User Tag List

First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 156

Thread: The Hobbit

  1. #11
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Can. Not. Wait!!
    I can.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #12
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I can.
    Don't like LOTR or The Hobbit?

  3. #13
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Don't like LOTR or The Hobbit?
    Loved the books, despite their flaws. I own pretty much anything Tolkien wrote, including the 10-12 books of notes his son edited tracking the evolution of his world and the story.

    I can handle watching most of The Fellowship, the others I can't even bear to load into the DVD player. I was not thrilled to see Jackson finally attached to The Hobbit. I only tolerate it because I felt like at least it popularized Tolkien's works and maybe invited new people to read them.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #14
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Loved the books, despite their flaws. I own pretty much anything Tolkien wrote, including the 10-12 books of notes his son edited tracking the evolution of his world and the story.

    I can handle watching most of The Fellowship, the others I can't even bear to load into the DVD player. I was not thrilled to see Jackson finally attached to The Hobbit. I only tolerate it because I felt like at least it popularized Tolkien's works and maybe invited new people to read them.
    Loved the books too, reading them over 10 times. But you're a true aficionado if you've read the bolded, unlike a plebian lover of LOTR like myself!

    Loved books and movies, although there appeared to a bit of miscasting, like Aragorn.

  5. #15
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Loved the books too, reading them over 10 times. But you're a true aficionado if you've read the bolded, unlike a plebian lover of LOTR like myself! Loved books and movies, although there appeared to a bit of miscasting, like Aragorn.
    I actually don't mind Aragorn, because the original character was merely a plot device and not personalized much at all. And I thought Boromir was finally done some justice, rather rather than being a total oaf. But some other characters (like Faramir) did not fare very well, there was a lot of video-game and AD&D trappings inserted into the action and visuals of the world (so that the balrog became merely a monster from a 3D shooter game, magic became a cheap tool rather than intrinsic to race/personage), there was a large focus on horror schlock in ways that seemed B-rate, subtle acting/character fell way to large-scale histrionics (re: The death of Denethor), and a lot of Tolkien's underlying essence of the character and race was lost.

    I actually really liked Jackson's version of King Kong because the source material was thin, so he could add to it without losing anything positive.

    Anyway, I'm hoping things improve for the Hobbit, but Jackson seems to be too surface-oriented. I think he'll nail Hobbiton and the spirit of the hobbits, but lose the rest, and Beorn will likely just slip into some crazy werebear schlock like out of UnderWorld.

    I do think it'll be interesting to see what happens since The Hobbit precedes LOTR, but the movie is post-LOTR in terms of production quality.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #16
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I actually don't mind Aragorn, because the original character was merely a plot device and not personalized much at all. And I thought Boromir was finally done some justice, rather rather than being a total oaf. But some other characters (like Faramir) did not fare very well, there was a lot of video-game and AD&D trappings inserted into the action and visuals of the world (so that the balrog became merely a monster from a 3D shooter game, magic became a cheap tool rather than intrinsic to race/personage), there was a large focus on horror schlock in ways that seemed B-rate, subtle acting/character fell way to large-scale histrionics (re: The death of Denethor), and a lot of Tolkien's underlying essence of the character and race was lost.

    I actually really liked Jackson's version of King Kong because the source material was thin, so he could add to it without losing anything positive.

    Anyway, I'm hoping things improve for the Hobbit, but Jackson seems to be too surface-oriented. I think he'll nail Hobbiton and the spirit of the hobbits, but lose the rest, and Beorn will likely just slip into some crazy werebear schlock like out of UnderWorld.

    I do think it'll be interesting to see what happens since The Hobbit precedes LOTR, but the movie is post-LOTR in terms of production quality.
    Aragorn as depicted by Viggo was too soft, especially his voice and mannerisms if you take into account his initial Strider role.

    Agreed that Sean Bean did an amazing job of Boromir and that Faramir was miscast hence appeared insipid.

  7. #17
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Aragorn as depicted by Viggo was too soft, especially his voice and mannerisms if you take into account his initial Strider role.
    Yes, the character was redesigned to appeal to modern Western culture. We like our heroes more a blend of gender (the "sensitive male") and with doubt/angst. The Aragorn of the books actually had no personality, he was just the "future king" and didn't seem to be much bothered by anything, nor in doubt of his eventual success... AKA a plot device.

    Agreed that Sean Bean did an amazing job of Boromir and that Faramir was miscast hence appeared insipid.
    Not agreed, completely. I didn't think Faramir was necessarily miscast, I merely thought the writer of the script effectively raped his character by downgrading his moral caliber unnecessarily to make a point that did not have to be made. The same thing happened with Frodo, who lost some of his purity given to him by Tolkien. A big premise of the Ring was that no matter how pure Frodo was (the angel in white at whose breast revolved the wheel of fire), in the very end he was still mortal and couldn't do what was required... and Jackson broke him too early, unnecessarily. At least Sam fared well.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #18
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Yes, the character was redesigned to appeal to modern Western culture. We like our heroes more a blend of gender (the "sensitive male") and with doubt/angst. The Aragorn of the books actually had no personality, he was just the "future king" and didn't seem to be much bothered by anything, nor in doubt of his eventual success... AKA a plot device.
    That's the part of Western culture I can't embrace. The new age sensitive guy hence my attraction to stoic men in general.

    Not sure if I agree that Aragorn didn't have much personality in the books. In my mind's eye, he was a strong, silent hero, looking and acting certain ways. Perhaps that was my Ni acting up, filling in all the blanks.

    Not agreed, completely. I didn't think Faramir was necessarily miscast, I merely thought the writer of the script effectively raped his character by downgrading his moral caliber unnecessarily to make a point that did not have to be made. The same thing happened with Frodo, who lost some of his purity given to him by Tolkien. A big premise of the Ring was that no matter how pure Frodo was (the angel in white at whose breast revolved the wheel of fire), in the very end he was still mortal and couldn't do what was required... and Jackson broke him too early, unnecessarily. At least Sam fared well.
    Did you see Wenham in 300? Weak.

  9. #19
    Member kissmyasthma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    I???
    Enneagram
    huh sp/so
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I actually don't mind Aragorn, because the original character was merely a plot device and not personalized much at all. And I thought Boromir was finally done some justice, rather rather than being a total oaf. But some other characters (like Faramir) did not fare very well, there was a lot of video-game and AD&D trappings inserted into the action and visuals of the world (so that the balrog became merely a monster from a 3D shooter game, magic became a cheap tool rather than intrinsic to race/personage), there was a large focus on horror schlock in ways that seemed B-rate, subtle acting/character fell way to large-scale histrionics (re: The death of Denethor), and a lot of Tolkien's underlying essence of the character and race was lost.

    I actually really liked Jackson's version of King Kong because the source material was thin, so he could add to it without losing anything positive.

    Anyway, I'm hoping things improve for the Hobbit, but Jackson seems to be too surface-oriented. I think he'll nail Hobbiton and the spirit of the hobbits, but lose the rest, and Beorn will likely just slip into some crazy werebear schlock like out of UnderWorld.

    I do think it'll be interesting to see what happens since The Hobbit precedes LOTR, but the movie is post-LOTR in terms of production quality.
    I agree; as a fan of Tolkien's work beyond LotR, I think the films are a little frustrating. However, I've been able to get friends who wouldn't have otherwise touched the books to become Tolkien fans by showing them the movies (even though ideally one would read the books first. ah, well). The films have made it easy for me to connect to other fans, and I can appreciate a lot of the talent that went into making them.

    I was disappointed when Guillermo del Toro had to pull out of The Hobbit and Peter Jackson stepped in, because I was looking forward to seeing a somewhat different interpretation of Middle Earth. But I'm relatively excited about The Hobbit movies (seeing Ian Mckellen and Christopher Lee in their roles again will be fun).

  10. #20
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Darn! I wanted to see the different types of the characters:

    Quick prompt:

    Bilbo: ISfP
    Gandalf: INtp
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

Similar Threads

  1. The Hobbit
    By Elfboy in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-02-2016, 05:01 AM
  2. The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies
    By BadOctopus in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-26-2015, 12:55 PM
  3. The Hobbit (Desolation Of Smaug)
    By Emperor Enigma in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-13-2014, 04:48 PM
  4. Two Drunk NERDS Discuss The Hobbit Movie
    By Mal12345 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-21-2013, 08:00 AM
  5. The Hobbit
    By Aesthete in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-16-2013, 05:10 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO