Peter Jackson to make The Hobbit (1 Viewer)

[Andrew74]

I enjoyed this. The dragon was well done - the look, the voice. Only thing that hit me half way through was I needed to forget I ever read the book, since the movie went way off. Even more so than the first and any of the LOTR movies.

yeah I think this was to be expected. It is almost impossible to have a near 9 hours movie on a 300 page book with out making additions. I knew this going in so I did my best to simply separate the book from the movie.

Not just the additions - they strayed far off the book material as well.

 

[Brady Marino]

I enjoyed this. The dragon was well done - the look, the voice. Only thing that hit me half way through was I needed to forget I ever read the book, since the movie went way off. Even more so than the first and any of the LOTR movies.

yeah I think this was to be expected. It is almost impossible to have a near 9 hours movie on a 300 page book with out making additions. I knew this going in so I did my best to simply separate the book from the movie.

Not just the additions - they strayed far off the book material as well.

The Legolas/Tauriel storyline I know isn't from the book and I know it's mostly filler, but I wasn't offended by it. As I stated before, I actually liked Lilly's character more than Arwen and I think whoever is playing Kili is killing it.

 

[Snotbubbles]

I enjoyed this. The dragon was well done - the look, the voice. Only thing that hit me half way through was I needed to forget I ever read the book, since the movie went way off. Even more so than the first and any of the LOTR movies.

yeah I think this was to be expected. It is almost impossible to have a near 9 hours movie on a 300 page book with out making additions. I knew this going in so I did my best to simply separate the book from the movie.

Not just the additions - they strayed far off the book material as well.

The Legolas/Tauriel storyline I know isn't from the book and I know it's mostly filler, but I wasn't offended by it. As I stated before, I actually liked Lilly's character more than Arwen and I think whoever is playing Kili is killing it.

I believe Jackson is using Tolkien's notes. Tolkien wrote the Hobbit for his children and it was incomplete/rushed. After he wrote LOTR he went back to the Hobbit. I think this second pass is the material Jackson is using.

 

[shadyridr]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

the first ones pace after the first 45 minutes and the second one for its entirety are pretty much identical. But since you gave up during the very beginning of a 9 hour story, I am unsure if you will like this one much better but you might.

It is not the worlds most complicated story so it probably won't matter if you don't get every last nuance, it is just a kids story after all. As I mentioned earlier I could never enjoy the middle of a story with out seeing the beginning but if missing a ton of the story does not bother you, give it a shot.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I enjoyed this. The dragon was well done - the look, the voice. Only thing that hit me half way through was I needed to forget I ever read the book, since the movie went way off. Even more so than the first and any of the LOTR movies.

yeah I think this was to be expected. It is almost impossible to have a near 9 hours movie on a 300 page book with out making additions. I knew this going in so I did my best to simply separate the book from the movie.

Not just the additions - they strayed far off the book material as well.

The Legolas/Tauriel storyline I know isn't from the book and I know it's mostly filler, but I wasn't offended by it. As I stated before, I actually liked Lilly's character more than Arwen and I think whoever is playing Kili is killing it.

I believe Jackson is using Tolkien's notes. Tolkien wrote the Hobbit for his children and it was incomplete/rushed. After he wrote LOTR he went back to the Hobbit. I think this second pass is the material Jackson is using.

Interesting. I have read all of the appendices in LOTR but have not read any of his extended notes that were published later by his son. Everything I read from reviews said that Tauriel was a brand new character as are all of her interactions with the dwarves.

Are you saying Tolkien has notes on this major side character that matches the movie? That is pretty cool.

 

[Snotbubbles]

I enjoyed this. The dragon was well done - the look, the voice. Only thing that hit me half way through was I needed to forget I ever read the book, since the movie went way off. Even more so than the first and any of the LOTR movies.

yeah I think this was to be expected. It is almost impossible to have a near 9 hours movie on a 300 page book with out making additions. I knew this going in so I did my best to simply separate the book from the movie.

Not just the additions - they strayed far off the book material as well.

The Legolas/Tauriel storyline I know isn't from the book and I know it's mostly filler, but I wasn't offended by it. As I stated before, I actually liked Lilly's character more than Arwen and I think whoever is playing Kili is killing it.

I believe Jackson is using Tolkien's notes. Tolkien wrote the Hobbit for his children and it was incomplete/rushed. After he wrote LOTR he went back to the Hobbit. I think this second pass is the material Jackson is using.

Interesting. I have read all of the appendices in LOTR but have not read any of his extended notes that were published later by his son. Everything I read from reviews said that Tauriel was a brand new character as are all of her interactions with the dwarves.

Are you saying Tolkien has notes on this major side character that matches the movie? That is pretty cool.

I have no idea what Tolkien's notes are. I'm sure Jackson is taking artistic liberties.

 

[Andrew74]

Question I had on the movie.

Spoiler

When Smaug first meets Bilbo and is looking for him, he says Bilbo is carrying a ring of gold that is precious. Then later he says the darkness is coming. Are we to assume Smaug knows this is the one ring and that Sauron is coming back? Seems pretty farfetched since he's been doing nothing buy lying around sleeping for years.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

just got back from part 2

Really liked it.

Cant wait for next xmas, or they releasing it in the summer?

 

[NewlyRetired]

just got back from part 2

Really liked it.

Cant wait for next xmas, or they releasing it in the summer?

it was originally scheduled for July 18th but was pushed back to December 17th of next year.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Question I had on the movie.

Spoiler

When Smaug first meets Bilbo and is looking for him, he says Bilbo is carrying a ring of gold that is precious. Then later he says the darkness is coming. Are we to assume Smaug knows this is the one ring and that Sauron is coming back? Seems pretty farfetched since he's been doing nothing buy lying around sleeping for years.

I can't answer your question directly but your question did make me think of a scene in the extended edition of Hobbit 1 which might tie to your question.

In the extended edition, there is an extra scene between Sauron, Gandalf, Galadriel and Elrond talking about the fates of the Dwarven Rings of Power. There is an outside chance that Smaug himself was involved in their disappearance. If he consumed one of the Dwarven Rings of Power, perhaps he could be more aware of the one ring.

 

[NewlyRetired]

The Hobbit DOS was the #1 movie for the 3rd week in a row. Only one other movie did that in 2013 and that was Gravity.

 

[Mjolnirs]

I saw it this weekend and really enjoyed it. Saw it in HFR 3D and thought some of the scenes were amazing.

Like others, I don't like how far off script some of it is, but there has to be some backstory that are in Tolkein's notes and of course filler to just fluff the story into 3 movies.

I really thought the part with Beorn was extremely well done.

 

[Daywalker]

but maybe because the 3D effect was so annoying.

That's how I feel about every 3D movie I see. Can ruin a flick.

Watched this again at home with no 3D. Enjoyed it quite a bit more. Was much brighter and could take in the whole screen as opposed to the gloomy keyhole view that I got from the 3D.

Could watch Cate Blanchett all day in that getup.

Looking forward to checking out the 2nd now.

 

[thecatch]

Liked the second one a lot but didn't think it was much different from the first in terms of pacing. Definitely a little more action but still had parts that dragged.

 

[Riversco]

Question I had on the movie.

Spoiler

When Smaug first meets Bilbo and is looking for him, he says Bilbo is carrying a ring of gold that is precious. Then later he says the darkness is coming. Are we to assume Smaug knows this is the one ring and that Sauron is coming back? Seems pretty farfetched since he's been doing nothing buy lying around sleeping for years.

Spoiler

I can't answer your question directly but your question did make me think of a scene in the extended edition of Hobbit 1 which might tie to your question.

In the extended edition, there is an extra scene between Sauron, Gandalf, Galadriel and Elrond talking about the fates of the Dwarven Rings of Power. There is an outside chance that Smaug himself was involved in their disappearance. If he consumed one of the Dwarven Rings of Power, perhaps he could be more aware of the one ring.

Its unclear what Smaug knew. We know that:

1. Both Sauron and Smaug had fallen under the influence of Morgoth at some point, so they have a connection there and that connection may lead them into an alliance.

2. Smaug was a creature of the First Age living in the Third Age. Creatures of the First Age were very powerful, practically unstoppable in the Third Age.

3. Dragons get more powerful as they age. Its not unreasonable to assume Smaug's sense of perception of events were quite powerful by the time he encountered the burglar. Could he sense Sauron's return? Could he sense the invisible burglar? Could he sense the One Ring? Probably.

 

[NewlyRetired]

but maybe because the 3D effect was so annoying.

That's how I feel about every 3D movie I see. Can ruin a flick.

Watched this again at home with no 3D. Enjoyed it quite a bit more. Was much brighter and could take in the whole screen as opposed to the gloomy keyhole view that I got from the 3D.Could watch Cate Blanchett all day in that getup.

Looking forward to checking out the 2nd now.

I can't watch any movie in 3d. It never feels right and I get a bit of a headache.

If you enjoyed the first you should enjoy the second.

 

[MaxThreshold]

but maybe because the 3D effect was so annoying.

That's how I feel about every 3D movie I see. Can ruin a flick.

Watched this again at home with no 3D. Enjoyed it quite a bit more. Was much brighter and could take in the whole screen as opposed to the gloomy keyhole view that I got from the 3D.Could watch Cate Blanchett all day in that getup.

Looking forward to checking out the 2nd now.

I can't watch any movie in 3d. It never feels right and I get a bit of a headache.

If you enjoyed the first you should enjoy the second.

I'm the same way. I avoid 3D like the Plague. The 2nd was definitely better than the first.

 

[tri-man 47]

Excellent movie ...much better than the first, which seemed to have a lot of filler scenes. This was much more natural action. Loved watching the elves fight ..and watching Tauriel in general. I had no interest in 3D, but I did notice a couple scenes that seemed to be designed for 3D moments - the bees in the house/stable; the butterflies above the tree line.

 

[BigTex]

Loved it, the Dragon was awesome but a bit too confident in himself but I guess he has every right to be.

ETA: I wanted to see more of the skin-changer he was clearly a bad ### not to be ####ed with.

 

[stbugs]

I loved the movie, but the only thing that I didn't like as a dad was the gratuitous violence. There was a lot of fighting in all 3 of the LOTRs, but nothing seemed out of the norm, i.e. something you wouldn't expect with swords and bows, but they didn't glorify it. In this one, the decapitations were done to make sure we knew exactly what happened, like when Legolas was in the fishing town with the two swords. Contrast that to Aragorn in his fight scene with the Uruk-hai leader in LOTR Fellowship where he decapitates him. One seemed in the flow of battle and one seemed like they were trying to make it look funny like hey look no body.

The Hobbit is a movie I let my boys watch whenever the want, this one seemed to bother them a bit. It reminded me of Transformers (1 and especially 2) where Michael Bay went out of his way with swearing and drug use to make the point that it wasn't a "toy" movie, but let's be honest, kids will watch it.

Anyway, good flick, loved the actions, but I think it would have been even better, especially for kids, without trying to make sure we saw all the cool kill shots.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I loved the movie, but the only thing that I didn't like as a dad was the gratuitous violence. There was a lot of fighting in all 3 of the LOTRs, but nothing seemed out of the norm, i.e. something you wouldn't expect with swords and bows, but they didn't glorify it. In this one, the decapitations were done to make sure we knew exactly what happened, like when Legolas was in the fishing town with the two swords. Contrast that to Aragorn in his fight scene with the Uruk-hai leader in LOTR Fellowship where he decapitates him. One seemed in the flow of battle and one seemed like they were trying to make it look funny like hey look no body.

The Hobbit is a movie I let my boys watch whenever the want, this one seemed to bother them a bit. It reminded me of Transformers (1 and especially 2) where Michael Bay went out of his way with swearing and drug use to make the point that it wasn't a "toy" movie, but let's be honest, kids will watch it.

Anyway, good flick, loved the actions, but I think it would have been even better, especially for kids, without trying to make sure we saw all the cool kill shots.

kids love orc decapitations

 

[stbugs]

I loved the movie, but the only thing that I didn't like as a dad was the gratuitous violence. There was a lot of fighting in all 3 of the LOTRs, but nothing seemed out of the norm, i.e. something you wouldn't expect with swords and bows, but they didn't glorify it. In this one, the decapitations were done to make sure we knew exactly what happened, like when Legolas was in the fishing town with the two swords. Contrast that to Aragorn in his fight scene with the Uruk-hai leader in LOTR Fellowship where he decapitates him. One seemed in the flow of battle and one seemed like they were trying to make it look funny like hey look no body.

The Hobbit is a movie I let my boys watch whenever the want, this one seemed to bother them a bit. It reminded me of Transformers (1 and especially 2) where Michael Bay went out of his way with swearing and drug use to make the point that it wasn't a "toy" movie, but let's be honest, kids will watch it.

Anyway, good flick, loved the actions, but I think it would have been even better, especially for kids, without trying to make sure we saw all the cool kill shots.

kids love orc decapitations

I do too, just thought it was almost like the Goblin King scenes in the first one where they were trying to make the orc deaths "fun" and light hearted. I just thought that detracted from the fight scenes for me and made it a little much for kids.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Loved it, the Dragon was awesome but a bit too confident in himself but I guess he has every right to be.

ETA: I wanted to see more of the skin-changer he was clearly a bad ### not to be ####ed with.

Cumberbatch could not have done better with Smaug. Perfect casting.

It is hard to say what will happen in the 3rd movie, but if they show the Battle of the 5 Armies, we should get a chance to see Beorn (skin changer) again.

 

[BigTex]

Loved it, the Dragon was awesome but a bit too confident in himself but I guess he has every right to be.

ETA: I wanted to see more of the skin-changer he was clearly a bad ### not to be ####ed with.

Cumberbatch could not have done better with Smaug. Perfect casting.

It is hard to say what will happen in the 3rd movie, but if they show the Battle of the 5 Armies, we should get a chance to see Beorn (skin changer) again.

I certainly hope so he seemed to want revenge because of what happened to his kind and being the last one left he has a revenge on his mind and probably wouldn't pass up an opportunity to kill as many as he possibly could.

 

[Brunell4MVP]

Liked the second one. Hated the first.

Both had too much filler. I can live with straying from the book. But the filler in #1 was brutal. It could have been a 30 minute movie. #2 has far less meaningless fighter action filler than #1. The story line holds together. Balin is a good character. Gandalf is good as always. Bilbo holds up. The evil characters are well done, especially the way Jackson found a way to make the necromancer take on the shape of the Eye of Sauron, which my kids struggled with the concept of in the LOTR movies. Legolas is the only character that doesn't do anything for me. Major yawn.

 

[gianmarco]

Just saw it today with my son. Solid movie, very enjoyable. Looking forward to the last installment.

 

[Andrew74]

Question I had on the movie.

Spoiler

When Smaug first meets Bilbo and is looking for him, he says Bilbo is carrying a ring of gold that is precious. Then later he says the darkness is coming. Are we to assume Smaug knows this is the one ring and that Sauron is coming back? Seems pretty farfetched since he's been doing nothing buy lying around sleeping for years.

Spoiler

I can't answer your question directly but your question did make me think of a scene in the extended edition of Hobbit 1 which might tie to your question.

In the extended edition, there is an extra scene between Sauron, Gandalf, Galadriel and Elrond talking about the fates of the Dwarven Rings of Power. There is an outside chance that Smaug himself was involved in their disappearance. If he consumed one of the Dwarven Rings of Power, perhaps he could be more aware of the one ring.

Its unclear what Smaug knew. We know that:

1. Both Sauron and Smaug had fallen under the influence of Morgoth at some point, so they have a connection there and that connection may lead them into an alliance.

2. Smaug was a creature of the First Age living in the Third Age. Creatures of the First Age were very powerful, practically unstoppable in the Third Age.

3. Dragons get more powerful as they age. Its not unreasonable to assume Smaug's sense of perception of events were quite powerful by the time he encountered the burglar. Could he sense Sauron's return? Could he sense the invisible burglar? Could he sense the One Ring? Probably.Where do you get the info on Smaug/First Age? I knew Sauron was In Morgoth's service but hadn't heard that about Smaug. The only thing I remember from Tolkien was that Gandalf was concerned that Sauron would bring Smaug into his service.

We know from The Hobbit that he knew Bilbo was there (the 2nd time he went down), despite his wearing the ring, as he could smell him, feel his breath, etc (quote was used in the movie).

 

[netnalp]

Question I had on the movie.

Spoiler

When Smaug first meets Bilbo and is looking for him, he says Bilbo is carrying a ring of gold that is precious. Then later he says the darkness is coming. Are we to assume Smaug knows this is the one ring and that Sauron is coming back? Seems pretty farfetched since he's been doing nothing buy lying around sleeping for years.

Spoiler

I can't answer your question directly but your question did make me think of a scene in the extended edition of Hobbit 1 which might tie to your question.

In the extended edition, there is an extra scene between Sauron, Gandalf, Galadriel and Elrond talking about the fates of the Dwarven Rings of Power. There is an outside chance that Smaug himself was involved in their disappearance. If he consumed one of the Dwarven Rings of Power, perhaps he could be more aware of the one ring.

Spoiler

Its unclear what Smaug knew. We know that:

1. Both Sauron and Smaug had fallen under the influence of Morgoth at some point, so they have a connection there and that connection may lead them into an alliance.

2. Smaug was a creature of the First Age living in the Third Age. Creatures of the First Age were very powerful, practically unstoppable in the Third Age.

3. Dragons get more powerful as they age. Its not unreasonable to assume Smaug's sense of perception of events were quite powerful by the time he encountered the burglar. Could he sense Sauron's return? Could he sense the invisible burglar? Could he sense the One Ring? Probably.

Where do you get the info on Smaug/First Age? I knew Sauron was In Morgoth's service but hadn't heard that about Smaug. The only thing I remember from Tolkien was that Gandalf was concerned that Sauron would bring Smaug into his service.We know from The Hobbit that he knew Bilbo was there (the 2nd time he went down), despite his wearing the ring, as he could smell him, feel his breath, etc (quote was used in the movie).

Smaug probably knows the history of the rings. I recall that the one ring calls out to beings of power. Maybe Smaug can sense the ring drawing his attention. Might be also why he didn't kill Bilbo right off. Maybe to find out what he could of this little being.

Seems like Smaug would be a fitting mount for Sauron.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

The LOTR series was excellent, although now when I rewatch them seem to ponder along, and I wonder if my love for them at the time wasn't because of 9-11. Regardless, The Hobbit blows so far. Both films are ludicrously bloated. Granted, the second isn't as bad as the first, but both needed an editor to get them down to about half of their actual running time.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

The LOTR series was excellent, although now when I rewatch them seem to ponder along, and I wonder if my love for them at the time wasn't because of 9-11. Regardless, The Hobbit blows so far. Both films are ludicrously bloated. Granted, the second isn't as bad as the first, but both needed an editor to get them down to about half of their actual running time.

9 11 and lotr ??

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

The LOTR series was excellent, although now when I rewatch them seem to ponder along, and I wonder if my love for them at the time wasn't because of 9-11. Regardless, The Hobbit blows so far. Both films are ludicrously bloated. Granted, the second isn't as bad as the first, but both needed an editor to get them down to about half of their actual running time.

9 11 and lotr ??

Yes, absolutely. Fellowship of the Ring came out a couple of months after 9/11. The storyline deals with a civilization that's under threat from a barbaric, evil force that's completely bent on that civilization's destruction. The hobbits and elves and dwarves have no real choice but to get involved because even if they don't want war, war is coming for them regardless. It's not hard to see 9/11 echoing in this. Tolkien was almost certainly thinking about WWII when he wrote LOTR.

Obviously it's a coincidence since those films were in production and post-production way before 9/11, but it was eerie how appropriate those movies were for that time in our nation's history. It was basically wartime propaganda, only serendipitous. I remember reading an interview with Peter Jackson in which he lamented this coincidence, but it's there nonetheless.

 

[netnalp]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

The LOTR series was excellent, although now when I rewatch them seem to ponder along, and I wonder if my love for them at the time wasn't because of 9-11. Regardless, The Hobbit blows so far. Both films are ludicrously bloated. Granted, the second isn't as bad as the first, but both needed an editor to get them down to about half of their actual running time.

I still enjoy re-watching them. Probably do so once a year. The Return of the King, once the eagles arrive once the ring is destroyed is where I might start turning it off. There isn't much enjoyment in re-watching that long ending after that.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

The LOTR series was excellent, although now when I rewatch them seem to ponder along, and I wonder if my love for them at the time wasn't because of 9-11. Regardless, The Hobbit blows so far. Both films are ludicrously bloated. Granted, the second isn't as bad as the first, but both needed an editor to get them down to about half of their actual running time.

I still enjoy re-watching them. Probably do so once a year. The Return of the King, once the eagles arrive once the ring is destroyed is where I might start turning it off. There isn't much enjoyment in re-watching that long ending after that.

I can't stop at that point. That leaves out one of the best moments in the trilogy for me: "you bow to no one my friends".

=======

The first Hobbit was a decent movie, nothing great but still fun but the second movie was a solid movie. You have to be crazy to rate the second as "blowing" in my book.

I personally can't wait for the 3rd movie and hopefully anyone who thinks the first two blew won't bother wasting their time with the 3rd and taking a crap in this thread

I don't even know why you would want to see the second movie if you hated the first one that much, it just makes no sense at all. Why torture yourself?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Do i have to watch the first one to follow along this one? I gotta be honest, i shut the first one off 45 minutes in. It was a drag to get thru. This one sounds more my speed. Fyi i loved the lord of the rings trilogy.

The LOTR series was excellent, although now when I rewatch them seem to ponder along, and I wonder if my love for them at the time wasn't because of 9-11. Regardless, The Hobbit blows so far. Both films are ludicrously bloated. Granted, the second isn't as bad as the first, but both needed an editor to get them down to about half of their actual running time.

I still enjoy re-watching them. Probably do so once a year. The Return of the King, once the eagles arrive once the ring is destroyed is where I might start turning it off. There isn't much enjoyment in re-watching that long ending after that.

I can't stop at that point. That leaves out one of the best moments in the trilogy for me: "you bow to no one my friends".

=======

The first Hobbit was a decent movie, nothing great but still fun but the second movie was a solid movie. You have to be crazy to rate the second as "blowing" in my book.

I personally can't wait for the 3rd movie and hopefully anyone who thinks the first two blew won't bother wasting their time with the 3rd and taking a crap in this thread

I don't even know why you would want to see the second movie if you hated the first one that much, it just makes no sense at all. Why torture yourself?

My daughter and I saw the first one together, and she wanted to see the second so I took her. If the theater hadn't been dark, I would have been checking my watch after the first hour or so. The parts featuring Smaug were fine. The rest of the movie just moved along way too slowly and seemed put there just to pad the running time.

 

[Mjolnirs]

Tolkien was almost certainly thinking about WWII when he wrote LOTR.

Actually, no.

"As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical."

"The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would in confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle-earth. In that conflict both sides would have held hobbits in hatred and contempt: they would not long have survived even as slaves."

 

[Quez]

I didn't care for the LOTR movies but have loved the 1st 2 Hobbit films. LOTR movies seemed to drag way more IMO.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Finally saw the first one.

Scenes without Orcs = good. Scenes with Orcs = give me a break.

 

[Brady Marino]

Tolkien was almost certainly thinking about WWII when he wrote LOTR.

Actually, no.

"As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical."

"The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would in confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle-earth. In that conflict both sides would have held hobbits in hatred and contempt: they would not long have survived even as slaves."

He did fight in WW1, so I find it hard to believe that he wasn't inspired at least a little by that experience.

 

[Quez]

Downloaded the song from the credits, I See Fire. Good song.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Finally saw the first one.

Scenes without Orcs = good. Scenes with Orcs = give me a break.

Just to make sure, do you really mean Orcs and not Goblins?The Orcs chased them on the Wargs until they find the passage to Rivendell.

The Goblins were the group that captures them in the misty mountains with the fat Goblin King.

 

[Psychopav]

Tolkien was almost certainly thinking about WWII when he wrote LOTR.

Actually, no.

"As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical."

"The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would in confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle-earth. In that conflict both sides would have held hobbits in hatred and contempt: they would not long have survived even as slaves."

He did fight in WW1, so I find it hard to believe that he wasn't inspired at least a little by that experience.

I'm sure his experiences influenced his writing but he much preferred the idea that his stories would be adapted by the reader. If he was influenced by anything, IMO, it was by his desire (obsession, even?) to develop a rich and decidedly English mythology, built on the foundations of linguistics and his deeply pious Catholic beliefs.

 

[Brady Marino]

Tolkien was almost certainly thinking about WWII when he wrote LOTR.

Actually, no.

"As for any inner meaning or 'message', it has in the intention of the author none. It is neither allegorical nor topical."

"The real war does not resemble the legendary war in its process or its conclusion. If it had inspired or directed the development of the legend, then certainly the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron; he would not have been annihilated but enslaved, and Barad-dur would not have been destroyed but occupied. Saruman, failing to get possession of the Ring, would in confusion and treacheries of the time have found in Mordor the missing links in his own researches into Ring-lore, and before long he would have made a Great Ring of his own with which to challenge the self-styled Ruler of Middle-earth. In that conflict both sides would have held hobbits in hatred and contempt: they would not long have survived even as slaves."

He did fight in WW1, so I find it hard to believe that he wasn't inspired at least a little by that experience.

I'm sure his experiences influenced his writing but he much preferred the idea that his stories would be adapted by the reader. If he was influenced by anything, IMO, it was by his desire (obsession, even?) to develop a rich and decidedly English mythology, built on the foundations of linguistics and his deeply pious Catholic beliefs.

That's a good point. When I read The Hobbit and the LotR series, I had no idea he was in WW1. It probably doesn't change my view of his books, but it does lend an interesting perspective to view the books from.

 

[T Bell]

Loved it, the Dragon was awesome but a bit too confident in himself but I guess he has every right to be.

ETA: I wanted to see more of the skin-changer he was clearly a bad ### not to be ####ed with.

Cumberbatch could not have done better with Smaug. Perfect casting.

It is hard to say what will happen in the 3rd movie, but if they show the Battle of the 5 Armies, we should get a chance to see Beorn (skin changer) again.

I agree that Cumberbatch is awesome, as is the animation of the dragon, but I don't like what they've done with the dialogue.

In the book, Bilbo is absolutely scared ####less throughout his dialogue with Smaug, and he seems to choose each word carefully, always making it a point to flatter Smaug while trying to disguise who he is and why he's there. That all seems to be lost in the way the movie's dialogue is written.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Finally saw the first one.

Scenes without Orcs = good. Scenes with Orcs = give me a break.

Just to make sure, do you really mean Orcs and not Goblins?The Orcs chased them on the Wargs until they find the passage to Rivendell.

The Goblins were the group that captures them in the misty mountains with the fat Goblin King.

All of the above. The undermountain stuff, the stuck in a tree stuff, the Orcs riding as the gang runs around an open field. I didn't sign up for Jerry Bruckheimer.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Finally saw the first one.

Scenes without Orcs = good. Scenes with Orcs = give me a break.

Just to make sure, do you really mean Orcs and not Goblins?The Orcs chased them on the Wargs until they find the passage to Rivendell.

The Goblins were the group that captures them in the misty mountains with the fat Goblin King.

All of the above. The undermountain stuff, the stuck in a tree stuff, the Orcs riding as the gang runs around an open field. I didn't sign up for Jerry Bruckheimer.

Gotcha. I would not recommend the second one then for you.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Peter Jackson has changed the name of the 3rd movie.

It was originally titled "There and Back Again"

The new name will be "The Battle of the Five Armies"

 

[Brady Marino]

Peter Jackson has changed the name of the 3rd movie.

It was originally titled "There and Back Again"

The new name will be "The Battle of the Five Armies"

Very lame, IMO. There and Back Again would have been a great homage to the book.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Peter Jackson has changed the name of the 3rd movie.

It was originally titled "There and Back Again"

The new name will be "The Battle of the Five Armies"

Very lame, IMO. There and Back Again would have been a great homage to the book.

His point made sense to me.

He stated that Tolkien never intended that only part of the story to be entitled "There and Back Again". He said that "There and Back Again" was intended to represent the whole story.

Jackson says eventually when they release the super duper extended editions of all 3 movies they will entitle the box set "There and Back Again".

 

[Todem]

Peter Jackson has changed the name of the 3rd movie.

It was originally titled "There and Back Again"

The new name will be "The Battle of the Five Armies"

Excellent choice.

That is the climax of the book.

I actually wrote and recorded a pretty sweet progressive rock song titled The Battle of the Five Armies, based on that chapter of The Hobbit.