Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 6

[DarthSkywalker]

So Frodo knows everything or most about what happens in this trilogy before his adventure begins in FOTR?,Since Frodo is not part of the Hobbit books and his cameo is made for the movie I figured it takes place after ROTK

Bilbo has been telling Frodo the stories of his adventures since forever. Remember Sam's line about "Mr. Bilbo's trolls"?

 

[TX85]

No more stories will be released by the Tolkien family for public domain. Another thing the family are not happy with Peter's films.

The films ain't 100% accurate the books But whats to hate about the films on their own?,They feel J. R. R. Tolkien wouldn't be happy&proud of them or what??

 

[TX85]

Bilbo has been telling Frodo the stories of his adventures since forever. Remember Sam's line about "Mr. Bilbo's trolls"?

Oh ok cool!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The films ain't 100% accurate the books But whats to hate about the films on their own?,They feel J. R. R. Tolkien wouldn't be happy&proud of them or what??

They are a bit stuck up, but there are some valid reasons. Especially when you think of the change in tone of the stories.

 

[Super Kal]

i was thinking the exact same thing... i absolutely adored the films, and i wholly look forward to The Hobbit. in fact, it was the movies that inspire me to read the books. i intend to either read the books themselves, or get some audio-books of them

 

[CGHulk]

what's the story behind them not liking the film?... forgive me if these are newbie questions, i love these films, but i had never heard of this franchise before the films, so all of this is still quite new to me

They are not faithful to the books.

Here's a quote from Peter about the matter.
http://movieline.com/2012/07/15/hobbit-silmarillion-48-fps-tolkien-peter-jackson-comic-con/

 

[DarthSkywalker]

i was thinking the exact same thing... i absolutely adored the films, and i wholly look forward to The Hobbit. in fact, it was the movies that inspire me to read the books. i intend to either read the books themselves, or get some audio-books of them

You'd have to have read the books to fully understand. What they are doing with the Hobbit is probably just making it worse.

 

[Kane52630]

I honestly can't think of a book being adapted to a movie that's being fully faithful. It's one of those things you should always keep in mind if are a fan of any book.

 

[CGHulk]

I think if the books were adapted faithfully they'd be pretty boring, and lack character development as was in the books. There's not much dialogue or character interaction within the books. The Battle of Pelennor Fields was explained on one page. There are over a hundred pages of the characters walking or on horse back from one location to another, where the author indulges himself of the look of mountains and shrubbery and trees. Saruman is only mentioned in the books until you see at the end when he took over The Shire.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I honestly can't think of a book being adapted to a movie that's being fully faithful. It's one of those things you should always keep in mind if are a fan of any book.

True. But then there are changes that aren't necessary in the least, which are done to be more "Hollywood" or "cinematic". In these "efforts" Jackson has disregarded more then a few characterizations in favor of something more "cool" or typical. See Legolas.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think if the books were adapted faithfully they'd be pretty boring, and lack character development as was in the books. There's not much dialogue or character interaction within the books. The Battle of Pelennor Fields was explained on one page. There are over a hundred pages of the characters walking or on horse back from one location to another, where the author indulges himself of the look of mountains and shrubbery and trees. Saruman is only mentioned in the books until you see at the end of the books when he took over Hobbiton.

I never thought it was about stuff like that. More to do with characters being written as something they aren't and others as jokes really.

Not that I don't really love these films. I do, at least the first two. But that doesn't change that some decision are a bit baffling if you have read the books.

 

[Super Kal]

I honestly can't think of a book being adapted to a movie that's being fully faithful. It's one of those things you should always keep in mind if are a fan of any book.

i'm with Kane on this... you will never find a movie that is completely faithful to the book. the closest one i have seen was Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, based off of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Before they had a finalized script, they were reading the lines verbatim from the book, however, of course, once the script was finalized, things changed.

i dont think I've ever seen a movie completely faithful to the book counterpart.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

i'm with Kane on this... you will never find a movie that is completely faithful to the book. the closest one i have seen was Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, based off of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Before they had a finalized script, they were reading the lines verbatim from the book, however, of course, once the script was finalized, things changed.

i dont think I've ever seen a movie completely faithful to the book counterpart.

There are degrees of faithfulness. There is a difference between changing dialogues and the look of a character and changing the general ideas and the characters themselves.

One thing though about Tolkien. The man worked tirelessly to craft his world. The particulars were such for very specific reasons. So messing with it just to mess with it probably doesn't sit well with his family.

 

[Super Kal]

True. But then there are changes that aren't necessary in the least, which are done to be more "Hollywood" or "cinematic". In these "efforts" Jackson has disregarded more then a few characterizations in favor of something more "cool" or typical. See Legolas.

im only guessing here, but was legolas more animated in the book? (i mean more exaggerated facial structure, or something)

 

[TX85]

At least Peter Jackson respects the source material enough and loves it,The LOTR films resulted way better than I expected and they could have easily been WAY more off with many other director&producers,Could have been more a HOLLYWOOD MOVIE filmed in movie studios with a cast of all major names and all that stuff

 

[Super Kal]

There are degrees of faithfulness. There is a difference between changing dialogues and the look of a character and changing the general ideas and the characters themselves.

One thing though about Tolkien. The man worked tirelessly to craft his world. The particulars were such for very specific reasons. So messing with it just to mess with it probably doesn't sit well with his family.

i dont mean to undermine the work Tolkein did, however, Hollywood has been doing that ever since its creation, changing things for the sake of change... look at Dragonball Evolution... that is a prime example. when you give the rights away to something like a book to a film industry, chances are it will be messed with, unfortunately... that's almost an inevitability, especially when it comes to Hollywood

 

[CGHulk]

I never thought it was about stuff like that. More to do with characters being written as something they aren't and others as jokes really.

Not that I don't really love these films. I do, at least the first two. But that doesn't change that some decision are a bit baffling if you have read the books.

I read the books, But I saw the films first. I understand that those that read the books decades prior to the movies coming out would be disappointed. But the books are not structured for cinema. The pacing is not conducive to film, you can't possibly expect audience members to sit through hours of characters riding on horses with shots of trees and mountains without dialogue. Having Gimli and Legolas having about two pages of dialogue through out the whole trilogy. So much time was spent on Pippin walking around Minas Tirith and meeting a friend and hanging out day and night with the guy, where the important parts of the story were lightly handled.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

At least Peter Jackson respects the source material enough and loves it,The LOTR films resulted way better than I expected and they could have easily been WAY more off with many other director&producers,Could have been more a HOLLYWOOD MOVIE filmed in movie studios with a cast of all major names and all that stuff

That is the thing. They don't think he respects it. Not agreeing or disagreeing, that is just their point of view and there are things in the films that support that.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I read the books, But I saw the films first. I understand that those that read the books decades prior to the movies coming out would be disappointed. But the books are not structured for cinema. The pacing is not conducive to film, you can't possibly expect audience members to sit through hours of characters riding on horses with shots of trees and mountains without dialogue. Gimli and Legolas having about two pages of dialogue through the whole trilogy.

I am not disagreeing. My point would be that isn't the real problem. The problem is how characters were changed for change sake. Heck even Gandalf, who is turned from one of the most powerful beings and great leaders in existence, to a guy who runs around hitting people with a sword and is afraid of the Witch-king.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

i dont mean to undermine the work Tolkein did, however, Hollywood has been doing that ever since its creation, changing things for the sake of change... look at Dragonball Evolution... that is a prime example. when you give the rights away to something like a book to a film industry, chances are it will be messed with, unfortunately... that's almost an inevitability, especially when it comes to Hollywood

Which is why they don't want to give the rights out to the other work. Why they plan on getting the LOTR and The Hobbit rights back once they can.

I don't understand why people have a problem with that.

 

[CGHulk]

I am not disagreeing. My point would be that isn't the real problem. The problem is how characters were changed for change sake. Heck even Gandalf, who is turned from one of the most powerful beings and great leaders in existence, to a guy who runs around hitting people with a sword and is afraid of the Witch-king.

See since I saw the movies first then I read the books later, this didn't bother me. I was to preoccupied at how thin the story was written. What I've read from the faithful readers is that the story wasn't it's success according to Tolkien. It was that the books were British based language devoid of Latin.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

See since I saw the movies first then I read the books later, this didn't bother me. I was to preoccupied at how thin the story was written.

I never understood the thinly written story argument. I read the books when I was quite little. If there were no stories I would have stopped right away.

But still, not the point. You are coming at it from a completely different angle then those that we are talking about. Tolkien's estate is a bit stuck up, I agree, but I also agree they have more then a few points that back their position and in the end it up to them.

 

[TX85]

Which is why they don't want to give the rights out to the other work. Why they plan on getting the LOTR and The Hobbit rights back once they can.

I don't understand why people have a problem with that.

It's not hard to understand that tons of people love the films even IF they aren't too accurate to the source material,Happens all the time with comic book movies.

I've read the books and I love them But I personally love the films much more overall,I feel it'd suck IF the Tolkien estate takes the rights back,I understand their concerns&disappointment But as a fan I love Peter's vision&work and he would like to do more and I support him

As I said before..the films could have truly been so much worse!

 

[CGHulk]

I never understood the thinly written story argument. I read the books when I was quite little. If there were no stories I would have stopped right away.

But still, not the point. You are coming at it from a completely different angle then those that we are talking about. Tolkien's estate is a bit stuck up, I agree, but I also agree they have more then a few points that back their position and in the end it up to them.

The stories seem thin to me because I saw the movies first and Peter beefed them up. I had a problem while reading the book that for hundreds of pages the characters were riding on horses or walking, while the author indulges himself described the look of trees and mountains and shrubbery. When finally a character spoke or there was some action it only lasted a page or two. I agree with Peter Jackson as he said while making The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien needed an editor.

 

[Super Kal]

Which is why they don't want to give the rights out to the other work. Why they plan on getting the LOTR and The Hobbit rights back once they can.

I don't understand why people have a problem with that.

when it comes to this industry, the only problem i have is when a person gives the rights of their book to a film industry and they expect them to stay 100% faithful, and yet complain when it's not 100% faithful, even though they sold the rights to that film company... i find that very silly.

that company now has The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. their priority is to make a profit from this franchise, and they will do whatever they will to make a profit, and that includes changing the story, the characters, the flow, the tone, the dialogue, you name it... at this moment in time, the Tolkien family does not own The hobbit of the lord of the Rings. When they give those rights away, that industry has the right to change whatever they want to change for the sake of money.

they'll get it back eventually, but they dont own it right now... that may sound mean, but it's the truth. I love these movies, and it's these movies that inspired me to get the books, but to sit there and expect the film industry to stay 100% faithful, no matter what film that may be, that's being naive.

every single film adaptation has suffered from that. every single one.
that's what Hollywood is. a film industry that will make money at any cost.

it doesnt make Hollywood "right" in doing it, but any person who wants to get a story made into a movie should be aware of this.