New Hobbit Trailer Debuts

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday September 19, 2012 @07:38AM from the hairy-feet-abound dept.

New submitter madmarcel tips news that a new trailer for The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey has been released. "The new piece (seen above) is about the same length -- 2 1/2 minutes -- as the December trailer. But it cuts to the chase more quickly, leaving out the Frodo voiceover that sets up the Lord of the Rings follow-up. Instead we get the quick voiceover explanation -- 'the dwarves are determined to reclaim their homeland' -- before we meet up with Martin Freeman's Bilbo Baggins and set off. There's a slightly less self-serious tone to the proceedings this time around, though questers do 'enter the mountain' and play important games of riddles."

96 of 130 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

hobbits by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 07:42 · Score: 1

make me shave my feet in shame
Meh? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 07:44 · Score: 2, Funny

No Smaug. Less spiders than the Dark Forest. Lame.
1. Re:Meh? by Genda · 2012-09-19 07:54 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  "The Hobbit" without Smaug, would be like L.A, without smog... unnatural and strangely surreal.
2. Re:Meh? by antsbull · 2012-09-19 08:19 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Really? I didn't realize that you had seen it? Reviewing a film before you've even seen it is a touch douchey don't you think?
3. Re:Meh? by spongman · 2012-09-19 09:54 · Score: 2
  
  Drink up me 'obbits, yo ho!
4. Re:Meh? by i_ate_god · 2012-09-19 10:41 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Or San Francisco without smug
  
  --
  I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
5. Re:Meh? by Genda · 2012-09-19 13:07 · Score: 1
  
  Whacha be sayin bout dem lil men wit de hairy feet!!! Eh, Monn?
6. Re:Meh? by Genda · 2012-09-19 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  I'd pay good cash money to see Captain Jack Sparrow played by "mini-me" Verne Troyer. Have it be about a shrinking curse... that would certainly be having me blowing my favorite beverage outta my nose... hairy feet would be optional.
Awesome by OldSport · 2012-09-19 07:49 · Score: 4, Informative

I'll be bringing my 4-year-old daughter to that one -- time to start the indoctrination into geekery...
(My first memory was seeing Return of the Jedi in the theater at age 4.)
1. Re:Awesome by nege · 2012-09-19 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  Mine was seeing Dune in 1984 at age 4! :)
2. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 08:00 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If you get the chance, read The Hobbit to her in the time before the movie is released. Give her the chance to use her own imagination before seeing the film.
  I read The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings to my son somewhere between the ages of 5 and 10. I can't remember exactly. It took weeks over the summer holidays. But it was a very memorable experience. Four is probably too young for TLotR, but probably fine for The Hobbit.
  Years later, when the films came out, my son understood why I was raging so much about the loss of "The Scouring of the Shire" :-) Anyway, we're both looking forward to seeing Smaug eventually, although that's probably going to be mostly in the next film.
3. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 08:30 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  "I'll be bringing my 4-year-old daughter to that one -- time to start the indoctrination into geekery..."
  Try actually reading her the book like a real parent would.
4. Re:Awesome by Java+Pimp · 2012-09-19 08:46 · Score: 1
  
  I've been lucky enough to have seen all the Star Wars movies when they were first released in the theater...
  Get off my lawn!
  
  --
  Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
  Kull: She told me she was 19!
5. Re:Awesome by CQDX · 2012-09-19 09:19 · Score: 1
  
  Mine was seeing 2001 at age 4. Still trying to figure that one out.
6. Re:Awesome by Sponge+Bath · 2012-09-19 09:53 · Score: 2
  
  I have friends who hate the 1984 Dune with a passion, but I always had a soft spot for it. Yes, it had cheesy parts. But it also had David Lynch freakery, Patrick Stewart and Sting as the prancing bad boy ("I will kill you!"). Just thinking about it makes me laugh these decades later.
7. Re:Awesome by Mr+Foobar · 2012-09-19 10:13 · Score: 2
  
  Mine was seeing Dune in 1984 at age 4! :)
  Mine was seeing 2001: A Space Odyssey at age age 7!
  I win! :D
  
  --
  -> I dislike sigs...
8. Re:Awesome by i_ate_god · 2012-09-19 10:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Lynch's Dune is not close to the book in terms of story, but it is very accurate in terms of over all feeling I find.
  
  --
  I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
9. Re:Awesome by funwithBSD · 2012-09-19 12:13 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  FWIW, Frank Herbert seem to be ok with the results:
  I get asked a specific question a lot of times, if the settings, the scenes that I saw in David’s film match my original imagination, the things I projected in my imagination. I must tell you that some of them do, precisely. Some of them don’t, and some of them are better. Which is what you would expect of artists such as David and Tony Masters. I’m delighted with that! Why not take it and improve on it visually? As far as I’m concerned the film is a visual feast.
  
  --
  Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
10. Re:Awesome by jeffasselin · 2012-09-19 13:17 · Score: 1
  
  One of mine is seeing Empire Strikes Back in a theater at 5!
  
  --
  If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
11. Re:Awesome by ShoulderOfOrion · 2012-09-19 16:08 · Score: 1
  
  Youngster. I saw it at 7. I still vividly remember the Ape/Bone/Tool scene melting into the Space Station on the big screen. Loved it. Yeah, pretty much the entire theater was saying WTF during the last 10 minutes. When you figure it out, let me know.
12. Re:Awesome by dissy · 2012-09-19 18:14 · Score: 1
  
  I was 4 when my parents took me to all of Bladerunner, Wrath of Kahn, Tron. I remember seeing Wargames too but think that was the next year.
  '82 was one of the best years for scifi movies, and I made it just in time!
13. Re:Awesome by pantaril · 2012-09-19 22:59 · Score: 1
  
  Lynch's Dune is not close to the book in terms of story, but it is very accurate in terms of over all feeling I find.
  Note that the original dune was heavily cuted and edited before screening in theaters. The original dune had runtime of 137 minutes. There exists extended edition (with 177 minutes of runtime) featuring outtakes, additional footage, test close-up shots of certain actors, and even fabricated (i.e. "cheated") footage, which is closer story-wise to the Herberts original book.
  Personaly i think that even the original dune managed to capture the atmosphere of Herberts universe quite well. Maybe it was incomprehensible to the viewer not familiar with the book, but that was no problem for me.
14. Re:Awesome by OldSport · 2012-09-19 23:21 · Score: 1
  
  Hahaha... amazing how bringing my daughter to see her first movie in the theater has somehow been twisted into me being a shitty parent. Gotta love the Internet.
  Just FYI, I've read more books with my daughter in the last six months than you've probably read in your entire life.
15. Re:Awesome by MatrixCubed · 2012-09-20 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  You waited until she was 4? I've done LOTR marathons with my little girl since before she could speak.
16. Re:Awesome by arashi+sohaku · 2012-09-20 02:39 · Score: 1
  
  You're lucky. My dad took me to see The Exorcist when it came out. Made quite the impression on a 5-year-old's imagination...
  
  --
  No .sig for me, I'm trying to quit.
Trailers by Scutter · 2012-09-19 07:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

Am I the only one who prefers to wait for the finished product rather than watch it in two-minute disjointed chunks over the course of the next three months?
I quit watching trailers entirely for this reason and because they almost always give away the plot (or the best jokes, or the twist) anymore. Tron: Legacy, for example (admittedly, not exactly a thespianic masterpiece), completely ruined the entire plot start to finish for me with a four-word sentence in the trailer. It gave it away completely.

--

"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
1. Re:Trailers by Scutter · 2012-09-19 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  I can't imagine a trailer for The Hobbit contains spoilers for anyone on /.
  Of course it'll have spoilers. While the story is obviously well-known, there are also sets, costumes, music, acting, and all of the other things that go into a finished film. If all I were interested in was the story, I would just read the book. I don't even like seeing the still photos (for ANY film), because I want to approach the film fresh and be surprised and amazed by everything on the screen.
  
  --
  
  "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
2. Re:Trailers by Scutter · 2012-09-19 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  Here is a hint to go with your attention deficit disorder... It's just like LOTR's but with a more butchered storyline.
  You completely missed the point. Also, I'm not sure why you are accusing me of having ADD. Not wanting to have a film spoiled by trailers means I have a mental disorder?
  
  --
  
  "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
3. Re:Trailers by furbearntrout · 2012-09-19 08:54 · Score: 1
  Sturgeon's Law applies to all mainstream films.
  The trailer, by necessity, includes scenes from the (relatively)non-crap 10% of the film.
  Ergo, crappy trailer==very crappy film.
  --
  Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
4. Re:Trailers by flimflammer · 2012-09-19 08:56 · Score: 1
  
  The only time I ever watch trailers anymore is in theaters. Trailers always seem to make a movie look extraordinarily epic, no matter how bad the movie ends up being, so it's an entertaining several minutes before the movie starts.
5. Re:Trailers by fm6 · 2012-09-19 08:57 · Score: 1
  
  What, you think the purpose of a movie is telling a story? No it's about spectacle and cheering on the good guys. Fans (short for "fanatics") can't get enough of that. They don't mind trailers that give away too much, just as the movie itself will get a lot of repeat business.
6. Re:Trailers by DrFalkyn · 2012-09-19 09:39 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Am I the only one who prefers to wait for the finished product rather than watch it in two-minute disjointed chunks over the course of the next three months?
  I quit watching trailers entirely for this reason and because they almost always give away the plot (or the best jokes, or the twist) anymore. Tron: Legacy, for example (admittedly, not exactly a thespianic masterpiece), completely ruined the entire plot start to finish for me with a four-word sentence in the trailer. It gave it away completely.
  I'm with you. It would be a travesty if the studios give away the plot to The Hobbit
7. Re:Trailers by crazyjj · 2012-09-19 12:03 · Score: 1
  
  ADD is NOT a mental disorder, it's a serious medica
  Oh look, a bird!
  
  --
  What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
8. Re:Trailers by hoboroadie · 2012-09-19 21:04 · Score: 1
  
  I saw an epic Pulp Fiction trailer at a screening of Reservoir Dogs. I got a strong impression that it was a movie worth seeing. BTW it was about ten minutes long, and played after the feature.
  
  --
  They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
What's a Nimoy? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 07:56 · Score: 5, Funny

I didn't see any songs by Leonard Nimoy, how good could it be?
http://youtu.be/XC73PHdQX04
1. Re:What's a Nimoy? by fm6 · 2012-09-19 09:03 · Score: 1
  
  I see your corny 60s video and raise you an acid trip:
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-yy2URAYqU
2. Re:What's a Nimoy? by funwithBSD · 2012-09-19 12:15 · Score: 1
  
  What's a Nimoy, precious?
  
  --
  Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
3. Re:What's a Nimoy? by Avatar8 · 2012-09-20 02:51 · Score: 1
  
  It was rumored that Nimoy was going to voice Smaug. I still hear Richard Boone's gravelly boom every time I think of the dragon, though.
Yay, more walking! by crazyjj · 2012-09-19 08:00 · Score: 1

I wonder what all manner of interesting thing will walk, and walk, and walk in this installment?

--
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by SilverJets · 2012-09-19 08:00 · Score: 1

Wouldn't surprise me. He's making 3 movies out of it. How much extraneous crap is Jackson cramming into the story in order to get 3 movies?
Also, I heard Legolas is in this. God.
Wish it was not split into 2 movies by danbuter · 2012-09-19 08:01 · Score: 1

I'm going to be seeing this in the theater at least once. I just wish Jackson didn't feel the need to split the movie in half. I'm curious where the dividing point will be.
1. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by space_jake · 2012-09-19 08:09 · Score: 2
  
  It's getting split into three movies actually.
2. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by Scutter · 2012-09-19 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  Luckily, he's changed his mind about splitting it in half. Now it's a trilogy instead.
  
  --
  
  "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
3. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by Misagon · 2012-09-19 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  It is worse. It is split in three parts. A lot of things from the Lord of the Rings appendices that happen during the same time as The Hobbit are being put into the movies.
  Personally, I am considering waiting for the inevitable 2015 fan-edit that follows just the story of the book "The Hobbit". I don't know who will make it, but probably several people will try doing it.
  Seeing it at home will probably also be the only way that I am going to be able to see it in a good threatre, in high resolution in 2D. Yes, I have 20/20 vision and the inter-eye crosstalk and lack of depth of field in so called "3D" movies bugs the hell out of me. Where I live, movies are not shown in 2D, (takes me an hour to travel to the closest 2D theatre, which is a shoebox) so watching it at home after the BluRays have come out is likely going to be my only option if I want a good movie experience.
  
  --
  "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
4. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by alaskana98 · 2012-09-19 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  I got bad news for ya. He's splitting it into THREE parts. I'm guessing the first movie will cut off right before they get to Mirkwood, the second will have them going from Mirkwood to when Smaug is first shown, then the third will deal with Smaug and all the other grandiose things that happen after that.
5. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by GNious · 2012-09-19 08:28 · Score: 1
  
  Still split in half - just with a 3rd half attached somewhere.
6. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  I think what they've done is split the Hobbit into 2 parts. The third will be about events between the Hobbit and LotR and based on notes left by Tolkien that never made it into any of the books. Really it's still 2 movies, but they've decided to make a third that picks up sometime after that Hobbit (or possibly chronicles events that aren't discussed in great depth in the novel) and probably ends sometime before FotR begins.
7. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by ShoulderOfOrion · 2012-09-19 16:20 · Score: 1
  
  Three is bad? Wait until he starts filming 'The Silmarillion'.
8. Re:Wish it was not split into 2 movies by KozmoStevnNaut · 2012-09-19 22:11 · Score: 1
  
  You need to get yourself a pair of 2D glasses. You can make them yourself from two sets of 3D glasses, or you can buy a pair instead:
  http://www.2d-glasses.com/
  
  --
  Eat the rich.
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by Iniamyen · 2012-09-19 08:01 · Score: 5, Funny

One does not simply rewrite the story!
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by vlm · 2012-09-19 08:07 · Score: 2

If I remember the hobbit correctly, that's going to pretty well F up the script WRT the dwarve / elve racial tensions.
Couldn't they have just added a teenage female human with a crossbow without screwing up the story too much? I heard all fantasy-type movies are now required to have one of those in the cast.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
48 FPS by Hatta · 2012-09-19 08:10 · Score: 2

Is there a list of theatres that will be showing this in 48FPS?

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
1. Re:48 FPS by Hatta · 2012-09-19 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  Is that a comprehensive list?
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
2. Re:48 FPS by Hatta · 2012-09-19 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  Same here. Which I'm guessing means I won't be watching it, since I don't live in NYC or LA.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
3. Re:48 FPS by funwithBSD · 2012-09-19 12:16 · Score: 1
  
  How are you going to get a headshot with 48 FPS?
  
  --
  Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by vlm · 2012-09-19 08:10 · Score: 2

Oh no. Please, I hope I'm getting this wrong, but I've got a real bad feeling I'm gonna be right about this:

I read somewhere that they were adding a female Elf to the company, because ...
... he thinks he's remaking "snow white and the seven dwarfs"

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
Mine was "Star Trek II." by JaimeZX · 2012-09-19 08:10 · Score: 1

Kaaaaaaaaaaaaahnn!
WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by Thud457 · 2012-09-19 08:15 · Score: 1

If it's like the last preview, it needs a lot more DRAGON BURNING DOWN THE TOWN and a lot less of dwarves singing.

WHAT THE FUCK ?!!!

--
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1. Re:WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by cervesaebraciator · 2012-09-19 08:21 · Score: 2
  
  I'm sorry to say there's probably a reason you haven't seen a dragon. Remember, they stretching this out into two--no wait, scratch that--three films. You can't go showing your dragon too early.
  It reminds me of a parody of the final Harry Potter film(s) the Onion did a while back. See here.
2. Re:WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by theshowmecanuck · 2012-09-19 08:41 · Score: 1
  
  If they keep stretching movies out like that they'll end up like this. Also The Onion (linked from the page above).
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
3. Re:WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by Jeremiah+Cornelius · 2012-09-19 08:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The whole homeland crap in the voiceover narration betrays horrible mis-representation.
  The lure was the TREASURE.
  The battle of 5 armies was over preserving the TREASURE.
  Lonely Mountain was never a "homeland". That was Khazad Dum.
  
  --
  "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
  Never been known to fail..."
4. Re:WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by Slider451 · 2012-09-19 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  The Dwarves had more than one home. The Blue Mountains (Ered Luin) west of the Shire are yet another.
  
  --
  Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
5. Re:WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by Beerdood · 2012-09-19 09:49 · Score: 1
  
  If it's like the last preview, it needs a lot more DRAGON BURNING DOWN THE TOWN and a lot less of dwarves singing. WHAT THE FUCK ?!!!
  Oh jeez, there's no satisfying some people. I can understand when nerds might dislike Matthew Mcconaughey's latest rom com because of jealousy, or because the plot is unrealistic, or because they have a Y chromosome. But even when they make a movie glorifying irritable, overweight neckbeards - arguably slashdot's greatest demographic - there's still haters!
  
  --
  Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
6. Re:WTF, where's the freakin' D R A G O N ??? !!! by Ginger+Unicorn · 2012-09-20 00:43 · Score: 2
  
  And if you don't like reading complaints about complaints, then you're definately reading the wrong website. Now if you'll excuse me, i'm going to FUCKING GO SOMEWHERE ELSE before someone calls me a fucking child :p
  
  --
  (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
Distorted square shape by uvsc_wolverine · 2012-09-19 08:21 · Score: 1

Any idea what the small distorted square shape is on the left 1/3 of the screen at 38 seconds? Looks like some unfinished effects work. It moves along with one of the dwarves (dwarfs?).

--
This space for rent...
1. Re:Distorted square shape by iceaxe · 2012-09-19 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  ...dwarves (dwarfs?).
  Dwarves. See the Author's Note at the beginning of a copy of the book. (Like the one on my e-reader, right here in my pocket...)
  
  --
  WALSTIB!
2. Re:Distorted square shape by enilnomi · 2012-09-20 03:37 · Score: 1
  
  It's an Ear Trumpet.
  
  --
  education is no substitute for intelligence
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by cervesaebraciator · 2012-09-19 08:23 · Score: 3, Funny

Also, I heard Legolas is in this.
Wait, so Orlando Bloom's going to play a female elf?
Familiar Lyric by Tarlus · 2012-09-19 08:23 · Score: 1

From the end of the trailer, "Home is now behind you. The world is ahead."
That is very similar to the lyric of the song that Pippin sang to Denethor during Jackson's rendition of "Return of the King."

--
/* No Comment */
1. Re:Familiar Lyric by jeffasselin · 2012-09-19 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  It is indeed reminiscent of the theme of "The Road Goes Ever On", part of which Bilbo recites at the end of The Hobbit and of which many verses are sung throughout The Lord of the Rings.
  
  --
  If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-19 08:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

"One does not simply rewrite the story!"
Apparently you never watched Peter Jackson's LOTR trilogy or touched the books.
Re:nice but by iceaxe · 2012-09-19 08:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

While I understand the impatience to get to dessert...
A full length novel is generally much, much longer in terms of plot than the average two to three hour film screenplay. A typical screenplay is more equivalent to a short story or novelette. While The Hobbit is by no means a lengthy tome, it is certainly more than a short story, and when you add in the additional material Jackson is introducing (White Council, Dol Guldur, Radagast, etc.) it would be impossible to cram into a commercially viable screenplay.
I was fine with two films, and I'm fine with three. I'm happy to have the story fleshed out with more context, and I'm mostly fine with having Jackson and company extrapolate and add things, recognizing that film and text are different media with different strengths and weaknesses and techniques for storytelling. My "fine" stops with altering things that Tolkien actually wrote, as happened in spots in the Lord of the Rings movies. Nonetheless, I expect I'll enjoy these just as thoroughly as the last three. I doubt Jackson will pull a Lucas on us... let us hope.
And let it be said, I am willing to pay for my enjoyment, repeatedly, and do not begrudge the commercial nature of the venture, provided the art is not compromised thereby.

--
WALSTIB!
Re:I lost interest in the movie series... by flimflammer · 2012-09-19 09:01 · Score: 2

Thank god my OCD doesn't force me to nitpick movie special effects.
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by dreamchaser · 2012-09-19 09:22 · Score: 2

Wouldn't surprise me. He's making 3 movies out of it. How much extraneous crap is Jackson cramming into the story in order to get 3 movies?
Also, I heard Legolas is in this. God.
That would not be implausible since he was the son of the King of the elves of Mirkwood.
Great, more senseless mangling of both plot and by PJ6 · 2012-09-19 10:06 · Score: 1

character out of my favorite books. I wonder if these movies tend to be less appealing to people that actually read the books. Or is it just me.
1. Re:Great, more senseless mangling of both plot and by bartron · 2012-09-19 12:11 · Score: 1
  
  So don't watch them and read the books instead. Personally I couldn't give a flying f if the movie(s) deviate from the words Tolkien wrote or if stuff is added that wasn't in the book (but is in the LOTR appendices). Movies are like a magic show. If you watch David Copperfield and do nothing but complain how such-and-such is not physically possible then GTFO. Same with movies. As long as the move has pace and the story is compelling then sit back and enjoy the show. Treat it as an interpretation of the story rather than some attempt to visually display the book verbatim and I'm sure you will enjoy it.
2. Re:Great, more senseless mangling of both plot and by _Shad0w_ · 2012-09-19 19:22 · Score: 1
  
  Cutting Bombadil is a common thing with LoTR adaptations. Mostly because the character adds little or nothing to the story and is something of an anomaly in the setting, even Tolkien said, "Tom Bombadil is not an important person - to the narrative".
  
  --
  Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.
3. Re:Great, more senseless mangling of both plot and by PJ6 · 2012-09-20 11:03 · Score: 1
  
  So don't watch them and read the books instead. Personally I couldn't give a flying f if the movie(s) deviate from the words Tolkien wrote or if stuff is added that wasn't in the book (but is in the LOTR appendices). Movies are like a magic show. If you watch David Copperfield and do nothing but complain how such-and-such is not physically possible then GTFO. Same with movies. As long as the move has pace and the story is compelling then sit back and enjoy the show. Treat it as an interpretation of the story rather than some attempt to visually display the book verbatim and I'm sure you will enjoy it.
  With that argument you could invalidate practically any cinematic criticism regardless of merit.
  
  My problem with the adaptation has nothing to do with deviation per se, but how it was done. Not that you ("GTFO") care, of course.
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by Farmer+Tim · 2012-09-19 10:54 · Score: 4, Funny

By the look of things, PJ could turn Gandalf taking a dump into an entire movie all its own. "Hnnnn...you...shall...not...pass...hnnn".

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Leave it to Jackson to play plot point twister by otopico · 2012-09-19 12:00 · Score: 1

Did anyone else catch Tom ,mutha f*cking, Bombadil?
Sure he had to doctor the story to fit him in, but I'm pretty excited about it.
1. Re:Leave it to Jackson to play plot point twister by jeffasselin · 2012-09-19 14:49 · Score: 1
  
  I think you're confusing Radagast for Tom Bombadil.
  
  --
  If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
Go to youtube instead by Snaller · 2012-09-19 12:33 · Score: 1

Then you won't have that ugly apple marring the entire trailer

--
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
A fine line between 'creating buzz' and spoling it by CuteSteveJobs · 2012-09-19 12:45 · Score: 1

I'm looking forward to The Hobbit, but instead of licking the screen at every trailer, picture, snippet or press interview I'm going to ignore avoid looking at any of it, walk into the cinema when it finally comes out and be pleasantly surprised.
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by binarylarry · 2012-09-19 14:16 · Score: 1

Legolas isnt a girl?
I thought she was always playing hard to get with the hairy midget from the lotr movies.

--
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Re:Scouring of the Shire by hoboroadie · 2012-09-19 20:54 · Score: 1

I boycotted the Gorilla movie because of their dubious decision to excise the main plot point from the LotR. I can never forgive that. I have magnanimously lifted the boycott, however, in appreciation of Jackson's support of the effort to free the West Memphis Three. I hope he doesn't fuck up this time..

--
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
Re:I lost interest in the movie series... by dzfoo · 2012-09-19 21:13 · Score: 1

It must be a miserable existence to not be able to enjoy things for what they are.
Sorry dude.
-dZ.

--
Carol vs. Ghost
...Can you save Christmas?
Re:Bombadillo by hoboroadie · 2012-09-19 21:17 · Score: 1

Replaced by a chef's roll of knives. Gotta stay within the budget.

--
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
How big is a Hobbit, really? by DoctorBonzo · 2012-09-19 23:57 · Score: 1

I mostly like Jackson's Ring series & this looks to be 'bout as good, but I've never gotten a consistent feel for the "actual" size of a Hobbit from the films.

Anyone else?
1. Re:How big is a Hobbit, really? by Sedated2000 · 2012-09-20 01:59 · Score: 1
  
  Not sure if your question is really how tall are they, but in the lore of Lord of the Rings, they were called halflings because they were exactly half the size of the men who named them. If my memory is correct, it was the Numenor, who were tall (about 6' 5" to 7" average). That puts Hobbits at about 3' 2.5" to 3.5'.
2. Re:How big is a Hobbit, really? by Avatar8 · 2012-09-20 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  That's been one of my gripes. Jackson has the hobbits the same height as the dwarves. Hobbits range from 3 to 4 feet, the tallest having been 4' 6". Dwarves range between 4 and 5. While you may have some seeing eye to eye around the 4 foot height, there should be a visible difference between Bilbo and the other dwarves.
  It's mostly when they do the close scenes with characters side by side. On action or distant scenes where they substituted actual little people, those were much more accurate.
Re:Scouring of the Shire by Avatar8 · 2012-09-20 02:35 · Score: 1

I wish I had boycotted KK. It made the 1976 version look like a classical masterpiece.
Not only was the major plot point of the Scouring lost, but the change to Faramir being tempted by the ring tells me that Jackson, Boyens and Walsh did not GET Tolkien's writing or understand how the ring worked.
While I'll be cringing and bitching about changes to "The Hobbit," I'm sure I'll still enjoy the scenery and journey of these movies. I just don't understand the gall of thinking you can improve on what many consider the epitome of fantasy writing.
Re:Are they really adding an Elf to the company? by Avatar8 · 2012-09-20 02:47 · Score: 1

Legolas is there logically; he just was not mentioned in "The Hobbit" as Tolkien had not yet created him.
"Prince" Legolas is the son of the Elven King, Thranduil of the wood elves who reside in north eastern Mirkwood. Like Aragorn he chose to go without his royal title and amenities until he felt he had earned it.
The addition of Tauriel, or more accurately, the naming and extrapolation of the captain of the woodland guard, is all Jackson's creation.
Re:nice but by Avatar8 · 2012-09-20 02:57 · Score: 1

This is the key point of the debates between the movies and books.
C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien wrote in similar styles which is no wonder since they attended college together and were friends. They both "skip over" the details of long journeys and battles. The final battle in "Lion, Witch and Wardrobe" only took up two pages in the book. Likewise the battle of five armies only took up a few pages until Bilbo was knocked unconscious and the battle was summarized for him upon his awakening.
Today's writers, directors and audiences leave nothing to the imagination. All the details are poured forth so the audience does not have to think.
I'm sure I'll enjoy these movies, too, despite disliking all of unnecessary additions and changes.
Meh. More interested in Troll Bridge by dywolf · 2012-09-20 04:15 · Score: 1

This has cash in written all over it.

--
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Re:Scouring of the Shire by FreekyGeek · 2012-09-21 04:41 · Score: 1

Mod up! I'm so glad to finally hear that I'm not the only one who feels that the Scouring oif the Shire was pretty much the entire point of the whole trilogy, and leaving it out was a crime beyond imagining. Yeah, I guess it brings down the Hollywood-happy-ending thing a bit. Gods forbid we should have to grow or think or not always have everything end perfectly. Chopping the last part off completely ruined all character growth that was in the books and, iof you ask me, the most personal and intimate part of them from Tolkein (who, don't forget, was a veteran and deeply affected by the horrors of war, especially when he returned home).
Re:Scouring of the Shire by hoboroadie · 2012-09-21 07:22 · Score: 1

I took a class once on reading, and ever since I compulsively look for the plot point. (Ditto Film School.)
Omniscience aside, Tolkein's primary P.O.V. was of the Hobbits, and the theme was the little guy who wanted to stay home and garden being thrust into the world of ambitious Biggers*, and doing whatever they had to do in order to return to their own lives. Kinda like the Draft. One of the foremost subplots also was that adventure and war were not very fun or glorious for some folks.
*Reference from Bored of the Rings.

--
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.