Three Times The Hobbit?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

To be fair I feel ill with any 3d being astigmatic but I can imagine that improving it might increase the nausea.

To be even fairer, I get nauseous from most Peter Jackson films.

[Mithalwen]

There is that factor.

[davem]

Its interesting how both LotR & TH end with an anti-climactic battle - LotR doesn't end (as with the film) with the epic battle & the fall of Sauron, but with the Scouring, which is a nasty, brutal fight between ordinary Hobbits & a bunch of thugs - and as SF writer China Mieville put it, you end up with a broken Saruman only capable of doing a little mischief in a mean way (as Mieville put it, 'You can't even get a decent Dark Lord any more').

Of course, the Battle of Five Armies is a devastating conflict, but it happens off-stage so the heroics go mostly unnoticed, & the main impression we are left with is of carnage & loss as Bilbo is lead through the corpse-strewn field to the dying Thorin, whose final words are to tell Bilbo that he was right after all, & that its the Hobbit's values that really matter, not battles or treasure. And yet, its fairly clear that what Jackson cares about are those very things - battle (on-screen) & treasure (profit).

If you re-tell LotR without the ugly brutal wastefulness of the Scouring, or depict the Battle of Five Armies on screen, then you don't get Tolkien. The Scouring shows us the ugly reality of war - not glorious battles, where heroes fall in noble self sacrifice to save the world from evil personified, but where ordinary people die in the streets & fields they grew up in, in front of their spouses & children, in order to make their little corner of the world a bit better for those they love.

Bilbo's lying senseless through the BoFA & only awakening after its all over, to then pick his way through the blood, stench & hacked up corpses, to watch his friend die an agonising death while telling him that, after all, it was all a bit bloody pointless when all was said & done, & that Bilbo's way is better, is to give the reader the death without the having given him even a glimpse of the glory. As far as Bilbo is concerned the dead might have been killed in an eruption of the Mountain, or by mass suicide. Death without glory is the way both books end when it comes to war.

And that is clearly what Jackson misses. Still, I'll be going to see the spectacle, because as with the LotR movies, I reckon something of Tolkien will come through. What is sad is that many people will see the film & not read the book, or if they do go on to read it, they will do so in the light of PJs take on it.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by davem

Its interesting how both LotR & TH end with an anti-climactic battle - LotR doesn't end (as with the film) with the epic battle & the fall of Sauron, but with the Scouring, which is a nasty, brutal fight between ordinary Hobbits & a bunch of thugs...

...And that is clearly what Jackson misses. Still, I'll be going to see the spectacle, because as with the LotR movies, I reckon something of Tolkien will come through. What is sad is that many people will see the film & not read the book, or if they do go on to read it, they will do so in the light of PJs take on it.

Very well said, davem.

Additionally, I think that movie-goers didn't get to see the growth and maturation of the hobbits in Jackson's LotR, particularly because the Scouring of the Shire was omitted. The brilliance of Tolkien's original story is that the hobbits must fend for themselves once they return home. They must become the leaders, without the aid of wizards, dwarves, elves, glorified Anglo-Saxon horsemen or legendary kings.

Likewise, the enemy is no longer a Dark Lord with demonic orkish minions, wargs and balrogs; instead, as you said, they must face mercenary thugs, mannish brutes and vagrants, and Sharky, wounded, old and treacherous, bereft of divine power, but still able to commit appallingly petty acts of vengeance. And they must overcome the evil inherent in even unassuming but greedy hobbits. Thus, Tolkien offers a foreshadowing of the wars of the 4th age and onward, where the foe we fight is ourselves and not a supernatural enemy.

Jackson caught the cinematographic spectacle of the story, the huge sweep of vast armies and the marvelous edifices of lost empires, but he failed utterly in capturing the heart of the story and the nobility of the individuals involved. How else can one explain Frodo abandoning Sam, the savaging of the tragic hero Denethor, the befuddlement of Treebeard, and the trivialization of Aragorn's peer, Faramir?

Aragorn commits an ignoble act of treachery by beheading an ambassador under a flag of truce merely for a cheap one-line pun, and simply for the sake of added spectacle and CGI overkill a legion of undead scrubbing bubbles destroys Sauron's army, all but eliminating the need for the valorous and lethal charge of the Rohirrim. Frodo whines throughout the movie, Merry and Pippin never progress past boorish louts, Elrond is cynical and bitter, Gimli is a walking dwarf joke, and the character with the most depth isn't even human but a CGI replication.

I know Tolkien eschewed allegory, but woe to all of us if Jackson decides to make a movie about the Bible: Jonah would be swallowed by a CGI leviathan of Jurassic proportions, Noah's ark would be nuclear-powered, Moses would not inflict ten plagues on Egypt (he'd have at least twenty, including zombies, dragons, spiders and flying monkeys), and a wise-cracking Jesus, ably assisted by his 12 ninjas, would call down the heavenly host to smite the Romans. Because, after all, one must use creative license, and the original scripture needs tweaking to appeal to modern audiences.

[davem]

Just a quick acknowledgment and thanks for all the positive rep for what was a very rushed post. There are certainly numerous points in the films where you get the sense that Jackson just doesn't get Tolkien's point, where the story becomes for him so completely unintelligible, that all he can do is invent an alternative. I so wish the Hobbit movie would follow the book and build up to the BOFA, with the audience expecting another Pelenor Fields, only for the screen to go black when Bilbo is knocked unconscious and the viewer to see nothing of the battle at all. That would be being faithful to Tolkien. But it won't happen, obviously. We'll basically get rehash of PF, a 'glorious' epic battle, with eye popping effects (and probably some few pratfalls to lighten the mood), which will overwhelm and undermine Bilbo and Thorin's final farewell. Anyway, too rushed again - and typed on a phone ( I was tempted to leave in the 'eye pooping effects' that the predictive text threw up back there.....)

[Bêthberry]

On the other hand, there's this perspective.

Originally Posted by Calisuri

The ‘bad guys’ are not quite horrible monstrosities that cause death and destruction but instead are similar to villains in an episode of the A-Team. You know, where no matter how many times they shoot at our heroes, they never actually hit their mark. It ultimately makes for exciting confrontations, but no real concern the heroes will meet their doom. Some who are not familiar with the childish nature of The Hobbit might find this a bit odd when they compare the drama to the LOTR films.

Folks at TORN are getting busy: mumble mumble funny frames mumble

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by davem

I so wish the Hobbit movie would follow the book and build up to the BOFA, with the audience expecting another Pelenor Fields, only for the screen to go black when Bilbo is knocked unconscious and the viewer to see nothing of the battle at all. That would be being faithful to Tolkien.

*coughs* Let's not get carried away here. At the risk of sounding like all the people bleating "But films and books are different mediums!" (which is for some reason supposed to demolish any criticism of the films whatsoever)– I really *don't* think that could work at all on screen.

Besides, the battle *is* described in the book– just not from Bilbo's point of view.

[cellurdur]

Originally Posted by davem

Just a quick acknowledgment and thanks for all the positive rep for what was a very rushed post. There are certainly numerous points in the films where you get the sense that Jackson just doesn't get Tolkien's point, where the story becomes for him so completely unintelligible, that all he can do is invent an alternative. I so wish the Hobbit movie would follow the book and build up to the BOFA, with the audience expecting another Pelenor Fields, only for the screen to go black when Bilbo is knocked unconscious and the viewer to see nothing of the battle at all. That would be being faithful to Tolkien. But it won't happen, obviously. We'll basically get rehash of PF, a 'glorious' epic battle, with eye popping effects (and probably some few pratfalls to lighten the mood), which will overwhelm and undermine Bilbo and Thorin's final farewell. Anyway, too rushed again - and typed on a phone ( I was tempted to leave in the 'eye pooping effects' that the predictive text threw up back there.....)

As has been pointed out we do get a description of the battle from: from Thorin's death, his nephews valiant stand around him to Beorn's appearance. This was a great battle.

Personally I don't care if the films are true to the events only described in the Hobbit, as long as they are true to the Legendarium. I would go as far as saying I don't even mind if things are added to the Legendarium, which likely happened, but were never explicitly stated. For me it is fine to have Legolas with his father at Mirkwood, why not show a young Aragorn playing in Rivendell or even have Gandalf mention how Elrond's great grandfather wielded Glamdring.