Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

In the books I think thats the only character that doesn't actually do anything.

To the Hobbit, I don't know if I could stand the Hobbit without all the cool songs.

Orlanth wrote:True but Helms Deep was only a small portion of the book, wheras it was a much larger portion of the film. It needed breaking up somehow.

They did break it up, by going back and forth between Helms Deep and Fangorn Forest.

GG

generalgrog wrote:

Orlanth wrote:True but Helms Deep was only a small portion of the book, wheras it was a much larger portion of the film. It needed breaking up somehow.

They did break it up, by going back and forth between Helms Deep and Fangorn Forest.

GG

Meh. I wasn't keen on the Fangorn scenes and always thought it was an excellent time to make a run for the restroom. The deleted scenes are more humorous, but even more dull.

Im honestly a bit excited about that. I personally love LOTR movies, and have beena HUGE fan of the hobbit since I was a little kid. I used to watch that animated movie weekly. As long as that Wood fella that played Frodo isnt in it Ill be happy. He just weirds me out.

I dunno that the hobbit is suited to an epic dark movie style. I hope they keep it in the spirit of the book.

KingCracker wrote:Im honestly a bit excited about that. I personally love LOTR movies, and have beena HUGE fan of the hobbit since I was a little kid. I used to watch that animated movie weekly. As long as that Wood fella that played Frodo isnt in it Ill be happy. He just weirds me out.

That's pretty unlikely, given the fact Frodo's not actually IN The Hobbit!

You never know, they might bung some sort of linking scene in at the end in a george lucas like effort of continuity between films. Would utterly ruin it though.

If Frodo is in the Hobbit then the film will have to be an 18 certificate.

i've but one thing to say about the hobbit.....it better having singing goblins

Well there will be an orc-estra to play the theme music.

*groan*

I'd be quite short with them if they started into an orc-estral hobbit.

I found the book depressing, so the way the movies added comic relief through Gimli was a good idea, just not really portrayed well.

greenskin lynn wrote:i've but one thing to say about the hobbit.....it better having singing goblins

Fifteen birds on five fir trees,

Their feathers were fanned in a fiery breeze,

But, funny little birds, they had no wings!

O what shall we do with the funny little things?

Roast 'em alive, or stew them in a pot;

Fry them, boil them and eat them hot?

Hoo-Rah!

I just hope that PJ doesn't run with another emo gay hobbits walking concept, I agree with Kevin Smith on the OTT releationship between Sam-wise and Frodo.

If PJ stays away from such in the Hobbit then I would like to venture that Sean Astin would make a good Bilbo.

Now that I think about it, we need a "reimagining" here.

Michael Bay Director/Producer

Sylvestor Stallone as Bilbo

Vladimir Putin as Gandalf

Tiger Woods' former "friends" as the Dwarves

Bobcat Golthwait as the voice of Sauron

Adolf Hitler as Adolf Hitler

As an added bonus Mel Brooks will return to the screen to reprise his role as Yogurt.

"May the Schwaartz be Mit YOU!"

Albatross wrote:Well, apart from the bit about King Kong - it was awwwwright, not good IMO. And it was FAR too long.

Oh my god yes.

Usually you worry about the studio stepping in and messing with the director's vision. With King Kong, the issue was that PJ was given carte blanche, and no one at the studio stood up and said "Peter, it's time to CUT THE @#$%& FILM!!!" The giant insect scene lasted twice as long as it should have. PJ lost ALL sense of pacing with that film.

I think the Hobbit would be better off in someone else's hands, and that's not meant as a slight to PJ. Sometimes it's just better to bring in a fresh vision.

Jackson has always has problems with timing, it seems. The good thing is that Tolkein's work absolutely defies standard form beyond the fact that we don't make four-hour epics anymore...
Jackson at least has proved he's able to jam a zillion pages of canon into a few three-hour canisters without it turning out looking like the unkempt, poorly dressed hobo he himself happens to be.

I agree that without singing it won't be right, and The Hobbit as a rule is better left to gaudy stage productions... the reason, I guess, is why Jackson wants to do the Hobbit as a movie. Other than making a little money, I don't see how appropriating the text into a modern film can be... useful.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:Other than making a little money, I don't see how appropriating the text into a modern film can be... useful.

That is really the only reason a film gets produced, really. At least at this level of play.

I thoroughly enjoyed all three of the lotr movies and king kong. I got the best sleep in my life out of them. 12 hours of unbeatable sleep.

Tripod have the best comment on PJs KK.

"Anyone seen king kong? Fething long, isn't it?"

"Get to the Fething Monkey!"

The project's in development hell. The production studio is broke. The rights are about to revert. If it never gets made, I'll be a happy man.

Albatross wrote:

KingCracker wrote:Im honestly a bit excited about that. I personally love LOTR movies, and have beena HUGE fan of the hobbit since I was a little kid. I used to watch that animated movie weekly. As long as that Wood fella that played Frodo isnt in it Ill be happy. He just weirds me out.

That's pretty unlikely, given the fact Frodo's not actually IN The Hobbit!

True true, but as Whatwhat said, they could do one of those hey this film is connected with the others!

But aside from that, I mean at all. I dont care if whats his nuts plays a damn tree, that cant talk or cant move, just STATIC! If he is there, I will get weirded out. Seriously dont like that guy

Frazzled wrote:In the books I think thats the only character that doesn't actually do anything.

To the Hobbit, I don't know if I could stand the Hobbit without all the cool songs.

Pippin does quite a bit, nearly all of it counterproductive. His only real benefits was hat he was a Hobbit and thus for the most part trustworthy and good natured and above all else outside he regular social order and thus a free agent. Everyone else was either a noble or told to shut up and follow orders. hobbits were commoners, but commenors from an alien society that wasnt trying to social climb elsewhere. Thus the Hobbits could fit in anywhere and be left to get on and help. By asnd large Gandalf chose his Hobbits well, but Merry and Pippin were never his actual choices, he didnt want them on the fellowship but was willing to accept them.

The story of Pippin is local boy made good, although that could be more properly apportioned to Sam as Meerry and Pippin were gentry of the Shire, wheras Sam Gamgee was a genuine peasant he was also a genuine hero. Pippin was useless by trying desperately to be useful. Galadriel encouraged him to avoid despair in this, and eventually he did show a measure of merit by helping kill a troll with the help of his enchanted blade. Though he was also the only mamber of the Fellowaship to make boast on return to the Shire, calling his sword a troll-bane.


On to the Hobbit, an overlooked part of the book concerns the introcuction to Gandalf. The wizard who encourages hobbits to go on adventures then are never seen again. as we know of no other successful Hobbits, and they were quite unknown in any land beyond Bree with the exception of the elves 9an most still hasdnt actually seen one). I thus wonder what happened to the rest of Gandalf proteges. I wonder how many Hobbits did Gandalf lead out into the wilds to die before he hits jackpot with Bilbo.

So Gandalf groomed halflings to go on a "big adventure" with him and they were never seen again?

*shudder*

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:So Gandalf groomed halflings to go on a "big adventure" with him and they were never seen again?

*shudder*

Yes, but I suspect you are reading more into this than shown in the book or this thread.

I dunno
There is a lot of stuff in LOTR about Frodo trying to resist fingering Sauron's ring

Orlanth wrote:On to the Hobbit, an overlooked part of the book concerns the introcuction to Gandalf. The wizard who encourages hobbits to go on adventures then are never seen again. as we know of no other successful Hobbits, and they were quite unknown in any land beyond Bree with the exception of the elves 9an most still hasdnt actually seen one). I thus wonder what happened to the rest of Gandalf proteges. I wonder how many Hobbits did Gandalf lead out into the wilds to die before he hits jackpot with Bilbo.

I thought that Bilbos grandfather, one of the Tooks, was a succsessfull adventurer with Gandalf? That's where their wealth came from...

GG

Bullroarer Took? I think that was his name...


In "The Hobbit" video game by Sierra (made official by the Tolkein estate), Bilbo talks with his neighbors about an adventure that his grandmother had as well. Seems the Baggins' family history was of some concern to the hobbits of Hobbiton.

One of the finer points missed in the books concerning Gimli and Legolas was how they overcame their cultural opinions by seeing what the other considered beautiful, specifically the crystal caverns beneath Helm's Deep and (iirc) Fangorn Forest. Or was it Mirkwood...?

Thats not canon middle Earth lore though, its an official licenced product, big difference. In fact I fear the computer game add ons as contaminents of middle earth canon almost as much as I do Games Workshop add ons.

The actual reference is fleeting:

From The Hobbit
"Not the Gandalf who was responsible for so many quiet lads and lasses going off into the Blue for mad adventures? Anything from climbing trees to visiting elves - or sailing in ships, sailing to other shores!"

it is indicated later that not all of Gandalfs proteges are seen again but from the tex we can se gandlaf chose both male and female hobbits and the elves were aware of hem likely just in Rivendell and the Grey Havens. it makes sense that most of the hobbits taken by Gandalf were taken west, a relatively safe direction for adventures where they could be safely observed while left to their initiative.

Courtesy of Wikipedia, "list of hobbits":

Belladonna (Took) Baggins (2852–2934): The "remarkable" ninth child, and eldest daughter, of the Old Took and his wife Adamanta. The wife of Bungo Baggins and mother of Bilbo Baggins, she was well known to the wizard Gandalf.

My mistake that it was his grandmother, but it's been a while since I played the game. While you don't see Frodo (and you wouldn't since he didn't arrive in Hobbiton until much later) in the game, there are children that I believe become the mothers (not wives, as I thought earlier) of Merry and Pippin.

There's also this entry:

Bandobras "Bullroarer" Took (2704–2806): The younger son of Isumbras III, Bandobras was known for his exceptionally large stature for a Hobbit (he stood 4' 5" and could ride a horse), although he was later surpassed by his descendant Pippin and Pippin's friend Merry Brandybuck. He led the defence against the orcs of Mt. Gram led by Golfimbul at the Battle of Greenfields. He is said to have knocked Golfimbul's head off with a blow from his club and sending it flying into a rabbit hole, and is thus credited with inventing the sport of golf. While his older brother Ferumbras succeeded to the Thainship, he fathered many descendants, including the North-tooks of Long Cleeve.

On a related note, my son and I are listening to the unabridged Fellowship audiobook. While he's seen the movies and read The Hobbit, he's never read the LotR trilogy. At almost 13, I think it's time he experienced the work of Tolkein in a more direct manner.

In his own time Gavin

I read it when aged about 19 and thought it was the bees knees.

Tried to read it a few years later and couldn't get back into it at all and never read it since.

In a TV interview at the time of the release of the Fellowship, Terry Pratchett said that if you weren't totally into the Lord of the Rings when you were 14 there was something wrong with you.
If you were still totally into the Lord of the Rings when you were 40, there was something wrong with you!