Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy

Mr. Darcy · 2012-11-02 03:24:05

So... trilogy. I for one have no idea how they're going to give the first movie a satisfying ending. The book doesn't resolve the conflict in Chapter 1 until Smaug dies (SPOILER!).

There are also shenanigans with only being able to see it in 48 frames per second in certain major cities. I dunno if Portland will even be one.

Imipolex G · 2012-11-02 10:55:28

Trilogy? For a book that's less than one-third the length of the LOTR trilogy?

Well, I suppose that's how it works. Milk it, etc.

Mr. Darcy · 2012-11-02 11:37:29

Less than 1/4 the length!

They're adding a frame story with Frodo, Gandalf's adventure against the Necromancer, Legolas is going to be in the elf town (hopefully just so he can accuse the dwarves of taking the hobbit to Isengard), etc.

The second movie is titled "the Desolation of Smaug", so they're not even going to get to the place introduced as the goal in Chapter 1 until the second movie.

Imipolex G · 2012-11-02 12:19:33

Gilda said:
Legolas is going to be in the elf town (hopefully just so he can accuse the dwarves of taking the hobbit to Isengard), etc.

*fangirl swoon*

lee4hmz · 2012-11-02 12:23:33

Gilda said:
The second movie is titled "the Desolation of Smaug"

I Read That As(tm) "the Desolation of Smug"

Imipolex G · 2012-11-02 12:24:18

"The Desolation of Smug" sounds like one of those blogs Odradek reads.

lee4hmz · 2012-11-02 12:25:29

Imi: Indeed.

Aliroz · 2012-11-02 14:01:05

I'm off to go write that blog right now!

Corporal Forsythe · 2012-11-02 15:03:08

Imipölex G said:
Trilogy? For a book that's less than one-third the length of the LOTR trilogy?

They just took a few pointers from the TV episode scriptwriters for Dragonball Z

Justice4243 · 2012-11-02 15:11:36

OK, I loved the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but does the movie studio realize that Peter Jackson is using their skyscrapers of money to create the worlds most expensive fan-fiction?

Well, if the movies are good, I guess Peter Jackson deserves to be crowned king nerd.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-02 15:12:12

I've actually read The Hobbit, so I might just see these.

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 06:42:12

I'm not sure I want to watch the movie any more if it's going to be altered to this extent. Sniff. Fuck you Peter Jackson, you are not, nor will you ever be Tolkien.

Mr. Darcy · 2012-11-07 12:38:27

^ NO one will ever be Tolkien, after a whole genre of authors trying for 40 years.

I'm still glad for a film version, because what else in pop culture is actual literature?

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 12:49:10

The Hobbit 4: The Orcinator

Before his defeat at the hand of Frodo Bagins, Sauron sends an unstoppable Orc back in time to eliminate Frodo's mother. A future Samwise Gamgee catches wind of this plot and uses Elven magic to send one of the living Baggins descendants to combat the Orc and keep Frodo's mother alive.

Rated R

Obā-san · 2012-11-07 12:53:14

^ NO one will ever be Tolkien, after a whole genre of authors trying for 40 years.

I'm still glad for a film version, because what else in pop culture is actual literature?

Does Tolkien count as literature? I mean, i liked the books and all, and they were well written, but I didn't find any real deeper meaning in them, y'know? IMO they fall solidly into the category of simply entertainment. Great entertainment, to be sure, but still.

Justice42 said:
The Hobbit 4: The Orcinator

Before his defeat at the hand of Frodo Bagins, Sauron sends an unstoppable Orc back in time to eliminate Frodo's mother. A future Samwise Gamgee catches wind of this plot and uses Elven magic to send one of the living Baggins descendants to combat the Orc and keep Frodo's mother alive.

Rated R

i'd watch it.

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 12:59:17

Mr. Truant said:
Does Tolkien count as literature? I mean, i liked the books and all, and they were well written, but I didn't find any real deeper meaning in them, y'know? IMO they fall solidly into the category of simply entertainment. Great entertainment, to be sure, but still.

I'm sorry to have to ask but, are you serious?

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 13:02:03

^^I think the truth would be sadder, if Jackson had his druthers. Another movie would be called "Legolas: The Undying Lands" and would be about Legolas and swollen to the point where he has to be rolled around John Rhys Davies as Gimli wandering around solving people's problems.

Obā-san · 2012-11-07 13:05:02

^ ^ vaguely

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 13:07:15

I don't know how "deep" they are, but Tolkien does have some subtle points he' trying to make here and there. Tom Bombadil comes to mind.

Obā-san · 2012-11-07 13:09:57

true.

to be fair I read all the books in like 6th grade, and 6th grade me did not have the best eye for detail/picking out subtext/allegory/analysis/ect.

Mr. Darcy · 2012-11-07 13:10:55

Mr. Truant said:
Does Tolkien count as literature? I mean, i liked the books and all, and they were well written, but I didn't find any real deeper meaning in them, y'know? IMO they fall solidly into the category of simply entertainment. Great entertainment, to be sure, but still.

Heck yeah he counts as literature. While Lord of the Rings has not been taken seriously by academe (which is biased in favor of novels, and LotR is a romance), it's a well-constructed narrative of deep and ambiguous symbolism. While of course inferior to War and Peace, it's comparable in both scope and the personality of the authors.

Obā-san · 2012-11-07 13:11:44

it's a well-constructed narrative of deep and ambiguous symbolism

curse you 6th grade me, you have mislead me once again

Obā-san · 2012-11-07 13:12:05

i shall have to get back to rereading them i guess.

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 13:43:25

Not to mention kudos to Tolkien for inventing entire languages for his series.

PLUS the impact of his creations on the entire fantasy genre.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-07 13:49:01

oh gog the literature/entertainment argument again.

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 13:54:31

Uh, we had a slight entymology malfunction, but uh... everything's perfectly all right now. We're fine. We're all fine here now, thank you.

How are you?

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-07 13:56:13

I am a bell.

Mr. Darcy · 2012-11-07 13:59:25

Also, as much as they're going to pad The Hobbit, Tolkien is still getting more respect in Hollywood than the classics. The Iliad got turned into Troy, Frank Miller turned the Spartan story from Herodotus into 300, and no King Arthur movie follows its literary inspiration.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-07 14:02:34

300 was based (very very very very loosely based) on a historical event. History is not literature.

Of course, anyone with a degree in history will point out that while there were 300 Spartans, the number of their allied troops was several thousand. But that's not as good a story.

Aliroz · 2012-11-07 14:10:38

What, I think the story of the 400 thebans and 700 thespians, who didn't have the insane military training and bravery of the Spartans, who refused to run away when they had the chance. Born-bred-and-raised-warriors raised to be brutal and savage, staying and fighting to the death? Awesome. People from rather more peaceful cultures, including one mostly known for theater, refusing to run away when they have the chance? Incredible.

Then again, I always rooted for the Persians, so yeah. The Persians were just so amazing in their culture and everything.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-07 14:13:04

But it's not a TRU UNDERDOG STORY OF IMPOSSIBLE ODDS.

So most people don't want to hear it. Or at least that's what most people who tell the story think.

Also yeah the Spartans were sort of dicks.

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 16:43:32

I found 300 to be unbearable tripe. I think saying it was loosely based on history is an insult to history. The film was so incredibly historically inaccurate. It's also my belief that at least 30minutes of the film/my life could have been saved if the film hadn't insisted upon doing things in slow-motion.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-07 16:45:12

I have never actually seen 300.

I make it a point to not watch films based on historical events specifically because they reawaken my inner history nerd.

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 16:45:53

It is more likely to awaken your inner history demon.

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 16:49:23

I found 300 to be unbearable tripe. I think saying it was loosely based on history is an insult to history. The film was so incredibly historically inaccurate. It's also my belief that at least 30minutes of the film/my life could have been saved if the film hadn't insisted upon doing things in slow-motion.

To be fair, it was very accurate to the graphic novel (except people wore more clothes in the movie). It was the graphic novel that was "so incredibly historically inaccurate".

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 16:50:53

Fair enough. It's still a crap movie though :P

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 16:55:43

I was entertained the first time I watched.

Somehow it did not fair further re-watches.

Salix Babylonika · 2012-11-07 17:17:21

King_Friday said:
It is more likely to awaken your inner history demon.

King_Friday said:
inner history demon.

King_Friday said:
history demon.

Justice4243 · 2012-11-07 17:47:37

Fund it!

King_Friday · 2012-11-07 21:15:57

XD

Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories