfectly within reason for Gandalf, assured by Saruman of the One Ring's loss out to sea, to surmise that Bilbo's ring was just one of the many lesser Elven-rings. He admits that these rings can be dangerous, but Bilbo didn't begin displaying any genuine causes for concern until many years later, being a hobbit and therefore resilient toward such mechanisms. Gandalf, being confined to the mind and body of an old man, is not infallible. That hardly makes him an idiot. When you've got Sauron basically in hiding, the head of your Order (and an expert in ring lore) telling you not to worry, and Bilbo finding this thing in a random cave, what's the cause for paranoia at that point in time?

...And then Aragorn tricks Gimli into selling his soul to Melkor in order to erase the burden of morality in choosing to sacrifice the dwarf so that he may use the blood in a ritual to take control of the Balrog...

Sorry, I was off on my narrative. This in the quote would make an excellent bit of exposition for the audiences. It answers questions as to how Gandalf could be in close proximity to the Ring and not feel its presence.

 

[Vartha]

[blackout]Bilbo grabs it in the second movie and hides it from Thorin in the third movie. He escapes the mountain and gives it to Bard[/blackout]

That explains alot.

 

[Boom]

...And then Aragorn tricks Gimli into selling his soul to Melkor in order to erase the burden of morality in choosing to sacrifice the dwarf so that he may use the blood in a ritual to take control of the Balrog...

Sorry, I was off on my narrative. This in the quote would make an excellent bit of exposition for the audiences. It answers questions as to how Gandalf could be in close proximity to the Ring and not feel its presence.

They do offer something along those lines in the first film.

"There are many magic rings in this world, Bilbo Baggins, and none of them should be used lightly."

 

[Greens]

It's just a convoluted mess. Many of us have seen LoTR. We know what's coming. You might as well let The Hobbit be its own thing instead of being a glorified three-film commercial that nobody needs. Then those audiences who haven't seen any of these films can have the unique privilege of going into The Hobbit first without all this baggage of things to come.

This trilogy really does seem like a commercial for LOTR. By adding the meetings of the White Council, Gandalf's sidequest, Saruman and Galadriel there is this unnecessary baggage (as you said) that gets no resolution in the first three films.

Let audiences enjoy the relatively light story of The Hobbit before they go off into the dark world of LOTR. The first trilogy serves as an introduction to the Hobbits, dwarves, elves and other aspects of Middle-earth. Bilbo then passes the torch to Frodo, with Gandalf as overlap.

 

[GR8GODZILLAGOD]

Battle of the Five armies is currently sitting on a 58% "Rotten" rating. Yikes.

 

[Greens]

Battle of the Five armies is currently sitting on a 58% "Rotten" rating. Yikes.

The Desolation of Smaug will probably be seen as the highlight of the trilogy. The RT scores reflect this.

AUJ = 64%
DOS = 74%
BOTFA = 58%

Just for fun, let's look at LOTR's scores...

FOTR = 91%
TTT = 96%
ROTK = 95%

 

[Boom]

This trilogy really does seem like a commercial for LOTR. By adding the meetings of the White Council, Gandalf's sidequest, Saruman and Galadriel there is this unnecessary baggage (as you said) that gets no resolution in the first three films.

Let audiences enjoy the relatively light story of The Hobbit before they go off into the dark world of LOTR. The first trilogy serves as an introduction to the Hobbits, dwarves, elves and other aspects of Middle-earth. Bilbo then passes the torch to Frodo, with Gandalf as overlap.

Not to mention the thematic significance of the Battle completely changes by bringing Sauron into the fold. The Battle of Five Armies is a horrifying manifestation of greed. The dwarves are hoarding their treasure. The men want the treasure. The elves want the treasure. The goblins want the treasure. In that regard, Smaug acts as a sort of prelude to the horror of things to come. The "dragon sickness." It's no accident that the turning tide of the battle (and the subsequent victory for the heroes) comes in the form of [blackout]Beorn and the Eagles - two forces of nature with no desire for materialistic wealth.[/blackout]

Here, the battle becomes about Sauron's play to take control of the North. The destructive nature of greed is all but lost thematically. It's reduced simply to "Fight Sauron... again!" in the most literal of senses.

 

[Greens]

Not to mention the thematic significance of the Battle completely changes by bringing Sauron into the fold. The Battle of Five Armies is a horrifying manifestation of greed. The dwarves are hoarding their treasure. The men want the treasure. The elves want the treasure. The goblins want the treasure. In that regard, Smaug acts as a sort of prelude to the horror of things to come. The "dragon sickness." It's no accident that the turning tide of the battle (and the subsequent victory for the heroes) comes in the form of [blackout]Beorn and the Eagles - two forces of nature with no desire for materialistic wealth.[/blackout]

Here, the battle becomes about Sauron's play to take control of the North. The destructive nature of greed is all but lost thematically.

By infusing the movies with an overarching evil à la Emperor Palpatine the original message, if you will, is compromised. I understand why Jackson did what he did, I really do, but on practically all accounts he failed.

 

[Boom]

By infusing the movies with an overarching evil à la Emperor Palpatine the original message, if you will, is compromised. I understand why Jackson did what he did, I really do, but on practically all accounts he failed.

I cant understand it, because if this was his thought-process throughout developing this project, then he wasn't the right man for the job. To me, it's just that simple. This is not what The Hobbit needed to be to work effectively and beautifully as a cinematic adaptation.

I am happy that these movies do have fans. As a fan of Tolkien, it would have been utterly demoralizing if these films were universally hated. So despite my complaining, I am happy that some people found entertainment in these. I'm simply left to imagine what could have been if with a filmmaker who was genuinely interested in adapting the book and focusing squarely on Bilbo's story. Something more intimate, personable, and thematically resonant.

Maybe in my lifetime.

 

[Victarion]

They do offer something along those lines in the first film.

"There are many magic rings in this world, Bilbo Baggins, and none of them should be used lightly."

Yes, though I was more keying in on that, because of how common the rings are, Gandalf would have no reason to examine Bilbo's too closely.

 

[ThePhantasm]

"The lesser rings were only essays of the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles..."

-Gandalf, Fellowship of the Rings, Shadow of the Past

"In Eregion long ago many Elven-rings were made, magic rings as you call them, and they were, of course, of various kinds: some more potent and some less. The lesser rings were only essays in the craft before it was full-grown, and to the Elven-smiths they were but trifles - yet still to my mind dangerous for mortals. But the Great Rings, the Rings of Power, they were perilous."

There's the full quote from the third chapter of Lord of the Rings. Magic rings are most certainly within the lore.

It's perfectly within reason for Gandalf, assured by Saruman of the One Ring's loss out to sea, to surmise that Bilbo's ring was just one of the many lesser Elven-rings. He admits that these rings can be dangerous, but Bilbo didn't begin displaying any genuine causes for concern until many years later, being a hobbit and therefore resilient toward such mechanisms. Gandalf, being confined to the mind and body of an old man, is not infallible. That hardly makes him an idiot. When you've got Sauron basically in hiding, the head of your Order (and an expert in ring lore) telling you not to worry, and Bilbo finding this thing in a random cave, what's the cause for paranoia at that point in time?

Thanks Boom. Saved me the trouble of looking up those quotes myself.

 

[Broseph44]

Am I the only one that enjoys the Hobbit films? I also haven't read the book either but I don't really care to. So I enjoy the movies just fine, it seems mostly everyone in here read the book and loved it but hates the movies haha. Oh well but seriously does anyone else enjoy them like I do?

 

[Boom]

I've seen plenty of people who do.

My dad's been asking me all day about going to the midnight showing tonight. And my girlfriend's brother will argue with me to death in their defense.

 

[Silvermoon]

Am I the only one that enjoys the Hobbit films? I also haven't read the book either but I don't really care to. So I enjoy the movies just fine, it seems mostly everyone in here read the book and loved it but hates the movies haha. Oh well but seriously does anyone else enjoy them like I do?

You're not the only one. I've enjoyed them as well (I've read the books, though admittedly it's been quite a while since I have)

 

[DCW]

The Desolation of Smaug will probably be seen as the highlight of the trilogy. The RT scores reflect this.

AUJ = 64%
DOS = 74%
BOTFA = 58%

Just for fun, let's look at LOTR's scores...

FOTR = 91%
TTT = 96%
ROTK = 95%

While I never wished failure on The Hobbit trilogy, I can't help but chuckle at those scores, especially when compared to the original trilogy's. It was such an epic failure to split this movie into multiple parts, let alone three parts.

 

[Boom]

TheOneRing is in full meltdown mode. The "agenda" talk regarding the RT score has already started.

I'm sure this makes me an *******, but I'm quite amused by how worked-up they all are over there. Funny to me that three years ago they were singing out joyously over Del Toro's departure and Jackson's subsequent return. And here we are now.