|
I would accept the Silmarillion as an HBO series, with each season tackling a different story.
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2012 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 01:44 |
|
|
Are people really trying to state that 9/11 influenced a trilogy which was filmed before 9/11 (at least like 95% of it)? Anything that was in the movies that reminds you of 9/11 was in there before. Lets not forget that we didn't all of a sudden gain knowledge of terrorism/evil/hatred on September 11, 2001. Allegory is lazy. Writing good stories that inherently represent the themes that you're trying to convey is good literature. But I tend to believe Tolkien when he says allegory is 1 for 1 literature. As in ring=nuclear power, Sauron=Hitler, etc. I feel like modern happenings influence the writer, but don't necessarily equate to a 1 for 1 allegory. Just overall themes. Surely LOTR's themes can be drawn from both WWI and WWII. To say otherwise would just be ignorant. But I feel like Tolkien was a bit more creative than than that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2012 07:17
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Not in this thread? Are you reading the same thread as me? Wank posted:Whether is was intentional or not I think lines like that were influenced by 9/11 in one way or another. I think the films would have been different if they were completed pre-9/11. The same with the post-9/11 star wars movies. Again, maybe not intentional but it does draw from the zeitgeist of the time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2012 08:03
|
|
|
The sad thing is, if people would just offer their opinions in such a way as "To me, X has always represented X and let me tell you why..." it would be ok/tolerable. The problem is, people actually say "Tolkien was trying to say that X was X..." and that's just dead wrong. You can think whatever you want to think and draw from it what you want, but don't put words in the author's mouth, especially when he explicitly stated things to the contrary.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2012 08:23
|
|
|
Black Bones posted:Principal photography was finished before the attack, but all the films were released after and post-production (re-shoots, editing, etc) continued till like at least 2005, so it definitely influenced the Two Towers and Return of the King. So it's an apt reading I think, one of many we could make - like I said earlier, the celebration of homosexual love is another reading we could make and discuss. Ok, so I comment on people that consider LOTR allegory, which was brought up the page before my post, and then you chime in and claim that no one is doing that, but "we're talking about SYMBOLISM". Well thats just fine with me, but if you're talking about symbolism then I wasn't talking to/about you. I was talking about the people that specifically consider LOTR allegory for something specific. And as for your statement that post production for TT and ROTK took place after 9/11 and therefore it "definitely influenced" the two films, we could probably argue that until we're blue in the face but I just don't buy it. Principal photography is done. Any additional filming that takes place ("pick-ups") are done only when necessary. Usually its to fill in a logic gap in the story, to rewrite a scene that didn't play right in the overall film, things like this. I just don't see how anything of any significance could draw directly from 9/11. Now if you want to say that 9/11 affected everybody, including those who worked on the film and they subconsciously inserted 9/11 ideas/themes into the story in whatever minor way they possibly could, I could MAYBE buy that. But we can't just take any piece of literature/art/film/theater that was released post-9/11 and give a definitive statement like it was "definitely influenced" by 9/11. Unless perhaps the creator/artist explicitly states that it was influenced by whatever. You can surely draw whatever themes you think are present in the work and how they relate to 9/11, but again....don't put words in the mouth of the artist by saying something is "definitely" present which may or may not be. End of derail. As to the idea of the One Ring not making everybody invisible, I remember reading something about it in The Letters of JRR Tolkien. A reader wrote in asking how Isildur cut the ring from Sauron's hand, shouldn't he have been invisible while wearing it. Tolkien responded by saying that the Ring's power, when not on the hand of its master, would be twisted into a power that was never intended by Sauron. So basically invisibility was never a power that was inherent in the Ring when Sauron forged it, but rather it was a by-product of lesser creatures wielding the power. I don't have the book in front of me, but I'll find it in the next couple of days and see if I can find the particular letter I'm speaking of.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2012 08:05
|
|
|
Wank posted:haha. Thanks - its all a big wank anyway. Oddly enough, I think the world (America in particular) was yearning for more of a fun fantasy world after 9/11 and LOTR didn't do as well as it could have because it was so heavy handed and serious in nature. Spiderman struck the perfect "escape" cord post-9/11 and I feel like that's why it did so well. I bring this up because I wonder if The Hobbit would have been the better film to be released post-9/11 because it is a bit more of a fun adventure story (there and back again, if you will) that provides a bit more of an escape than did LOTR. Yes I understand that LOTR is a fun fantasy as well, but the task at hand in those films is "Do this or the whole world perishes" while The Hobbit's task at hand is "Hey lets go steal some treasure from a dragon!" While art/literature/film that commented on or drew parallels to 9/11 was refreshing for some people, I personally think that there was this urge to escape from it all. I also think that's part of the reason why (among other things) the LOTR films did progressively better at the box office the further removed we were from 9/11. Just a side note thinking back on the release of FOTR, does anyone remember how odd the ad campaign was? Didn't they have some weird tie-in with Burger King for commemorative glasses or something? I just remember those ads being very silly overall. Then the ad campaigns for the next two films were much more serious and less silly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2012 03:39
|
|
|
I'm going to be giddy in my seat if during the Riddles in the Dark scene, the history of the Ring motif starts playing, and if during the riddle game its Gollum's song in the background. I am so happy Howard Shore is doing the music, as I think his motifs in LOTR were fantastic. Judging by the Misty Mountain song from the Hobbit trailer, it sounds as if Howard is going to be pleasing me yet again.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
Back to the music for a moment (yeah I'm totally excited for the music), what themes from LOTR do you think will make it into The Hobbit? Here's a couple I've been thinking of: -The History of the Ring theme - this is the one used during the title screen in all three LOTR movies, and usually anytime the ring specifically is being talked about or shown. I doubt it will be used over the title screen for The Hobbit considering the One Ring doesn't play a huge role in the overall story (at least not compared to LOTR). But we will probably see it during the Riddles in the Dark sequence. And maybe whenever Bilbo uses the ring. -The Shire theme - This one is pretty iconic from the original trilogy and I think it will for sure start out The Hobbit. This is some ~70 years before LOTR though so I think Howard Shore will use different instruments to try to convey maybe a different time (although maybe not, considering The Shire is pretty timeless and when we see it in LOTR it is pretty untouched/unaffected by the troubles of the world) -The Rivendell theme - beautiful, but not too memorable. Will probably still feel very nostalgic/familiar when I hear it while sitting in the theater. -The Isengard theme - This one is iffy. We'll probably see Isengard at some point during the two films, and for sure will see Saruman. With how foreboding this theme sounds, I'm not sure how it would work in a "Saruman isn't fully evil yet" way. Perhaps Shore will use it but lighten it up a bit. -Gollum's theme - I hope we hear this. I love it. -The Walking Song - I hope we hear something having to do with this too. We hear it ever so briefly in FOTR when Bilbo walks out the door. Maybe he can sing a bit more on his travels in The Hobbit? (although Jackson and Co. did steal some lines from it for Pippin's little song in ROTK) New themes we'll probably hear: -The Misty Mountain theme - No doubt this will be what we heard in the trailer. I love it. It is new yet has that Middle-Earth feel to it. I was giddy as hell watching the trailer when the singing stopped and the orchestra kicked in with the theme. It's gonna be so awesome. -Our gang of 14 theme - Maybe? Maybe something like the Fellowship theme? The more I think about it, the more I think this will be one of the main theme's of the movies along with the Misty Mountain song (or maybe they're one in the same? Who knows). -Mirkwood theme - Mirkwood will no doubt have a theme, and I'm excited to hear what sort of creepy stuff Shore is able to conjure up. I actually loved the stuff he did in Shelob's lair in ROTK and think he may do something similar considering spiders. -Goblin King/town theme - I imagine we'll hear something specific here. -Laketown theme - Not sure here, we'll see. I'm not sure what the tone of this theme would be. -Lonely Mountain/Smaug theme - They may each have their own theme, but I'm more inclined to believe that it would just be two versions of the same thing really. With the Lonely Mountain being more grand and sweeping, and the Smaug theme being more sinister. -Battle of the Five Armies theme - Maybe, but maybe it will just be a continuation of other things. Anything else you guys are excited to hear, or hear again?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
Wank posted:You just got me very excited for The Hobbit now. A smaug theme is going to be amazing. Shame it is nearly 2 years away. Ya I got myself very excited for The Hobbit by my post on the last page talking about the music. I kind of thought about it off and on the rest of the day yesterday and started wondering what kind of new themes we'll hear. You're right though, some sort of Smaug/Lonely Mountain theme has the potential to be epic. I love how music has that power to bring you back to a particular time and place. And the continuity of the music between LOTR/TH will perfectly set the stage to "return everyone to Middle-Earth" so to speak. It's probably one of the easiest (and best) decisions Peter Jackson made for The Hobbit. Say what you will about the Star Wars trilogy, but at the very least you have to admit that when you sat down for Episode 1 and that Star Wars theme kicked in, you were giddy as hell. Unfortunately it was all downhill from there. I have a feeling PJ won't let us down like that. edit: speaking of music from Lord of the Rings, holy poo poo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VznlDlNPw4Q&feature=related WARNING: do not watch if you don't want a song stuck in your head for the rest of the day Mahoning fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2012 21:48
|
|
|
kiimo posted:The hobbits the hobbits the hobbits the hobbits to Isengard to Isengard. What did you say? edit: Dear god the look on Aragorn's face is pretty much the funniest thing. Mahoning fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Feb 9, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
Vigilance posted:Yeah iirc it wasn't in the Helm's Deep Battle up until the very end when Gandalf comes in to save the day, and that worked really well. Actually my favorite part is the Ride of the Rohirrim in ROTK where there is this awesome building music while they charge towards the orcs and then as soon as they reach them, instantly nothing but the sounds of battle.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2012 23:50
|
|
|
Damnit, that's it. Now I've got to re-read the Silmarillion. I guess that will even me out with the 2 times I've read through The Hobbit and LOTR.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 06:57
|
|
|
Plucky Brit posted:Wouldn't he have done his insane method acting thing? Like trying to heal everyones wounds with herbs and refusing to use anything but a proper great sword? It certainly would've made the production diaries more interesting. Yeah except this is pretty much how Viggo was during filming.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 21:29
|
|
|
One of my favorite things is that scene in TTT when they discover the burnt pile of orcs and they think Merry and Pippin are dead, he kicks the helmet and lets out a cry of (what we think is) dismay. But Viggo actually broke his toe on that take and its the take they used in the final cut. His cry is of shear pain. Awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 21:52
|
|
|
A thought that I had thinking back on LOTR. After we're finished viewing both Hobbit movies, I think maybe looking back at the LOTR movies we'll have a slightly more nostalgic feeling towards Bilbo. Like, after we've seen all he's been thru and then you pop in ROTK and it gets to the point where old Bilbo says "I think I'm quite ready for another adventure" when leaving for the Grey Havens, I'll probably cry, I don't know about you guys. (I'm a terrible man-baby that cries at moments like that....the Gandalf "white shores" speech to Pippin gets me every loving time)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Go watch Game of Thrones, he is I mean, he IS incredible in it, but facts are facts.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2012 03:21
|
|
|
Per my count, Frodo and Thranduil are the only American actors in the films. Evangeline Lilly is Canadian.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
I hate when my immersion is thrown off by completely irrelevant background extras that don't matter and are meant to be the equivalent of a matte painting. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Except that real people don't always live up to their promises 100% of the time, and sometimes it takes some adversity for that person to remember and fulfill their promise. I know this is fantasy, and archetypes, and not real people....but moviegoers tend to identify with characters who are more like them. Sam didn't just up and decide to leave Frodo because he was told to. He felt betrayed, and confused, and for once in his life completely alone. Promise or no promise I'd do the same loving thing he did, even if it didn't make a ton of sense at the time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2012 07:22
|
|
|
Bonaventure posted:I didn't interpret it that way at all, I saw it as him being consumed by doubt and feelings of abandonment or whatever and coming across the lemonbread just kicked him in the rear end with a "wait, no, this is bullshit and I need to snap out of it or MISTER FRO-DO's gonna for real get strangled to death by Andy Serkis" moment. I'm gonna 4th this. This is how I interpreted it. It's not an "A-ha! I didn't eat the lembas bread!" It's more a symbol of self assurance for a man (hobbit) who is full of doubt. And now, Huntersoninski, you have 4 people who think that scene is something other than terrible. So lets quit acting incredulous.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2012 20:56
|
|
|
euphronius posted:They had orc waterskins IIRC. Wasn't it full of some weird orc liquor or something that burned their throats but they drank it anyways because its all they had?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
I forgot until today that I pay all this tuition which means I have access to a freaking library that I literally walk past every day. So......its been awhile. But I checked out The Silmarillion and am going to attempt to read it for a second time. (I actually own it, but its sitting in a storage unit and I don't feel like digging through boxes to find it) For those that have never read it, its kinda tough. At times it reads like the Bible, and other stretches reads like awesome Middle-Earth history. The problem is that as soon as you figure out who everyone is and where they are, the book moves on to a different story, tale, or legend. I'm excited though! I got the new edition with Ted Naismith illustrations. I rather like his art.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
Hedrigall posted:On my latest reread of LOTR I found the element I liked the most was all the dwarven stuff, especially the architecture/engineering in Moria. I found myself wondering what their more prosperous years there would have looked like; I loved imagining vast, bustling underground dwarf cities. So I'm looking for fantasy books that have more of this sort of stuff. I'm gonna assume that Marcus Heitz' The Dwarves trilogy is trash and I should look elsewhere - but correct me if I'm wrong. (seriously though, the covers look so loving dumb) I think that is an awesome aspect of any story, especially fantasy. Basically you see the remnants or ruins of an ancient civilization and you're given some information or background but left with just that. And so you have your imagination run wild not just about what that civilization was like, but about what is left over. Are there boobie traps? Is the place haunted? Is there a buried treasure? Is there a pack of survivors somewhere? What caused the civilization to die? That's what makes this passage from the book (and movie) so awesome: quote:We cannot get out. We cannot get out. They have taken the bridge and Second Hall. Frár and Lóni and Náli fell there bravely while the rest retr [...] Mazarbul. We still ho[...]g ... but hope u[...]n[...]Óin’s party went five days ago but today only four returned. The pool is up to the wall at West-gate. The Watcher in the Water took Óin--we cannot get out. The end comes soon. We hear drums, drums in the deep...They are coming.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2012 17:25
|
|
|
Effingham posted:Oh, God. Check out the powerful orchestral version of the dwarves' "Far Over the Misty Mountains" chant that kicks in at about the 12-minute mark. That is awesome, but I'm pretty sure its the same one from the trailer that kicks in about halfway through, after the dwarves stop singing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2012 02:27
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Does New Zealand just create more and more new land that is absolutely perfect for cinematography because that is bloody perfect. You know, America really does have everything when it comes to types of landscapes. Majestic mountains, beautiful deserts, lush forests, crystal clear lakes, etc etc etc. But god drat if New Zealand doesn't have nothing but that. I mean in the U.S. you see all that with just thousands of square miles of poo poo in between.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2012 20:33
|
|
|
Nilbop posted:Theatrical had Saruman in it, I remember seeing this after being told he wasn't in it and was like "huh." At what part? The scene at Orthanc goes something like this: Treebeard: "Saruman is locked in his tower." Gandalf: "And there Saruman shall remain. " And scene.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2012 00:14
|
|
|
I would like to be friends with Viggo Mortensen 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Geekboy posted:I'm 100% straight and not only would like to be friends with him, I would probably be just fine with kissing him on the mouth. If you qualify this with "slightly open lipped" I'm totally with you.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2012 18:55
|
|
|
I just finished up "Of Beren and Luthien". God what a badass loving story.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2012 03:26
|
|
|
They should rename it "Or There and Back Again"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
I guess to each his own, or maybe watching a movie filmed in a studio is different, but I've never found 48 fps to be all that distracting. I mean sure, it looks different, and I'm pretty sure I'm going to see the Hobbit in 24fps, but I just don't think its that "jarring". Even watching those 2 videos from Reddit, I totally see the difference and think its quite obvious but just don't see the big deal. I see it only as a minor "annoyance" that would probably not even be noticeable by 30 min+ of viewing. I just don't buy the fact that doubling the frame rate ruins the illusion of studio/reality. It's the exact same set, just filmed twice as much. I could totally be wrong on that, but I don't see any real evidence of "this is why it seems more fake" other than "thats what I think". I'm not trying to say anybody is wrong or right, tastes and preferences after all....but just because its "different" or "weird" does not make it "fake" or "cheap" or anything other negative word thrown at it. It really is just different and new. And I'll probably give it a shot after I see it in 24fps.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
SatansBestBuddy posted:Aren't there two films? Then wouldn't it make sense that we won't see him until the second film? I mean, maybe we'll see him in the prologue explaining everything but I doubt we'll see him at all until film 2. Yeah, I imagine they have mock ups and everything for Smaug, but honestly they may not even get to actually rendering that bad boy for another year or so (unless he has a shot or two in the first film). Kind of like Gollum....he has a very small part in Fellowship, and they didn't really show much. The final product didn't look exactly like the shots in Fellowship either.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
Gollum looks much more like a creature in Fellowship than he does in the other two films. I think it was a good move to make the final product a lot more human looking, especially if you're going to view Gollum as a somewhat sympathetic and tragic character.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2012 21:24
|
|
|
Ummm, if I could just LIVE inside the studios there, that would be great. Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2012 07:24
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Maybe SHE will fall in love with him, and beg him for one hair from his mighty beard? Yes, let's hope its that.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2012 23:40
|
|
|
And I don't want none of that girly stuff added into the two 2-hour movies that are being adapted out of one relatively short children's story.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
kiimo posted:Bilbo has a most disturbing Game of Thrones-esque tryst with Lobelia Sackville-Baggins. Half the fans hang themselves, the other half furiously masturbate. There's an autoerotic asphyxiation joke in there somewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
So would you be ok with a gay love story between two of the dwarves, since it's pandering but not by the addition of a brand new character? Your point is pretty dumb an you're getting pretty worked up over something that you literally only read a sentence and know nothing more about. There's nothing wrong with saying "I don't like the idea of it, but I haven't heard enough to make a judgement." Instead you're making sweeping generalizations about the filmmakers intentions, something of which you know absolutely nothing about. Did you piss in your panties about the invented character Lurtz (I think that was his name), the Uruk-Hai from FOTR? I mean after all, there was more than enough in the 3 books (and appendices) to tell the story of LOTR without having to add characters. This elf may be the same thing. She's not so much a character as she is a means to an end. Much like Lurtz in FOTR. He had no character development, just was a main bad guy that would make for a cool showdown at the film's denouement. This elf woman may serve as a means to an end, a way to differentiate one dwarf from another. To increase the individual stakes for one of the main characters in The Hobbit 2's climax. You may think that's unnecessary because there's enough characters already but that is an awfully dumb nitpick. It's dumb because this isnt The Hobbit put to film, it's a film adaptation of The Hobbit. There is a difference. Peter Jackson has earned the right to tweak the story as he sees fit, and if you can't handle that I suggest not even bothering to see the movie because you'll probably want to hang yourself about 5 minutes in when Bombur makes his first fart joke.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2012 05:40
|
|
|
Huntersoninski posted:^^ Holy poo poo, you guys ARE just in love with Peter Jackson! And personal insults to too, NOW who's upset? Wow dude. I'm not sure what you considered an insult, but you need to relax. With all the CAPSS!!!! And basically pretending like we're telling you that you can't feel a certain way about something which you believe, when basically what we're actually trying to tell you is that your concerns are out of proportion with the given information. We literally know one sentence about this character and you've gone on and on about it like someone killed your childhood. It could literally be cut from the film like Arwen at Helm's Deep and you would have worried for nothing. As for the idea that this thread should be more than just "I like this" and "I can't wait for this", I agree to an extent. But honestly, hearing people bitch about something they literally know almost nothing about is not interesting or fun. I kind of want this thread to be one of those two things. And if you're not willing to let us tell you why you're possibly wrong in the way you feel, or that your fears are out of proportion to the reality of the situation, then you're just being a hypocrite.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2012 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 01:44 |
|
|
euphronius posted:Putting Arwen more front and center was a masterstroke that looks obvious in hindsight. If JRRT rewrote LOTR I think he would incorporate it himself. I think the best part is it nicely sets up the love triangle with Eowyn that is pushed to the background in the books (and it "humanized" Aragorn) The funny thing is, Tolkien basically wrote the happy ending for the Aragorn/Arwen love story into ROTK, and it really comes off as "What the gently caress?!" to the reader because there is nothing leading up to it. It just sort of like happens at the end. I think you're right, if Tolkien had to do it all over again he might have at least written in a few extra bits of the Aragorn/Arwen love story to really tie everything together a bit more cleanly. Oh and as for why we're all "defending" Peter Jackson and not Tolkien: Peter Jackson knows how to make a movie, Tolkien doesn't. Most writers don't understand how telling a story on screen works, which is why when a book is adapted, the script is rarely ever written by the author. Also, Tolkien is dead.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2012 15:14
|
|