Nerdgasm!!! (Hobbit content)

[sunvalleylaw]

This brings on a full on nerdgasm for me. Just sayin'



Anyone else interested?

[Robert****]

I am excited about this movie too. I loved that book when I read it a long time ago.

This movie will be a huge success in every way, I'm sure.

[R_of_G]

I wish I was excited about it. The book began a massive obsession for me at age 11.

However, after the amount of original material Jackson added to the LotR films (often at the expense of Tolkien's source material) knowing that this is somehow going to be two films suggests to me more of the same is coming.

To clarify, I have no issue with Tolkien's material being cut, it's common practice in adaptations for source material to fall by the wayside to make a film fit into a time limit. However, I take massive exception to source material being cut so that a writer/director's own material can be added.

That said, other people here are probably excited about the film so I won't continue to comment on this thread and ruin everyone else's fun. I'll just re-read the book for the billionth time.

[Commodore 64***]

I'm curious....what did you think of the Bourne movies, R_of_G?

[R_of_G]

I'm curious....what did you think of the Bourne movies, R_of_G?

I never saw them or read the books. However, my dad read all of the books and saw the films, so I could ask him for his opinion on the adaptations.

[sunvalleylaw]

The book began a massive obsession for me at age 11.

Same here. 5th grade, our teacher read it aloud to us. Started a yearly obsession with the entire series for a long, long time. The issue for me when the Trilogy films were coming out were my mental images I had crafted for myself, based on book cover art, calendars and novelties that were available back then, etc. But fortunately, Jackson put included those original artists in a team of designers that made the look of the film fit eerily with my mental visions. Some slight differences, my forests were more western WA coastal looking than the NZ mountains to some extent, but basically was there.

I did not like some of the cutting of the material, and did not like some of the supplemental material (Aragorn and Eowynn romance stuff) but was glad that the basic flavor of the books was mostly retained. Of course Jackson highlighted the battle stuff more than I would have preferred, but overall a good job. I am hoping for the same here. The scene in Bilbo's home as they are preparing to leave looks visually much as I had it in my head. I did not realize it was going to be two films. I think they can do the book in one. But, as I still read the books with my kids, and plan to start with my youngest daughter this year when we finish with the Potter books, I am confident I can keep the books in their treasured place, and enjoy Jackson's movie for what it is.

[R_of_G]

I did not like some of the cutting of the material, and did not like some of the supplemental material (Aragorn and Eowynn romance stuff) but was glad that the basic flavor of the books was mostly retained.

For me, it was mostly Jackson's absolute character assassination of Faramir that sent me over the edge (like the edge he sent Aragorn over in that wolf-attack scene that never happened in any of the books). If Jackson's intent was to portray Faramir as just another Boromir, he should have just left Boromir alive. For me, it was Faramir that always stood out as one of the most compelling characters in the books. His absolute refusal without the slightest hesitation to take the ring freely offered to him by Frodo was striking. More powerful characters like Galadriel, Gandalf and Aragorn all admitted to or showed at least some level of temptation towards the ring. Faramir by contrast issued that line that always stuck with me about not picking it up if it lay by the side of the road. Jackson obliterated that character.

[Tig***]

I read The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Supremacy. The movies replace several main characters and even the main bad guy, Carlos the Jackal, has been left out. They never mention the past Viet Nam covert project codenamed "Medusa", where David takes on the name "Jason Bourne" after killing the original Jason Bourne.

The Bourne Supremacy movie was wildly different than the book. It takes place in China and Hong Kong. I don't remember all of the other differences or issues other than the books feel dated with much older technology. The films are really entertaining. The stories are almost completely re-written, however.

[sunvalleylaw]

For me, it was mostly Jackson's absolute character assassination of Faramir that sent me over the edge (like the edge he sent Aragorn over in that wolf-attack scene that never happened in any of the books). If Jackson's intent was to portray Faramir as just another Boromir, he should have just left Boromir alive. For me, it was Faramir that always stood out as one of the most compelling characters in the books. His absolute refusal without the slightest hesitation to take the ring freely offered to him by Frodo was striking. More powerful characters like Galadriel, Gandalf and Aragorn all admitted to or showed at least some level of temptation towards the ring. Faramir by contrast issued that line that always stuck with me about not picking it up if it lay by the side of the road. Jackson obliterated that character.

You make very good points there. And there did not seem really to be a point in doing it, unless Jackson was trying to change the story in that the ring was too powerful for any mortal man to resist. You make a very good point about Tolkien's character that refused to allow himself to be tempted. Also, I never understood why he sent Aragorn over the cliff like that. I did not see what it added.

Well, the Hobbit is a prelude or prequel to the trilogy, but largely a more lighthearted adventure tale in and of its own. I hope Jackson's adaptation tells visually that tale with that flavor and that he does not try to turn it into something else. I like the trailer anyway!

[piebaldpython***]

I'm curious....what did you think of the Bourne movies, R_of_G?

My wife read all of the Bourne books and we both saw the movies. We both loved the movies.....she pointed out places in the movies where the movie differed from the book......sometimes drastically. That said, she said that ALL of the changes, in her humble opinion, were excellent and served the movies well.

Last week I just saw clip for the Hobbitt movie. The clip looked good with some of the same characters from the other movies. My wife is excited about that movie too as she has read the book.

[@nthony]

Despite being a HUGE Tolkien fan since I was a wee nipper, I'll be giving the Hobbit films a wide birth. Can't forgive Jackson for what he did to The Lord of the Rings, a director changing the story to satisfy his own ego is unforgiveable.

Now for the Bourne stories, I would say it didn't really matter. The canon was hardly unique enough to begin with. Tolkien's however is arguably the first and finest fantasy series of all time.

[Barre Fly]

I'm a huge pedant when it comes to adapting books to movies, but I have to say after forcing myself through the ordeal that was reading the first Bourne book, it was a rare exception where the film was vastly better. I seriously found Ludlum's writing so dull - but to be fair I haven't read anything else by him, so maybe that's not the best?

I am skeptical about The Hobbit film - what perspective I did enjoy from LotR was the visuals of the battle scenes, which I always find hard to imagine to scale in books - but the nit picking over large and small details caused my sister to elbow me in the ribs quite a few times in the cinema With The Hobbit, there's no need for anything so epic, I feel - except of course Smaug and the Battle of the Five Armies. It's a really intimate book to me, I even imagine the initial goblin encounters to be small army rather than teeming like insects as I'm sure they may transpire in the film. I'm nerding out too much now.

On the positive side, Aidan Turner. Mmmm.

[tomchang01]

This brings on a full on nerdgasm for me, you are right !!

[sunvalleylaw]

Hey Lisa! Nice to hear from you! Yeah, given how many times I have read The Hobbit, and LOTR, I have had my misgivings about the films. But I think "The Hobbit" can be made into a nice film about an individual adventure tale in its own right. IF, and only if, they avoid trying to change the tale into what it is not. I think they could do a good job. I hope that they do.

We shall see.

[Barre Fly]

Thanks

I hope so too, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't going to watch it!