Out of Character Discussion

I honestly thought the movie was pretty good, but would have been better if it was split into two parts. (Felt a little too rushed, and there wasn't anything about the whole Earth part of the story with Peter and Valentine)

@J-red: I completely agree. I think with that one part, it would be much better. Maybe not two movies, but a lengthened movie. The battle at the end was very good, but IMO didn't capture enough of the strategy that Ender used. But battle alone, it was epic. Because all battles are epic.

I think two, split it up between Battle School and Command School.  They really didn't emphasize at ALL the physical and mental toll that Command School took on Ender.

Also, I'm waiting for a reply from you in SOL.

*COUGH* Also they took basically everything out, and replaced it all with anti-War-on-Terror, they-just-want-to-be-left-alone themes that weren't in the book?

I tend to be overly critical of movie adaptations of books, yes, but the only adaptation I've ever seen that was worse than Ender's Game was Desolation of Smaug. xD

I didn't think DoS was that bad either, not nearly as good as the first part though.

@Supe: I hate you. Just hate you. (JK) I thought DoS was epic, especially with the LOTR appendix references/connections. I disagree with you J-red, lol, the first one was IMO way worst, although not terrible. Anyway, hopefully the 3rd one will be even more epic than The Return of the King (movie) which is probably impossible. Though TBOTFA's trailer looks soooo awesome.

After writing several multi-page reviews on all the reasons why DoS was possibly the worst adaptation of a book ever, I finally decided that not only did the movie have very little to do with the book, but PJ probably didn't really read it, either. Or else his LotR adaptations were so good, he used up all of his directing ability and now he's about at Michael Bay's level.

DoS essentially removed every theme of The Hobbit and replaced it with cheesy cliches, laughable attempts at suspense, and no less than TWO of the most over-the-top, cut-and-paste subplots I've ever seen. The elf-elf-dwarf wannabe love triangle was worse than pathetic-- it violated so many parts of Tolkien's universe, I don't even know where to begin, aside from the fact that it was cheesy to the point of cringing. The same goes for the "references" to the LotR books, such as the "Morgul arrow," which was just their cop-out for needing the (non-existent and, in the context of the Elven culture, horrifying) elf-warrior girl to perform some sort of healing magic that was yet another terrible attempt at referencing Arwen (unless all elf girls are trained in super-heal-magic, in which case there's no reason for anyone to die in any war ever). The Hobbit is about Bilbo scraping together and saving the day time and time again, despite being a comfort-lover; DoS took out basically all of Bilbo's heroics (especially in Mirkwood), probably to save time for the Azog subplot (oh yeah, he's supposed to be dead) that nobody wanted to see, and the love triangle that made everyone uncomfortable. Smaug, as cool as he seemed at first, was, by the end, reduced to a cheesy video-game boss, breathing fire only when it wouldn't hurt people (fire that somehow had the properties of a laser, since apparently hiding behind pillars and walls will shield you from...everything, including convection), smashing through big columns and landing heavily on tiny bridges, talking instead of attacking whenever he had them cornered, and basically doing everything he could to NOT actually catch them, which would have been easy at any given time. They even managed to ruin Bard, taking him from a grumbling-but-courageous captain-of-the-guard master bowman to a whiny dissident, and turning the EXPLICITLY DESCRIBED Black Arrow into some sort of "elven" arbalester bolt. They didn't even CONSULT the book on Beorn, and to be honest, even I'm confused as to what they're trying to do with Dol Guldur, it's so off. PJ managed to remove everything from the book that people wanted to see, and replace it with Hollywood cliches that you can find in any Michael Bay or JJ Abrams movie without having a wonderful book wrecked in the process.

Well now, you've gone and set me off again. xD

It's amazing how confusing ^^^that^^^ is for me.

I've seen the first Hobbit movie, and I didn't even know there was a love triangle. In fact, I didn't even notice any of the stuff you complained about, except maybe a bit of how Bilbo wasn't as heroic as he was in the book (Then again, I've never really read the book- well, not the full thing, anyway. I think I got through the first half).

Of course, I was also unaware any of Tolkien's books (or the movies, for that matter) were supposed to even have themes, so there you go.

I liked both UJ and DoS. Did they move away from the book? Yes. Is the love triangle annoying? You bet! Was I annoyed by the dumb ballista black arrow? Yep! But I still feel that it's a good set of movies. I watched DoS twice, and enjoyed it both times. But I guess your DoS is my ST (2009) (I finally watched the second, and actually really liked it and felt that it could actually be Trek; in spite of the errors.) So I don't blame you in the least for being a "purist" about your Tolkien.

Tolkien's work has a lot of spiritual and Biblical themes/parallels. The Hobbit is about a comfort-loving Hobbit, living in his comfortable life and comfortable home and comfortable neighborhood, until he's called on to leave his comfort zone and go do something great and noble, even though he's risking his life for it. Throughout the book, you see him turn out to be extremely courageous as he always ends up doing what's necessary, even if he doesn't like it or it may kill him (the spiders in Mirkwood, Thranduil's fortress, going into Smaug's lair, etc). There are a lot of obvious themes there, as well as others throughout the book (ordinary people doing great things, trusting in God's decisions, greed, etc). If DoS addressed any of those themes, it was purely by accident.

The stuff I talked about was all from DoS, so if you only saw the first Hobbit movie (which was passable, but not fantastic) you won't understand it. xD

YES, Dino, thank you-- for Trek fans who hated the JJ Abrams ST's, it's like that for me. Although nobody explained why everyone hated that movie. I watched it with a complete lack of ST knowledge, and still disliked it because of the convoluted plotline and cop-out deus-ex-machina's like the future-Spock and super-blood saving Kirk. Although that seems to be a common theme in movies lately, killing off someone you care about and then LOL NOPE bringing them back to life for no reason at all.

I plan to watch, and enjoy, TBoFA, but I must agree that I wish they would have kept them closer to the book.

By the way, feel free to get on chatbox any time anyone. I'm working on my SoL subplot at the moment, but I'll check in to the chat occasionally. (Don't worry, I'll be on when people are)

Quick question, Dino: What's TBoFA? There are so many acronyms on here now that I'm having trouble remembering all of them.

The Battle of Five Armies, the trailer for which I found both underwhelming and vague. Not saying the movie's gonna be as bad as DoS, but the trailer didn't help me at all. xD

The Battle of Four Armies, I think...

EDIT: Supe beat me to it.

Ah, right. Danke!

I think that the CGI effects of the Hobbit trilogy are great. I thought Smaug was very well done (voice and all), and even though it's not in the book, I love the subplot with Azog and Thorin.

However, to be honest, I'm disappointed in Jackson. He has taken an epic and yet humorous story and made it into a slightly cheesy kid's movie, to some degree or another. There are definitely a lot of things I like about the Hobbit trilogy, but there are so many things that are corny or unnecessary or overly modern-sounding that I honestly think somebody with a more LOTR-Hobbit-Silmarillion-oriented brain should redo the entire trilogy, using essentially the same actors and actresses but editing a bunch of things.

I will absolutely RIP MY BEARD OUT if Gandalf gets saved from Dol Guldur by GALADRIEL. Not only is that GROSSLY against the actual plot of Tolkien's books, but it is GROSS PERIOD. I mean, think about it: Gandalf is actually Olorin, one of the majestic and powerful Maia from the deathless land of Valinor. He was sent to Middle Earth to aid its people, but not to be subject to them--no matter who they were or how powerful they were. In powers alone he far surpasses Galadriel, and as an angelic being incarnated in flesh he is still superior to Galadriel. For him to be saved by her from the grip of Sauron--a Maia just like Gandalf and therefore far more powerful than Galadriel--is just plain nonsense. It just goes to show how much Jackson didn't want to be hammered by those nutty women's rights fanatics who can't stand a story if there isn't some overly-powerful and overly-courageous woman mastering men and saving the world.

If Gandalf gets saved by Galadriel, that will literally ruin my view of the entire trilogy. Right now, I have a fairly positive view of it, even though I definitely don't agree with how Jackson handled certain things. But if Gandalf is saved by Galadriel...

*heavy breathing*

...then I don't know what I'll do.

Scare, get on the chat

Scare, I am utterly confused by your logic. xD

That...if Gandalf...I mean, that would probably be the LEAST offensive thing to Tolkien's work in the entire trilogy. xD It's obvious that the White Council is going to go down to Dol Guldur and chase Sauron out. In the book, Gandalf gets the key from Thrain in the Necromancer's prison and escapes, convinces the White Council to attack, and they do so. Here, he gets the key, (somehow, I still can't figure out how-- if he went in the Necromancer's prison, why would he go back, since he already knew about Dol Guldur?) uses Radagast's message to convince the Council, and THEN goes to the prisons-- where he's captured, and then freed by the White Council.

That's actually not much twisting of the story compared to the rest of the movies so far, they just rearranged some sections to fit in with the REALLY bad parts that they changed, like Azog. Azog was very, very, VERY dead in the war to reclaim Moria. His SON, Bolg, led the orcish forces to attack the Lonely Mountain-- and they were NOT sent by Sauron, in any way; they were collected via warg riders by the Misty Mountain orcs, where they assembled to chase down Thorin as revenge for killing the Chief Orc.

Galadriel won't save Gandalf, the White Council will, which is very nearly what actually happened. Though the Maiar are extremely powerful, Galadriel and Elrond have actually been on Middle Earth longer-- Eldrond is a direct descendant of the two great marriages of Man and Elf, Beren/Luthien and Tuor/Idril, and has been around since the War of Wrath, even was raised by the Sons of Feanor and served as Gil-Galad's herald. Galdriel is Elrond's mother-in-law, and Tolkien considered her the most beautiful and powerful Eldar left in Middle Earth after the Sundering. She even held Nenya, one of the three Elven Rings. I wouldn't rank her very far below Gandalf, really; in truth, you underestimate the Elves. Fingolfin took on MORGOTH at one point, a Vala, who stand immensely higher than Maia, and stabbed Morgoth four times before dying. Beren and Luthien took on and humiliated Sauron, and went on to actually steal of Silmaril out of Morgoth's crown.

And as to Gandalf, the Maia are considered less than elves, just as humans are greater than angels in real life; we exceed the angels in both God's sight and in power, and many of the elves were nearly as powerful if not equal to the Maiar. The Wizards were sent to help men in their struggle against Sauron, the elves took on Morgoth alone, except for the two or three times when the Valar finally stepped in. The elves even served in the armies of the Valar to assault Angband; even the men did, and were rewarded with Numenor.

If you want something that wrecks Tolkien's works, look at anything to do with "Tauriel." The Elven culture, even that of the Grey Elves, were a very conservative, renaissance-type culture. Women did NOT go to war, not as a sexist idea, but because that was not their place in society. Very, VERY seldom, even throughout the less civilized Second and Third ages, do we see any female Elf take up a sword; Tauriel was added PURELY to have a strong female character, and introducing her as a captain of the guard in Mirkwood violates a big part of Elven culture. Her involvement in the attempt at a love triangle was not only gag-inducing, but downright insulting to Tolkien's work. When Aule created the Dwarves in impatience for the Firstborn, Eru himself said that there would often be emnity between Aule's sons and Eru's sons; during the Second Age, when the Nauglamir was created and the dwarves tried to keep it, elves and dwarves were put forever at emnity. The Legolas/Gimli "bromance" that happened in the Third Age was supposed to be REMARKABLE, because it had never happened that a dwarf and elf got along so well. But PJ thinks himself very clever for "referencing" Legolas/Gimli by having Tauriel/Fili get along, even though it's the same sort of copy-paste type of reference that made the SW prequels horrible.

Ahh, stop setting me off on this! xD

Wow... I knew I didn't know Middle Earth... now I REALLY know how little I know.
I am impressed by your knowledge and passion for the Tolkien-verse. And I'm going to back away now and leave this discussion to you two because... I have nothing intelligent to contribute to an otherwise well informed conversation. (runs away screaming "THEY'RE ALL CRAZY!!!! ALMOST AS CRAZY AS ME!!!!")

Star Trek is to you as LotR is to me.

I do like LOTR. But I certainly don't know it very well at all.

Ditto with Dino. TBCH IK nothing about Star Trek. I barely know anything about Middle-Earth except some of the battles. The Inheritance Cycle is my thing.

Anyone ever read The Wheel of Time series?

Sorry, I haven't.

I have no clue what just happened, but I know that Dino likes Inheritance. Bro. I have the hardcover boxset. I've skimmed a few of the books, but I haven't done any heavy reading. Some day, I'll post a list of the books in my library. Some I've read, Some I haven't. Which reminds me, I picked up Starcraft II: Devil's Due and Halo: The Thursday War for $2.00 each a couple of weeks ago.

Also, anyone read Ted Dekker?