Peter Jackson directs "The Hobbit"

Who's the elf lady?

tboon wrote:

Who's the elf lady?

His name is Legolas

Tanglebones wrote:
tboon wrote:

Who's the elf lady?

His name is Legolas

I sure hope Legolas gets a "We have to go back!" line at some point. I think I would laugh so hard that I would start crying and get kicked out of the theater.

Can elves grow the boozy beard necessary to really make that moment land?

Katy wrote:

I'm interested to see how he executes it. I may not agree with all his choices, but I'm not letting that make me unhappy.

The idea makes me unhappy specifically because of the execution of those ideas in the first movie. It's not good.

Tanglebones wrote:
tboon wrote:

Who's the elf lady?

His name is Legolas

Hehehe.

Peter Jackson's farewell from Friday to Ian McKellen, looking close to tears:

Peter Jackson wrote:

Seconds ago we finished our last shot with Gandalf. The end of an incredible adventure that began in 1999. I'm feeling very sad right now.

IMAGE(http://nerdapproved.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/gandalfs-last-scene.jpg)

His farewell to Orlando Bloom (SPOILERS, SORT OF [the quote not the video]):

Peter Jackson wrote:

A day after saying goodbye to Gandalf and Tauriel, it was time to farewell Legolas. What a great day it was, with Orlando battling a serious Orc for all 12 hours of shooting - part of the Battle of the 5 Armies for the third Hobbit movie.

When we finally got the day done, we said goodbye to Orlando, had a couple of beers ... and couldn't resist doing this!

Spoiler:

That quote confirms Battle of the 5 armies is in the third film. My guess being the 2nd ends with the death of Smaug then the 3rd begins with the battle.

New trailer!

Looking forward to it! My guess is that the second installment will be the best one because it won't have the whole battle of five armies thing which will get drawn out and dull.

tuffalobuffalo wrote:

Looking forward to it! My guess is that the second installment will be the best one because it won't have the whole battle of five armies thing which will get drawn out and dull.

My wife mostly just wants to hear more of Benedict Cumberbatch's voice and apparently that's going to make it harder for her to root against Smaug.

I hope someone puts together a "Content from just the original book and none of the extraneous crap" after all three movies are out, because the only stuff that makes me excited was, surprise, the stuff in the original book.

Did we really need the Legend of Legolas in Love?

ccesarano wrote:

I hope someone puts together a "Content from just the original book and none of the extraneous crap" after all three movies are out, because the only stuff that makes me excited was, surprise, the stuff in the original book.

Did we really need the Legend of Legolas in Love?

Nope. I still haven't watched the first part, but honestly, I'm running out of steam and drive to watch any of it the more I see of previews and stuff that has naught to do with The Hobbit, which this is still ostensibly titled. Really should have just called it "Tales from Middle Earth" or something.

New Trailer / Sneak Peek!

More stuff, including the worldwide fan event (full of excited fans in NY, LA, London and Wellington) available here: http://www.youtube.com/user/hobbitwb

The fan event video actually starts about 10 minutes in, and includes a screening of Jackson's latest behind-the-scenes vlog.

Just the vlog, if that's all you're interested in:

Published on Nov 4, 2013
It's been awhile since our last video blog. As we approach release, we want to show you a bit more of what we've been shooting. Hope you enjoy and we will see you in theaters on December 13.

This looks so good but I also know the first one really let me down with how much Jackson added and changed the tone. I will see it at some point but probably not in theaters.

That's one thing I really hate about PJ. Why are you drastically changing something? The books are some of the most successful books of all time. What makes him think he can do better than Tolkien did? WTF is with him? It is one thing to edit a script so that it is conveyed better across the screen, but it is entirely different when you are making massive additions or subtractions that dramatically change the work.

The books are fantastic, but they're not perfect. You pretty much have to make changes when adapting them for the screen. Unless you think the LotR trilogy would have been greatly improved by the presence of Tom Bombadil or tons of scenes devoted to poetry and singing. Not saying all the changes were good, but they weren't all bad either.

I read all the hate for the first movie and avoided it, but having seen it lately, I have to say, I enjoyed the heck out of it. Looking forward to the second.

Robear wrote:

I read all the hate for the first movie and avoided it, but having seen it lately, I have to say, I enjoyed the heck out of it. Looking forward to the second.

I think I may like it better than the LoTR movies ... until the end drags on forever. I think I prefer the longer pace where we spend time with the characters. I also don't like Frodo. He's useless. #sam4ever

With some exceptions I think that the Jackson changes are very good. Keep in mind that the original story was written far before Lord of the Rings, it was an entirely different tone, some things were outright retconned, and you have to read the four books with sort of a generous mind to fit all the pieces together properly. While I really disliked the Stone Giant fight and the extended mine chase scene, I really like how Jackson is bringing in the expanded universe that was happening alongside these events.

The Hobbit the book is only a prequel to the Lord of the Rings in a very specific and tiny sense, The Hobbit the movie is much more of a prequel, and thus far I think it is the better for it.

A lot of important things were going on during the time period when The Hobbit took place. Peter Jackson isn't exactly pulling this stuff out of thin air. I agree with Yonder. His additions pull the story further into the context of the author's much larger works.

It's been 6 years since this movie was announced as an expanded version of the book. I think it's time for people to come to terms with the fact that we were never going to get the tightly plotted kids movie that a lot of us were probably hoping for.

The same complaints come out with every new trailer, poster or rumour.

The first movie suffered from a few overlong sequences and abandonment of practical effects for digital. Particularly unfortunate in the case of the Pale Orc.

But the additions to the story, most of which are cannon, are very effective at showing things that would otherwise need explanation. For example, why would Gandalf wander off? You get told in the book LOTR, but in the movie of the Hobbit you need to be shown. Otherwise it makes no sense.

To all The Hobbit likers, a rebuttal:

The Radagast and his sled-bunnies sequence

tboon wrote:

To all The Hobbit likers, a rebuttal:

The Radagast and his sled-bunnies sequence

I found it funny, but ... yeah. Didn't ruin the movie for me.

Yeah, sled bunnies were kinda funny, but not good. I can live with it though. And I kinda dug the stone giants.

The stone giants is probably my least favorite part of the whole movie. There's just no way they would've held on.

tboon wrote:

To all The Hobbit likers, a rebuttal:

The Radagast and his sled-bunnies sequence

I loved seeing more of Radagast. According to Tolkien he eventually gave up being a wizard due to his obsession with nature and animals. I had no problem with the rabbits at all. It's just the sort of eccentric combination of nature and magic he'd use. After all, he was the one to send the great eagle Gwaihir to save Gandalf from Orthanc.

Wow you guys...hmmm...

(For the record I liked Radagast I just thought sled-bunnies was dumb. Sled-deer? OK. Sled-pumas? Better. Sled-bunnies? Dumb. Sorry. You know it to be true.)

Counter-counter-rebuttal:
Platforms falling down extremely deep holes that always land upright.

Spoiler:

Also, for the record, I have always thought The Hobbit unfilmable, so that Jackson is able to pull it off at all is a minor miracle. Not sure it deserves a trilogy but whatever. And I don't hate it by any means. There are many performances I quite enjoyed. I just don't love it and found stretches of it to be quite tedious, which means things I would normally not care about too much stand out all the more.

LouZiffer wrote:
tboon wrote:

To all The Hobbit likers, a rebuttal:

The Radagast and his sled-bunnies sequence

I loved seeing more of Radagast. According to Tolkien he eventually gave up being a wizard due to his obsession with nature and animals. I had no problem with the rabbits at all. It's just the sort of eccentric combination of nature and magic mushrooms he'd use. After all, he was the one to send the great eagle Gwaihir to save Gandalf from Orthanc.

That's better.