How anyone had the idea of making a trilogy out of a book that was the same length as a chapter in the Lord of the rings books still baffles me. It's just shockingly bad. It would have been a fantastic stand alone movie.
Film Lord of the Rings
- Thread starter Livvie
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Oh gosh... This is kinda sad to read. I mean I started it on Friday night and watched them leave... And I've had no motivation to continue whereas LOTR I didI think the LOTR trilogy is the best achievement in cinematic history, truly magnificent 10/10 stuff. I’ve never come close to feeling how I felt watching and even walking out of the cinema after Fellowship.
Now The Hobbit is my favourite book, was since I was about 10.
So with the knowledge of the above, trust me when I say The Hobbit movies are utter wank. They start well, the unexpected party is brilliant, then they get shitter, shitter and shitter as the films go on.
Ahhh I'll have to try power through just for completeness
Oh Cumberbatch is in it? That's good to know
Ah it does feel like and from what people have said, that they extend for the sake of extending
Even though it comes after LOTR, LOTR looks visually better so far
The 3rd is pretty decent. Just a bit too much CGI'ness that ruins this trilogy. Best part was the Dragon. Brilliant scene.
It's the sets. I have been thinking this for a while, actually. When you see some of the old (pre-affordable CGI) movie sets and think they are all basically green screens these days, it's definitely a lost art.
The CGI in the Hobbit is shite as well. The original LOTR practical effects and visual effects are vastly superior.
I'm a massive Tolkein fan, and love the LOTR films.
However I genuinely have never watched the last two hobbit movies. The first was difficult to get through.
However I genuinely have never watched the last two hobbit movies. The first was difficult to get through.
That's because in LOTR you see real sets with a CGI finish. In The Hobbit, it's pretty much all green screen.
So bizarre when you can hear Jackson say that whenever possible he wanted real light on real objects in the making of documentary to one of the LOTR films.
Laziness, I think.
I think the 'sword master' Bob Anderson played a big part in bringing it to life, the battle choreography was something else.
Good luck spotting him in it!!
One of the worst scenes in the extended edition, completely undermines Aragorn's character. It's revenge porn fitting for a Tarantino movie, not Lord of the Rings - they were right to cut it.
Agreed. Thank feck they didn't go with their original idea of Sauron coming on to the battlefield to face him in hand to hand combat...
It was perfectly possible to create an adaptation of the Hobbit over more than one film despite the shortness and child orientated nature of the book given the wealth of supplemental material in the appendices of LOTR, which they had the rights for. In fact, a more adult Hobbit in the style of LOTR is something I'd always dreamt of and Tolkien started writing one although never finished it.
I think the problems stem from these areas:
i)Warner Brothers are arseholes and fecked about much more than the old New Line set up did and so that created pressure
ii)Jackson taking over directing duties so late in the day meant they were far less prepared and had to go CGI over building sets to make the filming schedule.
iii)Jackson can't resist "going big" in action scenes and spectacle and with a big budget as he had on the Hobbit his lack of self control resulted in ridiculous physics defying Marvel-esque nonsense
iv)The crazy decision to go with 3D Red cameras at 48fps
I think the problems stem from these areas:
i)Warner Brothers are arseholes and fecked about much more than the old New Line set up did and so that created pressure
ii)Jackson taking over directing duties so late in the day meant they were far less prepared and had to go CGI over building sets to make the filming schedule.
iii)Jackson can't resist "going big" in action scenes and spectacle and with a big budget as he had on the Hobbit his lack of self control resulted in ridiculous physics defying Marvel-esque nonsense
iv)The crazy decision to go with 3D Red cameras at 48fps
Last edited:
Boo. I love the Mouth (it’s also one of my favorite bits from books)
How do you see it undermining Aragorn? I didn't have a problem with this scene at all.
Also, was this scene not in the OG version then? Aside from seeing it at the cinema, I've always watched the extended versions.
This 100%. The main reason I preferred TLOTR over the Hobbit movies is the feel. TLOTR had a more realistic tone and colour palette and less physics defying bullsh*t.
It was there from the off in the Hobbit. The whole clearing up after dinner scene at the start the Hobbit was so cringey and a lot of the stuff in in the goblin caves was crap too. Also, the barrel ride was nonsense that could and should have been a great scene. Felt like a fairy tale.
It's not the Mouth itself that is the problem - I also love the scene in the book. It's that Aragorn, one of the last great men descended directly from the once high and noble Numenor, just goes and kills an emissary in cold blood. Even if that emissary is a servant of Sauron, this isn't something a descendant of Isildur and true heir of Gondor's throne would do.
I would always encourage a LOTR fan to watch the Hobbit trilogy, rather than miss it altogether. Its obviously not a patch on the LOTR, but take out the overblown action sequences and there is some good stuff there. Mainly involving Freeman.
I understand it wasn't dealt with in the same way as in the book but I didn't have a problem with it in the movies, I actually thought it was a good scene.
I still enjoy the Hobbit trilogy, even if it isn't as good as TLOTR. My favourite is to watch all 6 movies on the trot.
Thanks for reminding me of this epicness, I see your point.
Those 18 hours just fly by.
I liked it too.
From Aragorns point of view all was lost anyway as they had captured Frodo and thus got the ring of power back again. I think the Mouth of Sauron also taunts Aragorn a bit by suggesting they tortured Frodo no? I can understand why he lashed out given it was probably going to be his last fight (as from his perspective his army was surrounded and Sauron had the ring).
You by the end of it all you almost feel like you've been on the quest to save middle earth with them all!
Last edited:
Yeah pretty much, the scene certainly didn't grate against my love of the book that's for sure and I think the scene reflected quite well the situation they were in.
I agree with your reasoning...but...the Aragorn in the films is a very different Aragorn to the one in the books. In the films he doesn't even want to be King at first etc - so for me that scene does make sense. He thinks he has lost his friend. Film Aragorn would do that.
They used real Orcs in Lord of the Rings , much better than the fake CGI Orcs in the Hobbit.
Speaking of Aragorn, this is probably my favorite moment in the books, wish they'd have found a way to include this full dialogue in the movie:
Same still eyed Strider dubiously. 'How do we know you are the Strider that Gandalf speaks about?' he demanded. 'You never mentioned Gandalf, till this letter came out. You might be a play-acting spy..., trying to get us to go with you. You might have done in the real Strider and took his clothes. What have you to say to that?'
'That you are a stout fellow,' answered Strider; 'but I am afraid my only answer to you, Sam Gamgee, is this. If I had killed the real Strider, I could kill you. And I should have killed you already without so much talk. If I was after the Ring, I could have it — NOW!'
He stood up, and seemed suddenly to grow taller. In his eyes gleamed a light, keen and commanding. Throwing back his cloak, he laid his hand on the hilt of a sword that had hung concealed by his side.... Sam sat wide-mouthed staring at him dumbly.
'But I am the real Strider, fortunately,' he said, looking down at them with his face softened by a sudden smile. 'I am Aragorn son of Arathorn; and if by life or death I can save you, I will.'....
There's so many good moments in the books, this is one though. I try and read it at least every couple of years and I still find new things to enjoy and focus on. Aragorns story is awesome.
Yeah there’s always new stuff to appreciate. I just checked and last time I read it was a year ago, this is what I wrote on the Cafe then:
I love the FOTR movie but they cut this line and chucked it into the Council of Elrond where it fell flat which is such a waste of that great moment. Too little time in Bree sacrificed to maintain the movie's pace I guess.
Also, I never got why they altered the scene in Balin's Tomb when Gandalf reads from the Book of Mazarbul and the Fellowship then echo the words of the doomed dwarves as they hear the orcs approach. "Drums in the Deep". "We cannot get put". It's one of the most naturally cinematic parts of the book and it seemed odd to change it.
Finished the first hobbit movie. It got better when gollum came in and the trolls? Or whatever they were came in