Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 17

[regwec]

It's hard to over-emphasize how influential these books are. The fantasy genre as we know it wouldn't exist without them. Without the Fellowship's journey through the Mines of Moria, the whole "dungeon crawling" species of role play gaming would have never been.

 

[InCali]

I would have preferred the 6 film treatment relating to each of the splits in the books. I like that the EE is split into 6 in that way and he could have really gone to town on each of those parts adding in many of those aspects. I think some of the early parts from the FotR book needed to be cut for the theatrical edition of the film or the pacing would have turned members of the general audience off but most of this could be added back for the EE which is for fans. Every adaptation misses out elements that are fan favourites and many of my favourites were cut completely (I've mentioned before but in particular Glorfindel, Prince Imrahil & the sons of Elrond). All things considered the guy did seriously well and his overall achievement on those films easily outweighs his mistakes. Plus imagine a Michael Bay LotR.


And he didn't seem to care about impact on the movies (wrecking for purists) of adding absolutely everything and much more with these Hobbit films! I'm in the advantageous situation that The Hobbit text means maybe 10% of what LotR means to me (I've only read it once). And because it's not ruining my childhood (as a LotR or Silmarillion farce would have done) I'd be able to enjoy these films even just as tech demos of fantasy battles and fantasy worlds with some nice character moments thrown in even if the overall project had the substance of Transformers sequels (and they had a bit more than that even to the most hardcore critics ).

I can't tell you how many times I've thought "Man, they should have done 6 films". The problem with some of what happened (the downfall of Saruman, for example) is that it precluded scenes I would have liked to see.

Also, one other thing that particularly annoyed me was how PJ made orcs much better warriors in the film than they really were. Boromir slew many, many Uruks and the chief almost kills Aragorn??? Really?? Aragorn would have smoked him in a matter of seconds. Obviously The Hobbit carried on where that left off; even to the extend of resurrecting a dead orc from the Battle of Azanulbizar. Dude, Dain chopped off his head. He didn't have a head anymore!!! t:

If you've read my opinion about the "Bay" movie (it which must not be named), you know I wasn't impressed. Yeah, if he'd done it we might have gotten stuck with mechanical orcs running around saying profound things like "I'll kill you" and, just maybe, other, even more complex dialogue.

Praise Elbereth for small favors......

 

[InCali]

So strange to think that any new author could use Gandalf or Aragorn or the Nazgul on a whim. I bet a lot of current authors invent characters that are pretty much the same in everything but name anyway. And I'd say the majority of fantasy writers have borrowed something from those texts.

From what I've seen, there hasn't been a whole lot of originality from other authors. Mostly you have quests, an object of power, a protagonist seemingly out of his league, etc. That might be an unfair criticism of other authors because Tolkien (to a large extent anyway) "created" the genre. Certainly there are fantasy stories outside of it, but I've seen authors fallling all over each other to create similar tales.

 

[regwec]

Not all fantasy writers plagiarise Tolkien: some plagiarise CS Lewis.

 

[Venomfan]

something I didn't understand in the movie. Legolas and Tauriel talk about Gundabad and say its the gateway to Angmar, then later Gandalf (i think) talks about how Sauron wants Erebor so he can get Angmar. If he already has a huge army at Gundabad he can get to Angmar whenever he wants.

 

[regwec]

Angmar is also dust at this point.

Eh, whatever.

 

[InCali]

something I didn't understand in the movie. Legolas and Tauriel talk about Gundabad and say its the gateway to Angmar, then later Gandalf (i think) talks about how Sauron wants Erebor so he can get Angmar. If he already has a huge army at Gundabad he can get to Angmar whenever he wants.

I don't understand a lot of "things" in the movie. In the book, Gandalf explained that Erebor (Lonely Mountain) was a strategic location and the Smaug could have been used to a terrible effect in the north. I believe he may have even mentioned Rivendell, but it is a long way from Erebor. It is close, however, to the Halls of Thranduil, Dale, Esgaroth, and even the Iron Hills. Without a stronghold in Erebor, Sauron's position in the region is dramatically weakened and his strongholds are, essentially, southern Mirkwood and maybe the Misty Mountains via the Old Ford or the Carrock (which would be dangerously close to where we think the Eagles Eyrie is). Both are, however, quite a distance away.

That's the best I can do.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I don't know the family structure. Is Royd Christopher's brother or another of his sons? And these 3 (including Simon) are the ones who are relevant right?

I really think the other Tolkien materials can be adapted well. The Hobbit was too small a property for a guy like PJ who wants to go as large as possible with this kind of material. He was more suited to LotR where it's difficult to go too big.

Would the Tolkien estate objections remain if they had more control (& right of veto - to be exercised in Alfrid situations) of the creative process? Maybe a film studio would be willing to work under restrictions if the expected sums added up and they would get exclusive rights to everything Tolkien for the next century.

Royd is, I believe, the great nephew of Christopher, and the Great-grandson of Professor Tolkien. In terms of current importance within the Tolkien estate, It's Christopher in charge, with Royd having some minor role. Simon was disinherited from it all back when he went against his father and offered Peter Jackson his help during LOTR. They've mended fences now, though I kind of doubt that he has any real authority within the estate. That might change if Christopher dies, but who knows.

You have to remember, Christopher's objections aren't so much quality of film, but more to fact that it'd be a film at all. It's not that they couldn't make a good adaptation but that they shouldn't . He doesn't view these books as something cinematic, he looks at them from the point of view of their linguistic and scholarly importance.

So, no, he'd never willingly let anyone try and make a film of the Silmarillion, no matter how talented or faithful.

 

[regnak]

Royd is, I believe, the great nephew of Christopher, and the Great-grandson of Professor Tolkien. In terms of current importance within the Tolkien estate, It's Christopher in charge, with Royd having some minor role. Simon was disinherited from it all back when he went against his father and offered Peter Jackson his help during LOTR. They've mended fences now, though I kind of doubt that he has any real authority within the estate. That might change if Christopher dies, but who knows.

You have to remember, Christopher's objections aren't so much quality of film, but more to fact that it'd be a film at all. It's not that they couldn't make a good adaptation but that they shouldn't . He doesn't view these books as something cinematic, he looks at them from the point of view of their linguistic and scholarly importance.

So, no, he'd never willingly let anyone try and make a film of the Silmarillion, no matter how talented or faithful.

And people say he isn't the devil? So who sold the rights to film LOTR in the first place? Was it JRRT himself or his wife?

 

[craigdbfan]

WB is going to be the first in line when those rights become available.

 

[Marvolo]

Not all fantasy writers plagiarise Tolkien: some plagiarise CS Lewis.

 

[Roose Bolton]

And people say he isn't the devil? So who sold the rights to film LOTR in the first place? Was it JRRT himself or his wife?

I think it was JRRT back in the 60s

 

[regnak]

I think it was JRRT back in the 60s

Well if the author was ok with his work being filmed then who is the son to overrule that? He disinherited someone over something his father agreed to? If anyone's wishes should matter after death it should be the author. The son sounds more like an uber prick all the time.

 

[regwec]

And people say he isn't the devil? So who sold the rights to film LOTR in the first place? Was it JRRT himself or his wife?

No, he isn't the devil. If you want to hear the stories within The Silmarillion, you can, by reading them. They wouldn't be known to the public at all if it wasn't for Christopher, and people wouldn't be able to whine that they are owed movies of them.

JRR sold the film rights to LOTR, because he needed the funds. His letters reveal how traumatised he was by subsequent attempts to adapt it.

 

[terry78]

Reading? What craziness is this?

 

[Bruce Malone]

If the Lord the Rings series had come out a few years later, I'm positive that Return of the King at least would have been split in two.

Look at all the young adult novel adaptations now that have the final film split whether it's really warranted or not.

 

[regnak]

Reading? What craziness is this?

I've read it, but like LOTR would like movies too.

 

[Vartha]

Royd is, I believe, the great nephew of Christopher, and the Great-grandson of Professor Tolkien. In terms of current importance within the Tolkien estate, It's Christopher in charge, with Royd having some minor role. Simon was disinherited from it all back when he went against his father and offered Peter Jackson his help during LOTR. They've mended fences now, though I kind of doubt that he has any real authority within the estate. That might change if Christopher dies, but who knows.

You have to remember, Christopher's objections aren't so much quality of film, but more to fact that it'd be a film at all. It's not that they couldn't make a good adaptation but that they shouldn't . He doesn't view these books as something cinematic, he looks at them from the point of view of their linguistic and scholarly importance.

So, no, he'd never willingly let anyone try and make a film of the Silmarillion, no matter how talented or faithful.

And people say he isn't the devil? So who sold the rights to film LOTR in the first place? Was it JRRT himself or his wife?

What gets me about the whole thing is Tolkein OBVIOUSLY "borrowed" from many sources, why is Chris being so stubborn about it? Granted they ARE JRR's creations story wise but alot of it came from his love for the old myths.

 

[The Guard]

I'm thinking Christopher Tolkien's objection to the adaptions is less of a logic thing and more just...how he feels.

 

[InCali]

No, he isn't the devil. If you want to hear the stories within The Silmarillion, you can, by reading them. They wouldn't be known to the public at all if it wasn't for Christopher, and people wouldn't be able to whine that they are owed movies of them.

JRR sold the film rights to LOTR, because he needed the funds. His letters reveal how traumatised he was by subsequent attempts to adapt it.

I can understand Christopher's perspective. From a strictly selfish point of view, I'd LOVE to see a really well done history of middle earth from A to Z. I can also understand that other people may not share that view. ESPECIALLY if you spent a good part of your life organizing and editing your father's writings and bringing them to us in the first place.

We wouldn't even be having this conversation if it weren't for Christopher Tolkien and, possibly, we would have never had the LotR and the Hobbit movies (I'll let everyone else decide for themselves whether that's a good or a bad thing.....). I can't say that I agree that a well done movie/series would do harm to his father's legacy, but he's certainly entitled to his opinion and has every right to proceed as he sees fit. I've spent a great deal of time reading and researching the writings of JRR Tolkien, but NOTHING compared to the time, energy, and love that his son has.

Personally, I'm willing to give a 90 year old man (or anyone for that matter) who has done what he has done a great deal of latitude.

I want to see the Silmarillion on screen, but it's not my call. If it does get done, I want to see it done with the care and love that Christopher Tolkien put into organizing his father's works.

For the time being I can read any of part of the Silmarillion and see those pictures in my head. For now, that's going to have to be enough.

 

[regnak]

I'm thinking Christopher Tolkien's objection to the adaptions is less of a logic thing and more just...how he feels.

What gets me is the disinheriting his son over working on the LOTR movies. That was just despicable. The son committed no crime. I do wonder if the reconciliation had a kneel before Zod moment.

 

[InCali]

What gets me about the whole thing is Tolkein OBVIOUSLY "borrowed" from many sources, why is Chris being so stubborn about it? Granted they ARE JRR's creations story wise but alot of it came from his love for the old myths.

No doubt that "every" writer or story teller ever has borrowed from the past (their own and the past of others). I think the reason Christopher is being "stubborn" is that he feels the history of middle earth is already in the proper medium (written) as it stands and was appalled by how the story translated on film. Part of that might be the media itself and part of it is certainly the work of the people who owned the rights.

I don't know the man, so I'm not an authority, but this seems logical to me.

Without Christopher Tolkien, I don't think there would have been a published Silmarillion and, certainly, not the one we have now. For that, I thank him.

 

[Roose Bolton]

What gets me about the whole thing is Tolkein OBVIOUSLY "borrowed" from many sources, why is Chris being so stubborn about it? Granted they ARE JRR's creations story wise but alot of it came from his love for the old myths.

Oh yeah, there's a lot of Norse mythology there. I think he admitted as such with the case of Turin being based on Sigurd with a bit of Oedipus thrown in.

 

[InCali]

Oh yeah, there's a lot of Norse mythology there. I think he admitted as such with the case of Turin being based on Sigurd with a bit of Oedipus thrown in.

Right. The man was a scholar and had read just about everything there was to read in mythology as well as other areas. I have a vague recollection that he did some work on Beowulf also.

 

[Roose Bolton]

If I'm not mistaken he did a full translation of Beowulf. He was quite taken with that tale.