FILM: The Hobbit (some spoilers)

  • Thread starter Thread starter iheartdance
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Admittedly, Radagast was not in The Hobbit as a book; but in LOTR, Gandalf informs is about the Council, the Necromancer, Mirkwood, and the doings of Radagast. Even Azog is properly fleshed out, although in the Hobbit, much of the material about him is in the form of the dwarvish family histories.

The only thing that seemed out of place was the first encounter with the orcs and wargs, so it was unnecessary. The later encounters were correct. Also, when they found Glamdring and Orcrist, there was no blade of Angmar.

I also wondered if they would incorporate material from the Silmarillion, but there is nothing in the first film from it
 
I also wondered if they would incorporate material from the Silmarillion, but there is nothing in the first film from it
According to an article I read recently, they can’t use any material from the Silmarillion because they don’t own the rights.
 
I’ve got to agree with some of the ‘dissenters’ here like Robyn and Pons.

I thought there was an awful lot of fluff and filler. Tolkien was genius - I don’t need Jackson trying to add to the story. ‘Fleshing’ out certain areas wasn’t necessary. I came home thinking he didn’t need the fluff to make it 2 movies - he could’ve easily did it with one. Then I found out it’s going to be 3!!! Bleh.

And the violence! The Hobbit was a child’s story.The first two LOTR films seemed lighter to me than The Hobbit.

The character development of Thorin and especially Bilbo - what? It took the whole story for them to get there and now in the film they’re already there?! And we have 2 more to go!?!?!

Disappointing.

I feel like Jackson’s been hanging out with Lucas or something. It makes me feel dirty.
 
Disappointing.

I feel like Jackson’s been hanging out with Lucas or something. It makes me feel dirty.
Some movie reviews have pointed out similarities to The Phantom Menace - i.e. you have a very popular movie trilogy, then a long span of time (although admittedly not as long in this case as it was in Lucas’ case) and then a new trilogy starting which is actually a ‘prequel’, that is the events depicted are earlier than the events in the original. In addition there is a sense that both filmmakers allowed themselves to get focused on technology at the expense of storytelling (character, plot, etc.) Peter Jackson was careful not to rely too heavily on CGI with the original trilogy, using miniatures and other forms of special effects whenever possible, to avoid that glossy fake look that computer generated images often have. Apparently they were more lazy with The Hobbit and went more with CGI, as Lucas did with his prequels.
 
Some movie reviews have pointed out similarities to The Phantom Menace - i.e. you have a very popular movie trilogy, then a long span of time (although admittedly not as long in this case as it was in Lucas’ case) and then a new trilogy starting which is actually a ‘prequel’, that is the events depicted are earlier than the events in the original. In addition there is a sense that both filmmakers allowed themselves to get focused on technology at the expense of storytelling (character, plot, etc.) Peter Jackson was careful not to rely too heavily on CGI with the original trilogy, using miniatures and other forms of special effects whenever possible, to avoid that glossy fake look that computer generated images often have. Apparently they were more lazy with The Hobbit and went more with CGI, as Lucas did with his prequels.
Lord of the Rings had tons of CGI effects, most notably Gollum, who never looked real to me.
 
[sign]Reminder: This thread is about the film “The Hobbit”[/sign]

Discussions about Lord of the Rings require a new thread.
:confused: The LOTR films and The Hobbit are set in the same world, and from the same director. It would seem only natural that discussion of the latter would attract comments on the former.
 
I am quite shocked about your enthusiasm over this film, because Tolkien belongs to the New Age teachers. It is really disturbing to see Catholics raving over somebody who embraces New Age teachings which distinctly diverge from Bible teachings.
 
I am quite shocked about your enthusiasm over this film, because Tolkien belongs to the New Age teachers. It is really disturbing to see Catholics raving over somebody who embraces New Age teachings which distinctly diverge from Bible teachings.
Okay, what proof do you have to back up your claim?
Tolkien was very well known as a practicing Catholic. What did he write that was contrary to biblical teachings? I have never seen Tolkien’s name associated with the New Age stuff.
 
Okay, what proof do you have to back up your claim?
Tolkien was very well known as a practicing Catholic. What did he write that was contrary to biblical teachings? I have never seen Tolkien’s name associated with the New Age stuff.
He may have been Anglican at first, but I’d hardly call that New Age 🤷

Tolkien’s religious background:
-Born into an Anglican family
-After his father died, a Catholic priest helped his mom raise him and his brother Hilary
-They later converted to Catholicism
-Later in life, Tolkien actually converted his friend C.S. Lewis from atheism. Much to Tolkien’s dismay, Lewis converted to Anglicanism instead of Catholicism
-Also later in life, Tolkien’s eldest son became a priest. In fact, Tolkien’s eldest son was the priest who held Tolkien’s funeral Mass

Examples of Tolkien’s faith in his works:
-Chapter “Mount Doom” of LotR. There’s a paragraph on lembas that could just as easily describe Eucharist
-Elf magic. “For this is what your folk would call magic, I believe: though I do not understand clearly what they mean; and they seem to use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy.” -Galadriel. Atheists in particular (and Jack Chick) would call the Sacraments (particularly the Eucharist) magic. And yet they “use the same word of the deceits of the Enemy.”
-Gandalf admonishes the death penalty. “Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.”
-I’ve never fully understood this one, but Frodo, Gandalf and Aragorn as priest, prophet and king.
-The Ring corrupts just like sin
-Light wins in the end.
-This gem from Two Towers (taken from the movie, based off and possibly quoted from the book)
Frodo: I can’t do this, Sam.
Sam: I know. It’s all wrong. By rights we shouldn’t even be here. But we are. It’s like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger, they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end. Because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing, this shadow. Even darkness must pass. A new day will come. And when the sun shines it will shine out the clearer. Those were the stories that stayed with you. That meant something, even if you were too small to understand why. But I think, Mr. Frodo, I do understand. I know now. Folk in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going. Because they were holding on to something.
Frodo: What are we holding onto, Sam?
Sam: That there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo… and it’s worth fighting for.
 
I am quite shocked about your enthusiasm over this film, because Tolkien belongs to the New Age teachers. It is really disturbing to see Catholics raving over somebody who embraces New Age teachings which distinctly diverge from Bible teachings.
Tolkien on “The Lord of the Rings”:

“The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work, unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision.”

Tolkien was a devout Catholic, and there are Catholic themes running through his work — more obvious perhaps in The Lord of the Rings than in anything else.

I am certainly aware that New Agers have “hijacked” his work for their own purposes, but that doesn’t make the Catholic themes disappear.

In fact, I am a member of a Yahoo group called “Christian Tolkien Fans” — formed by a lady who, though not Catholic, recognized the Christian themes in Tolkien’s work. She ran into resistance when she tried to discuss them in general Tolkien forums, so she formed a discussion group herself for Christians to discuss Tolkien.
 
I finally saw the movie this past weekend. I thought it was very well done. I don’t understand the comparisons to “Phantom Menace”. It didn’t deel like that to me at all. 🤷

Yeah, the book is geared towards kids, which means Tolkien kind of quickly glosses over some of the battle scenes. You cannot really do that with a movie.

Jackson does add a few minor battles (just as he did in LotR) to heighten the sense of urgency. With a movie, I understand how that helps the pacing.

Frankly, I thought this movie stuck more closely to the book than the original trilogy.

I greatly look forward to the extended edition of this movie (which will no doubt be forthcoming) and the future installments. 🙂

It did strike me that much of the film was somewhat close to Fellowship. You have the first half hour spent in the Shire. Finally they set out on their journey. They have a few skirmishes which eventually drives them to Rivendell. Then they set out again and end up in the mountain where an epic orc battle ensues. Then they emerge on the other side and find themselves in one last orc battle before looking at the mountain in the distance which is their final destination. The only thing missing was a stay in Lorien. 😛
 
I thought it was very well done. I don’t understand the comparisons to “Phantom Menace”. It didn’t deel like that to me at all. 🤷
I don’t think anyone has suggested that they are similar in themselves. The point is that each has a similar role in the career of its director. That is, each one is the beginning of a prequel trilogy, launched a number of years after the conclusion of the original trilogy. And so forth.
 
I find it funny that someone here would accuse Tolkien of being New Age. When I first read The Hobbit and LOTR, I suspected that he might have been Catholic even before he was a Catholics. Even the people who I know who are interested in New Age things are aware that Tolkien’s a Catholic.

I still prefer reading Tolkien’s books but I do love the film adaptions with it’s special effects and the actors. To be honest, I’m glad that it’s not possible to make a film adaption too faithful to the book. It does take forever to get from one place to another.

I think the Hobbit is better split off into 2 parts and that LOTR is slightly better in terms of editing.

And I love the actors, especially Sir Ian Mckellen and Sir Christopher Lee (I hope he lives to more than a 100). I’m looking forward to seeing more of Pace Lee as Thranduil. I laughed once I remembered that he is supposed to be Legolas’ father.
 
I find it funny that someone here would accuse Tolkien of being New Age. When I first read The Hobbit and LOTR, I suspected that he might have been Catholic even before he was a Catholics. Even the people who I know who are interested in New Age things are aware that Tolkien’s a Catholic.

I still prefer reading Tolkien’s books but I do love the film adaptions with it’s special effects and the actors. To be honest, I’m glad that it’s not possible to make a film adaption too faithful to the book. It does take forever to get from one place to another.

I think the Hobbit is better split off into 2 parts and that LOTR is slightly better in terms of editing.

And I love the actors, especially Sir Ian Mckellen and Sir Christopher Lee (I hope he lives to more than a 100). I’m looking forward to seeing more of Pace Lee as Thranduil. I laughed once I remembered that he is supposed to be Legolas’ father.
Yeah, funny thing is, Lee Pace is younger than Orlando Bloom
 
I don’t think anyone has suggested that they are similar in themselves. The point is that each has a similar role in the career of its director. That is, each one is the beginning of a prequel trilogy, launched a number of years after the conclusion of the original trilogy. And so forth.
Oh. I understand that. But I still don’t see it. 🤷 To me it still seems like comparing apples to oranges.
 
The film is no longer showing in my country.

I have chosen not to watch it.

I win.

Chew on that, Jackson.

👍
 
The film is no longer showing in my country.

I have chosen not to watch it.

I win.

Chew on that, Jackson.

👍
I’m sure Jackson is losing sleep over your refusal to watch it. 😉

Oh no wait, it’s just the difficulty in trying to sleep on a big pile of money. 😛
 
I wasn’t unhappy with the insertion of Radagast, but I was pretty unhappy with the Radagast we got. A Harry Potter character. I always pictured more of a St Francis type.

That aside, I enjoyed the movie greatly…and the tonal shifts (between a children’s story and a dark LOTR prequel) didn’t bother me much. The goblin town escape probably should have been handled a bit more low key, however.
He was a St Francis type
even to the brown
The Elf Queen seemed to be Marian
 
I wasn’t unhappy with the insertion of Radagast, but I was pretty unhappy with the Radagast we got. A Harry Potter character. I always pictured more of a St Francis type.

That aside, I enjoyed the movie greatly…and the tonal shifts (between a children’s story and a dark LOTR prequel) didn’t bother me much. The goblin town escape probably should have been handled a bit more low key, however.
“Low key” is not in Peter Jackson’s vocabulary. 😛
 
Just saw it. Was good cant wait for part 2

Really liked seeing the up close/ inside organization

weather it was inside the Dwarves castle and seeing what the Dwarves do and how their clan works ( forgot the name of it lol) the same goes for the Goblins and inside their tunnel

Was happy to see similarity scenes between this film and the computer game (anyone who knows or plays this game will get kudos from me {honesty ;);}) :

Lord of the Rings Battle for Middle Earth II
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top