The Hobbit in 2010

#5
#5
I'm looking forward to it. I think he did a marvelous job with LOTR. Some of the liberties he took with the plot I didn't necessarily agree with, but Jackson is still the best man to get "The Hobbit" done right.
 
#6
#6
MG1968 said:
I'm looking forward to it. I think he did a marvelous job with LOTR. Some of the liberties he took with the plot I didn't necessarily agree with, but Jackson is still the best man to get "The Hobbit" done right.
Click to expand...


I adored the FOTR.

I liked the Twin Towers.

I liked Return of the King.
 
#7
#7
if the characters just talked at normal speed the LOTR trilogy would have been hours shorter and infinitely more watchable. :snoring:
 
#9
#9
Agreed, should be good, And yes there is a lot of walking in all the books. I didn't realize til I said down and read all 3 books how much stuff was left out.
 
#10
#10
I wonder about the settlement....I think the studio was saying at a point that LOTR never made a dime.
 
#11
#11
i will definitely watch. LOTR was one of first series of books I read as a kid, obviously starting with the Hobbit.

There were several "liberties", as John Wayne mentioned above that Jackson took in LOTR and I wasn't thrilled with all of them, but oh well. The Ents seemed way cooler in the book and we never got to meet Tom Bombadil. He seemed like one cool guy. Either way, only Jackson could make the Hobbit seem very good.
 
#12
#12
volfanbill said:
i will definitely watch. LOTR was one of first series of books I read as a kid, obviously starting with the Hobbit.

There were several "liberties", as John Wayne mentioned above that Jackson took in LOTR and I wasn't thrilled with all of them, but oh well. The Ents seemed way cooler in the book and we never got to meet Tom Bombadil. He seemed like one cool guy. Either way, only Jackson could make the Hobbit seem very good.
Click to expand...

Plus the whole fight with Saruman at the end vanished.
 
#13
#13
volsforever27 said:
Plus the whole fight with Saruman at the end vanished.
Click to expand...

yeah, the ending was all kinds of screwed up. The Shire was ravaged in the book as well. Didn't play out in the movie as serious as the book made it out be. I really wanted to hear the Ents singing.
 
#14
#14
volfanbill said:
yeah, the ending was all kinds of screwed up. The Shire was ravaged in the book as well. Didn't play out in the movie as serious as the book made it out be. I really wanted to hear the Ents singing.
Click to expand...

You're right, they had to rebuild everything from scratch more or less. Maybe Jackson thought it would make the movies too long. :crazy:
 
#15
#15
volsforever27 said:
You're right, they had to rebuild everything from scratch more or less. Maybe Jackson thought it would make the movies too long. :crazy:
Click to expand...

Possibly. While exciting, he could have shortened the fight scenes to allow for better timing to accurately depict the books.
 
#16
#16
volfanbill said:
Possibly. While exciting, he could have shortened the fight scenes to allow for better timing to accurately depict the books.
Click to expand...

People wouldn't have likes the movies as well, only the hardcore fans of the books. That's just my opinion.
 
#17
#17
volsforever27 said:
People wouldn't have likes the movies as well, only the hardcore fans of the books. That's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with that. But adding Tom Bombadil and giving the Ents the life that they actually had would've added a fresh, comedic part of the trilogy that could've put it completely over the top.
 
#18
#18
What exactly is the sequel to the Hobbit going to be about? I know Tolkien wrote books that preceded the story of Bilbo, describing how the Rings came about and the Elves, Dwarves and men, but I've never heard any story of what happened between Bilbo's adventures and giving Frodo the ring. Anyone have any clue?
 
#19
#19
volfanbill said:
What exactly is the sequel to the Hobbit going to be about? I know Tolkien wrote books that preceded the story of Bilbo, describing how the Rings came about and the Elves, Dwarves and men, but I've never heard any story of what happened between Bilbo's adventures and giving Frodo the ring. Anyone have any clue?
Click to expand...


I didn't know there was going to be a sequal to The Hobbit. Or am I misunderstanding your question?
 
#21
#21
the only "sequel" that Tolkien wrote was LOTR Trilogy. Jackson may be planning to create a movie based on the 60 years that passed in Bilbo's life after the Battle of the Five Armies and the death of Smaug.

There is quite a bit of information contained in the appendices at the end of "The Return of the King".
 
#24
#24
MG1968 said:
the only "sequel" that Tolkien wrote was LOTR Trilogy. Jackson may be planning to create a movie based on the 60 years that passed in Bilbo's life after the Battle of the Five Armies and the death of Smaug.

There is quite a bit of information contained in the appendices at the end of "The Return of the King".
Click to expand...

There's not really enough there to make a movie though is there? I mean the Elves didn't do anything, the dwarves just fell apart. Aragorn got old. According to the books he should have been like 70 when the FOTR started. The Aragorn/Strider story is about all you would have. How he grew up the heir and went off on his adventures/battles and met Arwen. But is that really movie material? Also, how would you play off that Aragorn was 70 in LOTR?

I'm such a nerd.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top