New Movie: The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies

[DaveBj]

I remember being in the just-too-darn-stupid-to-look-at zone with the surfing Legolas during the Two Towers.

Not to mention the dwarf-tossing references.

 

[Joe_5859]

I don’t know if you already know this, but the walking in the snow part was not a Jackson addition but it was in the book. So, PJ was being faithful when he put in the walking on top of snow scene.

Ah. It’s been a long time since I read the books.

 

[SuperLuigi]

That’s a good way to look at it, if you want to save your sanity.

For me, The Hobbit really didn’t need much extra source material. Yes, if you want to fill 3 2.5+ hour movies, but it could have even been one very good feature length film without cutting much and still having a few good battle scenes.

I do wish sometimes more filmmakers who wanted to adapt longer books would consider doing a miniseries like Della suggested. The BBC production of Pride and Prejudice is still IMO one of the best literary adaptations for the screen I’ve ever seen, and I’d say that even if Colin Firth never did jump into that pond.

I think in general I’ve grown to like the writing on television much more than film, anyway. I don’t know if that’s me growing up, changes in the genres, or both, or what.

Overall, I think Jackson’s interpretation of the Lord of the Rings background story inserted in the Hobbit was good, and I would argue necessary. The Hobbit as a stand-alone story is more for older children, really. The appeal certainly was to a wider audience.

However, I’m not all that into the Kili-Tuvien romance thing. I’m sure they figured they needed some romance plot to draw at the box office, but the entire story is more about good vs evil than Romeo and Juliet.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I’m with you, Della. I look forward to seeing the third Hobbit movie (these are the only movies I’ve seen in the theater in the past three years). And I am confident I will enjoy myself. I, too, do not agree with all of Jackson’s artistic decisions. But the good outweighs the bad for me.

I suppose I generally agree with this.

I really hope the Wood Elves live up to their name in this movie, and I don’t just mean Orlando Bloom getting to do all the fancy stunts.

 

[Sarcelle]

Ah. It’s been a long time since I read the books.

Reading The Silmarillion, The Hobbit and LOTR annually ,especially when winter approaches is a personal tradition of mine. I started this when I turned 11 and continue to this day. I credit Tolkien for evangelizing me, one who was raised atheist, into the Catholic faith.

 

[Della]

Reading The Silmarillion, The Hobbit and LOTR annually ,especially when winter approaches is a personal tradition of mine. I started this when I turned 11 and continue to this day. I credit Tolkien for evangelizing me, one who was raised atheist, into the Catholic faith.

I’m another Tolkien convert but not from atheism, but from Protestant Pentecostalism (not to be confused with charismaticism). I had read TH and so had been introduced to his writing, but had not heard of LOTR until the Bakshi movie came out. Because it was a Tolkien story I went to see the film. As I watched I realized a deep spirituality was behind it, even more so than TH, which had already regarded as telling the truth about the human condition and God’s grace. After seeing the film I rushed straight to a bookstore and bought a paperback copy of LOTR. I read all of Frodo’s journey in one weekend at the end of which I wasn’t the same person. This is why I am so happy that PJ made these films–to whet the appetite of a new generation to read the books, hopefully see the deep faith and truths in them, and be drawn to the Church that was Tolkien’s inspiration and spiritual home.

 

[Sarcelle]

I’m another Tolkien convert but not from atheism, but from Protestant Pentecostalism (not to be confused with charismaticism). I had read TH and so had been introduced to his writing, but had not heard of LOTR until the Bakshi movie came out. Because it was a Tolkien story I went to see the film. As I watched I realized a deep spirituality was behind it, even more so than TH, which had already regarded as telling the truth about the human condition and God’s grace. After seeing the film I rushed straight to a bookstore and bought a paperback copy of LOTR. I read all of Frodo’s journey in one weekend at the end of which I wasn’t the same person. This is why I am so happy that PJ made these films–to whet the appetite of a new generation to read the books, hopefully see the deep faith and truths in them, and be drawn to the Church that was Tolkien’s inspiration and spiritual home.

Nice to hear from someone who also got inspired by Tolkien. I used to say that if God could not get my attention via reason or emotion, He was going to get to me via the imagination and He used Tolkien.

 

[Joe_5859]

Reading The Silmarillion, The Hobbit and LOTR annually ,especially when winter approaches is a personal tradition of mine. I started this when I turned 11 and continue to this day. I credit Tolkien for evangelizing me, one who was raised atheist, into the Catholic faith.

Cool. Thinking back, it’s been 12 years since I read them. I’m overdue for a re-read.

 

[tomarin]

Cool. Thinking back, it’s been 12 years since I read them. I’m overdue for a re-read.

I avoided rereading them for a long time because I worried they would appear childish to my now-aged eyes. But turned out they didn’t. I could do with a few fewer songs though.

 

[patrick457]

Please pardon this long explanation, but I think it is needed at this point in the thread:

The Hobbit began as a tale Tolkien told his children that, at the time, had no connection to his larger tale of Middle Earth, as told in The Silmarillian. After the great success of TH, he was commissioned to write another “hobbit” book, which became LOTR. Having turned the ring from a mere plot device in TH into a darker force in LOTR, he realized that the two stories didn’t mesh. He wrote several appendexes to fill in the gaps with the intention of rewriting TH to blend in with the later, longer, darker story. He never did that, probably because of the popularity of TH as a stand alone book. Fans certainly never fussed about the discrepencies between the tone of the two tales, either because they were enchanted by the whole work.

In the 1960s Tolkien actually tried rewriting The Hobbit into the more serious style of LotR, but fortunately for us, he gave up after a few chapters.

And well, while Tolkien claimed that The Hobbit was not connected to his legendarium, his early drafts actually show that there was some level of connection between the two works - though ultimately The Hobbit could still stand on its own feet. Well, you can’t always trust what the man said.

**Now for the films, PJ took the appendexes and added them to TH, essentially doing what JRRT had intended to do. ** It can be certainly be argued that PJ didn’t get everything right–his addition of a female warrior elf, for instance and the love triangle between her and Kili and Legolas, as one glaring example. I just dismiss such “out there” additions for the joy of having the larger story more complete in the films. I loved the addition of the White Council, for instance, about which JRRT only alluded, whetting our desire for a more complete account of it If the tone of the two stories is quite different we can only really blame JRRT himself–indeed he was quite sensible of it. But we cannot fault PJ for attempting to mesh the two stories as JRRT himself had wished to do.

To be honest, a purist might say that it’s even questionable whether PJ actually made full use of the supplementary material he had access to (i.e. the ones he could actually use in the film without the Tolkien Estate hounding him).

My position is basically that PJ’s adaptations are not perfect, but I’ll still watch the films.

 

[Della]

I certainly agree that the adaptations aren’t perfect. But, what is? Even Tolkien’s writings are perfect, after all. As basically an amateur writer of fiction he made mistakes that a Hemmingway never would have. But we forgive him these because we get swept up in his overall vision and are enchanted by ME and its characters.

As for songs in the films, I wanted MORE of those and far less chasing by orcs and battle scenes, which I consider pure pudding. Tolkien wrote those songs to tell us about the situations and characters as well as to set a certain tone. Without them the story suffers, IMHO. The dwarves’ song about reclaiming their mountain, for instance, has several stanzas, of which PJ only used a couple. I really didn’t need to hear all the stanzas, but I was very happy they included the ones they did. I think modern audiences are so used to images flashing by, one after another, that they don’t know how to sit still while characters and plots unfold. The best part of the first film was at Bag End, the Trolls, Riddles in the Dark, and the White Council. As for the rest, much of it could have been trimmed with no loss to character development or the plot.

 

[tomarin]

I certainly agree that the adaptations aren’t perfect. But, what is? Even Tolkien’s writings are perfect, after all. As basically an amateur writer of fiction he made mistakes that a Hemmingway never would have. But we forgive him these because we get swept up in his overall vision and are enchanted by ME and its characters.

Since you mention it, I’ve been noticing that Tolkien never uses the subjunctive tense when it seems to me he should. Bilbo is so often wishing he “was” at home in the Shire in his warm and cozy hobbit hole.

 

[patrick457]

Since you mention it, I’ve been noticing that Tolkien never uses the subjunctive tense when it seems to me he should. Bilbo is so often wishing he “was” at home in the Shire in his warm and cozy hobbit hole.

Well, to be fair he did use ‘elves’ and ‘dwarves’ (consciously) when the ‘correct’ plural was elfs and dwarfs. And elven for elfin. Didn’t he complain about the printers who were trying to ‘correct’ his grammar (farther for his further)?

 

[nocoastlayman]

I certainly agree that the adaptations aren’t perfect. But, what is? Even Tolkien’s writings are perfect, after all. As basically an amateur writer of fiction he made mistakes that a Hemmingway never would have. But we forgive him these because we get swept up in his overall vision and are enchanted by ME and its characters.

As for songs in the films, I wanted MORE of those and far less chasing by orcs and battle scenes, which I consider pure pudding. Tolkien wrote those songs to tell us about the situations and characters as well as to set a certain tone. Without them the story suffers, IMHO. The dwarves’ song about reclaiming their mountain, for instance, has several stanzas, of which PJ only used a couple. I really didn’t need to hear all the stanzas, but I was very happy they included the ones they did. I think modern audiences are so used to images flashing by, one after another, that they don’t know how to sit still while characters and plots unfold. The best part of the first film was at Bag End, the Trolls, Riddles in the Dark, and the White Council. As for the rest, much of it could have been trimmed with no loss to character development or the plot.

I kind of agree with you that more character development was needed. But alas, this film’s main audience will be nerdy young people from about age 8 on up and they like their action and images flashing and don’t have time for character development, or at least that’s the stereotype that Hollywood has of young people. So as a result you get films like the Hobbit trilogy with ADHD like speed that doesn’t focus on plot as much.

Also in my opinion, I don’t like how they added to the films. I know it was for money but for me this is just big budget middle earth Fan Fic. I like the original work and they could easily do it in one film or maybe two. Anymore it feels like most film makers are about the money though a few don’t seem to be and I like those (to me the Coen Brothers, Alexander Payne, and even Wes Anderson don’t seem as concerned about money. Even early Spielberg seems to have been more about a labor of love then just making money.)

 

[Della]

I kind of agree with you that more character development was needed. But alas, this film’s main audience will be nerdy young people from about age 8 on up and they like their action and images flashing and don’t have time for character development, or at least that’s the stereotype that Hollywood has of young people. So as a result you get films like the Hobbit trilogy with ADHD like speed that doesn’t focus on plot as much.

Yes, I agree. PJ made extended versions with more character development for us Tolkien nerds. LOL! When the hoopla is over and the price of the DVDs come down I’ll buy the extended versions. I’m just a fool for more Tolkien, I guess.

Also in my opinion, I don’t like how they added to the films. I know it was for money but for me this is just big budget middle earth Fan Fic. I like the original work and they could easily do it in one film or maybe two. Anymore it feels like most film makers are about the money though a few don’t seem to be and I like those (to me the Coen Brothers, Alexander Payne, and even Wes Anderson don’t seem as concerned about money. Even early Spielberg seems to have been more about a labor of love then just making money.)

To be fair to PJ and co., he has said on numerous occasions that he wanted to put in material from Tolkien’s appendexes in order to blend TH with LOTR as Tolkien intended. I’m not sure PJ needed to make 3 films to do that, but considering how many chase scenes and battles he included, he felt he needed 3 films to do his vision justice. That’s the kind of decision filmmakers make, for better or worse, often without the studios’ (name removed by moderator)ut, although the studio certainly liked the idea of more films because they would make more money, no doubt about that. :yup:

 

[AbideWithMe]

Della, I’ve liked all your comments.

From my preteen years on up I used to re-read LOTR and TH on a yearly basis. Yeah, it was escapism, but it led me back into seeing seeing the magic and wonder and holiness of God’s green earth.

I’m an artist, and I have a very vivid imagination, but seeing ME on a big screen is like finally getting to visit a distant country which I’ve imagined in my mind’s eye but never seen (or heard) in all its glory and atmospheric richness. Plus, I love seeing other artists’ imaginations brought to life, even if they are different than how I imagined Middle Earth. I love the movies for the visuals, and I’m so glad that for the most part the sets and scenes are rich, awe-inspiring and deep, not saccharine sweet eye candy. I read the books for the storytelling; the movies are worthwhile to me even if all they do superbly is provide great visuals.

 

[Sarcelle]

I also liked the musical accompaniment by Howard Shore. Now I can’t think of the Shire without its musical score. I also like how each place, the Shire, Rohan, Gondor, Rivendell, Moria, and Lothlorien and other places have their own musical score.

Some to me resemble Church music. Remember the song sang for Arwen when she was at Aragorn’s funeral?

 

[DaveBj]

I also liked the musical accompaniment by Howard Shore. Now I can’t think of the Shire without its musical score. I also like how each place, the Shire, Rohan, Gondor, Rivendell, Moria, and Lothlorien and other places have their own musical score.

Some to me resemble Church music. Remember the song sang for Arwen when she was at Aragorn’s funeral?

Me too. In fact, all of the LOTR cuts were on shuffle-play while I was writing the novel mentioned below. I love movie music. Howard Shore isn’t quite John Williams, but he’s very close.

 

[Joe_5859]

Here is Steve Greydanus’ review of the third Hobbit movie:

ncregister.com/daily-news/sdg-reviews-the-hobbit-3/

All in all, it seems along the lines of what I’d expect. I will probably enjoy the movie more so than Greydanus (as with the previous two installments). I generally agree with his criticisms, but I suppose I find it easier to overlook the faults than he does.

 

[jilly4ski]

I really enjoyed the LOTRs trilogy the cinematography was absolutely breathtaking. I am also less attached to the books than others. I didn’t read then until I was an adult, though oddly enough, I found the TTs to be my favorite book, but my least favorite movie of that trilogy and FotR to be my favorite movie, but my least favorite book. So my biggest complaint for the Hobbit movies is the cinematography. Some of the scenes are beautiful, like Smaug inside the lonely mountain. But the outdoor vistas seem lacking in color and definition. They look and feel fake. But I will go and watch the movie and no doubt enjoy it.