• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

The Hobbit

Beorn

Permabanned
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,005
I know it's more than a year away, but I'm so excited!!!

Peter Jackson just posted this on fb:

281997_224075227628090_160617097307237_599310_8106427_n.jpg
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
Can. Not. Wait!!

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2m2x8qJcGQ"]Hobbit[/YOUTUBE]
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
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.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
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.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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.
 

rav3n

.
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
11,655
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.
 

kissmyasthma

New member
Joined
Jul 29, 2010
Messages
98
MBTI Type
I???
Enneagram
huh
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
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).
 

Spamtar

Ghost Monkey Soul
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
4,468
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Darn! I wanted to see the different types of the characters:

Quick prompt:

Bilbo: ISfP
Gandalf: INtp
 
Top