One of my friends (not an Ag, though he would have been a good one) just sent me this:

"Hobbit on the 17th. I gave my staff the day off, bought them tickets and we are going as a group. Wow I am a great boss (sometimes).

If you missed it, my staff consists of programmers, etc....some of which read all the ancillary works of Tolkien and has way too much knowledge of middle earth, if that is possible."

quote:

---

quote:

---

The thinking is that Gandalf wants Thorin to take out Smaug so Sauron can't use Smaug as an A-Bomb in the coming War for the Ring?

---

Yep, pretty much. He says precisely that in the white council meeting in Rivdendell.

---

I thought it was that Gandalf knew they needed a stronghold in the north to prevent an attack by Sauron, once his full power is restored, on Rivendell through the north. This even happens, as depicted in the LOTR appendices, and thanks to the new dwarf garrison in the lonely mountain and a rekindled alliance b/w the dwarves and Mirkwood elves, the attack fails. I believe this happens during the same time as the LOTR trilogy.

I just want to state that the Rivendell literary scene in Fellowship of the Rings is hard as crap to get through. The writing is a little convoluted and I've never seen so many proper nouns / names in my life. I've actually had to get on LOTR.wikia, despite knowing the story in general. I've read many pages twice.

quote:

---

And the book is written as a children's story about a grand adventure - where the journey itself is the focus. So there's really little emphasis placed on this huge battle as a "grand climax" because the whole book was telling the tale on one small being placed in extraordinary circumstances and his personal growth through them.

---

quote:

---

One of my friends (not an Ag, though he would have been a good one) just sent me this:

"Hobbit on the 17th. I gave my staff the day off, bought them tickets and we are going as a group. Wow I am a great boss (sometimes).

If you missed it, my staff consists of programmers, etc....some of which read all the ancillary works of Tolkien and has way too much knowledge of middle earth, if that is possible."

---

That's what I'm Tolkien about.

Ha.


While we're on the subject, I'd just like to say Viggo Mortensen is one weird looking dude. Was he the right guy? Yes, but without the chin, I'm uncertain:

quote:

---

They never mention Legalos, no, but he is the wood elve king's son, so there is no reason for him to not be there.

---

dammit

quote:

---

Grew up in Lake Jackson on the edge of some woods, where we frequently found big spiders in our house. Banana spiders and others. So that would be the source of my Arachnaphobia.

Having said that, the Mirkwood sequence surprisingly didn't cause me any issues. I did kinda avert my eyes to the point of watching out of the corner of my eye.

Loved the movie

---

On this point, the book was scarier as far as the spiders go. Mirkwood was a creepy place.

quote:

---

---

Almost makes me wish I had gone to a Comic-con. Almost. Not quite.

quote:

---

Ha.


While we're on the subject, I'd just like to say Viggo Mortensen is one weird looking dude. Was he the right guy? Yes, but without the chin, I'm uncertain:

---

They originally cast Stuart Townsend, but he and PJ got into it early on and they replaced him with Viggo.
According to Townsend:

I was there rehearsing and training for two months, then was fired the day
before filming began. After that I was told they wouldn't pay me
because I was in breach of contract due to not having worked long
enough. I had been having a rough time with them, so I was almost
relieved to be leaving until they told me I wouldn't be paid. I have no
good feelings for those people in charge, I really don't. The director wanted me and then apparently thought better of it because he really
wanted someone 20 years older than me and completely different.

PJ is always talking about having to like the people you work with, if you're going to work with them over the course of several years.

Guessing the guy did not get along with Pete. But not wanting to pay him is pretty f-ed up. Though that one's probably on New Line, God knows those people are crooked as hell. They reported a loss on the trilogy so they wouldn't have to pay PJ.

quote:

---

PJ is always talking about having to like the people you work with, if you're going to work with them over the course of several years.

Guessing the guy did not get along with Pete. But not wanting to pay him is pretty f-ed up. Though that one's probably on New Line, God knows those people are crooked as hell. They reported a loss on the trilogy so they wouldn't have to pay PJ.

---

Dang. Seriously (on the latter statement)?

Yep, fairly well documented. They wanted to stiff the Tolkien estate as well.

I have heard Stuart Townshend is going out with Charleze Theron. That speaks for itself that he has done alright.

By the way, I ordered all the extended versions of LOR last night. I never got to sit down and enjoy LOR at the time anyhow. It was just a busy decade for me.

Good purchase. There's hundreds of hours worth of material on there, if you're so inclined.

Just bought my IMAX 3D ticket for next tuesday at 7 pm. Can't wait.

quote:

---

quote:

---

PJ is always talking about having to like the people you work with, if you're going to work with them over the course of several years.

Guessing the guy did not get along with Pete. But not wanting to pay him is pretty f-ed up. Though that one's probably on New Line, God knows those people are crooked as hell. They reported a loss on the trilogy so they wouldn't have to pay PJ.

---

Dang. Seriously (on the latter statement)?

---

Just read the NYT article. Time Warner sucks was the take home.

Stephen Colbert interviews Smaug

I always knew Smaug was a conservative

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

The thinking is that Gandalf wants Thorin to take out Smaug so Sauron can't use Smaug as an A-Bomb in the coming War for the Ring?

---

Yep, pretty much. He says precisely that in the white council meeting in Rivdendell.

---

I thought it was that Gandalf knew they needed a stronghold in the north to prevent an attack by Sauron, once his full power is restored, on Rivendell through the north. This even happens, as depicted in the LOTR appendices, and thanks to the new dwarf garrison in the lonely mountain and a rekindled alliance b/w the dwarves and Mirkwood elves, the attack fails. I believe this happens during the same time as the LOTR trilogy.

---

I think both of these were factors. Smart would have been a powerful ally. Strengthening the north turned out to be very important. The Iron Hills dwarves, Erebor dwarves, Kirkwood elves, and even the Dunedain fought a crucial part of the war on a second front.

If anyone's keeping track, the Top Critics reviews on RT are pretty damn good. Most agree it's closer to LOTR quality than the previous two Hobbit films.

One more day!

2 down... One to go at the marathon! Bring on the finale!!!

Best of the three for sure!!!!

Great to hear.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/11289765/The-Hobbit-How-the-clomping-foot-of-nerdism-destroyed-Tolkiens-dream-and-the-fantasy-genre.html

quote:

---

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/11289765/The-Hobbit-How-the-clomping-foot-of-nerdism-destroyed-Tolkiens-dream-and-the-fantasy-genre.html

---

It is ironic that the author wrote a long and boring article saying that LOTR was too verbose and uninteresting.

Ha

To be honest I stopped reading after the first paragraph. Bunch of rubbish.

quote:

---

To be honest I stopped reading after the first paragraph. Bunch of rubbish

---

Shocking!

Why, it's a horrible article.

Just sat down in the theater.

Just got back. I thought it was the best of the three, and a fitting end to the Hobbit trilogy.

Here's what I liked and disliked, specifically: *SPOILERS*

What I liked:

• The Dol Guldur fight scene was awesome, but definitely too short. Galadriel banishing Sauron was pretty badass.
  
• Smaug attack and death scene was really well done.
  
• There was a HUGE improvement in the CGI, I thought. The orcs all looked really good, Bolg and Azog especially.
  
• The pace was really quick, which was very refreshing for a Middle-Earth movie. The action never let up except for a few minutes early on.
  
• Billy Boyd song was fantastic.
  

What I didn't like:

• The early parts of the battle were a little chaotic and hard to follow, imo. I wasn't sure if Azog's strategy was to take Erebor or to take the city.
  
• Beorn for all of FIVE SECONDS? Come on, we should've seen some badass bear action for at least a couple of minutes. Wasted opportunity.
  
• Once the main battle dies down and it shifts into the one-on-one fights betwen Azog/Thorin and Bolg/Tauriel/Kili/Legolas, the fights started to feel a tad repetitive after a while. It was almost a relief when Kili finally gets killed.
  
• Gandalf fiddling with the pipe was funny, but it felt out of place in the middle of the emotional scenes. To go from mourning Thorin to that, back to Thorin, felt awkward.
  
• The scene where Thranduil tells Legolas about Aragorn felt a bit cheap and tacked-on.
  
• The music wasn't bad, but it wasn't memorable in the least. I still like putting on the LOTR soundtracks every once in a while, but I don't see myself doing the same with these Hobbit soundtracks.
  

All in all, I'd say it was a really fun movie, and I'll probably be giving it another watch, though it has its faults.

quote:

---

Just sat down in the theater.

---

Hell yeah. I aint reading your spoilers though. Weekend will be the earliest I can see it.

There is some truth to this:


"This is what British sci-fi author M. John Harrison called "the clomping foot of nerdism" and, unfortunately for all of us, it has taken over. In an essay which caused a storm in sci-fi's teacup back in 2007, Harrison criticised the urge, felt by both authors and fans, to exhaustively catalogue every detail of an unreal world as if it were a real place rather than a literary device. Often, nerd desire for this kind of encyclopaedic knowledge outstrips the author's ability to provide it. William Gibson, the author of Neuromancer, recalls a visit from two men who wanted to turn it into a Dungeons and Dragons style roleplaying game"

It is a problem with Star Wars as well. Who gives a crap about what yoda used to do back in the old days? Ah, I see he refers to Star wars later in the article.

" What's more, the very activity of canon formation is what nerds most enjoy: obsessively mastering a set of authorised texts, declaring their group allegiance through their memory of its most obscure passages, and then lawyering each other furiously wherever the authors leave gaps. We would all be so much better off had fantasy authors followed the example of elderly Tolkien, or even Borges himself, and just written fictional encyclopaedias"

That being said, canon, in the form of Star Wars canon, does have value. It leaves some entertaining things unsaid and leaves some mysterious features of that universe. Going back and filling that in was never the right decision.I wish I were more articulate about that, because I'm a fan of canon both for LOTR and Star Wars.

I believe the article may be implying that The Hobbit is better written than LOTR. With that I agree.

I feel sorry for the author of that article. It must be so tough to live life with a 15 second attention span.

There is a place for the exhaustive, hyper-detailed worlds of Tolkien, Star Wars, and Star Trek. The existence of that level of detail does not mean that there aren't plenty of fantasy stories being told for the less "scholarly" consumer. All the super hero movies, Star Wars, and Star Trek, though they are part of a bigger story and have plenty of background material, are fine as standalone movies. There is plenty of fantasy/sci-fi/dystopia for the casual reader and watcher. I'm not judging that person; sometimes that's what I want even though I've also read the Silmarillion and can extemporaneously describe Garm Bel Iblis's personality in detail.

LOTR, while a masterwork in both text and film (in my opinion), isn't exactly a 90 minute roller coaster ride for the Transformers crowd. I don't think much of The Hobbit as a movie; I agree with the author that they took a perfectly charming story and stretched it all out of shape, but I put that on
a) the studio's decision to make three movies that appeal to EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC
b) Jackson's willingness to write fan fiction to help fill in the extra 5 hours of screen time
c) Jackson and the studio not wanting to make a "less epic" followup movie. They might have trapped themselves a little bit by doing the epic first and leaving the children's book for last.

It's not evidence that "the nerds" are forcing every movie to have an encyclopedic backstory.

After all this time, it all makes so much sense. Peter was literally "winging it" while making this trilogy. No storyboards, very little production design, and having no idea how to do the Battle. Honestly surprised they released this and were so candid about it.