Switch Theme:

Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Actually, its not a plot hole.


I didn't say it was a plot hole. I said it felt rushed.


Assuming the scene says what it reported to say on Dakka it is a plot hole.
At this time Aragorn was ten years old and living in secret in Rivendell under the pseudonym Estel. His identity was secret even from himself and he was a ward of Elrond.

Aragorn had plenty of time to meet Legolas during his travels, it is almost certain that by the time of the Council of Elrond, Legolas knew exactly who Aragorn was.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Flashman wrote:
hence HBMC drawing a parallel between that and Legolas being sent to look for Strider.


Hold on, Gandalf sent Legolas to look for Strider.

Looking for Aragorn was enough of a plot hole.

Aragorn wasn't even called Aragorn for another ten years, and he took up his labours when he took up his name. Arathorn was never 'Strider' he lived openly under his own name as Chieftain of the Dunedain, which is how he got hunted, and was dead by this time.
Aragorn was named Strider by the Breelanders when they got to know him, we could assume he might have started that part of his job early. Though it appears he first started by squiring in Rohan, it coincides with the timing of when he was seen there. I cant remember his pseudonym from Rohan, but there was once mentioned in the appendixes IIRC.

At the time of the Battle of the Five Armies even Gandalf would not have heard of Strider.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/12/30 18:34:25


n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in gb
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?





UK

Just got back from seeing it. It was, in short, just as amazing as I had expected and hoped, and sits proudly among its fellows in both trilogies as the best set of films ever made. Brilliant acting all round, visually stunning and an excellent soundtrack as well. Honestly, it's hard to pick favourite bits, but the standouts for me were:
Spoiler:

-The White Council vs The Nazgul and Sauron. Great to see Saruman, Galadriel and Elrond get to cut lose and prove they are among the most powerful beings in Middle Earth. It was especially good to see Sauron banished to Mordor, another one of those tie-ins that make The Hobbit and LotR that much closer.

Dain, the Angriest Dwarf in Middle Earth. I'd been joking for months that, as it was Billy Connoly, he'd be swearing at just about everything, so when he rides up and asked the Elves to 'sod off', it made the film. Brilliant casting, hope we see more of him in the EE.

Richard Armitage gives the standout performance; Thorin's descent into madness was acted just about perfectly, as was his return from that. His fight with Azog was also very cool, if a little overlong.

The ending scene was great too, once more tying the whole lot together.

There were only a couple of things I didn't like, and even those are growing on me. At first, I wasn't a fan of Bard using his son as a crossbow, but the acting saved that. I'd have liked to have seen more of Beorn and of Radagast, so those shoot to the top of the Extended Edition wishlist. It's going to be a long few months waiting for that.


Yeah, twas epic.

 
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

Well at least someone likes it, other than Peter Jackson.

n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran



South Portsmouth, KY USA

 Orlanth wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Actually, its not a plot hole.


I didn't say it was a plot hole. I said it felt rushed.


Assuming the scene says what it reported to say on Dakka it is a plot hole.
At this time Aragorn was ten years old and living in secret in Rivendell under the pseudonym Estel. His identity was secret even from himself and he was a ward of Elrond.

Aragorn had plenty of time to meet Legolas during his travels, it is almost certain that by the time of the Council of Elrond, Legolas knew exactly who Aragorn

Gandalf would not have heard of Strider.




Except that by the events in LotR, Aragorn was 87 years old and the events of The Hobbit were set +/- 50 years before that. So Aragorn/Strider would have been 37 or so and already being active in the wilderlands. Also you are forgetting that he grew up in Rivendell, so his identity was well known to the elves. Not only Elrond but undoubtedly also the highest tiers of elven nobility, Cirdan, Thranduil, Celeborn, Lady Galadriel; considering he was of the house of Arathorn and thereby one of the last of the Numenorians. Not only that but those "in the know" would have wanted to keep an eye on him (two eyes as often as they could, I'm sure) as he was the last king of Gondor and the only real challenger to Sauron's power considering what his granddad did. He was destined for a showdown, why else would he carry around Narsil?

The elves knew this, and only reluctantly did Aragorn accept this destiny.




Armies: Space Marines, IG, Tyranids, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar.
I am the best 40k player in my town, I always win! Of course, I am the only player of 40k in my town.

Check out my friends over at Sea Dog Game Studios, they always have something cooking: http://www.sailpowergame.com. Or if age of sail isn't your thing check out the rapid fire sci-fi action of Techcommander http://www.techcommandergame.com
 
   
Made in au
Terminator with Assault Cannon






brisbane, australia

Aragorn was 87????

*Insert witty and/or interesting statement here* 
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






 the shrouded lord wrote:
Aragorn was 87????


It's good to be the king.

Or more accurately it is good to come from a noble line of humans that age incredibly slow and live longer than other humans.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in au
Terminator with Assault Cannon






brisbane, australia

 Ahtman wrote:
 the shrouded lord wrote:
Aragorn was 87????


It's good to be the king.

Or more accurately it is good to come from a noble line of humans that age incredibly slow and live longer than other humans.

oh ok...that makes more sense.

*Insert witty and/or interesting statement here* 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran



South Portsmouth, KY USA

One more point that I missed in Orlanth's post above was that Gandalf wouldn't have known Strider/Aragorn/Elessar at the time of the BOFA.

I submit that he would have indeed known him and quite well, I imagine, because of Gandalf's being a) a Maiar spirit in human form that was sent by Eru to help guide the free peoples of M.E. And was very active in this regard, being seen as a meddeler and troublemaker by many, and b) Had known the elves for many years even before Aragorn came to be in Rivendell. Undoubtedly because of his pedigree Gandalf and even Saruman would have had an early interest in the scion of the house of Arathrain.

So you see it is not a plot hole or failure to make a connection between Legolas and Strider, in fact it enhances the story and gives quite a bit of depth by saying so much in a mere two sentences.

Notice that Thranduil does not give up Strider's true name, he knows what it would mean if that were leaked at the wrong time. Aragorn could have been hunted down and ended before coming to power as his father was hunted down.


Armies: Space Marines, IG, Tyranids, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar.
I am the best 40k player in my town, I always win! Of course, I am the only player of 40k in my town.

Check out my friends over at Sea Dog Game Studios, they always have something cooking: http://www.sailpowergame.com. Or if age of sail isn't your thing check out the rapid fire sci-fi action of Techcommander http://www.techcommandergame.com
 
   
Made in gb
Joined the Military for Authentic Experience





On an Express Elevator to Hell!!

 the shrouded lord wrote:
 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
 Medium of Death wrote:
 Hordini wrote:
The LotR films, made by Peter Jackson, is infinitely superior to the Hobbit films, but Peter Jackson is a hack? I don't think Christopher Lee had much to do with it. I'm not saying actors can't have any effect on directors, as filmmaking is a collaborative art form, but last I knew Christopher Lee didn't have anything to do with the set and costume design, editing, cinematography, screenwriting, etc.



If you watch the behind the scenes on the LOTR's you can see Christopher is a massive Tolkien fan. He re-reads the books every year. He might not have designed things but he did have the pulse of the setting.

There seems to have been much more effort put into those films. There are hours of special features on the extended box sets of the LOTR. I'm sure there's a segment where it talks about Lee complaining about elements of the script to Jackson.



I'm not surprised - Christopher Lee actually met Tolkien prior to the authors death.

as apposed to meeting him post-death?


You have to clarify - can imagine Christopher Lee being into some dark stuff!

This made me chuckle


Epic 30K&40K! A new players guide, contributors welcome https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page
 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







I've got to say, I enjoyed this film more than the other 2. I'm not exactly one to complain about a film being made up of one long extended battle sequence.

In saying that, something really did seem a bit wibbly about the timeline of it all.

Spoiler:
I was sorta hoping for Dain to be riding a badger, mantic style. However, boar and goat cavalry are entertaining enough (but really, the whole 'goats appearing out of nowhere' was rather odd. And far more noticeable than the 'horses randomly appearing in the great hall' weirdness of The Two Towers.)

It's good seeing Billy Connolly, Ken Stott and James Nesbitt all in the same film. I would have liked to see them share a scene though. Just needed to add in Robbie Coltrane.

I do feel they made a mistake with Tauriel though. I didn't mind her presence in the film at all, or indeed the romance angle. Because, lets face it, it's pretty much needed in films nowadays.

However...

I would have thought that it would have been more interesting if Tauriel had done a heroic sacrifice in order to save Kili... Then failed, Kili dying anyway. Have this all witnessed by Legolas, who then bitterly blames the dwarves for this whole mess...

Thereby, making his developed friendship with Gimli in the LOTR all the more significant. It would certainly be better than the Aragorn reference...

I did like the White Council fight, very neat special effects on the ringwraiths. The Galadriel thing was a bit weird though (I would have thought it'd be a bit less ragged looking for one). Much of the sequence seemed very disjointed though.

In fact, that could summarise the film. Really quite disjointed (I'm not sure the geography really fit together too well either, for that matter)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/31 14:46:37


 
   
Made in gb
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?





UK

The goats/rams are shown in the trailer charging over a hill, but the shot did not appear in the movie (and neither did the Chariot and a few other lines/shots from the trailer). I expect the Extended version will clear that up well enough, though.

I was surprised Tauriel made it, but at the end of the third film the character was actually good enough that I was quite pleased she did. I did also like the idea of all three Elves basically going through the same lonliness and coming out of it in rather different ways. Thranduil's bitterness is explained by the loss of his wife, Tauriel attempts to move away from typical Elven aloofness/restraint and suffers for it, and in the end, Legolas starts down the road to becoming more like his father, before the companionship of Aragorn and Gimli rehumanises him in LotR.

 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






Ol' Blighty

 Sienisoturi wrote:
I believe that the problem with all the movies of the lord of the rings saga is, that the source material makes for a horrible movie. What makes tolkiens writing unique is the fact that he thoroughly describes every singly thing in the story, but doing that in a movie is hard if not impossible. Because of this, it is almost impossible to create a movie, that would be loyal to the source material.

I'd say the Lord of the Rings is much trickier to make into a film than the Hobbit; much more detail, much larger scale, and a much larger source material. I think the problem with the Hobbit is that the excuse of "film adaptations of treasured books are hard" seems a lot shakier after how good the LotR was. If it had happened to that trilogy, people would have gone with that excuse and defended it for all its worth, but after managing such a successful adaptation the first time round, PJ set one hell of a high bar for the Hobbit which he simply couldn't match, and it looks much worse for it.
It's a very similar situation to that of Star Wars, but maybe not to the same extent.


DS:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Plotr06#+D+++A++++/eWD251R+++T(Ot)DM+
JB: I like the concept of a free Shrike roaming through the treetops of the jungle. I'm not sure that I like the idea of a real Shrike sitting on my couch eating my Skittles.
corpsesarefun: Thank god I missed be nice to shrike day.
greenskin lynn: because of all the skittles and soda, you basically live off sugar water, like some sort of freakish human-hummingbird hybrid. 
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

 the shrouded lord wrote:
 Ahtman wrote:
 the shrouded lord wrote:
Aragorn was 87????


It's good to be the king.

Or more accurately it is good to come from a noble line of humans that age incredibly slow and live longer than other humans.

oh ok...that makes more sense.


Yup. In the Two Towers he tells Eowyn how old he is after she asks how he could have fought alongside her grandfather.

IIRC he died around the age of 200.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






If you've only seen the films, and haven't seen the extended Two Towers, then I guess you could be forgiven for not knowing how old Aragorn is.

Dunedain are long-lived, but still mortal.

"The Omnissiah is my Moderati" 
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

xraytango wrote:
 Orlanth wrote:


Assuming the scene says what it reported to say on Dakka it is a plot hole.
At this time Aragorn was ten years old and living in secret in Rivendell under the pseudonym Estel. His identity was secret even from himself and he was a ward of Elrond.

Aragorn had plenty of time to meet Legolas during his travels, it is almost certain that by the time of the Council of Elrond, Legolas knew exactly who Aragorn

Gandalf would not have heard of Strider.


Except that by the events in LotR, Aragorn was 87 years old and the events of The Hobbit were set +/- 50 years before that. So Aragorn/Strider would have been 37 or so and already being active in the wilderlands. Also you are forgetting that he grew up in Rivendell, so his identity was well known to the elves. Not only Elrond but undoubtedly also the highest tiers of elven nobility, Cirdan, Thranduil, Celeborn, Lady Galadriel; considering he was of the house of Arathorn and thereby one of the last of the Numenorians. Not only that but those "in the know" would have wanted to keep an eye on him (two eyes as often as they could, I'm sure) as he was the last king of Gondor and the only real challenger to Sauron's power considering what his granddad did. He was destined for a showdown, why else would he carry around Narsil?

The elves knew this, and only reluctantly did Aragorn accept this destiny.



You have been watchng the movies without the book then.

Except that by the events in LotR, Aragorn was 87 years old and the events of The Hobbit were set +/- 50 years before that.


The Lord of the Rings occurs over an extended time period. Bllbo's leaving party was seventeen years before the events of the rest of the story. In the book this is clear, in the film it is not.

xraytango wrote:

The elves knew this, and only reluctantly did Aragorn accept this destiny.


Pter Jackson modernised the character by removing Aragorns inherent selflessnes and added measure of tiredness and a case of 'whats in it for me'.
Aragorn did not reluctantly take up his burden, he had already taken up the burden decades before the events of he War of the Ring, though he did sit on a rock in Rivendell summoning his courage before marching with the Fellowship.

Though my main peeve with Peter Jacksons depiction of Aragorn is that he murdered Saurons ambassador during a parley, something Aragorn would never do.

xraytango wrote:
One more point that I missed in Orlanth's post above was that Gandalf wouldn't have known Strider/Aragorn/Elessar at the time of the BOFA.


You also missed the age given. He is a timeline for you:

The War of the Ring was 3018-19
Bilbo's eleventy-first birthday party was in 3001
Thorin's Quest & Battle of the Five Armies was in 2941
Aragorn was born in 2931

IIRC he died around the age of 200.


Aragorn reigned for 120 years, and gave up his life before he became too old to rule. At least twice in his life he was rejuvenated, once from his gift in Lorien and once at his coronation.
So he died at an age of 207 or 208 depending when in the year he died. He was very long lived even for a Dunedain, due to the rejuvenation of his youth endowed o him from Galadriel.
Yet as one of his line he was nevertheless relatively short lived, his ancestor Elros, brother of Elrond, first King of Numenor lived five centuries, and most of the Numerorean line lived at least three centuries. Though the years lessened over the generations due to the dilution of elf blood.
It is likely that Aragorn's children, including King Eldarion, who succeeded him lived as long as Elros, if not longer, and one or more if his children might have been allowed to count themselves amongst the Eldar and become immortal, because first generation half elves are given that choice.


This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/12/31 18:16:21


n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in au
Incorporating Wet-Blending






Australia

 Sienisoturi wrote:
I believe that the problem with all the movies of the lord of the rings saga is, that the source material makes for a horrible movie. What makes tolkiens writing unique is the fact that he thoroughly describes every singly thing in the story, but doing that in a movie is hard if not impossible. Because of this, it is almost impossible to create a movie, that would be loyal to the source material.

I take it you've never heard the saying "A picture's worth a thousand words"? Film is inherently description-dense - you can depict the characters, their surroundings and their actions all at the same time. If the problem with The Hobbit was really that Tolkien was too descriptive, why the feth would you exacerbate the problem by putting more stuff into the movie?

"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-C.S. Lewis 
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

 AlexHolker wrote:
 Sienisoturi wrote:
I believe that the problem with all the movies of the lord of the rings saga is, that the source material makes for a horrible movie. What makes tolkiens writing unique is the fact that he thoroughly describes every singly thing in the story, but doing that in a movie is hard if not impossible. Because of this, it is almost impossible to create a movie, that would be loyal to the source material.

I take it you've never heard the saying "A picture's worth a thousand words"? Film is inherently description-dense - you can depict the characters, their surroundings and their actions all at the same time. If the problem with The Hobbit was really that Tolkien was too descriptive, why the feth would you exacerbate the problem by putting more stuff into the movie?


Because Peter Jackson was seen as the new George Lucas after the runaway success of The Return of the King, and it went to his head.

So after ten years of ego he knew better than Tolkien, in his own head at least. This is what Jackson truly lost sight of. Lucas deserves his status because he made Star Wars, he made the film universe and lore and imagery. Jackson was riding on Tolkien's masterwork, and in general his films worked best when they sticked to the story.

Now post Hobbit Jackson truly is the new Lucas, post-prequels. Jackson had to have his Jar Jars.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/12/31 18:14:32


n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran



South Portsmouth, KY USA

Actually Orlanth, I read Hobbit - LotR every five years.

I forgot that there were 17 years in there.

It would have been better if Gandalf had taken leave from the Shire and done his research, then had a caption "17 years later" when he shows up again in the FotR movie.

Ever since the movies I see those in my head when I read the books.

Armies: Space Marines, IG, Tyranids, Eldar, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar.
I am the best 40k player in my town, I always win! Of course, I am the only player of 40k in my town.

Check out my friends over at Sea Dog Game Studios, they always have something cooking: http://www.sailpowergame.com. Or if age of sail isn't your thing check out the rapid fire sci-fi action of Techcommander http://www.techcommandergame.com
 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






Ol' Blighty

Orlanth wrote:Because Peter Jackson was seen as the new George Lucas after the runaway success of The Return of the King, and it went to his head.

So after ten years of ego he knew better than Tolkien, in his own head at least. This is what Jackson truly lost sight of. Lucas deserves his status because he made Star Wars, he made the film universe and lore and imagery. Jackson was riding on Tolkien's masterwork, and in general his films worked best when they sticked to the story.

Now post Hobbit Jackson truly is the new Lucas, post-prequels. Jackson had to have his Jar Jars.


It's overly harsh to portray Jackson as some arrogant slimeball who thought he knew better than Tolkien. He had a lot more pressure on him this time around, from an older age, attempting to mix together several source materials into one cohesive story, with more control from meddling producers, trying to simultaneously appeal to the target audience of the book (kids), the hardcore fans of the original trilogy and books, and casual watchers (adults).
He tried to add in all sorts of imaginative ideas to try and appeal to the much more visually-stimulated audiences of film, and that unfortunately just didn't work. PJ didn't write the universe or lore, but the imagery was pretty vague, whether from Tolkien's own hand or of the countless pieces of art from the likes of Dan Hennah and Alan Lee. He wasn't "riding on Tolkien's masterwork" with the Lord of the Rings, he directed an incredibly difficult and ambitious film adaptation of a Goliath of a book which many had deemed to be far to great an undertaking to even consider - and he did it well.

As for "his films worked best when they sticked to the story", it really wasn't the case for the Lord of the Rings. For instance, excluding Tom Bombadil was a very good decision and Boromir's rewritten death was easily one of my favourite scenes in the entire trilogy. The ending of the Return of the King, much-criticised for its length, was even longer in the book.

I'd say that the only parts where he deviated from the LotR books in a bad way was the army of the dead fighting at the Pelennor Fields, where it would've taken far too long explaining who, how and why Imrahil, the Knights of Dol Amroth, Halbarad, The Dunedain, and all those coastal villages turned up to fight, and Faramir/Boromir/Denethor's relationship with one another, which again would have taken a lot of time and the extended edition of the Two Towers goes some way into covering that anyway.


DS:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Plotr06#+D+++A++++/eWD251R+++T(Ot)DM+
JB: I like the concept of a free Shrike roaming through the treetops of the jungle. I'm not sure that I like the idea of a real Shrike sitting on my couch eating my Skittles.
corpsesarefun: Thank god I missed be nice to shrike day.
greenskin lynn: because of all the skittles and soda, you basically live off sugar water, like some sort of freakish human-hummingbird hybrid. 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





What I was most disappointed by Was the complete exclusion of the Grey Company. At the very least they should have done a few cameos of nameless non speaking rangers every once in a while sitting with Aragorn in the prancing pony at bree (while he was watching the Hobbits), at the Council of Elrond, and at Aragorns coronation. You know, just to remind viewers that Aragorns not the last living dunedain in middle earth.
   
Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Anyway, like the first film, the movie is in serious need of some fan-editing. I already did my own cut of An Unexpected Journey and there's enough issues here that I know I will do one here as well (and then probably do a one or two movie cut of the trilogy as well for fun).


Want to try your hand at a 2 hour cut of the whole series so it can be one movie, LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN?

 
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN


I can't give you a gold star as you didn't show your work.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Orlanth wrote:
You have been watchng the movies without the book then.


Why should he need to? The books =/= the movie, and vice versa.

 Orlanth wrote:
The Lord of the Rings occurs over an extended time period. Bllbo's leaving party was seventeen years before the events of the rest of the story. In the book this is clear, in the film it is not.


Because it's not 17 years in the movie. It's however long it took Gandalf to ride to Minas Tirith, do some research, and ride back.

 Orlanth wrote:
... something Aragorn would never do.


Never do... in the books, which, as we have established, are not the movies.


Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






 shrike wrote:


I'd say that the only parts where he deviated from the LotR books in a bad way was the army of the dead fighting at the Pelennor Fields, where it would've taken far too long explaining who, how and why Imrahil, the Knights of Dol Amroth, Halbarad, The Dunedain, and all those coastal villages turned up to fight, and Faramir/Boromir/Denethor's relationship with one another, which again would have taken a lot of time and the extended edition of the Two Towers goes some way into covering that anyway.


So you thought the changes to the Entmoot were a smart call? I cannot wrap my head around the constant pleas expressed for 'more' in this thread and others. I am constantly told that X or Y was too much for the LotR trilogy; it would have complicated things or taken too long to explain. And yet there was time for PJ to add in things he wanted that tied up great chunks of time.

The fact that there are people waiting for an extended version of the hobbit movies to make sense of them is insane. You are looking at a 300 odd page book given 450 plus minutes of screentime in theatrical release. If you cannot tell a decent cohesive story with that, you are objectively a bad filmmaker.
   
Made in gb
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?





UK

 Bromsy wrote:


The fact that there are people waiting for an extended version of the hobbit movies to make sense of them is insane. You are looking at a 300 odd page book given 450 plus minutes of screentime in theatrical release. If you cannot tell a decent cohesive story with that, you are objectively a bad filmmaker.


Or, in fact, you are trying to make a film that not only expands on a rather shallow book (let's face it, as a novel, The Hobbit has nothing like the depth of LotR) to make it worthy of standing alongside it's predecessors, but also to draw on dozens of pages of additional source material to expand the setting, tie the two trilogies together and make the most of the last chance to make a film in this setting. Which I think PJ has done an admirable job of; I don't see how The Hobbit films are any worse than LotR. Different, yes, but not worse.

And for the record, I'm waiting for the EE not to make sense of the film but because it is a great movie and I would like to see more of it.

 
   
Made in au
[DCM]
.. .-.. .-.. ..- -- .. -. .- - ..






Toowoomba, Australia

I just got back and it was as big a let down as I thought it would be.

If the the Peter Jackson fanfiction with Legolas et al was removed from the 3 movies and it had been 2 it would have been a rollicking good pair of movies.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should...

The first trilogy kept your interest the whole way, within 10 minutes I was just feeling flat and uninterested.

Also at this stage gandalf's powers seem to be 'ride horse', 'smoke pipe' and 'smack Orc with sword or stick'.

2025: Games Played:8/Models Bought:162/Sold:169/Painted:127
2024: Games Played:6/Models Bought:393/Sold:519/Painted: 207
2023: Games Played:0/Models Bought:287/Sold:0/Painted: 203
2020-2022: Games Played:42/Models Bought:1271/Sold:631/Painted:442
2016-19: Games Played:369/Models Bought:772/Sold:378/ Painted:268
2012-15: Games Played:412/Models Bought: 1163/Sold:730/Painted:436 
   
Made in us
Pragmatic Primus Commanding Cult Forces






Southeastern PA, USA

 Orlanth wrote:
 AlexHolker wrote:
 Sienisoturi wrote:
I believe that the problem with all the movies of the lord of the rings saga is, that the source material makes for a horrible movie. What makes tolkiens writing unique is the fact that he thoroughly describes every singly thing in the story, but doing that in a movie is hard if not impossible. Because of this, it is almost impossible to create a movie, that would be loyal to the source material.

I take it you've never heard the saying "A picture's worth a thousand words"? Film is inherently description-dense - you can depict the characters, their surroundings and their actions all at the same time. If the problem with The Hobbit was really that Tolkien was too descriptive, why the feth would you exacerbate the problem by putting more stuff into the movie?


Because Peter Jackson was seen as the new George Lucas after the runaway success of The Return of the King, and it went to his head.

So after ten years of ego he knew better than Tolkien, in his own head at least. This is what Jackson truly lost sight of. Lucas deserves his status because he made Star Wars, he made the film universe and lore and imagery. Jackson was riding on Tolkien's masterwork, and in general his films worked best when they sticked to the story.

Now post Hobbit Jackson truly is the new Lucas, post-prequels. Jackson had to have his Jar Jars.


Jackson has fallen into darkness.

However, the books aren't exactly immaculate works. Some of the story changes in the LotR movies were improvements, IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Bromsy wrote:
The fact that there are people waiting for an extended version of the hobbit movies to make sense of them is insane. You are looking at a 300 odd page book given 450 plus minutes of screentime in theatrical release. If you cannot tell a decent cohesive story with that, you are objectively a bad filmmaker.


Agreed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/01 15:35:14


My AT Gallery
My World Eaters Showcase
View my Genestealer Cult! Article - Gallery - Blog
Best Appearance - GW Baltimore GT 2008, Colonial GT 2012

DQ:70+S++++G+M++++B++I+Pw40k90#+D++A+++/fWD66R++T(Ot)DM+++

 
   
Made in ca
Dakka Veteran






Bromsy wrote:
So you thought the changes to the Entmoot were a smart call? I cannot wrap my head around the constant pleas expressed for 'more' in this thread and others. I am constantly told that X or Y was too much for the LotR trilogy; it would have complicated things or taken too long to explain. And yet there was time for PJ to add in things he wanted that tied up great chunks of time.

The fact that there are people waiting for an extended version of the hobbit movies to make sense of them is insane. You are looking at a 300 odd page book given 450 plus minutes of screentime in theatrical release. If you cannot tell a decent cohesive story with that, you are objectively a bad filmmaker.


Waaagh_Gonads wrote:I just got back and it was as big a let down as I thought it would be.

If the the Peter Jackson fanfiction with Legolas et al was removed from the 3 movies and it had been 2 it would have been a rollicking good pair of movies.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should...


I call this the Adaptation Death Spiral.

You adapt a work into a movie and you start making changes and adding new content. But then those changes or new story elements create new plot problems that the original story obviously doesn't answer so you have to add more new content to try and write out of your own mess. If left unchecked the cycle repeats until it spirals out of control and you're left with something unrecognizable.

E.g The entire second half of World War Z where they mount a mission for a magic serum was only required because they wrote themselves into a corner with super fast, super strong zombies that can infect and turn people in 10 seconds with the smallest bite or scratch. They are so ridiculously doomed without this magic serum. Half the movie spent solving the problem they created by deviating from the type of zombies described in the book...

Same thing with the hobbit movies - constantly having to check in with Legolas and Tauriel and giving screen time to PJs creations when the obvious solution is just to not include them in the first place...
   
Made in gb
Highlord with a Blackstone Fortress






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Orlanth wrote:
You have been watchng the movies without the book then.


Why should he need to? The books =/= the movie, and vice versa.


Because he had the license to make the films and claimed intention to tell the story.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
The Lord of the Rings occurs over an extended time period. Bllbo's leaving party was seventeen years before the events of the rest of the story. In the book this is clear, in the film it is not.


Because it's not 17 years in the movie. It's however long it took Gandalf to ride to Minas Tirith, do some research, and ride back.


Still a plot hole.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
... something Aragorn would never do.


Never do... in the books, which, as we have established, are not the movies.



Film makers have artistic license, they can remove or amalgamate characters to clarify and better fit screen time, they can add scenes not seen in original point of view etc etc.
But each change should be accompanied by a reason for the change.
Rewiring Aragorn's moral compass because Jackson felt like it is no reason, it made no change to the overall plot or allowed time or number of characters presented to the audience to change Aragorn's character.

A good director will only change original source material to make a plot more filmable, and not to rewrite the source material,with exception of propaganda film makers, which doesn't apply here.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/01 20:05:02


n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. 
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka






Ol' Blighty

Bromsy wrote:
 shrike wrote:


I'd say that the only parts where he deviated from the LotR books in a bad way was the army of the dead fighting at the Pelennor Fields, where it would've taken far too long explaining who, how and why Imrahil, the Knights of Dol Amroth, Halbarad, The Dunedain, and all those coastal villages turned up to fight, and Faramir/Boromir/Denethor's relationship with one another, which again would have taken a lot of time and the extended edition of the Two Towers goes some way into covering that anyway.


So you thought the changes to the Entmoot were a smart call? I cannot wrap my head around the constant pleas expressed for 'more' in this thread and others. I am constantly told that X or Y was too much for the LotR trilogy; it would have complicated things or taken too long to explain. And yet there was time for PJ to add in things he wanted that tied up great chunks of time.

I can't remember what was changed about the Entmoot, so I can't say.
PJ added very little in the LotR, he just changed or cut things. Almost everything that PJ put into the film that wasn't in the book wasn't on top of something else, it was a replacement, very few of which took up more time than the original.


DS:90-S++G+++M++B++I+Plotr06#+D+++A++++/eWD251R+++T(Ot)DM+
JB: I like the concept of a free Shrike roaming through the treetops of the jungle. I'm not sure that I like the idea of a real Shrike sitting on my couch eating my Skittles.
corpsesarefun: Thank god I missed be nice to shrike day.
greenskin lynn: because of all the skittles and soda, you basically live off sugar water, like some sort of freakish human-hummingbird hybrid. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: