The surprise gift they gave out to everyone who sat through the entire trilogy (extended editions, for the first two!) when Return of the King came out.
Man, I can't wait for the Hobbit.
I still have that too. It's sitting next to my Argonath bookends, Gollum statue, and Minas Tirith replica. I remember missing an exam in high school AND having the flu but still going to see that marathon in the theater.
Nobody posted this yet but, Cate Blanchett is back. I don't remember her in the book though so either they'll add her in or put her in the second film.
Nobody posted this yet but, Cate Blanchett is back. I don't remember her in the book though so either they'll add her in or put her in the second film.
Sounds like they might be adding in Gandalf's business after he parts ways with Bilbo and the Dwarves at the edge of Mirkwood. It's right around that time that the White Council (founded by Galadrial) move against the Necromancer in Dol Guldur and I seem to recall Gandalf mentioning heading south at that point.
Nobody posted this yet but, Cate Blanchett is back. I don't remember her in the book though so either they'll add her in or put her in the second film.
Sounds like they might be adding in Gandalf's business after he parts ways with Bilbo and the Dwarves at the edge of Mirkwood. It's right around that time that the White Council (founded by Galadrial) move against the Necromancer in Dol Guldur and I seem to recall Gandalf mentioning heading south at that point.
Yeah, Jackson has mentioned (but not officially stated) that the White Council and the goings on in Dul Guldur will likely be where most of the non-Hobbit runtime comes from.
Just finished rewatching the extended editions (what fucking great movies!) And I got a question!
Why does Bilbo age so quickly when he loses the ring but Gollum doesn't? He remains as agile and tough (in a lean rat like way) as always.
Wishpig on
WARNING: Picture below may cause spontaneous growth of facial hair and/or body hair.
Image by Sharpwriter on deviantart.com
0
LibrarianThe face of liberal fascismRegistered Userregular
edited December 2010
Ok, because people have asked the other guys who stated they did not think the LotR movies were that great why they thought so, I thought I might elaborate what I dislike about the movies:
The Look: Jackson has created a look for these movies that is very clean, everyone in those movies is sparkly shiny almost 1950s technicolor, everything looks very new, elven bread looks like it can be bought in your local supermarket all with fake leave packaging.
Some very bad and unnneccessary CGI, it's been a while but especially Lolegolas surfing on shields and oliphants and the end of Return of the King where Sauron's armies fall into the collapsing ground and leave the armies of men standing on a round platform.
Some casting decisions I do not approve, most notably Emofrodo.
Some very unneccessary changes to appeal to the blockbuster audiences, worst of that was making Gimli a comic relief character.
Now, it has been almost 20 years since I read the Lord of the Rings and I am not a huge hurggldurggl LotR nerd who hates every change to the source material, but one aspect of the story that really stood out to me in my memory of the book was the epic friendship between Gimli and Legolas.
Those guys were equals, fighting alongside and learning to respect each other although they were from very different cultures.
The movies made Legolas the coolest girlyboy ever and made Gimli, who was also supposed to be a young dwarf in the books iirc, a joke character.
Also the ending of the book that makes clear that every single bearer of the ring was tainted in a way and leaves to the Grey Lands(including Sam) was not realized in the movies. Yes I know the scene of Frodo and Bilbo leaving is in it, but they might have shown an old Sam being picked up by the elves as the closing scene of the movie, just for completeness sake.
The movies lack a lot of the spirit of the books imho, nuff said.
Ok, because people have asked the other guys who stated they did not think the LotR movies were that great why they thought so, I thought I might elaborate what I dislike about the movies:
The Look: Jackson has created a look for these movies that is very clean, everyone in those movies is sparkly shiny almost 1950s technicolor, everything looks very new, elven bread looks like it can be bought in your local supermarket all with fake leave packaging.
Some very bad and unnneccessary CGI, it's been a while but especially Lolegolas surfing on shields and oliphants and the end of Return of the King where Sauron's armies fall into the collapsing ground and leave the armies of men standing on a round platform.
Some casting decisions I do not approve, most notably Emofrodo.
Some very unneccessary changes to appeal to the blockbuster audiences, worst of that was making Gimli a comic relief character.
Now, it has been almost 20 years since I read the Lord of the Rings and I am not a huge hurggldurggl LotR nerd who hates every change to the source material, but one aspect of the story that really stood out to me in my memory of the book was the epic friendship between Gimli and Legolas.
Those guys were equals, fighting alongside and learning to respect each other although they were from very different cultures.
The movies made Legolas the coolest girlyboy ever and made Gimli, who was also supposed to be a young dwarf in the books iirc, a joke character.
Also the ending of the book that makes clear that every single bearer of the ring was tainted in a way and leaves to the Grey Lands(including Sam) was not realized in the movies.
The movies lack a lot of the spirit of the books imho, nuff said.
Well a few points tossed back at you...
1. Emofrodo? Really? You must have never met an emo person in your life if you think that... Frodo was a happy go lucky Hobbit, about as emo as a rainbow. The ring of course made him a sickly and a bit nutty... but never emo. Very weird statement. Unless you mean at the end, when he can't live in the shire. But hey, thats how the story goes.
2. I'm not sure what you mean by Grey Lands. Sam went to grey heaven to see off Frodo to to the undying lands. Looks like you combined those two. BUT Sam did not go with Frodo to the undying lands. He stayed and lived happily ever after for like 60 years until his wife died. Only then did he leave for the undying lands.
3. I think Legolas and Gimli's friendship was done very very well. From Gimli's gift to the "aye I can do that" speech, I think Jackson did a good job. As for each individually, Legolas looks like how Tolkien described elves. Coolest girlyboy ever? Elves were like fucking superhumans and they were, well, kinda "pretty". How you can fault the movies for following that is beyond me. Legolas was an uber deadly pretty boy. Very fitting. As for Gimli being a comic relief. Yeah, they turned him into that. But frankly, Dwarves are short, ugly, short-tempered, stubborn, and alcoholics, they almost naturally fall into the comic relief role. I'll agree they over did the comedy, I mean how many times did he fall on his ass in two towers? At least three... but for the most part he did add what I think was needed comic relief. Every group of friends needs that goofball right? And gimli had enough bad ass moments to make up for it. BUT I can see why Gimli the comic relief would piss you off, and I know you're far from the only one.
4. The CGI is showing it's age now, seven years is a long time technology wise, but when this movie was released it was absolutely stunning. I remember the crowd cheering like crazy at both those legolas scenes. Bashing the CGI now is like rewatching the the Empire Strikes back and saying, "man what shitty special effects!" Well, ok, thats a bit of an extreme example. But it's kind of along the same lines, hope you get my point.
I can easily see why someone wouldn't like the trilogy. I still cringe at many moments in Return of the King. Like the bed scene... and the Witch King fight.
But some of your reasons for disliking the movie puzzle me.
PS- I can't be the only one who always turns off return of the king at the crowning scene. Thats where it should have ended imo. God I hate that bed scene.
The surprise gift they gave out to everyone who sat through the entire trilogy (extended editions, for the first two!) when Return of the King came out.
Man, I can't wait for the Hobbit.
I still have that too. It's sitting next to my Argonath bookends, Gollum statue, and Minas Tirith replica. I remember missing an exam in high school AND having the flu but still going to see that marathon in the theater.
Nobody posted this yet but, Cate Blanchett is back. I don't remember her in the book though so either they'll add her in or put her in the second film.
I've got that too. I remember they didn't announce what you'd get for going to the marathon, so I assumed a t-shirt or keychain or something. That was a damn nice surprise. And if you can't tell, yes, they chopped up a print of each of the films and gave you a frame of each, so each one's unique.
Ok, because people have asked the other guys who stated they did not think the LotR movies were that great why they thought so, I thought I might elaborate what I dislike about the movies:
The Look: Jackson has created a look for these movies that is very clean, everyone in those movies is sparkly shiny almost 1950s technicolor, everything looks very new, elven bread looks like it can be bought in your local supermarket all with fake leave packaging.
Some very bad and unnneccessary CGI, it's been a while but especially Lolegolas surfing on shields and oliphants and the end of Return of the King where Sauron's armies fall into the collapsing ground and leave the armies of men standing on a round platform.
Some casting decisions I do not approve, most notably Emofrodo.
Some very unneccessary changes to appeal to the blockbuster audiences, worst of that was making Gimli a comic relief character.
Now, it has been almost 20 years since I read the Lord of the Rings and I am not a huge hurggldurggl LotR nerd who hates every change to the source material, but one aspect of the story that really stood out to me in my memory of the book was the epic friendship between Gimli and Legolas.
Those guys were equals, fighting alongside and learning to respect each other although they were from very different cultures.
The movies made Legolas the coolest girlyboy ever and made Gimli, who was also supposed to be a young dwarf in the books iirc, a joke character.
Also the ending of the book that makes clear that every single bearer of the ring was tainted in a way and leaves to the Grey Lands(including Sam) was not realized in the movies.
The movies lack a lot of the spirit of the books imho, nuff said.
Well a few points tossed back at you...
1. Emofrodo? Really? You must have never met an emo person in your life if you think that... Frodo was a happy go lucky Hobbit, about as emo as a rainbow. The ring of course made him a sickly and a bit nutty... but never emo. Very weird statement. Unless you mean at the end, when he can't live in the shire. But hey, thats how the story goes.
2. I'm not sure what you mean by Grey Lands. Sam went to grey heaven to see off Frodo to to the undying lands. Looks like you combined those too. BUT Sam did not go with Frodo to the undying lands. He stayed and lived happily ever after for like 60 years until his wife died. Only then did he leave for the undying lands.
3. I think Legolas and Gimli's friendship was done very very well. From Gimli's gift to the "aye I can do that" speech, I think Jackson did a good job. As for each individually, Legolas looks like how Tolkien described elves. Coolest girlyboy ever? Elves were like fucking superhumans and they were, well, kinda "pretty". How you can fault the movies for following that is beyond me. Legolas was an uber deadly pretty boy. Very fitting. As for Gimli being a comic relief. Yeah, they turned him into that. But frankly, Dwarves are short, ugly, short-tempered, stubborn, and alcoholics, they almost naturally fall into the comic relief role. I'll agree they over did the comedy, I mean how many times did he fall on his ass in two towers? At least three... but for the most part he did add what I think was needed comic relief. Every group of friends needs that goofball right? And gimli had enough bad ass moments to make up for it. BUT I can see why Gimli the comic relief would piss you off, and I know you're far from the only one.
4. The CGI is showing it's age now, seven years is a long time technology wise, but when this movie was released it was absolutely stunning. I remember the crowd cheering like crazy at both those legolas scenes. Bashing the CGI now is like rewatching the the Empire Strikes back and saying, "man what shitty special effects!"
I can easily see why someone wouldn't like the trilogy. I still cringe at many moments in Return of the King. Like the bed scene... and the Witch King fight.
But some of your reasons for disliking the movie puzzle me.
PS- I can't be the only one who always turns off return of the king at the crowning scene. Thats where it should have ended imo. God I hate that bed scene.
It's not that the CGI is showing it's age, a lot of it looked bad when they did it.
Now, the clean look they did for the movie was on purpose. That's just a design decision some people won't like but these are not supposed to be gritty, realistic films or books.
I didn't mind them turning Gimli into a bit of a jokey character, the characters needed some spicing up. The books are pretty dull stuff.
Ok, because people have asked the other guys who stated they did not think the LotR movies were that great why they thought so, I thought I might elaborate what I dislike about the movies:
The Look: Jackson has created a look for these movies that is very clean, everyone in those movies is sparkly shiny almost 1950s technicolor, everything looks very new, elven bread looks like it can be bought in your local supermarket all with fake leave packaging.
Some very bad and unnneccessary CGI, it's been a while but especially Lolegolas surfing on shields and oliphants and the end of Return of the King where Sauron's armies fall into the collapsing ground and leave the armies of men standing on a round platform.
Some casting decisions I do not approve, most notably Emofrodo.
Some very unneccessary changes to appeal to the blockbuster audiences, worst of that was making Gimli a comic relief character.
Now, it has been almost 20 years since I read the Lord of the Rings and I am not a huge hurggldurggl LotR nerd who hates every change to the source material, but one aspect of the story that really stood out to me in my memory of the book was the epic friendship between Gimli and Legolas.
Those guys were equals, fighting alongside and learning to respect each other although they were from very different cultures.
The movies made Legolas the coolest girlyboy ever and made Gimli, who was also supposed to be a young dwarf in the books iirc, a joke character.
Also the ending of the book that makes clear that every single bearer of the ring was tainted in a way and leaves to the Grey Lands(including Sam) was not realized in the movies.
The movies lack a lot of the spirit of the books imho, nuff said.
Well a few points tossed back at you...
1. Emofrodo? Really? You must have never met an emo person in your life if you think that... Frodo was a happy go lucky Hobbit, about as emo as a rainbow. The ring of course made him a sickly and a bit nutty... but never emo. Very weird statement. Unless you mean at the end, when he can't live in the shire. But hey, thats how the story goes.
2. I'm not sure what you mean by Grey Lands. Sam went to grey heaven to see off Frodo to to the undying lands. Looks like you combined those too. BUT Sam did not go with Frodo to the undying lands. He stayed and lived happily ever after for like 60 years until his wife died. Only then did he leave for the undying lands.
3. I think Legolas and Gimli's friendship was done very very well. From Gimli's gift to the "aye I can do that" speech, I think Jackson did a good job. As for each individually, Legolas looks like how Tolkien described elves. Coolest girlyboy ever? Elves were like fucking superhumans and they were, well, kinda "pretty". How you can fault the movies for following that is beyond me. Legolas was an uber deadly pretty boy. Very fitting. As for Gimli being a comic relief. Yeah, they turned him into that. But frankly, Dwarves are short, ugly, short-tempered, stubborn, and alcoholics, they almost naturally fall into the comic relief role. I'll agree they over did the comedy, I mean how many times did he fall on his ass in two towers? At least three... but for the most part he did add what I think was needed comic relief. Every group of friends needs that goofball right? And gimli had enough bad ass moments to make up for it. BUT I can see why Gimli the comic relief would piss you off, and I know you're far from the only one.
4. The CGI is showing it's age now, seven years is a long time technology wise, but when this movie was released it was absolutely stunning. I remember the crowd cheering like crazy at both those legolas scenes. Bashing the CGI now is like rewatching the the Empire Strikes back and saying, "man what shitty special effects!"
I can easily see why someone wouldn't like the trilogy. I still cringe at many moments in Return of the King. Like the bed scene... and the Witch King fight.
But some of your reasons for disliking the movie puzzle me.
PS- I can't be the only one who always turns off return of the king at the crowning scene. Thats where it should have ended imo. God I hate that bed scene.
It's not that the CGI is showing it's age, a lot of it looked bad when they did it.
Now, the clean look they did for the movie was on purpose. That's just a design decision some people won't like but these are not supposed to be gritty, realistic films or books.
I didn't mind them turning Gimli into a bit of a jokey character, the characters needed some spicing up. The books are pretty dull stuff.
I thought it was stunning. Never heard it called bad before. Oh well... to each their own.
But yeah, I loved the movies, not so much the books. I found the novels to be a fucking pain to read through. I did read 'um cause I loved the world, but dull is the right word for much of the novels.
And the clean look was done on purpose like you said. It is very much a juxtaposition of good vs evil. The good guys were all shiny and had teeth that could blind you... the bad guys were very much the opposite. It's high fantasy so it never really bothered me.
Goddamn I can't wait to see Jackson's take on the battle of the five armies. You know it's going to be glorious!
Wishpig on
WARNING: Picture below may cause spontaneous growth of facial hair and/or body hair.
Just finished rewatching the extended editions (what fucking great movies!) And I got a question!
Why does Bilbo age so quickly when he loses the ring but Gollum doesn't? He remains as agile and tough (in a lean rat like way) as always.
My view was that Gollum had the ring for a much, much longer period of time, and it completely transformed him into a being of darkness, whereas the ring was pulling Bilbo toward that, but he abandoned it before he could and so having not crossed the threshhold into pure darkness, he returned to regular hobbit and appropriate age.
jeddy lee on
Backlog Challenge: 0%
0/8
PS2
FF X replay
PS3
God of War 1&2 HD
Rachet and Clank Future
MGS 4
Prince of Persia
I hope they use some of the music from The Hobbit cartoon.
Everytime anyone mentions the book or movie i hum
"Well they look like birds! But they haven't any wings! Oh what shall we do? With the funny little things?"
Just finished rewatching the extended editions (what fucking great movies!) And I got a question!
Why does Bilbo age so quickly when he loses the ring but Gollum doesn't? He remains as agile and tough (in a lean rat like way) as always.
My view was that Gollum had the ring for a much, much longer period of time, and it completely transformed him into a being of darkness, whereas the ring was pulling Bilbo toward that, but he abandoned it before he could and so having not crossed the threshhold into pure darkness, he returned to regular hobbit and appropriate age.
If I remember correctly: Gollum was born a hobbit.
Well, something much like a hobbit I think is as definitive as Tolkien ever gets on the matter. Regardless, you can claim that hobbits and similar creatures are fairly resistant to The Ring's powers so that Bilbo's 61 years weren't quite fully corrupting (which grants the immortality a la the Nazgul or Gollum) but Smeagol's several centuries of possession were. I at least don't have a serious problem with that.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
MichaelLCIn what furnace was thy brain?ChicagoRegistered Userregular
Just finished rewatching the extended editions (what fucking great movies!) And I got a question!
Why does Bilbo age so quickly when he loses the ring but Gollum doesn't? He remains as agile and tough (in a lean rat like way) as always.
My view was that Gollum had the ring for a much, much longer period of time, and it completely transformed him into a being of darkness, whereas the ring was pulling Bilbo toward that, but he abandoned it before he could and so having not crossed the threshhold into pure darkness, he returned to regular hobbit and appropriate age.
If I remember correctly: Gollum was born a hobbit.
Yeah, a relative of the Hobbits, anyway. Much closer to them than Man or Elf.
Tolkien actually got a lot more specific than that if you get into the more esoteric writings. Smeagol was from one of the old hobbit groups known as the Stoors, who lived along riverbanks bank in the days before hobbits lived in the Shire.
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited December 2010
AVClub.com is reporting that Orlando Bloom is all but officially signed to return to Middle-Earth for the Hobbit films, and not for just a mere cameo.
I don't have much to comment on here, except that I'd really like them to hurry up and officially announce Hugo Weaving, Andy Serkis, and Ian McKellan's positions.
I read the book for the first time earlier this year, and I do not remember Legolas being in the book. Maybe someone can refresh my memory.
Don't worry, he isn't. But neither is Galadriel, yet Cate Blanchett is signed to appear as well. My guess with Legolas would be him appearing during the Mirkwood section, but if they're going the White Council route, who's to say he can't show up there?
Regardless, Bloom is probably just happy to be working again, and on something that's not going direct-to-DVD.
AVClub.com is reporting that Orlando Bloom is all but officially signed to return to Middle-Earth for the Hobbit films, and not for just a mere cameo.
I don't have much to comment on here, except that I'd really like them to hurry up and officially announce Hugo Weaving, Andy Serkis, and Ian McKellan's positions.
Gimli was also alive around that time... I wonder if he'll appear? I hope so... would be great to see him and Legolas interact. Even if they just shot each other scornful looks.
Actually, it would be even better (and easier) to see Gloin and Legolas interact. Father meets son's bff.
EDIT- Just read Rhys-Davies was asked to return but turned down the offer. Can't blame him... if I recall the make-up really fucked up his face for a time.
Wishpig on
WARNING: Picture below may cause spontaneous growth of facial hair and/or body hair.
There was a horrible episode of The OC which was an internet legend for awhile because of a death scene and its use of that song. Some simple google work will find it, I will not infect this thread by posting it.
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
So, Variety is reporting that Elijah Wood is boarding the project now, stating that the two Hobbit films will be using Frodo digging though old Bilbo's library and stumbling across "There and Back Again" as a framing device for the expanded story.
While several other LOTR cast members not in the Hobbit book are rumored to return (Legolas, Galadriel), for now it seems that Wood is likely the only former Hobbit to reprise his original role.
I like it, if only for the fact that they might release a giant version of "There And Back Again" for purchase, as I have always wanted one. It must be large and leather bound. Money is almost no object to get me what I want. Oh, and it must be red leather. Authenticity!
I like it, if only for the fact that they might release a giant version of "There And Back Again" for purchase, as I have always wanted one. It must be large and leather bound. Money is almost no object to get me what I want. Oh, and it must be red leather. Authenticity!
I like it, if only for the fact that they might release a giant version of "There And Back Again" for purchase, as I have always wanted one. It must be large and leather bound. Money is almost no object to get me what I want. Oh, and it must be red leather. Authenticity!
I like it, if only for the fact that they might release a giant version of "There And Back Again" for purchase, as I have always wanted one. It must be large and leather bound. Money is almost no object to get me what I want. Oh, and it must be red leather. Authenticity!
I like it, if only for the fact that they might release a giant version of "There And Back Again" for purchase, as I have always wanted one. It must be large and leather bound. Money is almost no object to get me what I want. Oh, and it must be red leather. Authenticity!
So, Variety is reporting that Elijah Wood is boarding the project now, stating that the two Hobbit films will be using Frodo digging though old Bilbo's library and stumbling across "There and Back Again" as a framing device for the expanded story.
While several other LOTR cast members not in the Hobbit book are rumored to return (Legolas, Galadriel), for now it seems that Wood is likely the only former Hobbit to reprise his original role.
That's a really good idea. Good way to tribute the trilogy. I mean, they are considered some of the best movies on IMDB. Which is saying a lot considering how it probably upset fans of the books.
I like it, if only for the fact that they might release a giant version of "There And Back Again" for purchase, as I have always wanted one. It must be large and leather bound. Money is almost no object to get me what I want. Oh, and it must be red leather. Authenticity!
Love it the way medieval knights loved their maids.
With a pure, unrequited love.
Speaker on
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
Some big-ish and not so big news on the casting front. First the minor news:
- Andy Serkis and Ian McKellan are finally locked in for reprising their roles as Gollum and Gandalf respectively. No one really ever thought they would do otherwise, but the wait for their official confirmation was a little nerve-wracking considering how most of the cast was scooped up over a month ago.
- Mikael Persbrandt (yeah, I know, who?) is locked to play Beorn. Persbrandt is a stage, screen, and TV actor from Sweden, apparently most famous for his Shakespearian work done with the late Ingmar Bergman. And he looks like this:
- The very, very elderly Christopher Lee seems to be giving Father Time the finger, and is "this close" to signing to return for Saruman.
- Spoilering this one, as it's very cool and very spoilery. But just a hint: it's related to the Elijah Wood casting.
Yeah, Ian Holm is coming back.
Atomika on
0
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited January 2011
Apparently, Ian McKellan had wavered on whether or not he really wanted to play Gandalf again. Interesting to see the inner thoughts of someone you really couldn't imagine that world being bereft of. From McKellan's blog:
I’m 71 and fit: though at my age who knows what accident is 'round the next corner? For a year or more, I have been arranging my professional commitments around the possibility of The Hobbit films starting at almost anytime. We brought the Waiting for Godot tour of Australia to New Zealand early 2010, assuming I would stay on to start shooting soon after. Then there was yet another delay: but in Wellington I met with Guillermo del Toro and later read his script for Part One, written with the LOTR writing team. It was true to the style, the fun and the romance of the trilogy.
When Peter Jackson, already producing, resumed the director’s chair, he kept me in touch with developments. A second screenplay was sent over, on the understanding that I would not talk about what I read in it.
After the ruckus over trade union expectations and unlikely rumours of filming outside New Zealand, suddenly crucial casting was announced, plus a start date in February 2011. Martin Freeman as Bilbo sounds perfect. As my agent continued to negotiate with Warner Brothers, I kept wondering was Gandalf what I most wanted to do, more than a new play for instance or indeed a new part? Sequels aren’t necessarily as rewarding to act in as their originals.
Could I let Gandalf go? Would anyone else care if I did? Elsewhere, does anyone care that Michael Gambon was not the first to play Dumbledore?
The deciding negotiation was not about money but about dates. Gandalf is needed on set over the next 18 months but with sizeable breaks when I can work on other projects. My worry that I could not easily escape from Middle Earth was lifted.
I am happy to say I start filming in Wellington on February 21 2011.
--Ian McKellen, London, January 2011
Glad he could convince himself.
Atomika on
0
GreasyKidsStuffMOMMM!ROAST BEEF WANTS TO KISS GIRLS ON THE TITTIES!Registered Userregular
edited January 2011
It would be bizarre for anyone else to play the role, I think. I got over Dumbledore, as much as I never liked the alternative. Ian owned the character, it was very necessary for him to finish what he started.
I totally understand his concerns about it though.
AVClub.com is reporting that Orlando Bloom is all but officially signed to return to Middle-Earth for the Hobbit films, and not for just a mere cameo.
I don't have much to comment on here, except that I'd really like them to hurry up and officially announce Hugo Weaving, Andy Serkis, and Ian McKellan's positions.
Gimli was also alive around that time... I wonder if he'll appear? I hope so... would be great to see him and Legolas interact. Even if they just shot each other scornful looks.
Actually, it would be even better (and easier) to see Gloin and Legolas interact. Father meets son's bff.
EDIT- Just read Rhys-Davies was asked to return but turned down the offer. Can't blame him... if I recall the make-up really fucked up his face for a time.
He doesn't really need to, since Gimli wasn't in The Hobbit. Gandalf is another issue.
Posts
I still have that too. It's sitting next to my Argonath bookends, Gollum statue, and Minas Tirith replica. I remember missing an exam in high school AND having the flu but still going to see that marathon in the theater.
Nobody posted this yet but, Cate Blanchett is back. I don't remember her in the book though so either they'll add her in or put her in the second film.
Sounds like they might be adding in Gandalf's business after he parts ways with Bilbo and the Dwarves at the edge of Mirkwood. It's right around that time that the White Council (founded by Galadrial) move against the Necromancer in Dol Guldur and I seem to recall Gandalf mentioning heading south at that point.
[Map]
Yeah, Jackson has mentioned (but not officially stated) that the White Council and the goings on in Dul Guldur will likely be where most of the non-Hobbit runtime comes from.
Why does Bilbo age so quickly when he loses the ring but Gollum doesn't? He remains as agile and tough (in a lean rat like way) as always.
Image by Sharpwriter on deviantart.com
The Look: Jackson has created a look for these movies that is very clean, everyone in those movies is sparkly shiny almost 1950s technicolor, everything looks very new, elven bread looks like it can be bought in your local supermarket all with fake leave packaging.
Some very bad and unnneccessary CGI, it's been a while but especially Lolegolas surfing on shields and oliphants and the end of Return of the King where Sauron's armies fall into the collapsing ground and leave the armies of men standing on a round platform.
Some casting decisions I do not approve, most notably Emofrodo.
Some very unneccessary changes to appeal to the blockbuster audiences, worst of that was making Gimli a comic relief character.
Now, it has been almost 20 years since I read the Lord of the Rings and I am not a huge hurggldurggl LotR nerd who hates every change to the source material, but one aspect of the story that really stood out to me in my memory of the book was the epic friendship between Gimli and Legolas.
Those guys were equals, fighting alongside and learning to respect each other although they were from very different cultures.
The movies made Legolas the coolest girlyboy ever and made Gimli, who was also supposed to be a young dwarf in the books iirc, a joke character.
Also the ending of the book that makes clear that every single bearer of the ring was tainted in a way and leaves to the Grey Lands(including Sam) was not realized in the movies. Yes I know the scene of Frodo and Bilbo leaving is in it, but they might have shown an old Sam being picked up by the elves as the closing scene of the movie, just for completeness sake.
The movies lack a lot of the spirit of the books imho, nuff said.
Well a few points tossed back at you...
1. Emofrodo? Really? You must have never met an emo person in your life if you think that... Frodo was a happy go lucky Hobbit, about as emo as a rainbow. The ring of course made him a sickly and a bit nutty... but never emo. Very weird statement. Unless you mean at the end, when he can't live in the shire. But hey, thats how the story goes.
2. I'm not sure what you mean by Grey Lands. Sam went to grey heaven to see off Frodo to to the undying lands. Looks like you combined those two. BUT Sam did not go with Frodo to the undying lands. He stayed and lived happily ever after for like 60 years until his wife died. Only then did he leave for the undying lands.
3. I think Legolas and Gimli's friendship was done very very well. From Gimli's gift to the "aye I can do that" speech, I think Jackson did a good job. As for each individually, Legolas looks like how Tolkien described elves. Coolest girlyboy ever? Elves were like fucking superhumans and they were, well, kinda "pretty". How you can fault the movies for following that is beyond me. Legolas was an uber deadly pretty boy. Very fitting. As for Gimli being a comic relief. Yeah, they turned him into that. But frankly, Dwarves are short, ugly, short-tempered, stubborn, and alcoholics, they almost naturally fall into the comic relief role. I'll agree they over did the comedy, I mean how many times did he fall on his ass in two towers? At least three... but for the most part he did add what I think was needed comic relief. Every group of friends needs that goofball right? And gimli had enough bad ass moments to make up for it. BUT I can see why Gimli the comic relief would piss you off, and I know you're far from the only one.
4. The CGI is showing it's age now, seven years is a long time technology wise, but when this movie was released it was absolutely stunning. I remember the crowd cheering like crazy at both those legolas scenes. Bashing the CGI now is like rewatching the the Empire Strikes back and saying, "man what shitty special effects!" Well, ok, thats a bit of an extreme example. But it's kind of along the same lines, hope you get my point.
I can easily see why someone wouldn't like the trilogy. I still cringe at many moments in Return of the King. Like the bed scene... and the Witch King fight.
But some of your reasons for disliking the movie puzzle me.
PS- I can't be the only one who always turns off return of the king at the crowning scene. Thats where it should have ended imo. God I hate that bed scene.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ni3H-tAo9SM
Image by Sharpwriter on deviantart.com
I've got that too. I remember they didn't announce what you'd get for going to the marathon, so I assumed a t-shirt or keychain or something. That was a damn nice surprise. And if you can't tell, yes, they chopped up a print of each of the films and gave you a frame of each, so each one's unique.
It's not that the CGI is showing it's age, a lot of it looked bad when they did it.
Now, the clean look they did for the movie was on purpose. That's just a design decision some people won't like but these are not supposed to be gritty, realistic films or books.
I didn't mind them turning Gimli into a bit of a jokey character, the characters needed some spicing up. The books are pretty dull stuff.
I thought it was stunning. Never heard it called bad before. Oh well... to each their own.
But yeah, I loved the movies, not so much the books. I found the novels to be a fucking pain to read through. I did read 'um cause I loved the world, but dull is the right word for much of the novels.
And the clean look was done on purpose like you said. It is very much a juxtaposition of good vs evil. The good guys were all shiny and had teeth that could blind you... the bad guys were very much the opposite. It's high fantasy so it never really bothered me.
Goddamn I can't wait to see Jackson's take on the battle of the five armies. You know it's going to be glorious!
Image by Sharpwriter on deviantart.com
My view was that Gollum had the ring for a much, much longer period of time, and it completely transformed him into a being of darkness, whereas the ring was pulling Bilbo toward that, but he abandoned it before he could and so having not crossed the threshhold into pure darkness, he returned to regular hobbit and appropriate age.
PS2
FF X replay
PS3
God of War 1&2 HD
Rachet and Clank Future
MGS 4
Prince of Persia
360
Bayonetta
Fable 3
DS
FF: 4 heroes of light
Everytime anyone mentions the book or movie i hum
"Well they look like birds! But they haven't any wings! Oh what shall we do? With the funny little things?"
If I remember correctly: Gollum was born a hobbit.
Yeah, a relative of the Hobbits, anyway. Much closer to them than Man or Elf.
I don't have much to comment on here, except that I'd really like them to hurry up and officially announce Hugo Weaving, Andy Serkis, and Ian McKellan's positions.
Don't worry, he isn't. But neither is Galadriel, yet Cate Blanchett is signed to appear as well. My guess with Legolas would be him appearing during the Mirkwood section, but if they're going the White Council route, who's to say he can't show up there?
Regardless, Bloom is probably just happy to be working again, and on something that's not going direct-to-DVD.
Gimli was also alive around that time... I wonder if he'll appear? I hope so... would be great to see him and Legolas interact. Even if they just shot each other scornful looks.
Actually, it would be even better (and easier) to see Gloin and Legolas interact. Father meets son's bff.
EDIT- Just read Rhys-Davies was asked to return but turned down the offer. Can't blame him... if I recall the make-up really fucked up his face for a time.
Image by Sharpwriter on deviantart.com
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I think the LOTR fanboy rage burnt itself out somewhere around when Saruman fell off of Orthanc.
Ha... I loved that scene. What a great and fitting end! I don't get why they cut it, well I guess it was prob just to gruesome...
This NEEDS to be posted! Overused joke but so fucking perfect for this scene... I laughed my ass off.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0nHw07ryM0
Image by Sharpwriter on deviantart.com
While several other LOTR cast members not in the Hobbit book are rumored to return (Legolas, Galadriel), for now it seems that Wood is likely the only former Hobbit to reprise his original role.
This will make you weep.
http://www.indyprops.com/pp-rb.htm
He isn't selling any of them
That is the part that makes you weep.
I hate you sooooo much right now.
That's a really good idea. Good way to tribute the trilogy. I mean, they are considered some of the best movies on IMDB. Which is saying a lot considering how it probably upset fans of the books.
Love it the way medieval knights loved their maids.
With a pure, unrequited love.
- Andy Serkis and Ian McKellan are finally locked in for reprising their roles as Gollum and Gandalf respectively. No one really ever thought they would do otherwise, but the wait for their official confirmation was a little nerve-wracking considering how most of the cast was scooped up over a month ago.
- Mikael Persbrandt (yeah, I know, who?) is locked to play Beorn. Persbrandt is a stage, screen, and TV actor from Sweden, apparently most famous for his Shakespearian work done with the late Ingmar Bergman. And he looks like this:
- The very, very elderly Christopher Lee seems to be giving Father Time the finger, and is "this close" to signing to return for Saruman.
- Spoilering this one, as it's very cool and very spoilery. But just a hint: it's related to the Elijah Wood casting.
Glad he could convince himself.
I totally understand his concerns about it though.