THE HOBBIT ~ Discuss and Spoil!

[Jan Van Quirm]

BEWARE OF SPOILERS HEREIN OF THIS AND FUTURE FILM SCREENPLAYS

It's a brilliant adaption that really works to beef up the bits of the underlying back story that were done after Tolkien wrote the original book so that the 2 sequels to come will eventually fill in the bits in the Lord of the Rings (written after TH) that didn't really fit this first outing for Hobbits in Middle Earth...

I lurved Radagast (Sylvester McCoy) and the Rhosgobel Rabbits Ditto Barry Humphries' inspired Great Goblin (although really he's more Sir Les Patterson than Dame Edna ). What were your thoughts on the bits that maybe didn't make it onto the page so well in the book?

 

[Who's Wee Dug]

I wanted to see if the couple of blurry bits were in the 2D version as well, I did not like that effect screwed up my eyes.

The best laugh out loud bit was the Dwarfs when sitting down to eat in Rivendell and looking disgusted at the salad when one of them says does it come with chips inspired genius that was and most definitely not in the book.

The Goblin scenes I thought were fantastic, as were the Trolls and Eagles and my favorite chapter in the book Riddles in the Dark lived up to my expectations. It is so good roll on the next one which should be just as good if not better.

 

[Quatermass]

While I'm yet to see The Hobbit, I am looking forward to seeing Sylvester McCoy in action. Ironic, he's appearing in The Hobbit, and Ian McKellen is appearing in this year's Doctor Who Christmas Special.

I should really re-read The Hobbit, actually. I have so many other books on my plate, it ain't funny, but I should re-read it.

BTW, love the picture's caption.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

You're probably too young to remember Catweazle Q? Geoffrey Bayldon was a bloody genius as he was also the Crowman in Wurzel Gummidge and Radagast's a little of both those characters appearance-wise really

Sylvester's a bit like that but on mind-enhancing drugs and more 'hedge' wizard (as in pulled through one backwards )

Riddles was very good indeed - slight deviations for the purists but again I think their screenplay adaptations work better for the format I thought the Eagles section was really spot on - in LotR I found some of those scenes rather stilted and/or disappointing, but PJ's obviously sent his CGI wizards off to see David Attenborough's film units and footage of real eagles flying etc this time around. Much more convincing and suitably 'noble' as these are supernatural Eagles of course... :shifty:

 

[Bouncy Castle]

Damn you, Jan.

I've just ordered the Entire Catweazle boxset.

 

[Who's Wee Dug]

Have you not seen it before Bouncy.

 

[Quatermass]

You're probably too young to remember Catweazle Q? Geoffrey Bayldon was a bloody genius as he was also the Crowman in Wurzel Gummidge and Radagast's a little of both those characters appearance-wise really

Sylvester's a bit like that but on mind-enhancing drugs and more 'hedge' wizard (as in pulled through one backwards )

I've heard of Catweazle for a long time (I think I first read about him in a book about science fiction and fantasy TV when I was young), but never actually watched it. I've seen Geoffrey Bayldon in action, though, as the astrologer Organon in the Doctor Who story The Creature from the Pit. He has this wonderful line which I need to look up when he introduces himself to the Doctor...

Ah, here we go...

"Astrologer extraordinary. Seer to princes and emperors. The future foretold, the present explained, the past... apologised for."

 

[CrysaniaMajere]

The title says spoil! so I can talk without hide everything , because you've already been warned

I watched the hobbit too loved it, and all in all I think it's lovely how it is so much like the book, the deviations are not many and are done usually to link thin trilogy to the other one (like the butterfly, or the presence of Saruman) or because big movies must have a certain kind of moral or heroes scene, so we get the Bilbo-saving-Thorin-scene and the final speech and hug Not necessary, but predictable.

One question, probably for Jan the expert
Elrond says 'we've been at peace for 400 years..." but the war with Sauron was something like 2000 years ago?? or not? What am I missing here?

 

[Penfold]

I think they might have been referring to the period of history involving the Witch King of Angmar (referred to in LoTR appendixes, Unfinished Tales, and The Hobbit books as well as the Hobbit film). If I recall correctly, he was the chief of the Nazgul and there was quite a battle to remove him. I'm sure Jan will come in and show me wrong on all counts with her superior knowledge on the subject.

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Yeah - Penners is correct. It's the war with the Witchking of Angmar that they're referring to (probably as I think that was supposed to be more like 800 years beforehand). This was centred north of Rivendell and involved Aragorn's people at war with each other effectively as the Witchking was the chief of the Nazgul and 'went bad' in the previous Age when Sauron was defeated by the last alliance of Elves and Men 3,000 years before TH - he was one of the

Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die

...

The fortress in Mirkwood was home to 4 of the Nazgul, but not to the Witchking in fact (he went from Angmar directly to Minas Morgul in Gondor/Mordor) and Sauron

Spoiler

(The Necromancer)

in fact took up residence there around the year 1060 of the Third Age - we're in something like 2950 in this story so he'd been there for nearly 2000 years, gradually regaining his strength. This is also one of the greatest contention in ME canon lore as some people (myself included) can't really see how the One could have lain in the Anduin for around 1500 odd years without him not getting at least some clue before Gollum carted it off to the Misty Mountains...

 

[Conforumist]

Is there lots of Christmas stuff in it??

 

[Who's Wee Dug]

Carol's in it.

 

[Willem]

I quite enjoyed it! Yes it was long, but never boring. I could've done without the silly Radagast stuff, and the story has it's faults (too many deus ex machinas) but that's a problem the movie inherited from the book itself.

And Martin Freeman makes a great hobbit!

 

[Jack Remillard]

I saw it in 2D this afternoon, no idea what the frame rate was.

Loved Radagast and his pack of Arcturan hyper-rabbits.

And Gandalf's final encounter with the Goblin King.

"That'll do it."

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Just been having an icily polite exchange with some canon nazis on the Tolkien forum I belong to - in a supposedly movie-oriented thread about Radagast and the Rhosgobel bunnies. Boy am I glad I don't take every syllable the Old Man wrote as gospel (including the bits where he contradicts himself or changes his mind several times)

I only wish pooh was into Tolkien more so I could get him to spam on there... :shifty: :twisted:

 

[Quatermass]

Just been having an icily polite exchange with some canon nazis on the Tolkien forum I belong to - in a supposedly movie-oriented thread about Radagast and the Rhosgobel bunnies. Boy am I glad I don't take every syllable the Old Man wrote as gospel (including the bits where he contradicts himself or changes his mind several times)

I fear that if I ever post on a major Doctor Who forum, I'd run into the same problem, even though Doctor Who's canon, compared to Middle Earth's, can be best described as a [EFF!]ing mess.

I only wish pooh was into Tolkien more so I could get him to spam on there... :shifty: :twisted:

Oh, [EFF!]! Don't even joke about that sort of crap!

 

[SpideyGirl]

Went to see it last week with my lad in 3d and special effects messed with my eyes at times, think i might prefer to see it 2d tbh but loved it nonetheless

P.S is it wrong to fancy one of the dwarves? http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2225907712/nm2636108 :shifty:

 

[Ghost]

hell no he was my main reason for watching being human

 

[Jan Van Quirm]

Him and Dean O'Gorman who plays his brother Fili (and Thorin too of course)

 

[SpideyGirl]

Agreed