On December 21 2011 21:33 Lebzetu wrote: Yay, time to ruin an amazing series with a half assed sequel!
yay, about time the idots come out of their holes. This is no sequel in fact the book "the hobbit" is older than LOTR and takes place before the events that happen in LOTR
3clipse Canada. December 21 2011 22:18. Posts 2541
YES! i got genuine chills down my spine when i watched a similar trailer with the opening theme from the original movies. 2012 is going to be the longest year I'll ever live because of this trailer
i liked the book so the movie is a must see. i dont really know if the people in this thread are trolling but how can anyone claim it will suck because its a bad sequel or it will suck because they reuse characters from the first movie.
The hobbit is the "original novel" and based on its success tolkien decided to write lord of the rings.
Last edit: 2011-12-21 22:29:05
frantic.cactus New Zealand. December 21 2011 22:26. Posts 163
This looks like it will be an excellent adaptation one of my favourite books ever. As always to make the story more big screen friendly some liberties must be taken with the story (Gandalf and Galadriel!) but thats understandable.
Fans of the story will like it, hardcore fans of the BOOK will dislike it and a good time will be had by all.
(Martin Freeman as Bilbo was an inspired piece of casting and the Dwarves all look badASS)
Terran it up since 2007
neobowman Canada. December 21 2011 22:27. Posts 2862
On December 21 2011 21:33 Lebzetu wrote: Yay, time to ruin an amazing series with a half assed sequel!
yay, about time the idots come out of their holes. This is no sequel in fact the book "the hobbit" is older than LOTR and takes place before the events that happen in LOTR
It was also meant as a children's book and is not nearly as good as Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. Even Tolkien himself said so. I read "the hobbit" but since I hardly remember anything of the book, I don't think I found it that interesting.
Still, The Hobbit sure looks like it could be a good movie.
I named him Waggleton P. Tallylicker...
Whitewing United States. December 21 2011 22:33. Posts 5726
On December 21 2011 13:02 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Wonder how long both films will be? Expect over 6 hours seeing how it is Peter Jackson...
I'm hoping that they will both be similar in length to the LotR films.
I feel the same way and hope it is the case.
Fuck, I'd be ecstatic if each film was 6 hours in length for a net of 12 hours. I would pay to sit through that, and I would have the biggest goddamn grin on my face the entire time.
ThorZaIN is an android sent from the future to destroy everyone and everything with his super advanced mechanics and strategies. ~Chill
Telcontar United Kingdom. December 21 2011 22:40. Posts 15851
On December 21 2011 21:33 Lebzetu wrote: Yay, time to ruin an amazing series with a half assed sequel!
yay, about time the idots come out of their holes. This is no sequel in fact the book "the hobbit" is older than LOTR and takes place before the events that happen in LOTR
It was also meant as a children's book and is not nearly as good as Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. Even Tolkien himself said so. I read "the hobbit" but since I hardly remember anything of the book, I don't think I found it that interesting.
Still, The Hobbit sure looks like it could be a good movie.
Many would disagree. The Hobbit is more accessible than LOTR which many (sadly) find too descriptive and slow paced these days. I personally prefer LOTR and it is my favourite book of all time. However, I can understand why it turns some off.
On December 21 2011 22:40 Boonbag wrote: I hope he does the silmarillon someday after or even some of the unfinished tales
The Silmarillion would be almost impossible to adapt to screen. There's just too much stuff going on that require proper explaining to be good. I guess he could pick out more standalone-ish stories to convert into films like The Children of Hurin and The Tale of Beren and Lúthien. I suppose he could also construct stories for the fall of numenor, the fall of gondolin and other important tales like that of Earendil. I'm not sure how motivated Peter Jackson would be after finishing The Hobbit though.
Last edit: 2011-12-21 22:48:46
Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn' Ambar-metta.
Boonbag France. December 21 2011 22:40. Posts 2137
Most people I know think LoTR is just to boring. nothing happens, all they do is walk walk walk and I can understand them. When I read the books and then re read them, I got so bored at long parts were nothing happens.
The hobbit is alot more simple and easy to access and people like that.
In any case, i think this movie will be epic.
Ciryandor United States. December 21 2011 23:12. Posts 3167
On December 21 2011 21:33 Lebzetu wrote: Yay, time to ruin an amazing series with a half assed sequel!
yay, about time the idots come out of their holes. This is no sequel in fact the book "the hobbit" is older than LOTR and takes place before the events that happen in LOTR
It was also meant as a children's book and is not nearly as good as Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. Even Tolkien himself said so. I read "the hobbit" but since I hardly remember anything of the book, I don't think I found it that interesting.
Still, The Hobbit sure looks like it could be a good movie.
Many would disagree. The Hobbit is more accessible than LOTR which many (sadly) find too descriptive and slow paced these days. I personally prefer LOTR and it is my favourite book of all time. However, I can understand why it turns some off.
On December 21 2011 22:40 Boonbag wrote: I hope he does the silmarillon someday after or even some of the unfinished tales
The Silmarillion would be almost impossible to adapt to screen. There's just too much stuff going on that require proper explaining to be good. I guess he could pick out more standalone-ish stories to convert into films like The Children of Hurin and The Tale of Beren and Lúthien. I suppose he could also construct stories for the fall of numenor, the fall of gondolin and other important tales like that of Earendil. I'm not sure how motivated Peter Jackson would be after finishing The Hobbit though.
See my post in Page 7 on how a 5-movie set can cover the whole of the Silmarillion.
On December 21 2011 19:44 Mafe wrote: Will probably a great movie. Period.
I wonder if/how they will make each of the 13 dwarfs unique. In the book, most of them had no personal backstory and no real individuality. I believe Tolkien missed some interesting possibilities here.
I do not like the look of Thorin Oakenshield. I always thought of him as one of the oldest of the dwarfs, with a beard longer than his hair. He looks more like an arrogant leader in the prime of his strength and more like a small human than a huge dwarf. Not like the king of a lost kingdom, who turned bitter through a live of disappointments, who feels superior to everyone around him and who now tries to have one last shot to restore the long lost glory of his family. At least that was he used to be in my memory.
He was arrogant as fuck, if you've read the Unfinished Tales section on The Quest of Erebor (which is basically more backstory to how Bilbo ended up accompanying them), and wanted NOTHING to do with the hobbit until Gandalf nearly forced him to bring him along. I WANT to see that part expounded upon after we see them singing, as it adds dramatic gravitas to his initially bumbling presence. Arrogance and a hint of bitterness after all can come in one great package.
Store
llKenZyll United States. December 21 2011 21:33. Posts 851
![[image loading]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-S4YfI3NbMb0/TaXv2NhMvJI/AAAAAAAABjE/hqKRb4JgRu0/s1600/haha_oh_wow.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/72/hdrfinal2.jpg/)
