Mark Vader Posted July 28, 2014 Share Posted July 28, 2014 The last movie involving Middle Earth arrives 12/17. http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi137931801/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wooderson Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 (edited) Yes. Love these movies. Definitely not the epic-ness of LOTR but still a whole lot of fun to watch. Pretty cool how they use that song from LOTR that Pippen sings too. Edited July 29, 2014 by Wooderson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 Still dont like the liberties that Jackson took with the movie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 seeing how its been 10 - 15 years since I read the book, the movies flow fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 seeing how its been 10 - 15 years since I read the book, the movies flow fine I never read the books. They any good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I never read the books. They any good? To be honest, no. They're iconic because of their impact on the genre, but Tolkien isn't a great story teller. There are chapters in the books that are baffling as to why they were written. It's almost as if Tolkien was trying to create a world, and then build a story so he could tell you more about the world, not the other way around. This is all pertaining to the LoTR trilogy. The Hobbit was written first as a standalone children's book, and Tolkien died before he finished rewriting it in the "epic" style of LoTR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 To be honest, no. They're iconic because of their impact on the genre, but Tolkien isn't a great story teller. There are chapters in the books that are baffling as to why they were written. It's almost as if Tolkien was trying to create a world, and then build a story so he could tell you more about the world, not the other way around. This is all pertaining to the LoTR trilogy. The Hobbit was written first as a standalone children's book, and Tolkien died before he finished rewriting it in the "epic" style of LoTR. Yeah, I just read The Hobbit last night. It was...serviceable, I guess. Didn't see what the big deal was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 (edited) Yeah, I just read The Hobbit last night. It was...serviceable, I guess. Didn't see what the big deal was. Give it credit for first in class, or if not first because you probably know of some ancient Hungarian scribe's epic about an equivalent middle earth, give it credit for being the breakthrough in English. Pretty much all the fantasy books that followed it are merely variations on Tolkein's creation. I for one love multiple pages written in Elvish. Edited July 30, 2014 by John Adams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 I've read a ton of fantasy and sci-fi. And I can tell you, Tolkein isn't my favorite. Overly wordy authors never are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 Yeah, I just read The Hobbit last night. It was...serviceable, I guess. Didn't see what the big deal was. the Hobbit is a breeze, and quite light-hearted when compared with his subsequent middle-earth based works. I haven't been to see any of the Hobbit movies because they have to invent an awful lot of material to make three movies out of it. The Silmarillion was a beast, but if you can make it past the first 100 or so pages, it gets pretty epic. Melkor makes Sauron look like Gatorman. The LOTR movies followed the books fairly closely, but I'm one of those really annoying people that gets really pissed off when they make significant changes from the original story for the sake of making a movie. they really wrote-in a hell of a lot for the Arwen character that she never actually did in the books, starting with her riding Froso to Rivendell to save him from being wounded by a Nazgul, and then turning the Nazgul by conjuring riders from the river. in the books, it was Elrond and Glorfindel that did that. everyone in the theater cheered, while I sat there glowering, saying wtf is this bullcrap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted July 30, 2014 Share Posted July 30, 2014 the Hobbit is a breeze, and quite light-hearted when compared with his subsequent middle-earth based works. I haven't been to see any of the Hobbit movies because they have to invent an awful lot of material to make three movies out of it. The Silmarillion was a beast, but if you can make it past the first 100 or so pages, it gets pretty epic. Melkor makes Sauron look like Gatorman. The LOTR movies followed the books fairly closely, but I'm one of those really annoying people that gets really pissed off when they make significant changes from the original story for the sake of making a movie. they really wrote-in a hell of a lot for the Arwen character that she never actually did in the books, starting with her riding Froso to Rivendell to save him from being wounded by a Nazgul, and then turning the Nazgul by conjuring riders from the river. in the books, it was Elrond and Glorfindel that did that. everyone in the theater cheered, while I sat there glowering, saying wtf is this bullcrap? The Hobbit movies used a lot of Tolkien's unfinished works to fill in the gaps. They added a few characters, and made up a couple, but I accept their transgressions. The use of Arwen and Aragorn's doubts arc was purely for Hollywood, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 The Hobbit movies used a lot of Tolkien's unfinished works to fill in the gaps. They added a few characters, and made up a couple, but I accept their transgressions. your problem is that you're a reasonable person and can appreciate license taken when converting a tale from one medium to another. I on the other hand, am an insufferable purist that can't relax enough to actually enjoy such things. I'll never forget how stoked I was when I walked into the theater to see the first Conan movie starring Arnold. being a huge Robert E Howard fan, I couldn't wait to see my favorite character from my favorite books lopping off heads on the silver screen. alas, I was clutching at my temples in a desperate attempt to keep my head from exploding less than 5 minutes into the film. I've only gotten worse in my old age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 To be honest, no. They're iconic because of their impact on the genre, but Tolkien isn't a great story teller. There are chapters in the books that are baffling as to why they were written. It's almost as if Tolkien was trying to create a world, and then build a story so he could tell you more about the world, not the other way around. This is all pertaining to the LoTR trilogy. The Hobbit was written first as a standalone children's book, and Tolkien died before he finished rewriting it in the "epic" style of LoTR. I respectfully disagree. The Hobbit is a fun good story, very creative. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is fantastic. The Two Towers in particular keeps you on the edge. I absolutely love the Mines of Moria sequence in Fellowship of the Ring, and the battle of Pellenor Fields in Return of the King is very well written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Give it credit for first in class, or if not first because you probably know of some ancient Hungarian scribe's epic about an equivalent middle earth, give it credit for being the breakthrough in English. Pretty much all the fantasy books that followed it are merely variations on Tolkein's creation. I for one love multiple pages written in Elvish. Everything's ultimately a rip-off of The Legend of Gilgamesh, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 I respectfully disagree. The Hobbit is a fun good story, very creative. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is fantastic. The Two Towers in particular keeps you on the edge. I absolutely love the Mines of Moria sequence in Fellowship of the Ring, and the battle of Pellenor Fields in Return of the King is very well written. I agree that there are great parts in LotR. I didn't mean to make it sound like it I was bashing Tolkien. But there are chapters, Tom Bombadil is a big one, where you have no idea what is the point. And there is no point besides Tolkien trying to flesh out his own world. Chapters like that clog up the narrative, from a storytelling perspective. I also enjoyed the Hobbit. But I can see how others might be critical of it. I mean, we didn't even get to witness the Battle of the Five Armies. Bard randomly saves the day and kills Smaug? A character not introduced until 60% into the book? I enjoyed his books, and have nothing but respect for the care he poured in to make Middle Earth seem real. But he wasn't the perfect storyteller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 Everything's ultimately a rip-off of The Legend of Gilgamesh, anyway. Darmak and Jalad at Tanagra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Hammersticks Posted August 1, 2014 Share Posted August 1, 2014 I literally fell asleep during the desolation of smaug. Is this one going to suck as badly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 I agree that there are great parts in LotR. I didn't mean to make it sound like it I was bashing Tolkien. But there are chapters, Tom Bombadil is a big one, where you have no idea what is the point. And there is no point besides Tolkien trying to flesh out his own world. Chapters like that clog up the narrative, from a storytelling perspective. I also enjoyed the Hobbit. But I can see how others might be critical of it. I mean, we didn't even get to witness the Battle of the Five Armies. Bard randomly saves the day and kills Smaug? A character not introduced until 60% into the book? I enjoyed his books, and have nothing but respect for the care he poured in to make Middle Earth seem real. But he wasn't the perfect storyteller. Alright, I see your point. I never fully understood what the point or purpose was of Tom Bombadil. I also agree that for all the build-up, Smaug's death is a downer. Which is why the second Hobbit movie, "The Desolation of Smaug" was great to see. Peter Jackson had to make the scenes with Smaug more exciting than they are in the book. I do love the way the book describes the conversation with Bilbo & Smaug, but for all the hype and purpose of the story, it kind of falls flat. Nevertheless I still love the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 Yeah, I just read The Hobbit last night. It was...serviceable, I guess. Didn't see what the big deal was. It's a kids book. I loved it growing up, and still have some fondness for it. I read it to my family last year and enjoyed it again, but I'm not sure how much was nostaliga. I remember the Trilogy being overly complex, too often to the detriment of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted November 7, 2014 Share Posted November 7, 2014 New trailer.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts