|
Pretty nice trailer. I'm guessing that they're not actually going to show Smaug until the second film, so that we can build him up as a menace ala Sauron but without the constant "I'm an eye, what's up with that?" reminders.
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:Kids of the future are gonna be so confused by the way history and pop culture (no disrespect) become entwined. Wait, Hitler was real? So was he really was the cloned leader of a robot army? It can't be any worse than Idiocracy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2012 04:21
|
|
|
Erwin posted:Do the giant spiders in The Hobbit have any relation to Shelob? I always pictured them much smaller, like the size of watermelons, and basically unrelated to Shelob. In the original (i.e., Pre-LOTR) story they're just some giant spiders, but they got retconned into being Shelob's offspring, much like Shelob is actually the child of the giant fuckoff spider Ungoliant from the Silmarillion. They are supposed to be a lot smaller though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:I must point out that Lilo & Stitch (released 2002) was originally scripted and very nearly completed with a climactic scene that involved a jetliner flying through a cityscape and I think maybe crashing into a building (or coming close). After 9/11 happened they pulled the fastest rewrite/rerecord/relayout/reanimation maneuver in living feature-animation memory, and no one was ever the wiser. And then there's this, which was set to release like a day before 9/11: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
kiimo posted:So...are we still in the Fourth Age? Or did the Bessemer Process signify the Fifth Age? According to wiki Tolkein considered around when he wrote LOTR to be about the start of the Seventh Age.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2012 07:46
|
|
|
Jesto posted:
Especially since it's two different movies and something like six hours between them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2012 04:58
|
|
|
The Hobbit: Bilbo Begins.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:I mean, that marathon will be potentially happening for the first time around summer 2014, so that child could have been born in like 1996. 1998 if they're just getting their first summer job.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2012 23:01
|
|
|
Jesto posted:What would people have trimmed? Aragorn becoming King? The Hobbits returning to the Shire? Frodo leaving on the boat? The book passing from Frodo to Sam, as it passed from Bilbo to Frodo? The last two, or at least that's what I would do. It'd be pretty easy to imagine Frodo just settling down in the Shire and smoking pipeweed for the rest of his days which is Good Enough for most audiences.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
kiimo posted:You jerks are robbing people of the best scene. ImpAtom posted:But it would have kind of missed one of the most important parts of the story and just made it 'and Frodo was awesome forever, the end!" Okay, out of context of the rest of the film (and the film series) that scene is great, but in the context of the film it's an epilogue to an epilogue about a story line that is never really elaborated on in any of the movies (all we're told is "The Elves are leaving!" why? who knows. where? who knows. They're just leaving).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 05:49
|
|
|
MANIFEST DESTINY posted:Welp glasses are back to being for dorks again, better go order some contacts. 3D contacts would be pretty cool.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2012 16:30
|
|
|
dpbjinc posted:Wait, how does he fit in, or affect the story in any way? Didn't absolutely nothing of note happen before the company got to the trolls, I.E. a very long way past Tom's forest? I just read the Hobbit and I don't remember Bombadil at all (unless he was the "yo don't drink the mirkwood river it's bad" guy).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2012 13:27
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:Actually, scratch that - a goon would never leave the house to go on any adventures. Bilbo really didn't either until Gandalf was all "oh god you're late it's time to gogogogogo".
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2012 15:41
|
|
|
Jesto posted:I kind of hope they release an 'Original Edition' of the two films, before someone decided that there would be three instead. Just to see whether or not it was a bad decision, which one flowed better, where padding was inserted to meet the runtime and so on. There'll be a fan edit that cuts out anything seen as "added by Jackson" (and probably another one which cuts everything out but the original Hobbit story), some people will like it, and it will probably be paced awkwardly but it'll be more 'faithful' to the book so it'll be lauded by nerds as the 'true' Hobbit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 13:56
|
|
|
Gianthogweed posted:Was anything like this done to LOTR? I don't remember seeing any highly lauded fan edits. Star Wars has tons of fan edits, some better than the movies that Lucas released, but it seems LOTR fans are happy to leave well enough alone. The Hobbit falls more in the "filmed too much" section (especially if you're a book purist) so it's a lot more likely that it'll happen.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
kaworu posted:It's funny though, because next to the sketchy CGI you get stuff like the Balrog which looked incredible. I still remember the first time I saw that in the theaters in FotR, it was one of those rare moments where your jaw just drops because you know you're looking at something the likes of which you've never, ever seen created on film. And not only did it look fantastic, but it was also perfectly true to the impossible-looking creature that Tolkien describes. Kind of amazing that it was in the same film as Freaky Galadriel. Except Balrogs don't have wings.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2012 05:07
|
|
|
BobTheSpy posted:Everyone on the IMDB boards already seems to loving hate this movie so much. Man, people judge poo poo quickly without actually experiencing it, don't they? Fans of a franchise are on a whole always more bitchy than any critic. Ever.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2012 06:32
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:I hadn't realized that there are no HFR 2D showings. Now I'm conflicted. I hate 3D but I really want to see if HFR is any good. Why must you make me choose? If the reason you hate 3D is the eyestrain, this is supposed to fix that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
Fought Foo posted:it felt like LOTR with new characters. That's not a bad thing for anyone in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2012 17:26
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Uh, I don't know why you immediately jump to the conclusion that I want a completely literal minded adaptation simply because I expressed misgivings about the tone of the film. But hey, if you're absolutely dead set on painting anyone who isn't 100% positive all the time about this adaptation as some kind of immature baby, go right ahead. quote:Speak for yourself. I'm not happy that one of my favorite childhood books is being adapted into something entirely different. e: You're about one phrase away from using "raping my childhood" unironically.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 14:54
|
|
|
Can anyone confirm that there's a HFR version of the film that's in 3D but not IMAX/fake IMAX? My theater is saying all the non-2D showings are HFR but I thought there was just a normal 3D version as well.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 03:33
|
|
|
GordonTheDeadFish posted:So it's confirmed where this film ends, with the company saved by eagles and heading off to visit Beorn. This has probably been discussed, but are there hints about where the split between 2 and 3 is? It's probably going to be Smaug's death.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
casa de mi padre posted:I agree. It's pretty unrealistic that a bunch of manly men (or dwarvely dwarves) would go on a journey for so long without the company of women. Tolkien wrote these stories as war allegory. We all know what soldiers do to relieve some stress. Where are the whores? They don't have to show a bunch of dwarves gangbanging a woman, but they could've included a nice scene with a "pleasure wench" or something. Didn't you know why they went to Beorn's house?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 15:47
|
|
|
oswald ownenstein posted:Jesus, 65% on RT. Is this movie really that bad? Here's the top rotten review on RT: quote:My first thought in watching “The Hobbit” was: Do we really need this movie? It was my last thought, too. Having powered his way through the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy, which had its occasional majesties, director Peter Jackson now feels compelled to give us this prequel, based on the Tolkien novel that spawned the cult I never joined. As you can see, if "I just want more LOTR" is your motivation you should be ok.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 20:37
|
|
|
Bombadilillo posted:Also as of the set out of the quest in FotR the audience has no idea there are flying mounts for the 9, so again, PJ didnt address the obvious question.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
Bombadilillo posted:
But there's no way Sam could have known about the Eagles. Gandalf's whole shtick is not telling people how he did a trick and unless he told Sam there's no way that he would have known.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2012 16:58
|
|
|
A GLISTENING HODOR posted:Quoting myself: I'm sorry it didn't have the rape quota of a GRRM novel.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:By "Star Wars of our time", I basically mean a genre trilogy that has pervasive and lasting influence, and I think The Matrix Trilogy fits that bill better than anything else in recent memory. It's, of course, an imperfect comparison. The only lasting influence of the Matrix trilogy is that its creators got to have enough esteem to (co)direct Cloud Atlas and Speed Racer. it's not as though people are still making Matrix shirts like they are for Star Wars still.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
MeinPanzer posted:What about the Narnia movies? Those stand out most to me, though I guess they can be qualified as movies for kids. Narnia's probably the best example of drawing from both LOTR and Harry Potter and not doing too well because of it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 03:11
|
|
|
Ave Azaria posted:Sorry to say, but in terms of influence, the Star Wars of the 2000s was probably the loving Spider-man trilogy. You could just as easily give it to the X-men trilogy/spinoffs.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 04:15
|
|
|
Bombadilillo posted:How many Harry Potter games have their been compared to LotR games? I can think of some horribly reviewed ones and 2 lego HP games. There was one for every single Harry Potter movie (I think including DH 1&2), a few Lego Harry Potter ones, and some probably misc games as well.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 16:43
|
|
|
ZeeBoi posted:I was only slightly annoyed that Bilbo's discovery of the ring in The Hobbit was different than the one we saw in Fellowship. It'd be kinda funny if we got an alternate version of events at the end of the 3rd movie ala Life of Pi.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2012 22:09
|
|
|
Well, I just saw it again in HFR. Like everyone else, I thought it was kind of jarring at first, but I got used to it as the movie went on; I'm really glad that I saw it first in 2D. Towards the end, I thought it really made things feel more real, sort of like a play. The (e.g.) wargs didn't look like actual dogs, but they looked like what a puppet of a dog might look like. Overall, I think Jackson can improve but I'm optimistic about the future endeavors of the format (if Cameron doesn't upset them with 60FPS).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2012 03:27
|
|
|
Supernorn posted:thanks for spoiling Life of Pi dude. I wasn't expecting that in a hobbit thread. That's as much a spoiler as "The empire built a second Death Star" is a spoiler for Return of the Jedi.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Yes, a spoiler for a movie that's in theaters right now is the same as a spoiler for a 30 year old movie. Yes, yes. Age is irrelevant.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2012 19:25
|
|
|
Supernorn posted:I'm not sure how pretty clearly spoiling the end of a current release movie really compares. But I didn't spoil the end, I said that there was another story of events. I didn't say what the new events were, what the old events were, or how thematically it doesn't matter since the whole point is that you choose the story you want to believe in. Pi chose the original story, the investigators chose the second. It's fair game for the Hobbit (film) to have spoilers because it's not a direct adaptation, most people haven't read the appendices, and things like Azog aren't in Tolkien media at all (and if you notice, most people have stopped spoiling it anyway).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:They wrote a script, worked out the filming schedule, found out they needed the same exact number of days to film it as they did on the first trilogy and broke it into three films. Plus there are clearly scenes that they did leave for the EE (there's a shot in the trailer of Bilbo looking at the broken sword that's reforged in FOTR).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2012 05:31
|
|
|
TJO posted:I found it bizarre when Azog put a price on the dwarves. Like, orcs have currency? An economic system? How much does Sauron pay? Are there farmer orcs and miner goblins and general economic producers? Blacksmiths that make the lovely armour and take a paycheck for it? Is there an orc class system? Evil certainly seems hierarchical, are they just victims of neoliberalism? I thought they were just driven by hatred or whatever. Well, I dunno about the orcs, but it's mentioned that most of the guys that ride the giant elephants in the later LOTR movies are just mercenaries paid by Sauron so I guess he does do dealings outside of evil mind control.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2012 01:26
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Saw it today. I have an ultra-specific question. When Bilbo finds the ring in this movie, did they superimpose a little bit of Ian Holm's Bilbo finding the ring from one of the flashback scenes from one of the LOTR movies? If you mean did they shoot it like the flashback scene than no, it's basically totally different.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2012 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
Orange_Lazarus posted:They didn't mention during the LOTR movies that Gandalf possessed the ring of fire right? Hopefully they'll point that out at some point during The Hobbit. They never mentioned the Elf Rings outside of the prologue iirc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2012 02:58
|
|