Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
There were songs in the Hobbit though. The goblins, the Elves of Rivendell, the Dwarves, and others all had cutesy little songs.
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Well I'm sure they could live without the dwarf dish washing scene altogether, so no danger of song there. Same for all the others really, there's no real need for them, so don't fret.
The only song the film actually needs is "Roads go ever ever on" and perhaps not even that one. Even so, they've already done that one in LotR twice without it sounding cute, so I don't see the problem.
-------------------- "It speaks to some basic human needs: that there is a tomorrow, it's not all going to be over with a big splash and a bomb, that the human race is improving, that we have things to be proud of as humans." -Gene Roddenberry about Star Trek
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
Wonder if Ian Wolfe will play Bilbo again?
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
In a way I both hope and don't hope Ian Holm will play Bilbo, because it may demand more of the character physically than he can give, he's been having some real problems with his health the last years. Of course, Bilbo was about 50 in his book, but then again, so was Frodo and the others supposed to be in "Fellowship". :-/
Maybe they can do some keyframe animation shit on Holm when he needs to leap and stab and barrelswim and such.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
Eh. Is there an Ian Wolfe that I might have gotten confused with Ian Holm?
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh my god, there actually is an Ian Wolfe. I thought you were just soaping there, but according to IMDB he's from Illinois and was born in 1896. He's almost older than Tolkien, the son of a bitch! Never played Bilbo though.
Oh and he's been dead since 1992, so the movie set would smell all funny. What else you got?
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Septimus & Mr. Atoz, bitch.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It's gonna be hard to top Richard Boone as Smaug. That exchange from the animated film has stuck with me all the way from first viewing. I'd say Liam Neeson if he wasn't doing Aslan. How about Michael Dorn?
Ian Hom has said he wouldn't do Bilbo even if asked. He knows he's too old. They were able to fudge things for the finding of the Ring with makeup and tape, but he knows he wouldn't be able to pull off the entire Hobbit storyline.
I don't know about "Roads Go Ever On" but I'd love the Dwarves' song from after dinner ("Far o'er Misty Mountains old...").
It'd be nice to see Hugo Weaving identifying the moon letters on Thror's map. And maybe have Liv Tyler lurking somewhere in the background.
Likewise maybe seeing Legolas somewhere in the background of Thranduil's halls.
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
I hope they don't have Arwen lurking in the background. I *really* hope. That whole romantic sub-plot pissed me off greatly. It wasn't *in* the books, *she* wasn't in the books (at least not with that name, and I'm not even sure with that gender - I think there was an Aruwen who was a throwaway character at some point, but it might have been Elrond's son instead of daughter? I can't remember for sure, anyway), and the whole thing just struck me as being a concession..."Oooh, how are we going to appeal to the mainstream female audience? Oh, let's add in a pointless romantic sub-plot, perfect."
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
She was in the book with exactly the same name and the same history. She did have two brothers though, they were twins. The ones who went with her down to Gondor in the end of the book. Maybe you should re-read it, you'd probably notice a lot of things. I re-read it after a few years and it was like christmas.
Walsh and Jackson even went so far as to show her final destiny in the movie as it played out in the book, when Elrond described it to her. The father-daughter argument never happened in the book but it was the only way to have Arwen's fate remain shown in the movie, it wouldn't be interesting or welcome to see it happen after Frodo had already sailed away. She did linger in Lothlorien after it had faded and her son was born, and she did lay down and die on the mound where they had gotten engaged years earlier.
Except for switching Glorfindel's part out for her in the first movie and making her decision to forsake her immortality for Aragorn a recent one (as opposed to one taken several decades before the events of the movies) they didn't extend her character more than necessary. The romantic subplot was in the book just as well, most noticeable when Eowyn tried to hit on Aragorn and he had to refuse. I don't blame Jackson for picking that up.
If they choose to add Arwen in the background of Rivendell they would be nothing more than accurate, but if they want to score points with the miniscule, fundamentalist tolkienite crowd (who will boycott it anyway under the mistaken impression that people care about what they think) they should have Glorfindel sit in at the table as well, that would be nice.
I, for one, look forward to seeing Orcrist. Ever since I saw what they did with Glamdring I've been hoping for it.
[ December 27, 2007, 12:06 AM: Message edited by: Nim ]
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
Hmm. Wow. Is my memory *really* that bad? Now I've got to question *all* the problems I had with the movies doing things differently than the books lol. I really, really don't remember anything about Arwen and Aragorn...I do remember Eowyn hitting on him, but the way I remembered it, he refused because he was way too old for her, though he didn't look it (which I thought they twisted into that scene with the stew in the second movie).
Of course, that brings up the question I've always had about elf-human relations...if the elf is, say for the sake of example, 4,000, and the human is even as old as a hundred, isn't the elf still kind of a pedophile?
And now that we're on the subject - why/how is it that Arwen gave up her immortality? I thought the only time an elf ever became a mortal was when Elrond's brother chose to become human rather than elven in the Silmarillion.
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Jackson and Walsh were far more faithful to Tolkien's work than most of the "fans" give them credit. If you watch the documentaries and listen to the commentaries on the extended edition you'll see just how much work went into being true to Tolkiens world and to be honest, IMHO they even improved the story in some places. Some of it was mostly for drama, some for better story telling or harsh practical reasons. I mean would ANYONE sit through the Scorching of the Shire after the film was already effectively over? I mean as it was there were already about fifteen false endings between the ring being destroyed and the credits rolling. Nevertheless less they still kept it in the Mirror of Galadriel scene. Would it make sense to have Tom Bombadil in the middle of a chase sequence? No, it would have killed the movie and dragged out what was already an unusually long film. Even so, they put his words in Treebeards mouth, which is not an unreasonable connection given where Tom lives. Adapting a book, any book, verbatim into a coherent movie is impossible and the best that you can hope for is that the spirit of the book is respected. Frank Herbert knew it, JK Rowling knows it and I think Tolkien even said as much.
Oh and as for wedging Arwen into the first film; if you think she was overused as she was, consider that at one point they had her leading the elves at Helms Deep, even shot some footage of Liv in battle armor, sword a'swinging. Her presence in the Flight to the Ford was necessary not only to add some female appeal into what was for the most part a sausage fest but also to establish her as Aragorn's equal (or even superior) and give him some depth beyond just being a King in exile. Otherwise she'd be a glorified extra that spent most of the films looking all vapid and tragically sad...instead of just doing that in the second and third film. Call it blasphemy but Tolkien was never much for subtle characterisation. Which is fine for the sort of book he wrote, but would simply fall flat in the big screen. Seriously, go back and read some of the dialogue, especially the Aragon & Boromir stuff and try and "hear" it being said by actors. It's surprisingly silly. As I said, a film is a completely different animal to a book.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
