Peter Jackson directs "The Hobbit"

tuffalobuffalo wrote:

I figure it's time I post my Hobbit collection here:

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/jDgt6.jpg)

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/Z4d48.jpg)

I'm so excited!

I have the rightmost one, the green with slipcover. Those are some cool editions you have.

I'm not even watching the trailer. I'm definitely watching in theatre and I want to go in fresh.

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:\

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:

Bloody nerds

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:

There's a difference between levity and Peter Jackson's "original" contributions being flat out dumb.

ccesarano wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:

There's a difference between levity and Peter Jackson's "original" contributions being flat out dumb.

well i thought it was funny... not our fault you have no soul

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:

Pretty much.

Though this isn't too bad. Wait until the thread starts for the next Star Trek flick....

duckilama wrote:

Have you listened to the Tolkien Professor podcast, tuffalo?
Great stuff.

He's finally finishing his Hobbit lectures too.

ccesarano wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:

There's a difference between levity and Peter Jackson's "original" contributions being flat out dumb.

^^^HASN'T SEEN THE FAMILY DINNER SCENE IN DEAD ALIVE^^^

Malor wrote:
Here's your trailer

Whoah. That looks incredible. They recreated Bag End and the altar of Narsil exactly, from what I can see.

And yeah, that song was shiver-inducing. There's a lot of singing in the Hobbit, isn't there? It would be very cool if that made it into the movie, if they can do it with that kind of quality.

Not having seen the actor for Bilbo before, I can totally buy him in the part. Totally.

From what I've heard, they kept the Bag End set from the original trilogy intact, and it's become a bit of a tourist attraction. I know they have LotR tours in NZ where you can climb Mt. Doom and the like.

Maq wrote:

Just that Martin Freeman deserves a little better than "the guy that plays Watson". I guess you guys have your own version of the Office and don't get as much Martin Freeman action.

Very little, yeah.

Yeah, he was also a pron star in "Love Actually"!

nel e nel wrote:
ccesarano wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Let me sum up the arguments on the last couple pages:

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

:

There's a difference between levity and Peter Jackson's "original" contributions being flat out dumb.

^^^HASN'T SEEN THE FAMILY DINNER SCENE IN DEAD ALIVE^^^

I just threw up a little in my mouth. The last time I saw that scene, I was eating Mac and Cheese. Bad choice.

farley3k wrote:

Yeah, he was also a pron star in "Love Actually"!

Ummm, he was stand in.

Norfair wrote:
duckilama wrote:

Have you listened to the Tolkien Professor podcast, tuffalo?
Great stuff.

He's finally finishing his Hobbit lectures too.

I've heard of it, but haven't listened to it yet. I'll check it out.

I think I'm going to take the time between now and next December to finish my 15 year quest of actually reading The Silmarillion.

Grenn wrote:
nel e nel wrote:

^^^HASN'T SEEN THE FAMILY DINNER SCENE IN DEAD ALIVE^^^

I just threw up a little in my mouth. The last time I saw that scene, I was eating Mac and Cheese. Bad choice.

AT LEAST YOU WEREN'T EATING PUDDING

nel e nel wrote:
Grenn wrote:
nel e nel wrote:

^^^HASN'T SEEN THE FAMILY DINNER SCENE IN DEAD ALIVE^^^

I just threw up a little in my mouth. The last time I saw that scene, I was eating Mac and Cheese. Bad choice.

AT LEAST YOU WEREN'T EATING PUDDING

Plop. Appropriately enough, the first time I watched it was with a friend who has serious mommy issues.

Barab wrote:

I think I'm going to take the time between now and next December to finish my 15 year quest of actually reading The Silmarillion.

SO BORING!

Why is it referred to a brain dead here?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103873/

anyways, yay!
something to watch over xmas break

groan wrote:

Why is it referred to a brain dead here?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103873/

anyways, yay!
something to watch over xmas break

Different names in NZ/USA

@Barab you might try listening to the aforementioned podcast's Silmarillion lectures as you go.

groan wrote:

Why is it referred to a brain dead here?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103873/

anyways, yay!
something to watch over xmas break

Braindead is the original title. It was released in North America as Dead Alive because there was already another horror film here called Brain Dead.

duckilama wrote:

@Barab you might try listening to the aforementioned podcast's Silmarillion lectures as you go.

I actually just listened to the introductory podcast after seeing the discussion about them here, bookmarked!

Barab wrote:

I think I'm going to take the time between now and next December to finish my 15 year quest of actually reading The Silmarillion.

Knowing these things does add some depth to the story, but it reminds me of that long stretch in the Bible where they list out SoandSo is the son of SoandSo for pages and pages. Or that description of building the tent-version of the temple for the Ark of the Covenant while they were in the desert.

/Thank you both!

Tanglebones wrote:
groan wrote:

Why is it referred to a brain dead here?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103873/

anyways, yay!
something to watch over xmas break

Different names in NZ/USA

ClockworkHouse wrote:
groan wrote:

Why is it referred to a brain dead here?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103873/

anyways, yay!
something to watch over xmas break

Braindead is the original title. It was released in North America as Dead Alive because there was already another horror film here called Brain Dead.

momgamer wrote:
Barab wrote:

I think I'm going to take the time between now and next December to finish my 15 year quest of actually reading The Silmarillion.

Knowing these things does add some depth to the story, but it reminds me of that long stretch in the Bible where they list out SoandSo is the son of SoandSo for pages and pages. Or that description of building the tent-version of the temple for the Ark of the Covenant while they were in the desert.

The last time I read the Silmarillion I really got into it. So much so that I almost enjoyed it more than LoTR. If you're into history or origin stories, there's a lot there to find. If you really want to get a lot of out it, I recommend reading LoTR immediately before. You'll probably notice more connections.

1. "LOTR had too much levity! Legolas shield surfing and whatnot!"
2. "The Hobbit is not going to have enough levity! Where're all the singing and silliness?!"

Pople are holding the movies to different standards because the books are different. The Hobbit is supposed to be fun, so grim awfulness shouldn't really be in that movie, and LOTR is supposed to be dark, so shield-surfing doesn't belong there. The Hobbit is lighthearted and slightly silly; the Lord of the Rings is a massive work that's very grim and serious.

If you haven't actually read the books, you probably should -- you'd understand how silly you look for pointing out the 'contradictions'.

I don't feel like it's quite that polarized. There are grim parts and silly parts in both books. (spoilering rest of this on the off chance someone hasn't read the books)

Spoiler:

I think the Mirkwood is pretty damned grim, particularly that bit with Shelob's cousins. We'll have to see how much of the parts with the trolls and the barrow where he got Sting. And if he does it right, the Battle of the Five armies is going to be a heck of a lot more than an essay on sharing (as someone above suggested).

And surfing aside, the silliness between Legolas and Gimli, particularly in battle, was very much a part of LOTR. Same goes for the byplay between the Hobbits, and the singing/dancing on the tables when drunk. Thank goodness he skipped the songs extolling the virtues of a good bath in LOTR, and I seriously hope he skipped the one about doing the dishes in The Hobbit.

Moria is downright nasty in both books. Someone above mentioned they didn't think Moria was that scary in LOTR. It's not supposed to be the same; you'll see why here (again, if he does it like the book). The reason the Bakshi version is so much "creepier" has to do with the denizens of the area. Who are basically wiped out in The Hobbit between Gandalf's visit and the Battle of Five Armies, leaving the endless dark, dusty caverns with only the remnants of a great host to creep around the edges of their old hunting grounds for the Fellowship (and one BIG ugly in the deep).

On the other hand, the portentous and ethereal elves in LOTR are going to be a heck of a contrast to the tree-singing, teasing ones in this older Rivendell. Maybe he's going to play teasing/more lightheartedness off as a natural result of the long years of peace since the fall of Sauron the first time, whereas when the Fellowship comes through they've had 60 years to get a bit stern about the whole business starting up again.

Momgamer says smart things. That means I don't have to hurt myself trying to say smart things. I can just be all like "^^^ That :D" and move on.

Spoiler:

Huh, I never made the connection between the Goblin tunnels in the Hobbit and Moria from LotR, even though the locations are essentially the same. Except that would imply an additional entrance and exit that Gandalf should have known about when considering whether and where to enter Moria.

complexmath wrote:
Spoiler:

Huh, I never made the connection between the Goblin tunnels in the Hobbit and Moria from LotR, even though the locations are essentially the same. Except that would imply an additional entrance and exit that Gandalf should have known about when considering whether and where to enter Moria.

Spoiler:

I think the tunnels they are captured in during The Hobbit are somewhat north of Moria itself. Quite likely there are connections, though.