Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 188

Thread: The Hobbit

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    79,159
    vCash
    1500

    The Hobbit

    The battle of helms deep was very short in the book. In the movie it lasted almost an hour. Same thing will happen in the battle of five armies.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,955
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    The battle of helms deep was very short in the book. In the movie it lasted almost an hour. Same thing will happen in the battle of five armies.
    Yeah, all they needed to do at Helm's Deep was bring a group of elves that never showed up in the book and then go right ahead and kill my second favorite character in the entire middle-earth history (Haldir) who didn't die in the events of the LOTR at a battle he never even attended.

    Second most maddening thing about LOTR right there. Topped only by giving my FAVORITE character from the entire middle-earth history (Glorfindel) absolutely no screen time whatsoever, but to add insult to injury, they gave HIS horse to Arwen, and then they go ahead and give Arwen one of the most awesome feats performed by an elf in the entire series, when in reality it should have been Glorfindel all along.

    So you're right, Jackson will probably bring Radagast into the final battle with his bunnies, and he'll probably kill him off or something.

    Oh, frustration. Can you see why I have no trust for Jackson? The movies are great if not compared to the events in the book, and he ruined some very important things from the book.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    1,301
    vCash
    1500
    I can watch the movie many more times and I'll probably still wont be able to put a name on every dwarf. I think they really needed a scene where Thorin or Gandalf gives each dwarf a short backstory to Bilbo.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    79,159
    vCash
    1500
    Those event are still on the book, I learned long ago that no movie will be just like the books and to expect and want such a thing will only upset you. I love what Jackson has done with the movies and do not mind the tweaks here and there.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Canadian In Michigan.
    Posts
    42,037
    vCash
    1500
    Thought it was only ok. Mind you I didn't read the books. Some awesome scenes though.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,955
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Those event are still on the book, I learned long ago that no movie will be just like the books and to expect and want such a thing will only upset you. I love what Jackson has done with the movies and do not mind the tweaks here and there.
    But to screw with Glorfindel was too much. He is, perhaps, the most badass character in all of middle-earth history. Also, Jackson was going to cut out the Dead Men of Dunharrow if not faced with massive fan uproar.

    Look at Harry Potter. There are big and awesome subplots from the novels that never made the films, but every major character was given his or her due screen time. There were no major missing scenes. In middle-earth filmography, however, not only are important scenes and characters emitted, but drastically different scenes and characters are renovated and changed and added. The idea of Haldir at Helm's Deep, or any elves at Helm's Deep rather than Legolas, would be the equivalent to Harry Potter's parents showing up fully alive at the Battle for Hogwarts. There is a wealth of very serious backstory, bitter feelings and hostility responsible for elves not showing up at Helm's Deep, and to just throw them in to make the scenes more dramatic uprooted loads of continuity from the source material.

    What Jackson has done was to take what he liked and remove what he did not like at the expense of the source material. He's a fanboy out there playing with action figures and changing the plot as he saw fit. I like the movies for what they are, but I hate them for what they should be.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    1,301
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tongue-Splitter View Post
    But to screw with Glorfindel was too much. He is, perhaps, the most badass character in all of middle-earth history. Also, Jackson was going to cut out the Dead Men of Dunharrow if not faced with massive fan uproar.
    Glorfindel, as awesome as he is, was just a background character in LotR. For movie reasons, it was things that could be condensed.

    And random: It would actually make sense if they cut out the Dead Men or didn't rely on them as much. Aragorn in the films was someone who doubted himself and was afraid of becoming king. What better way than to get Aragorn over the hill by having him rescue Gondor's cities and rallying them to Minas Tirith? Denethor was portrayed as an incompetent leader, so what Denethor couldn't do, Aragorn did, which builds him confidence and eases the transition from being a self-doubter to the kingly leader he should be.

    To me, Pelennor Fields has always been about men turning the tide of battle, doing things for themselves, and no longer needed to rely on elves or dwarves. Compare that to the Dead Men of Dunharrow from the film, who were basically a nuke with friendly-fire off.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    17,897
    vCash
    1500
    Middle Earth's universe is about a billion times more detailed than Harry Potter's universe. These movies would be 6 hours apiece if they tried to cram every detail of those books into them. Movies are visual Spark Notes at best. Anymore than that and you probably pass the point where they will profit to the levels hoped for.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,955
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Canterbury View Post
    Glorfindel, as awesome as he is, was just a background character in LotR. For movie reasons, it was things that could be condensed.

    And random: It would actually make sense if they cut out the Dead Men or didn't rely on them as much. Aragorn in the films was someone who doubted himself and was afraid of becoming king. What better way than to get Aragorn over the hill by having him rescue Gondor's cities and rallying them to Minas Tirith? Denethor was portrayed as an incompetent leader, so what Denethor couldn't do, Aragorn did, which builds him confidence and eases the transition from being a self-doubter to the kingly leader he should be.

    To me, Pelennor Fields has always been about men turning the tide of battle, doing things for themselves, and no longer needed to rely on elves or dwarves. Compare that to the Dead Men of Dunharrow from the film, who were basically a nuke with friendly-fire off.
    All good points, but Glorfindel could have been added. It's as simple as that.

    Middle Earth's universe is about a billion times more detailed than Harry Potter's universe. These movies would be 6 hours apiece if they tried to cram every detail of those books into them. Movies are visual Spark Notes at best. Anymore than that and you probably pass the point where they will profit to the levels hoped for.
    With the extended cuts, the movies total over eleven and a half hours. They could have done better at putting in what was in the book and leaving out what was not. All I'm saying.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    22,588
    vCash
    1500
    I thought it was an incredible film. I have a few problems with only:

    1) The main bad guy should have not been CG, I feel that they needed a real person with makeup/costume there. It just didn't feel right.
    2)The mountains fighting each other was a waste of time, and dragged on a little bit. It really just didn't fit.
    3) Why was there some weird love/sex thing between Gandalf and Galadriel? I know it wasn't intended, but myself and my 4 friends agreed that it came off odd.

    Everything else was spectacular. Great visuals, great scenery, great references to the lore.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    33,406
    vCash
    1000
    It is what it is. Didn't exceed expectations, wasn't anything I didn't expect. Its the ****ing Hobbit, same **** as LOTRs. If you like LOTRs, you probably like the Hobbit. It was OK, but the Hobbit being 3 movies is a bunch of crap. Its obvious why they're making 3 movies, so I don't blame them.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    37,408
    vCash
    2100
    I liked it just fine. It was definitely worth the price of admission for me. I think a lot of people have unrealistic expectations about a book to film adaptation, but oh well. You need to look at the book and film as two different entities.

    I enjoyed it, and it was a VERY quick 3 hours.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,788
    vCash
    6000

    The Hobbit

    Never read the books, nor seen any of The Lord of the rings movies. But I thought it was a good movie


    #KNICKSTAPE #PLAYOFF2013

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cool Ranch, NM
    Posts
    18,432
    vCash
    1500
    I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and will look forward to the next two chapters of this saga.

    I never read the books though.

    I just love the visuals and the music in these movies.
    DUDA


    Quote Originally Posted by VendettaRed07 View Post
    noah is gonna be a beast man.

    with him and harvey, its like were gonna have Goku and Vegetta in the same rotation

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    54,788
    vCash
    1500
    I watched it last night and really enjoyed it. I was a bit surprised by some of the harsh reviews for this movie...but whatever. If you're a fan of the LOTR movies then you'll enjoy this.

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •