The Hobbit: An Extraneous Journey

[Kuruharan]

I think the point regarding "When going to a Peter Jackson film, you have to expect to see a Peter Jackson film" is well made. However, I don't think the validity of this point negates the ability of critics of the films to express their points of view.

Speaking personally, and as a self-confessed (and in some respects, fairly harsh) critic of the films, there are three things in particular that really get my goat, even knowing that it is a Peter Jackson film. The first is how needless so many of the especially silly changes from the books are. I do understand that changes have to be made when moving a story from book to film. However, that reason is used as an excuse to justify the most ridiculous alterations to the story that don't even make much sense when taken just within the context of the movie. They certainly aren't necessary for transitioning from book to film.

The second is this sort of Panglossian attitude that these are the best of all possible Tolkien films in this the best of all possible worlds. That is just nonsense. As I just said, many of the changes imposed by Jackson and Co. are needless and have the effect of making the story worse and more confusing rather than better, even from a film perspective.

The third is the sort of cynical exploitation of Tolkien and his fans that Jackson seems to be indulging in at this point along with Jackson's turning of the work of a better mind into his own little ego project.

Now, all that being said...Yes I went and saw the film and yes I bought some of the merchandise to give to my Father as part of his Christmas presents.

Does this make me a hypocrite? Some might say so. I don't think it does. Some might say that I was giving Jackson and Co. another chance, in hope rather than in expectation. A rather Tolkienish attitude if I do say so myself.

Personally, at bottom I have a rather strong wish that somebody other than Jackson had made these films and overall I feel perfectly justified to express my opinions and impressions about what I saw. Its what we do here.

Besides, if we didn't discuss this stuff, there wouldn't be a Downs at all.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

The first is how needless so many of the especially silly changes from the books are. I do understand that changes have to be made when moving a story from book to film. However, that reason is used as an excuse to justify the most ridiculous alterations to the story that don't even make much sense when taken just within the context of the movie. They certainly aren't necessary for transitioning from book to film.

Fair enough point, though the only one I still fail to be able to fit in properly is the Azog thing. And the Elves' attitude though I think that will be explained later. The rest does fit coherently, even when the text is looked at. The only bits which jar are those 'echoings' of the LotR films, which I almost universally dislike and find disappointing (partic. when Bilbo decides he's going to walk back to The Shire).

The third is the sort of cynical exploitation of Tolkien and his fans that Jackson seems to be indulging in at this point along with Jackson's turning of the work of a better mind into his own little ego project.

Now on this point I have to say that the whole Tolkien bandwagon is pretty exploitative. I have spent thousands of pounds on stuff we do not really need, and that's not just the toys I collect, but all these new editions and books with fancy covers and whatnot. The publishers and the Estate are certainly not immune from being involved in 'exploitation' of fans.

Originally Posted by Boro

It may get me cast out of here as a leper here...but Tolkien is not infallible. Brilliant man. An unrivalled imagination. But a writer? Parts of extreme wonder and beauty that pull you into his imagination. Other parts of very slow pace and a little too much of the "Let's send a hobbit blindly into Mordor and count on a Fool's Hope, trust in the greatest luck anyone can ever have and hope for the best?" for me. (It's why I've always sympathized with Boromir. "Really you want to send this hobbit into THAT place, when the only entrance you know is...the large flippin front gate? What do you expect him to do when walking to the front door?")

There's nothing wrong in bringing this up because Tolkien himself was deeply unhappy with how The Hobbit did not 'fit' with his later work and repeatedly tried to rewrite it. One of the things he disliked the most was his tone, which I will say right now can be cringe inducing. He admitted that he 'talked down' to children in the novel and always regretted this. That's one of the main things that has been stripped right out in the making of the film and personally as an adult viewer I find this very interesting. I'm really not sure if this is the 'tone' that some viewers feel is lacking, because had it remained, the film would have been twee. I'd rather have fights than twee.

Oddly, my biggest disappointment was the "burrahobbit" joke not being included. I think I'd have ignored all the other things not to my taste had that been included, I like it so much

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Now on this point I have to say that the whole Tolkien bandwagon is pretty exploitative. I have spent thousands of pounds on stuff we do not really need, and that's not just the toys I collect, but all these new editions and books with fancy covers and whatnot. The publishers and the Estate are certainly not immune from being involved in 'exploitation' of fans.

That is a valid point from a certain perspective, I won't argue that.

However, in my own view it's not exploitation in the same way because the Estate owns the material. Jackson and Co. in my view have sort of expropriated it for their own purposes and in my opinion misused it. Christopher Tolkien has not gone through and re-written Lord of the Rings in an attempt to sell more books. He has edited some of his father's work and published the results of his editing, but he has always been explicit as to what he has done.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Now on this point I have to say that the whole Tolkien bandwagon is pretty exploitative. I have spent thousands of pounds on stuff we do not really need, and that's not just the toys I collect, but all these new editions and books with fancy covers and whatnot. The publishers and the Estate are certainly not immune from being involved in 'exploitation' of fans.

Mind you, in most all cases that's HarperCollins rather than the Estate; CT hasn't been driving for a plethora of Deluxe and Illustrated and Anniversary editions just to generate repeat sales. Believe me when I tell you he's got plenty of money for his own modest requirements and isn't driven to be more than "comfortably well-off" (even if his bank balance is already far beyond that Bagginsy level).

The one exception I can think of is CT's endorsement of and limited lobbying for the Hammond-Scull corrected text which issued as the "50th Anniversary edition;" but this was motivated chiefly by an interest in accuracy, and clearing out five decades of accumulated typos and textual errors. Naturally, the big leather-bound gold-edged Superduperdeluxe edition was HC's idea.

[Lalwendë]

I don't know... The estate must surely have a final say on whether new editions are published and indeed not published; it was they who had The Tolkien Family Album withdrawn and not reprinted after the first run so they must retain privileges. I hope so anyway. In a weird way, I'd rather it was them exploiting poor saps like me who are suckers for nice books than Rupert Murdoch, who owns Harper Collins and is about 10,000 times more sinister than Jackson could hope to be.