ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

A proper Hobbit

TolkienEditor has cut Peter Jackson's abusive monstrosity in half and thereby, in large part, restored Tolkien's much-beloved tale:
I decided to condense all three installments (An Unexpected Journey, The Desolation of Smaug and The Battle of the Five Armies) into a single 4-hour feature that more closely resembled Tolkien’s original novel. Well, okay, it’s closer to 4.5 hours, but those are some long-ass credits! This new version was achieved through a series of major and minor cuts, detailed below:

The investigation of Dol Guldor has been completely excised, including the appearances of Radagast, Saruman and Galadriel. This was the most obvious cut, and the easiest to carry out (a testament to its irrelevance to the main narrative). Like the novel, Gandalf abruptly disappears on the borders of Mirkwood, and then reappears at the siege of the Lonely Mountain with tidings of an orc army.

The Tauriel-Legolas-Kili love triangle has also been removed. Indeed, Tauriel is no longer a character in the film, and Legolas only gets a brief cameo during the Mirkwood arrest. This was the next clear candidate for elimination, given how little plot value and personality these two woodland sprites added to the story. Dwarves are way more fun to hang out with anyway. :P

The Pale Orc subplot is vastly trimmed down. Azog is obviously still leading the attack on the Lonely Mountain at the end, but he does not appear in the film until after the company escapes the goblin tunnels (suggesting that the slaying of the Great Goblin is a factor in their vendetta, as it was in the novel).
I was pleased to learn that in addition to getting rid of "Tauriel", the ridiculous barrel-fight is also gone. The Hobbit: The Tolkien Edit is a 6GB MP4 file, available by either torrent or direct download. Not all of Jackson's egregious stupidities have been excised, but most of them have been surgically removed.

UPDATE: Another, even more reduced option:
After about 312 new edits and cuts and almost 5 hours removed from the trilogy, this single film combines the three Peter Jackson movies into one immense epic that accurately tells the story of Bilbo, while maintaining what new ideas and battles have been implanted in Jackson’s retelling (such as the Battle of the Five Armies containing orcs instead of goblins). 
The following is a list of all the major edits/alterations to the films for this single edit. Scenes aren’t always simply removed, sometimes they are repositioned or sometimes specific elements are taken out or added in for coherency or pacing:  
  • Removed all of Elf-Dwarf Love Triangle Plot
  • Removed all of Gandalf’s necromancer adventures
  • Removed most of orc scenes/battles/mentions in first 2/3’s of the film (including removing frames with orcs from the post-goblin escape scene at the end of “Unexpected Journey”)
  • Removed Bilbo killing a wolf - the first thing he kills is the spider in Mirkwood forest, giving the sword the name “Sting”
  • Removed all of (elder) Bilbo’s introduction to the lore
  • Removed all of the heavy foreshadowing for LOTR and the evil of the ring - kept to the spirit of the book, it was a playful invisibility ring!
  • Added a deleted scene of the Shire villagers as an intro to the film
  • Reduced much of the Dwarves’ dinner at Bilbo’s
  • Created faster transition to Bilbo getting out of the house
  • Reduced Rivendell
  • Reduced Stone Giant scene
  • Reduced goblin scene, re-ordered dialogue to mirror book interactions between Thorin & Goblin King
  • Kept Gollum scene entirely intact - no cutting between that and the goblin lair, although shortened as well as removed Gollum beating the corpse in the beginning
  • Created voice-over transition into Beorn scene at the beginning of “Desolation of Smaug”
  • Reduced Mirkwood forest & Woodland Realm capture scenes
  • Heavily reduced Laketown capture (all of Laketown is about 10 minutes total now)
  • Removed Smaug battle scene with dwarves in the mines (kept Bilbo’s conversation with Smaug, the battle was outrageously cartoonish and long)
  • Removed Bard using his son as a bow, the shots dance around it and the scene is intact 
  • Rearranged much of Battle of Five Armies for coherency of Bilbo concealing and giving away the Arkenstone without the need for so many silly slow-motion Thorin bits
  • Removed many elements of the Battle of Five Armies that contained too much CGI monsters or silly battle actions (like repeated head-butting) 
  • Reduced and rearranged the battle to get to Thorin quicker
  • Removed elves from the final fight scene (Kili fights the orc in order to protect Bilbo instead of his elf love interest)
  • Removed final flash-forward scene, the film ends with Bilbo finally coming home

Labels:

112 Comments:

Anonymous Scooter January 27, 2015 5:59 AM  

Fan edits are fantastic. I always thought it would be an interesting experiment for a filmmaker if they put out all of the raw footage from their film online and crowdsourced the post production.

Anonymous Athor Pel January 27, 2015 6:00 AM  

Three of the four sites given for download had already taken it down for terms of service violation. The one link that did work is in New Zealand and is quite sloooow.

Anonymous Foster January 27, 2015 6:01 AM  

But did they get rid of the "Hey, let's attack the dragon who destroyed our entire civilization by drowning him in a pool of gold. That's sure to work!" To borrow JC Wright's term, that was the loudest peal of the stupid hammer in the movie for me. I mean, they could try it, but if they did, we need to see some barbecued dwarves.

Anonymous Dikaios Rik January 27, 2015 6:35 AM  

This already sounds a whole lot better than what I'd seen in the theatres.

And as usual, someone just had to go and whine about da wimminz:

However, did you at all consider that by cutting Tauriel and Galadriel you remove women entirely from the whole movie? I mean, it’s cool that you managed to cut it down so much, but the reason why they were included in the first place was largely because the Hobbit (book) completely fails to include women at all, and that the female audience wants someone to relate to, too.

Amusement abounds.

Anonymous VD January 27, 2015 6:44 AM  

However, did you at all consider that by cutting Tauriel and Galadriel you remove women entirely from the whole movie?

To which the only response is: so what?

Anonymous Orlok January 27, 2015 6:45 AM  

Links are dead dead dead - that was Fast . Thanks for the info Vox you continue to provide coolness

Blogger Northern Hamlet January 27, 2015 6:58 AM  

Like the novel, Gandalf abruptly disappears

For some reason, that little back story really pissed me off. We didn't need to know where Gandalf was. It's a testament to his character that he's a mythic wandering wizard with his fingers in all sorts of pots.

Anonymous Oswald January 27, 2015 7:02 AM  

"However, did you at all consider that by cutting Tauriel and Galadriel you remove women entirely from the whole movie?"

...But they did leave in Legolas the Gay.

Anonymous VD January 27, 2015 7:04 AM  

But they did leave in Legolas the Gay.

Not much of him. And they took out the stupid spaghetti Western showdown.

Blogger Bodichi January 27, 2015 7:23 AM  

This is a great idea and I look forward to watching it.

Anonymous Stingray January 27, 2015 7:36 AM  

To which the only response is: so what?

I think the only response is: Good. I won't watch the movie. I don't even like to look at the posters. When I heard that they had to put in token women, I refused waste any time on it at all.

but the reason why they were included in the first place was largely because the Hobbit (book) completely fails to include women at all

*facepalm*

Anonymous Salt January 27, 2015 7:38 AM  

The direct links may be down but I suspect the torrent is still available.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 7:40 AM  

When there's something that only includes women you never hear the reverse.

The women who complain can make an all female version of the hobbit. They can get the new Anglican bishop dyke to play gandalf.

Anonymous takin' a look January 27, 2015 8:01 AM  

-FUBAR Nation Ben

The women who complain can make an all female version of the hobbit. They can get the new Anglican bishop dyke to play gandalf.

I'd think she would be a shoo-in for Gollum. Judy Parfitt would be a better choice as Gandalf the Fey Femme.

Anonymous Feh January 27, 2015 8:02 AM  

"You eliminated all the women! How can I relate to this movie?"

(hands over vibrator)

"Here, go console yourself."

Blogger Cluttermonkey January 27, 2015 8:14 AM  

"JULES SAYS: Ah. Clever.

However, did you at all consider that by cutting Tauriel and Galadriel you remove women entirely from the whole movie? I mean, it’s cool that you managed to cut it down so much, but the reason why they were included in the first place was largely because the Hobbit (book) completely fails to include women at all, and that the female audience wants someone to relate to, too.

Just a little thought, there.?"

Gammas and White Knights feel the need to even defend non-canon fictional female characters. Colour me surprised. Or is Jules a women's name? The whole mentality is contained in writing "[...] completely fails [...]" when referring to such a successful and well-loved book in whatever context. And that for the, in the comment writers mind, unspeakable crime of not existing solely to cater to vapid and solipsistic adult women, who are so coddled in western society, that they believe even children's books and tale of adventure must be centred around and catered to them alone. But I suppose we should be thankful that Jackson kept the travesty to adding non-canon females and giving them as much screen time as he can get away with with the majority who aren't familiar with the book, and didn't turn Bilbo into Bilbolina the Sassy adventure-girl.

Btw. the NZ link is still up atm.

Anonymous HongKongCharlie January 27, 2015 8:21 AM  

Downloading the torrent as we speak.

HongKongCharlie

Anonymous Trimegistus January 27, 2015 8:30 AM  

This is kind of tangential, but bear with me. Anyone else watching the "Agent Carter" show? It's a quasi-spinoff of "Agents of SHIELD" about Peggy Carter doing Agenty stuff in 1949.

Most of the fun is drowned out by Mean Guys saying Sexist Stuff to poor widdle Agent Carter, but what's particularly bizarre, almost insane, is the show's direct and apparently literal equation of female empowerment with violence. Agent Carter is a Strong Female Character because she injures men.

The fact that tons of women seem very excited about this is revealing. Apparently there are a lot of women who fantasize about injuring men (even as they have Category Five conniptions over any imaginary hint of "violence against women" in fiction).

I'd like people's opinions: is this an innate female-psyche thing (fantasizing about being stronger than men except of course for the One True Alpha who can beat her) or is it more Crazyworld cultural propaganda?

Anonymous Roundtine January 27, 2015 8:30 AM  

I'm finding a 3 Hour, 4.7 GB Hobbit edition out there, doesn't look like the same guy, since his cut is 4.5 hrs and 6 GB, but the idea is the same.

Blogger Ben January 27, 2015 8:32 AM  

We were discussing this on the other page a while ago. It's excellent news. And this is only the first version. I'm sure there will be others that will be even better.

FYI people the torrent works fine, using uTorrent and peer block it took about 15 minutes on a mediocre broadband connection (a few days ago). I'm hoping we'll eventually get something that is full 1080p and 7.1 audio, plus maybe some extended scenes if any good ones are eventually released.

Now if only someone could edit Radagast to not be such a yammering idiot.

Blogger Ben January 27, 2015 8:37 AM  

Also, here is the file from extratorrent, which is where he posted the original 2GB version.

Blogger Shimshon January 27, 2015 8:38 AM  

There's a different three hour cut I found too:

http://definitivehobbitcut.tumblr.com/

Sounds even better than the four hour version.

I watched a few minutes of the first movie and didn't even bother with the next two. This, I'll watch.

Blogger Nate January 27, 2015 8:42 AM  

"I'd like people's opinions: is this an innate female-psyche thing (fantasizing about being stronger than men except of course for the One True Alpha who can beat her) or is it more Crazyworld cultural propaganda?"

A lot of it is pure delusion. They don't just fantasize that they can beat up men... they really believe it.

Blogger Ben January 27, 2015 8:44 AM  

There's a different three hour cut I found too:

This is only the beginning. Good news for tolkien fans.

Blogger jaericho January 27, 2015 8:59 AM  

I have the LoTR movies on my server but I really wasn't keen on adding the three hobbit movies to my plex server. But now I can. I have already downloaded the first version listed.

Anonymous Gecko January 27, 2015 9:07 AM  

My theory is that these movies were revenge against Christopher and the Tolkien estate for angering Peter Jackson.

Blogger Nate January 27, 2015 9:13 AM  

second option looks to chopped up to me.

Blogger Gunnar von Cowtown January 27, 2015 9:13 AM  

Trimegistus sez "I'd like people's opinions: is this an innate female-psyche thing (fantasizing about being stronger than men except of course for the One True Alpha who can beat her) or is it more Crazyworld cultural propaganda?

Here's my two cents; it's mostly crazyworld cultural propaganda. There is a disproportional representation of "gender non-comforming" and "low sexual market value" women amongst the female sci-fi, fantasy, comic fan demographic. Also, a certain segment of self-loathing "low sexual market value" men also enjoy the "butt kicking babe" genre for obvious reasons. This disproportional representation of ne'er do wells is even more extreme in the ranks of writers, producers and "creative types" within the entertainment industry. Thus, the supply of "butt kickin' babe" media completely outweighs the demand, or in some cases attempts to create the demand.

Add up the numbers from book and ticket sales. When it comes to sci-fi/fantasy, the super majority of women (aka "gender conforming" middle-to-high SMV women) have already voted with their hearts and dollars. They chose the Twilight franchise by a wide margin. "Hi, I'm Bella. I smell nice. How 'bout you two supernatural Alphas spend the next five films fighting over me?"

Agent Carter is just another example of our elites having a completely different agenda than the people.

Blogger Nate January 27, 2015 9:21 AM  

" They chose the Twilight franchise by a wide margin."

Not just that. Note that 50 Shades is probably the most popular book with women... ever. And its all about a sub girl getting stuff shoved up her butt.

OpenID cailcorishev January 27, 2015 9:28 AM  

Yeah, but Twilight and 50 Shades make sense. We know girls like to have hunky guys fight over them, and that they like to be dominated by the right man. But since when do they fantasize about beating men up? That seems new in the last generation. Agent Scully never beat guys up.

It's as if someone came out with a skin mag called Pegging and it suddenly started outselling Playboy and Penthouse among men.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey January 27, 2015 9:33 AM  

Awesome! Did they remove the random blacks, Asians, and assorted mystery meat in the crowds at Laketown...?

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 9:34 AM  

Watched the preview of the three hour cut and it's much better. See, Peter, you could've of done it in one film, two at most and it would've been much better except for angering feminists for not including the strong independent woman type.

My only issue is that the creator may need to edit this to take into account the extended edition of the five armies, if there's anything worth adding in.

Anonymous Stingray January 27, 2015 9:37 AM  

is this an innate female-psyche thing (fantasizing about being stronger than men except of course for the One True Alpha who can beat her) or is it more Crazyworld cultural propaganda?

I think it's innate. We see a strong woman beating up a man (this means that she is inherently better than him) and then we think, "Yeah! She did it, I identify with her, so I can do that, too!" It's not coherent like that. It's just a feeling. But that is basically the process.

It's female solipsism.

Anonymous Bob January 27, 2015 9:44 AM  

Why not just make Bilbo a girl while we're at it? It's not like the other edits were better.

Anonymous Bob January 27, 2015 9:46 AM  

Also, thanks for the post. Glad I can see the Battle of the Five Armies (one of the more interesting bits of lore from the novel) without having to sit through more of that inane love triangle.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 9:51 AM  

How did Jackson come up with the pale orc idea anyways?

Anonymous Stickwick January 27, 2015 9:53 AM  

However, did you at all consider that by cutting Tauriel and Galadriel you remove women entirely from the whole movie? I mean, it’s cool that you managed to cut it down so much, but the reason why they were included in the first place was largely because the Hobbit (book) completely fails to include women at all, and that the female audience wants someone to relate to, too.

Oh, we do, do we? The book doesn't fail to include women, it doesn't include women because there is no good reason to include them. And not all women are capable of only relating to women. I deplore the addition of Tauriel, and am glad there's a recut version that omits her entirely.

Reduced much of the Dwarves’ dinner at Bilbo’s
Created faster transition to Bilbo getting out of the house


It's been too long since I read the book, so I don't remember -- is this in keeping with the spirit of the book? I rather liked the slow pace of the beginning of the first movie.

Anonymous jamsco January 27, 2015 9:54 AM  

Vox, they've also done this (trim three movies into one) with Star Wars Ep 1-3. Considering your disdain for those movies would you watch that?

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 January 27, 2015 9:58 AM  

I didn't look at these movies as an adaptation of The Hobbit. I saw them as a prequel series to the first movie series based on Tolkien's lore as a whole.

That said, these cuts seem to be reasonable. The only thing I really like about the movies is how it differed from the lore about what the Nazgul did after Saurons first defeat at the end of the Second Era. In the original stories, they just roamed around and fortified certain areas. In the movies, they were buried and sealed, which made much more sense from a tactical standpoint. Why would let such things roam free in the first place?

Anonymous Wendy January 27, 2015 10:24 AM  

It's been too long since I read the book, so I don't remember -- is this in keeping with the spirit of the book? I rather liked the slow pace of the beginning of the first movie.

No, in the book the pace is pretty slow, or at least not in a hurry to leave the Shire, so I'm a little disappointed to hear of those parts being cut. Except for the caricature nature of depicting the dwarfs and pretty much ignoring all but Thorin, Balin, Kili and Fili, I thought PJ managed to do quite well on the Shire parts. (Disclosure, I only watched the first of the Hobbit films since I was disgusted with the movie after they left the Shire.) Still and all, the best part of all the movies is the music. That, they managed to get right.

Anonymous Stilicho January 27, 2015 10:27 AM  

How did Jackson come up with the pale orc idea anyways?

Michael Moore?

Blogger Gunnar von Cowtown January 27, 2015 10:33 AM  

cailcorishev sez "But since when do they fantasize about beating men up? That seems new in the last generation."

Well, there's the rub. One theory is that it's not driven (much) by consumers wanting to see women beat up men. It's coming from the top down, and "women beating up men" is just a symptom of the greater disease of radical equalitarianism.

I would bet ca$h money that 15-20 years ago most if not all sci-fi/fantasy films and TV shows, or any action oriented show for that matter, started out predominately male. Then some jackass from marketing (or a producer with a sociopolitical axe to grind) tells some executive producer that the network needs to do better among females 18-35 because they buy stuff. The executive producer tells the writers that if they wanna get this pilot made, they'll need more strong female characters. For a writer or director, the path of least resistance is just to make one or two of the male characters female, but leave everything else exactly the same. (See Starbuck in the "new "Battlestar Galactica"")

This has been reinforced for so long that writers pretty much know not to bring a script to the network unless they've done their diversity bean-counting ahead of time. Enter Joss Whedon, exit men as a mass TV market for anything much other than sports, and here we are.

Anonymous H2 January 27, 2015 10:41 AM  

Where is the John C. Wright review of the Hobbit 3? I don't think he's put one up yet!

OpenID cailcorishev January 27, 2015 10:51 AM  

Vox, they've also done this (trim three movies into one) with Star Wars Ep 1-3.

Interesting. My first thought was that there's nothing there worth doing that with; the silk purse from a sow's ear problem. But maybe if you cut out all the wooden acting and bad Lucas humor from the first movie, all the teen angst from the other two, all the boring pod racing and fights with CGI robots and creatures, and everything that just didn't make sense....yeah, maybe you could get a pretty good 90-minute flick out of it.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 10:52 AM  

John Wright doesn't need to do a review of the pile of dung that was Hobbit 3.

OpenID cailcorishev January 27, 2015 10:55 AM  

One theory is that it's not driven (much) by consumers wanting to see women beat up men. It's coming from the top down, and "women beating up men" is just a symptom of the greater disease of radical equalitarianism.

That would have been my guess, but Trimegistus said tons of actual women seem excited about Agent Carter. (I don't know if he means actual women he knows, or just the media saying they are, though.) But if regular women are buzzing about the show in the break room, are they just following herd orders, or does it really turn them on?

OpenID cailcorishev January 27, 2015 11:00 AM  

I would bet ca$h money that 15-20 years ago most if not all sci-fi/fantasy films and TV shows, or any action oriented show for that matter, started out predominately male.

I didn't see the original Law & Order until it was in syndication, probably 10 years after it started. It was striking to see a show with an entirely male cast: both cops and their boss, both lawyers and their boss, all male. One black guy (who was Catholic, which was also unusual), but not a single nod to the matriarchy for something like the first three seasons.

I don't think there's any way you could get away with that on network TV today. That was 25 years ago.

Blogger Joshua Dyal January 27, 2015 11:11 AM  

Michael Moore?

Close. That's the Great White Whale, not the Pale Orc.

Blogger jimmy-jimbo January 27, 2015 11:44 AM  

I've already seen the first two movies. I can't unsee them. I will still watch the last part when it comes out on video. The Tolkien edit is a great idea. I thought the fans should enjoy an edit in the spirit of the book. Nonetheless, I watched the original LOTR extended version and loved every minute. Despite the taking of liberties, more Peter Jackson's lengthened version was quite enjoyable as cinematic eye candy. I doubt the movie studio will allow an abbreviated cut; however, Peter Jackson could go George Lucas in a positive way.

Blogger Quadko January 27, 2015 12:01 PM  

A nitpick: orcs are goblins - names used synonymously by Tolken, as I understand, just more 'goblin' word usage in Hobbit, 'orc' usage in LotR, but both in both - part of the multiple language. And thus the uruk-hai - to fight a war, you need more than just goblins, you need super-orcs. :)

I love the idea of a single "the hobbit" edit!

Blogger JDC January 27, 2015 12:05 PM  

I have never understood the desire to "connect" with characters and novels solely by gender. Women hate each other, yet desire to have themselves represented with characters that are strong, independent (but not too busty). Liberal theologians have tried to feminize Jesus for the same reason bleating, "We can't connect with an alpha Jesus. We want him sensitive, caring, and tolerant of everyone."

He called a woman a dog. He referred to his own mother as woman. He was a leader and a man of action. He wasn't afraid to warn people of the fires of hell, and yet, chastised his disciples for dismissing children. He banished demons, and called one of his closes friends satan when he decided Jesus' destination wasn't the cross and resurrection. He sat down, made a whip and kicked ass (I picture Jesus entering the temple, and in Piperesque style saying, "I'm here to chew figs and kick ass...and I'm all out of figs.") He loved the sinner and yet hated sin. He sought out sinners and displayed compassion, but never told them to stay in their sin.

Four years of seminary, I was bombarded by this mindset. Feminize Jesus and we will give women someone to connect with. Rubbish. A feminized man leads nobody. Good riddance Tauriel and Galadriel...you should be home raising and home schooling your elf babies.

Anonymous VD January 27, 2015 12:13 PM  

Vox, they've also done this (trim three movies into one) with Star Wars Ep 1-3. Considering your disdain for those movies would you watch that?

I'd consider it, anyhow.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 12:25 PM  

"Vox, they've also done this (trim three movies into one) with Star Wars Ep 1-3. Considering your disdain for those movies would you watch that?"

Based on the preview for the new star wars it seems like the diversity bean counters are doing their job with the magic negro stormtrooper and the girl as the first persons you see. I wouldn't be surprised if they were the new heroes.

Are you going to watch the new star wars and hope it isn't a pile of dung or wait until it comes out?

Blogger rycamor January 27, 2015 12:27 PM  

Trimegistus January 27, 2015 8:30 AM

I'd like people's opinions: is this an innate female-psyche thing (fantasizing about being stronger than men except of course for the One True Alpha who can beat her) or is it more Crazyworld cultural propaganda?


1. There is no fury like a woman scorned. Due to the average woman's increasing BMI contrasted with the increasing perfection of the hottest of the hot, and the fact that there are fewer and fewer masculine men available, there are millions of very dissatisfied women. Displaced rage abounds.

2. Once society goes down the road of trying to appease women's anger, it only intensifies. I'm sure we will end up with movies glorifying torture of men by women before the West achieves total collapse.

Anonymous Jill January 27, 2015 12:46 PM  

Well, I guess those cuts won't be marketed as comedy. I mean, really, there was no better comedic dialogue than "if this is love, why does it hurt so much?" [cue deep elven king voice] "because it was real". I could not stop laughing during the final installment. It was psychologically healing to my wounded soul.

Anonymous Jill January 27, 2015 12:50 PM  

"Oh, we do, do we? The book doesn't fail to include women, it doesn't include women because there is no good reason to include them. And not all women are capable of only relating to women. I deplore the addition of Tauriel, and am glad there's a recut version that omits her entirely." Agreed. Tolkien's book is great w/o female characters, and if he'd included females, they wouldn't have been retarded like Tauriel.

Blogger automatthew January 27, 2015 1:09 PM  

I watched as much as I could stand of the Preview.mp4 from the second, shorter edit. Even the good parts are stupidly done. Jackson's direction turns everything up to 11. It's not enough to have eagles rescuing the adventurers from burning trees. No, they're all in one giant tree that's not only burning, it's falling over the edge of a cliff. And some of the dwarves get dropped, only to be caught on the backs of other eagles. And Gandalf has to jump.

In the book Gandalf does prepare himself for a leap, but it is a leap to bring destruction to the enemy, at the cost of his own life.

This movie looks to be garbage, through and through. Which is exactly what I would expect from the despoiler of Faramir.

Blogger buzzardist January 27, 2015 1:10 PM  

How did Jackson come up with the pale orc idea anyways?

Apparently, narratively, it is "unconventional" to have the chief antagonist die long before the major action at the film's end.

From what I saw in the first Hobbit movie, Jackson was trying to set up an arch-foe with an ancient grudge who would carry us all the way through the Battle of the Five Armies.

But Jackson lacked the chops in the end even to do justice to this altered story line. Yeah, the pale orc led the battle at the end, and, yeah, there was supposedly that ancient grudge, but it didn't really seem to matter one way or another once the battled descended upon the Lonely Mountain. A quarter of the first movie seemed devoted to building up that story line, and there was but a scarce nod to it in the third movie.

Instead, I suspect that Jackson finally realized (too late) what the real antagonist was at the Battle of the Five Armies--Thorin himself. Smaug is dead, but the spirit that invited the dragon in the first place still lives in Thorin's heart. Until that is slain, Erebor remains unsafe. That is a decent story, and that's what the third movie ultimately swung toward, making all of that crap about the pale orc extraneous (not to mention the love triangle and Dol Guldor side stories).

As a note, Jackson came very close to making a similar mistake to Tauriel in the LOTR. Originally, by his account, Arwen was supposed to be at Helm's Deep. Jackson (or, should I say, Fran Walsh) had the elves showing up at Helm's Deep, which they do not in the novel, to put Arwen physically closer to Aragorn. It wasn't the Hobbit love triangle, but Jackson was going to have Arwen fighting at Helm's Deep. It would have been a disaster. With LOTR, at least, they realized this at the last minute, kept the (male) elves showing up, but shifted Arwen to dream sequences. Still not the novel, but substantially better than the mistake that could have been.

Sadly, with the Hobbit, there were no such last-minute realizations.

Blogger JCclimber January 27, 2015 1:13 PM  

whew, downloaded before they could get to the last site.....

Anonymous FP January 27, 2015 1:13 PM  

"and that the female audience wants someone to relate to, too."

Totally, and movies like Steel Magnolias or the YoYo Sisterhood need more action scenes with explosions n' stuff. That will get more men in the theaters for sure.

Re Argent Carter, it had a hard time going 2 minutes without some reference or whinge about sexism.

Blogger jimmy-jimbo January 27, 2015 1:20 PM  

I don't mind eliminating women from stories. Women are distractions to a good story. Men are better able to confront their emotions without a women beating it out of them. I'm surrounded my women all the time at home. It's fine to have a woman around as long as she doesn't cause drama. Drama at home isn't the kind of stories I want to enjoy in a movie. You'll get some boiling bunnies or some over the hill Sex in the City.

My biggest problem with Part 2 is the “Desolation of Smaug” was missing the “Desolation of Smaug”. Its like they padded Part 2 and left off the conclusion to Part 3. This deception in where they cut the movie make the edits more justifiable.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 1:38 PM  

JC they shut down the 3 hour movie web site. Glad I downloaded it.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 1:44 PM  

Should of been a question. It looks like it's still up.

Anonymous Gecko January 27, 2015 2:15 PM  

I don't care if the orc/Azog questions are serious or not, but they provide an excuse to talk lore so I'll take it.

As Quadko said, orcs are goblins and goblins are orcs. The biggest distinction comes when Uruk-Hai get thrown into the mix, and I think that's what creates some of the confusion. There really weren't Uruk-Hai in the The Hobbit.

Azog's son Bolg was actually the leader of the goblins at The Battle of Five Armies. Azog was slain at Moria by the same Dain who later came to Thorin's aid in The Hobbit. (Dain and Thorin were second cousins.) Bolg had no part to play in the story, however, until the battle at the end where he had a chance to avenge his father. Peter Jackson's Azog was not entirely made up, but it certainly was a convoluted attempt to add a supervillain where none existed.

@automatthew
I couldn't agree more. This attempt just isn't worth it. The Faramir crime was a perfect example of how these freaks cannot understand nobility and honor - the very things that Tolkien and Lewis worked so hard to recall in their 20th century death throes.

@buzzardist
Arwen at Helm's Deep? Holy crap. That explains so much.

@jimmy-jimbo
The "desolation" actually refers to the desolate land around the Lonely Mountain, as seen in the map in The Hobbit.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 2:23 PM  

I'm watching the 3 hour version and the unexpected meeting with bilbo and the dwarves is not cut at all.

Anonymous Gecko January 27, 2015 2:29 PM  

I thought this interview was an interesting find:

They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25, and it seems that The Hobbit will be the same kind of film. Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time. The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away.
- Christopher Tolkien, July 2012

Anonymous Stickwick January 27, 2015 2:30 PM  

Jill: I mean, really, there was no better comedic dialogue than "if this is love, why does it hurt so much?" [cue deep elven king voice] "because it was real". I could not stop laughing during the final installment.

The writers were apparently plagued by the same twisted protege of Screwtape as George Lucas when he penned such profound lines as, "You're so... beautiful." "That's only because I'm so in love." "No, it's because I'm so in love with you." "So, love has blinded you?" Blaaaaarrrrrrggggg. What we really need is a scene in which Jar Jar goes completely unhinged, murders everyone in sight with a lightsaber, figures out how to cross branes in the SFF multiverse and continues the killing spree in Jackson's Middle-earth, brutally disembowels Tauriel and Legolas, and finally making a desperate leap out of the tallest tower, impaling himself on the spire of a nearby building while the camera lingers long and lovingly on his spasming body. The hexalogy immediately ends with the joyous celebration on Endor, with the Force ghosts of Obiwan, Anakin, and Yoda smiling approvingly at the scattered bodies of the Ewoks.

Anonymous Stingray January 27, 2015 2:35 PM  

What we really need is a scene in which Jar Jar goes completely unhinged . . .

That I'd watch.

Anonymous Joel P. January 27, 2015 2:57 PM  

With LOTR, at least, they realized this at the last minute, kept the (male) elves showing up, but shifted Arwen to dream sequences.

IIRC, It had more to do with the fact that they were pressured by a pissed off fanbase who found out about the Arwen Helm's Deep appearance by way of leaked set photos. If those photos hadn't gotten out, who knows what they would have done. They probably would have gone ahead with their plan of turning Arwen into some kind of kickass elf-warrior.

Blogger rycamor January 27, 2015 2:57 PM  

@Stickwick,

Remedial fanfic FTW!!!

Blogger JDC January 27, 2015 3:33 PM  

Let the Ewoks hit the floor!

Anonymous VD January 27, 2015 3:51 PM  

Are you going to watch the new star wars and hope it isn't a pile of dung or wait until it comes out?

I have no intention whatsoever of watching it.

Anonymous Wendy January 27, 2015 4:04 PM  

I always thought if they were smart, they'd kill off JarJar in Episode III. Even hating the film, people would pay money just for that. Sadly, it didn't happen. They were probably afraid of thunderous applause from parents in the theaters.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 January 27, 2015 4:06 PM  

@Gecko

Yeah, but did he get paid royalties?

I understand what Christopher Tolkien is saying, but he still benefits from these movies. What I'd like to know is did he forgo any royalties from the Hobbit movies.

Anonymous Anubis January 27, 2015 4:23 PM  

"Anyone else watching the "Agent Carter" show?"

A show where guys are shooting at each other with full auto weapons and a girl with a pistol hits everyone throwing them back. That's less realistic than Tomb Raider when Angelina Joelee is surrounded by 8 guys and jumps in the air kicking them all to the ground, women enjoy it because they are bad at physics. The reality is even the best fighting woman in the world doesn't have much of a chance against the local tough guy at a bar.

I think these have been posted before but not only can’t the best female athletes compare with their male counterparts, but they can barely compete with male children.
These two links show two sets of track and field records. This one is for female world record holders: (http://trackandfield.about.com/od/worldrecords/tp/Women-s-world-records.htm)
… and this one is for U.S. amateur high school boys: (https://www.trackandfieldnews.com/index.php/records/30-records/277-mens-outdoor-high-school-records)

Anonymous Corvinus January 27, 2015 4:25 PM  

I was wondering when someone would have the bright idea of taking the Hobbit movies and whittling out the extraneous junk. I hope they used the extended version, though, as I suspect there was a lot of genuine Tolkien that was cut out for the theatre version. The end of the Battle of Five Armies left me a bit confused.

As for the Dol Guldur business... that could be a special feature put into a side movie (as a special feature, perhaps) that people can view if they want, as it is genuine Tolkien. I'm not convinced that it belonged in The Hobbit, though.

As far as the new Star Wars, I'm not optimistic that Lucas will have any badass like Han Solo considering how much stronger feminist idiocy and manboobery are now than in the 1970s. I'm expecting CGI porn with nauseating characters like Anakin when he was courting Padme.

Anonymous Corvinus January 27, 2015 4:28 PM  

The end of the Battle of Five Armies left me a bit confused.

And come to think of it, the Jackson Tolkien movies all tend to be pretty awful at actually finishing battles.

Blogger Darth Toolpodicus January 27, 2015 4:29 PM  

Stickwick FTW.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera January 27, 2015 4:35 PM  

@Laguna Beach Fogey: Awesome! Did they remove the random blacks, Asians, and assorted mystery meat in the crowds at Laketown...?

The funniest part about random Haradrim in Laketown is that they were begging for purists to complain about this (so that they could be subsequently subjected to the two minutes hate), but the purists were too busy complaining about worse stuff that it flew under the radar.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera January 27, 2015 4:41 PM  

@Corvinus: I'm expecting CGI porn with nauseating characters like Anakin when he was courting Padme.

CGI porn has its place, alongside good makeup. Apparently it's hard work, like putting cartoons or muppets alongside human actors, but it can be done. See Guardians of the Galaxy and Sesame Street for examples.

Anonymous Jill January 27, 2015 4:43 PM  

"What we really need is a scene in which Jar Jar goes completely unhinged, murders everyone in sight with a lightsaber, figures out how to cross branes in the SFF multiverse and continues the killing spree in Jackson's Middle-earth, brutally disembowels Tauriel and Legolas..."

You should immediately make that YouTube video. You'd have a premade fan base.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 4:43 PM  

Random Haradrim? Where?

Anonymous Stickwick January 27, 2015 4:48 PM  

Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time. The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away.

Seldom has such deep disappointment been expressed so eloquently. Why on earth Jackson -- whose meager pre-LOTR credits include the dreadful Meet the Feebles and Bad Taste -- was chosen to direct something so monumental is beyond me. I remember back in the latter days of the 1990s when he claimed, in response to fans' concerns about his vision for the movies, that he was planning "good, solid action adventures," realizing we were never going to get anything that measured up to the book.

Corvinus: As far as the new Star Wars, I'm not optimistic that Lucas will...

Just FYI, Lucas has nothing to do with the new SW. Disney bought the rights, and when Lucas handed them all of his ideas for the new movies, they basically dropped them in the trash can right in front of him. Still, I think you're right. The trailer had the stale whiff of warmed over family-style political correctness all over it, so adjust your expectations accordingly.

Anonymous Stickwick January 27, 2015 4:52 PM  

Jill: You should immediately make that YouTube video. You'd have a premade fan base.

We should rev up a Kickstarter campaign to fund a "fan film," with good production values and everything. I bet we'd exceed our goal within a day.

OpenID cailcorishev January 27, 2015 5:03 PM  

As far as the new Star Wars, I'm not optimistic that Lucas will have any badass like Han Solo considering how much stronger feminist idiocy and manboobery are now than in the 1970s.

Being frozen seemed to wussify Han already anyway. On Endor, when he's telling Leia he won't get in the way of her and Luke, one of the Rifftrax guys says, "For an intergalactic space pirate, this guy's pretty insecure."

Blogger mmaier2112 January 27, 2015 5:22 PM  

I'd rather slam my left nut in my truck door than watch even a hack edit job of this filmed abortion ever again.

Blogger automatthew January 27, 2015 5:26 PM  

Stickwick: "Why on earth Jackson -- whose meager pre-LOTR credits include the dreadful Meet the Feebles and Bad Taste -- was chosen to direct something so monumental is beyond me."

The effect exposes the intent.

Anonymous Gecko January 27, 2015 5:30 PM  

@swiftfoxmark2

This is all off the top of my head, but my understanding is that the estate did what it could to stop The Hobbit. However, once it became inevitable after some legal battles, they did get some royalties. At that point, why not try to take away as much of PJ's profits as possible? To forego them would only reward PJ further.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 5:37 PM  

Just finished the three hour version of the hobbit and it isn't bad. All that needs to be done is maybe add in whatever's useful from the five armies extended and release the movie in HD under a different name.

Anonymous FUBAR Nation Ben January 27, 2015 5:43 PM  

Degeneration follows a cycle. In the case of classic SF/F it starts off as something precious to an outcast group (nerds). Then someone will come along and make it popular by changing it to cater to the mass market (LOTR) and finally destroying it (The Hobbit).

You see the same thing in Game of Thrones.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera January 27, 2015 6:39 PM  

@FUBAR Nation Ben: Random Haradrim? Where?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILRIdY2W8qk

Blogger Zeke OF Confettii January 27, 2015 11:28 PM  

Jrrt sold the film rights to a con artist in 1965 or thereabouts, for what probably seemed to him a huge sum (which means he was cheated, probably very severely).
I doubt any money went to his heirs, though I would happy to be wrong.

Blogger Zeke OF Confettii January 27, 2015 11:31 PM  

I believe I read that back in the days of global cooling, when info was printed on the skins of dead ents.

Anonymous Joe Author January 27, 2015 11:56 PM  

“TolkienEditor has cut Peter Jackson's abusive monstrosity in half…”



Code for gatekeeping. There was a “proper Hobbit”, treated by a filmmaker who interpreted this work in his own way. One need not conform exactly to the book when rendering THEIR version.


“When I heard that they had to put in token women, I refused waste any time on it at all.”

Super. No problem.


“To which the only response is: so what?”



Indeed, so what! The same answer can be offered to Jackson’s detractors who claim that he is doing a “disservice” to Tolkein’s work. Jackson makes movies. He does it to satisfy his artistic curiosity as well as to make money for his financial backers.


“The book doesn't fail to include women, it doesn't include women because there is no good reason to include them.”

So what? Jackson chose to take a book and make it his own. Well within his creative liberty. Should he do it? Absolutely.


“Then some jackass from marketing (or a producer with a sociopolitical axe to grind) tells some executive producer that the network needs to do better among females 18-35 because they buy stuff.”

Exactly how the world works today. Don’t like it? Don’t watch it or buy it. Want something “true” to the original? Make it yourself.


“I don't think there's any way you could get away with that on network TV today. That was 25 years ago.”



It’s called increasing market share and expanding one’s brand.


“The executive producer tells the writers that if they wanna get this pilot made, they'll need more strong female characters. For a writer or director, the path of least resistance is just to make one or two of the male characters female, but leave everything else exactly the same. (See Starbuck in the "new "Battlestar Galactica"") “

So what? Read what you want. Write what you want. Produce what you want.

Anonymous brentg January 28, 2015 12:27 AM  

I think we got a whole 3-5 seconds of Beorn in the last battle as well. In the book, he was an entire army himself. I can still get chills reading of him rescuing Thorin and ripping apart bolg and his body guard. In the movie battle if you blinked, you missed him. That change / omission was worse than the stupid love triangle.

Anonymous TroperA January 28, 2015 4:22 AM  

Just FYI, Lucas has nothing to do with the new SW. Disney bought the rights, and when Lucas handed them all of his ideas for the new movies, they basically dropped them in the trash can right in front of him. Still, I think you're right. The trailer had the stale whiff of warmed over family-style political correctness all over it, so adjust your expectations accordingly.

We'll see plenty of token minority characters, including at least one gay person. Hollywood's been itching to insert an openly gay character into a big box office, family-friendly franchise. Thus far they've had to settle with making their gay characters ambiguous during the run of the work, only announcing their sexuality once the show is over and they've pocketed their proceeds.

Blogger Manveer Claire January 28, 2015 5:01 AM  

I thought the movies were great, but I never read the books. Had the movies come out before the books, you would probably be praising the movies right now, and claiming that the books suck because they left out so much from the movies.

Fans just like to complain regardless. Which is why directors should disregard them.

Anonymous TroperA January 28, 2015 5:08 AM  

“TolkienEditor has cut Peter Jackson's abusive monstrosity in half…”



Code for gatekeeping. There was a “proper Hobbit”, treated by a filmmaker who interpreted this work in his own way. One need not conform exactly to the book when rendering THEIR version.

So, as long as I've paid for the rights, I can do whatever I want to any intellectual property I own. Good to know. So I could presumably buy the rights to the Sesame Street characters, dress them all up like Leather Daddies and film them frolicking in a pool of urine and sell the resulting movie. And according to you, no one else would have the right to get upset over this. Just because someone can't legally stop another person from ruining a franchise with cash-grabbity idiocy, that doesn't mean they have to be happy and accepting of it. As long as free speech exists, dissatisfied fans are allowed (and are going) to speak out about such things...


“To which the only response is: so what?”



Indeed, so what! The same answer can be offered to Jackson’s detractors who claim that he is doing a “disservice” to Tolkein’s work. Jackson makes movies. He does it to satisfy his artistic curiosity as well as to make money for his financial backers.

"So what?" can be said to the woman who whined about the lack of female characters, because inserting female characters into a narrative where they don't belong, purely for the sake of pandering to an audience, spoils the integrity of the work. Your "So what?" is arguing that pandering to an audience is a good thing. It may be a desirable thing to do for someone who wants to maximize the amount of money he can pull in for the cash he invested in buying the rights to a work, but in no universe could it be argued that it is an objectively good thing for the work itself.

“The book doesn't fail to include women, it doesn't include women because there is no good reason to include them.”

So what? Jackson chose to take a book and make it his own. Well within his creative liberty. Should he do it? Absolutely.

You forgot to add the phrase "-but only if the only thing he's interested in is making the most money he can. If he wants to create a work that does justice to the original story and which resonates with future audiences through the mists of time, then no. He shouldn't do it."

“Then some jackass from marketing (or a producer with a sociopolitical axe to grind) tells some executive producer that the network needs to do better among females 18-35 because they buy stuff.”

Exactly how the world works today. Don’t like it? Don’t watch it or buy it. Want something “true” to the original? Make it yourself.

"Because I'm sure a random blog commenter like yourself has 500 million dollars to buy up the rights of the Hobbit franchise and produce his own A-list fantasy movies! And I'm sure Hollywood would also welcome the chance to distribute and promote movies with traditionalist, Tolkien-approved messages that don't jive with the Official Equalitarian Narrative!"

(Cont....)

Anonymous TroperA January 28, 2015 5:09 AM  

(...cont)

“I don't think there's any way you could get away with that on network TV today. That was 25 years ago.”



It’s called increasing market share and expanding one’s brand.

Which is ALWAYS a good thing, no matter what the circumstances. Did you know that the market share of lumber produced by impoverished convict labor shot through the roof during the latter 19th Century? Hoo boy. I'll bet THAT was good for the economy!

“The executive producer tells the writers that if they wanna get this pilot made, they'll need more strong female characters. For a writer or director, the path of least resistance is just to make one or two of the male characters female, but leave everything else exactly the same. (See Starbuck in the "new "Battlestar Galactica"") “

So what? Read what you want. Write what you want. Produce what you want.

And remember to keep your mouth shut when you see characters from your beloved childhood--male characters you looked up to and modeled yourself after -- turned into vapid whores who can totally roundhouse kick 300 lb men into a corner despite weighing as much as a vacuum cleaner. You should just get with the program and get on the right side of history already, you sex-bigoted, Capitalism-hating shitlord!

Anonymous Ain January 28, 2015 7:41 AM  

Manveer Claire: "Had the movies come out before the books, you would probably be praising the movies right now, and claiming that the books suck because they left out so much from the movies."

That's extremely unlikely. It doesn't seem that you've been following the discussion here for long or you would know that the notion of ass-kicking women is enthusiastically mocked.

Blogger CM January 28, 2015 8:24 AM  

Trimegistus:
I'd like people's opinions: is this an innate female-psyche thing (fantasizing about being stronger than men except of course for the One True Alpha who can beat her) or is it more Crazyworld cultural propaganda?

I am of the opinion that feminism's roots (llike all the way down to the very basics) is about women not needing men for survival - to be able to live on their own right and not a man's. It presents itself in many awful and nasty ways, but that, I think, is the crux of the issue. From Jane Austen "I couldn't marry the man I loved because society" to the worst man-hAter of modern day.

The most basic necessity we have is to survive in a hostile world - physical protection. And it is notably the one most blocked from women by unbreachable and un-caring biology, so it would only make sense we would fantasize about being self-sustaining in such a manner.

Anonymous Wendy January 28, 2015 10:40 AM  

Had the movies come out before the books, you would probably be praising the movies right now, and claiming that the books suck because they left out so much from the movies.

No. There is a universe of difference between PJ (and crew) and Tolkien in style and quality. The movies have their own problems quality-wise (like writing and dramatic crutches like relying on wide open caverns and big things falling for effect, among other things).

Anonymous clk January 28, 2015 10:48 AM  

This 3 hr hobbit was excellent... you could tell that the source material for the last movie wasnt as deep (yes .. they will have to wait to the extended version with cuts) but overall a fine movie.. much more enjoyable than the original 9 hrs and made much more sense all around ... Excellent job.

Anonymous Stingray January 28, 2015 11:06 AM  

And it is notably the one most blocked from women by unbreachable and un-caring biology

Would you please explain this? Do you mean that man's protection instincts towards women are unbreathable and uncaring?

Anonymous Stickwick January 28, 2015 3:14 PM  

Manveer Claire: I thought the movies were great, but I never read the books. Had the movies come out before the books, you would probably be praising the movies right now, and claiming that the books suck because they left out so much from the movies.

So, we have one (1) data point, an admission of ignorance (hasn't read the book), and an extrapolation from ignorance. Do yourself a favor: before you comment on this again, read through the archives on this topic and pay particular attention to the comments from the regulars, and you'll see what the main objections are.

Fans just like to complain regardless. Which is why directors should disregard them.

In this case, we're talking about one of the most popular works in the Western world, so the fans would comprise a very large proportion of the moviegoers.

Anonymous Gecko January 28, 2015 4:58 PM  

First is always favorite? Let's test this hypothesis. What does the Ilk think about A Song of Ice and Fire? All those super important details that were left out?

Anonymous Joe Author January 28, 2015 10:54 PM  

“So I could presumably buy the rights to the Sesame Street characters, dress them all up like Leather Daddies and film them frolicking in a pool of urine and sell the resulting movie.”

Presumably is the operative word. I would imagine any deal is contingent upon what the purchaser plans to do with those characters. In your case, your deal would definitively fall through.


“can't legally stop another person from ruining a franchise with cash-grabbity idiocy...”

The audience speaketh --> Domestic Total Gross: $258,366,855
It’s the PEOPLE’S franchise!


“because inserting female characters into a narrative where they don't belong...”



According to YOU, they do not belong, which is fine. It’s not your call to make, it is up to the people who are making the film.


“spoils the integrity of the work.”

Debatable.


“He shouldn't do it.”

That’s called gatekeeping, my friend.


“As long as free speech exists, dissatisfied fans are allowed (and are going) to speak out about such things...”



Wonderful. Your point?


“turned into vapid whores who can totally roundhouse kick 300 lb men into a corner despite weighing as much as a vacuum cleaner.”

[Laughs] it is observably true that the majority of females who watch womyn on film or the boob tube who kick the asses of several thugs comprehend this portrayal as mere fantasy.

Blogger Shimshon January 29, 2015 2:26 AM  

I'm only 23min into the 3 hour version and it's already a much more engaging movie. I think by this point I bored of the first movie, stopped, and didn't even bother with the rest of the series.

Anonymous Gecko January 29, 2015 5:44 PM  

The first "so what" was a suggested answer to an actual question. Merely jumping into a discussion and saying "so what" after various statements is the kind a thing a toddler does when he's learning to speak.

Anonymous Joe Author January 30, 2015 12:05 AM  

"Merely jumping into a discussion and saying "so what" after various statements is the kind a thing a toddler does when he's learning to speak.'

It's called mocking the opposition, son.

Read what you want, Write what you want. Create what you want.

Blogger Manveer Claire January 30, 2015 2:11 AM  

@Ain

The ass kicking woman bits I found mostly forgettable and hardly a major aspect of the movie.

@Wendy

Had say the whole necromancer bit been originally part of the book, people wouldn't feel the need to cut it out or complain about it, in fact, they would likely complain if it were left out. When you consider that, is it really a scene that made the movie a less enjoyable experience, or do fans just like to complain?

But I haven't read the book yet, so I could be completely off on my analysis.

Anonymous Banjo February 02, 2015 3:34 PM  

Manveer:The ass kicking woman bits I found mostly forgettable and hardly a major aspect of the movie.

And since they weren't part of the book, yet were forgettable and easily excised from the movie, they should never have been included as they were obviously tacked on in the first place.

Manveer:Had say the whole necromancer bit been originally part of the book, people wouldn't feel the need to cut it out or complain about it

Obvious statement is obvious. However, I submit that Tolkien wouldn't have been so sloppy with this scene in the book.

This scene shows without a shadow (haha) of a doubt that the necromancer is, in fact, Sauron, Middle Earth's ancient enemy. Additionally, the Nazgul are released and attack the Council. These two items create a few problems.

1. No longer are we in the dark when the nine search the shire. We know what these things are. Big secret spilled and suspense eliminated.

2. The Council now knows for a fact that Sauron is back instead of merely hearing whispers and rumours. Where is the wriggle room for Saruman to use to keep them at bay?

3. Sauron is back, the Nine are abroad, yet Gandalf lets Bilbo take his magic ring and spend the next 60 years alone, unprotected, in the Shire? Gandalf is far in his dotage if, knowing these things, he did not straightaway take Bilbo to Rivendell.

Adding that scene, while visually appealing, destroys consistency and logic.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts