1 posted on
07/21/2008 8:17:13 PM PDT by
Oyarsa
To: Oyarsa
Uh-oh. Two words: “Ralph Bakshi.” Different isn’t always better.
To: ecurbh; HairOfTheDog
To: Oyarsa
"I think The Hobbit has a peculiar spirit in relation to not only the trilogy, but also to Tolkeins work." The Hobbit IS different in spirit in relation to the trilogy. More focus on the individual (Bilbo), not as "dark" and militaristic--at least that's my recollection (although it's been a few years since I've read them). But of course there's a lot that they have in common.
It's probably a good idea not to stray TOO far from Jackson's vision and style, which worked very well.
I'm still hoping for James McAvoy as Bilbo.
To: Oyarsa
I have heard that, in the two movies, they will do more to set up LOTR (ie Sauron’s return to Mordor). Most of this plot is only hinted at in LOTR Appendices and the Silmarillion. Looking forward to that part especially.
To: Oyarsa
There's no way to make a complete, "true" translation of the LOTR books to film, and I think Jackson did the best he could. The persistent complaint about ROTK is that it's too long, with too many endings--and some people wanted the scouring of the Shire in there, too? People would have been leaving the theater in droves at that point. Had nothing to do with not wanting to condemn socialism--if the three movies together don't show the value of both the individual and teamwork, what makes anyone think that the Shire sequence would somehow get across a critique of socialism? Not everyone sits around thinking "Hmmm, we can't put that major scene in because people will see it as critical of socialism." Sometimes, it's just a case of "The movie's already three hours and change, we gotta wrap it up somehow!"
The purists will never be satisfied, and they don't seem to understand that you can't make a trilogy of films just for them--the books had to be streamlined, and some hidden socialist agenda wasn't behind that decision.
16 posted on
07/21/2008 9:41:29 PM PDT by
Darkwolf377
(American secret agent in enemy territory (Cambridge, MA))
To: 2Jedismom; 300winmag; Alkhin; Alouette; ambrose; Anitius Severinus Boethius; artios; AUsome Joy; ...
 Ring Ping!! |
Anyone wishing to be added to or removed from the Ring-Ping list, please don't hesitate to let me know.
23 posted on
07/22/2008 6:13:24 AM PDT by
ecurbh
(Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.)
To: Oyarsa
bflr = bump for later reading
27 posted on
07/22/2008 9:37:59 AM PDT by
fishtank
(FIRST defeat Obama. ------------------ THEN resist McCain. ---------- A good plan.)
To: Oyarsa
The key point about The Hobbit relative to the Lord of the Rings is that the former was written for children, the latter for adults. The humor, motivations, and moral choices confronted mainly by Bilbo, and to some extent the dwarves, are aimed at the level of a child. I hope that the film version retains this sensibility.
38 posted on
07/23/2008 12:49:54 PM PDT by
Faraday
To: Oyarsa
I hope Del Toro keeps the look of LOTR but vastly improves on Peter Jackson’s ham-handed plot and character development.
43 posted on
09/07/2008 7:14:07 AM PDT by
JohnnyZ
(This gun for hire)
To: Oyarsa
Jackson's wife is co-writing and Jackson is the producer. Del Toro is a very very good director. But Jackson will be signing his paychecks and I doubt Del Toro will stray too far off the farm.
On the other hand Del Toro is very right in the sense that The Hobbit is a very different book than LOTR.
45 posted on
09/07/2008 7:23:42 AM PDT by
Artemis Webb
(Sarah Palin: Babies, Guns, Jesus. HOT DAMN!)
To: Oyarsa
The Hellboy movie Del Toro did this summer has me looking forward to his Hobbit.
49 posted on
09/07/2008 7:47:28 AM PDT by
denydenydeny
("[Obama acts] as if the very idea of permanent truth is passe, a form of bad taste"-Shelby Steele)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson