Red Mosquito

harmless wrote:I didn't say it couldn't be entertaining, but it was never going to be true to the book, stretched out into three. For the same reasons that the Narnia movies weren't true to the books because they were changed to become an "epic" movie. These books are not epics; they're humble campfire stories. Anyway, regardless of all that, they'd all be better movies without Peter Jackson involved and that was my main point really. He also dragged King Kong out into a pointlessly bloated movie.

King Kong sucked so bad...i walked out from the theatre.

VinylGuy wrote:

harmless wrote:I didn't say it couldn't be entertaining, but it was never going to be true to the book, stretched out into three. For the same reasons that the Narnia movies weren't true to the books because they were changed to become an "epic" movie. These books are not epics; they're humble campfire stories. Anyway, regardless of all that, they'd all be better movies without Peter Jackson involved and that was my main point really. He also dragged King Kong out into a pointlessly bloated movie.

King Kong sucked so bad...i walked out from the theatre.

I enjoyed bits of it, but yeah, it's so long it ends up being much ado about nothing.

harmless wrote:it was never going to be true to the book, stretched out into three.

I don't think making changes is a problem.

I do, however, think there's a pretty wide gap between "changes would have to be made in order to film this as three movies" and "any change that are made are acceptable, because changes were inevitable."

None of these additions look to enhance or support the story. They look like a while new story is getting grafted on for the sake of demographic appeal.

McParadigm wrote:

harmless wrote:it was never going to be true to the book, stretched out into three.

I don't think making changes is a problem.

I do, however, think there's a pretty wide gap between "changes would have to be made in order to film this as three movies" and "any change that are made are acceptable, because changes were inevitable."

None of these additions look to enhance or support the story. They look like a while new story is getting grafted on for the sake of demographic appeal.

Yeah, I'm not doubting that at all. I'm just doubting that the situation could've / would've been any different as long as their plan was to make a trilogy out of a single, short book. Whatever you do, you're going to have to stuff that full of stuff which isn't true to the original book and which will piss some fans off. That's why I don't think this should ever have been a trilogy, because pointless and / or extraneous padding was necessary.

Forgive my ignorance, it's been years since I read The Hobbit. But what are the changes Jackson has made now?

cutuphalfdead wrote:Forgive my ignorance, it's been years since I read The Hobbit. But what are the changes Jackson has made now?

The book is only 127 pages so that's clearly not enough material for three films.

I'm not sure, Pete, but that's the general point I'm making. To debate the appropriateness of the padding misses the point; the fact that there's any padding at all would be a problem, whatever it was.

harmless wrote:I'm just doubting that the situation could've / would've been any different as long as their plan was to make a trilogy out of a single, short book. Whatever you do, you're going to have to stuff that full of stuff which isn't true to the original book and which will piss some fans off. That's why I don't think this should ever have been a trilogy, because pointless and / or extraneous padding was necessary.

Agreed. Which is why like everybody who wasn't financially involved thought it was a terrible idea from the start.

McParadigm wrote:

harmless wrote:I'm just doubting that the situation could've / would've been any different as long as their plan was to make a trilogy out of a single, short book. Whatever you do, you're going to have to stuff that full of stuff which isn't true to the original book and which will piss some fans off. That's why I don't think this should ever have been a trilogy, because pointless and / or extraneous padding was necessary.

Agreed. Which is why like everybody who wasn't financially involved thought it was a terrible idea from the start.

NNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Tolkien The Silmarillion Movie Coming - MoviesOnline - http://www.moviesonline.ca/movienews_11758.html
As the saying goes '"Never" is the word God listens out for whenever he needs a laugh'

dimejinky99 wrote:NNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Tolkien The Silmarillion Movie Coming - MoviesOnline - http://www.moviesonline.ca/movienews_11758.html
As the saying goes '"Never" is the word God listens out for whenever he needs a laugh'

I'd like to see a well made movie of this part:
"Akallabeth," the story of the downfall of the great island kingdom of Numenor at the end of the Second Age;
*shrugs*

cutuphalfdead wrote:Forgive my ignorance, it's been years since I read The Hobbit. But what are the changes Jackson has made now?

To answer your question, PJ has mined the corresponding backstory from LOTR and history of middle earth books to pad out and extend these to three films.
So you'll hopefully see a lot more of the white council, them discovering its actually Sauron who is ensconced in Mirkwood and hem evicting him via a big battle-hopefully well see some actual proper big elven magic here cos as Tolkien tells it, he's expelled mainly by the white council but Galadriels powers mainly assisted by Gandalf.

It could be amazing. I'm dubious.

dimejinky99 wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:Forgive my ignorance, it's been years since I read The Hobbit. But what are the changes Jackson has made now?

To answer your question, PJ has mined the corresponding backstory from LOTR and history of middle earth books to pad out and extend these to three films.
So you'll hopefully see a lot more of the white council, them discovering its actually Sauron who is ensconced in Mirkwood and hem evicting him via a big battle-hopefully well see some actual proper big elven magic here cos as Tolkien tells it, he's expelled mainly by the white council but Galadriels powers mainly assisted by Gandalf.

It could be amazing. I'm dubious.

Yeah, I always figured the padding could be done well if it was faithfully culled from the history of Middle Earth. With that said, I thought part 1 pretty much sucked.

malice wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:NNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Tolkien The Silmarillion Movie Coming - MoviesOnline - http://www.moviesonline.ca/movienews_11758.html
As the saying goes '"Never" is the word God listens out for whenever he needs a laugh'

I'd like to see a well made movie of this part:
"Akallabeth," the story of the downfall of the great island kingdom of Numenor at the end of the Second Age;
*shrugs*

There are a lot of 'of's in that description.

harmless wrote:

malice wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:NNNNOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
Tolkien The Silmarillion Movie Coming - MoviesOnline - http://www.moviesonline.ca/movienews_11758.html
As the saying goes '"Never" is the word God listens out for whenever he needs a laugh'

I'd like to see a well made movie of this part:
"Akallabeth," the story of the downfall of the great island kingdom of Numenor at the end of the Second Age;
*shrugs*

There are a lot of 'of's in that description.

Brits, yanno?

cutuphalfdead wrote:

dimejinky99 wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:Forgive my ignorance, it's been years since I read The Hobbit. But what are the changes Jackson has made now?

To answer your question, PJ has mined the corresponding backstory from LOTR and history of middle earth books to pad out and extend these to three films.
So you'll hopefully see a lot more of the white council, them discovering its actually Sauron who is ensconced in Mirkwood and hem evicting him via a big battle-hopefully well see some actual proper big elven magic here cos as Tolkien tells it, he's expelled mainly by the white council but Galadriels powers mainly assisted by Gandalf.

It could be amazing. I'm dubious.

Yeah, I always figured the padding could be done well if it was faithfully culled from the history of Middle Earth. With that said, I thought part 1 pretty much sucked.

To be fair, not a lot happens in that first part of the story except the mines.

Th next two films will probably be overloaded and too heavy with stuff.

Potential to be great. I've a feeling DOS will be kick ass. Despite the sucky trailers

I sort of imagine everybody sitting around a table many years ago, right after Lord of the Rings and Pirates made Bloom so popular, smoking set piece pipes and thinking "Man, if only we could have some sort of Legolas tragic romance film. We'd make enough money to buy all the Indian homeless child organs we can eat! I could pay my ex-wife to pick my nose! We could even shut down the government if we wanted to. But, alas, we can't."

And now, suddenly, the ghost of Tom Cruise has seen fit to grant them this one chance to do exactly that...graft a purposeless and pouty little mini-movie onto the scarred, borrowed heart of their previously too-sparse woopsidaisy.

These people aren't stupid. They hurried right over, pulled the scriptwriters off of whatever crying Fillipino girls they were on top of at the moment, slapped their backs, and said, "Son, we're gonna need you to OH MY GOD WHAT WERE YOU DOING TO HER SHE'S-"

That's sort of where my imagination fades to black. But the gist is still there.

dimejinky99 wrote:I've a feeling DOS will be kick ass.

I was gonna answer that in binary, McP.
Then I realised you'd probably be able to read it and suddenly it wouldn't be funny.

dimejinky99 wrote:I was gonna answer that in binary, McP.
Then I realised you'd probably be able to read it and suddenly it wouldn't be funny.

I reach pretty deep into autism territory, to be frank. Not a whole lot of what any of you say makes an impact.