|
Post by Erik-El on Dec 21, 2011 0:01:20 GMT -5
To be honest, I think this movie looks like it could be really good, but we'll have to approach it with the same mindset that we had to approach X-Men First Class and the Batman series. If we expect the story and the characters to be exactly the same as what we know, we'll be sorely disappointed. The Batman movies are great, but they're very little like the comic version of Batman. There's no real detective work in them. There were dozens of things that could have made me hate X-Men First Class if I had given in to my inner fanboy. But, all of those movies turned out great to watch as long as we kept in mind that they weren't supposed to be exactly like the originals. New writers and new medium of storytelling means new story. That's what I think about this movie. "Peter Jackson + film" simply can not create the same product as "JRR Tolkien + book." It's a different storyteller and a different medium through which to tell it. If I watch this movie expecting it to be just like the book was, I'll hate it. If I watch this movie with the understanding it can't and won't be just like the book was and is instead it's own entity, I think it will be a very good movie. Seems completely reasonable from someone that seems to have read the books.
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Dec 21, 2011 0:05:14 GMT -5
I just want the same tone. Is that really so hard to ask? Honestly, even before I knew Peter Jackson planned to make this film, I always thought The Hobbit wouldn't make a good movie if you stuck to the same tone. It's one of the most entertaining books I've ever read, but it has too much detail and fun sidestories, and not enough epic plot to make a good movie.
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 0:06:38 GMT -5
I just want the same tone. Is that really so hard to ask? Honestly, even before I knew Peter Jackson planned to make this film, I always thought The Hobbit wouldn't make a good movie if you stuck to the same tone. It's one of the most entertaining books I've ever read, but it has too much detail and fun sidestories, and not enough epic plot to make a good movie. There was an okay animated version. I think it has the potential to be a good adventure film.
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Dec 21, 2011 0:06:39 GMT -5
To be honest, I think this movie looks like it could be really good, but we'll have to approach it with the same mindset that we had to approach X-Men First Class and the Batman series. If we expect the story and the characters to be exactly the same as what we know, we'll be sorely disappointed. The Batman movies are great, but they're very little like the comic version of Batman. There's no real detective work in them. There were dozens of things that could have made me hate X-Men First Class if I had given in to my inner fanboy. But, all of those movies turned out great to watch as long as we kept in mind that they weren't supposed to be exactly like the originals. New writers and new medium of storytelling means new story. That's what I think about this movie. "Peter Jackson + film" simply can not create the same product as "JRR Tolkien + book." It's a different storyteller and a different medium through which to tell it. If I watch this movie expecting it to be just like the book was, I'll hate it. If I watch this movie with the understanding it can't and won't be just like the book was and is instead it's own entity, I think it will be a very good movie. Seems completely reasonable from someone that seems to have read the books. I read the Hobbit, and it is one of my favorite books. It will be difficult to suppress the fanboy side of me that wants the movie to be just like the book, but no more difficult than it was for X-Men First Class.
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Dec 21, 2011 0:07:52 GMT -5
Honestly, even before I knew Peter Jackson planned to make this film, I always thought The Hobbit wouldn't make a good movie if you stuck to the same tone. It's one of the most entertaining books I've ever read, but it has too much detail and fun sidestories, and not enough epic plot to make a good movie. There was an okay animated version. I think it has the potential to be a good adventure film. To each his own, I suppose. I thought that animated version was garbage.
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Dec 21, 2011 0:09:57 GMT -5
And as far as "a good adventure film" goes, that is (I hope) why Jackson is splitting this movie into two parts. It'll have a good overarching epic story, but he'll have the time he needs to take it slow and include all the details and mini-stories that the book had.
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 0:11:39 GMT -5
And as far as "a good adventure film" goes, that is (I hope) why Jackson is splitting this movie into two parts. It'll have a good overarching epic story, but he'll have the time he needs to take it slow and include all the details and mini-stories that the book had. We'll see. But based off this trailer I'm not optimistic.
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Dec 21, 2011 0:16:31 GMT -5
And as far as "a good adventure film" goes, that is (I hope) why Jackson is splitting this movie into two parts. It'll have a good overarching epic story, but he'll have the time he needs to take it slow and include all the details and mini-stories that the book had. We'll see. But based off this trailer I'm not optimistic. You are the Decoy. You have no choice but to be optimistic.
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 0:17:04 GMT -5
We'll see. But based off this trailer I'm not optimistic. You are the Decoy. You have no choice but to be optimistic. THE OPTIMISM WAS A DISTRACTION. I HAVE THE CAR.
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Dec 21, 2011 0:22:23 GMT -5
You are the Decoy. You have no choice but to be optimistic. THE OPTIMISM WAS A DISTRACTION. I HAVE THE CAR. YOU WILL HAVE OPTIMISM IF I HAVE TO BEAT IT OUT OF YOU.
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 0:23:07 GMT -5
THE OPTIMISM WAS A DISTRACTION. I HAVE THE CAR. YOU WILL HAVE OPTIMISM IF I HAVE TO BEAT IT OUT OF YOU. YOU WOULD HAVE TO BEAT IT INTO ME FOO!
|
|
|
Post by substancedii on Dec 21, 2011 0:42:41 GMT -5
First of all The Hobbit movie"'S" are not based solely on the book "The Hobbit". They are also based on the Silmarillion and other writings. This has been common knowledge for a long time. The movie will also follow Gandalf as he hunts down and fights the necromancer. I for one, am very excited to see extended parts of the story included in this saga. I dont understand what people mean when they say this doesn't feel like The Hobbit. Of corse it doesn't feel like the book because its not the book. Who is to say what a hobbit movie should feel like? The Lord of the rings movies didn't really feel like the book either, and thank god. Can you imagine how stupid Tom Bombadil would have looked in the movies that Peter Jackson made? Books do not always translate well to movies when done to directly. The differenc between The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, is that, even though they are both superbly written, The Hobbit is a children's book. Are you suggesting that Peter Jackson make a children's movie out of The Hobbit. That has already been atempted with a classic trilogy and we all have come to know that disaster as something that I like to call "The Phantom Menace". Tolkien expanded on the hobbit over the years and obviously though of it as a lot more then a children's book as do a lot of his fans. I am glad that Peter Jackson is not telling the story of the hobbit as a children's story. He is telling 1 5 part story regarding the rings of power and the end of the third age. I am glad he is including other material because it helps tell the story. Lord of the Rings & The Hobbit will have something that Star Wars will never have.... Consistency. and i for one am FUCKING EXCITED AS HELL
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Dec 21, 2011 0:45:27 GMT -5
First of all The Hobbit movie"'S" are not based solely on the book "The Hobbit". They are also based on the Silmarillion and other writings. This has been common knowledge for a long time. The movie will also follow Gandalf as he hunts down and fights the necromancer. I for one, am very excited to see extended parts of the story included in this saga. I dont understand what people mean when they say this doesn't feel like The Hobbit. Of corse it doesn't feel like the book because its not the book. Who is to say what a hobbit movie should feel like? The Lord of the rings movies didn't really feel like the book either, and thank god. Can you imagine how stupid Tom Bombadil would have looked in the movies that Peter Jackson made? Books do not always translate well to movies when done to directly. The differenc between The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, is that, even though they are both superbly written, The Hobbit is a children's book. Are you suggesting that Peter Jackson make a children's movie out of The Hobbit. That has already been atempted with a classic trilogy and we all have come to know that disaster as something that I like to call "The Phantom Menace". Tolkien expanded on the hobbit over the years and obviously though of it as a lot more then a children's book as do a lot of his fans. I am glad that Peter Jackson is not telling the story of the hobbit as a children's story. He is telling 1 5 part story regarding the rings of power and the end of the third age. I am glad he is including other material because it helps tell the story. Lord of the Rings & The Hobbit will have something that Star Wars will never have.... Consistency. and i for one am FUCKING EXCITED AS HELL Hell yeah!
|
|
|
Post by Power NeXus on Dec 21, 2011 1:34:21 GMT -5
substancedii: 1) I agree with pretty much everything you said there. 2) The Hobbit movies are supposed to also cover stuff from the Silmarillion? Well, I guess that would explain why the Necromancer is in the cast list on IMDB when he was only mentioned once in The Hobbit. I guess this means I need to finally get around to reading The Silmarillion.
|
|
|
Post by substancedii on Dec 21, 2011 2:05:40 GMT -5
there are a lot of side stories and notes that were used as well. you may not like The Silmarillion. It is more of a generlazation of the history of middle earth... it reads kind of like a bible. i found it pretty interesting though other then LOTR and the hobbit. there really is only one more actual novel... it is called the children of hurin. It takes place in the second age I think. he was working on the book when he died. it took his son christopher like 30 years to go though everything and get it released. It deals a little with Morgoth (sauron's master) if you are up for some hard core stuff go of The Silmarillion though
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 2:06:58 GMT -5
Why would you stuff those two together?
I don't like the sound of it...
|
|
|
Post by substancedii on Dec 21, 2011 2:22:02 GMT -5
stuff what together... The Silmarillion was used for reference not word for word script
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 2:22:46 GMT -5
But aren't they adding parts from it?
I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by substancedii on Dec 21, 2011 2:31:29 GMT -5
yes but not directly. peter jackson is using The Silmarillion, short stories, and notes in reference to making a coherent story.
source material
|
|
Decoy Elite
The Unstoppable Ledgernaut
I've seen things you wouldn't believe
Posts: 4,854
|
Post by Decoy Elite on Dec 21, 2011 2:34:30 GMT -5
Don't know why he'd need to...I always felt the Hobbit stood on it's own rather well.
But whatever.
|
|