"Lament for Thorin Oakenshield" Topic

Thorin is tallest, but he is also supposed to be the oldest! (See Timeline for Durin's Line in ROTK) Peter Jackson did such a good job casting the LOTR to match Tolkien description and Alan Lee's artwork. Why did Thorin have to become sexy for this movie? He should be old, have a long beard, be angry, greedy. Who is to say that Dwarves can't get stronger as they age. I have high hopes for this movie, but am initially disappointed by the portrayal of my favorite Tolkien character.

Exactly! This guy is the best. Couldn't they have gotten Ron Pearlman, or Clint Eastwood or William Shatner or somebody that looks and acts like this guy.

I prepared to be disappointed on more counts than just that. Whatever faults of the LOTR movies, the casting was very well done. I think Jackson is going off the rails for the hobbit.

Lower your expectations. My friend, who is an unabashed fan of the LOTR movies, went to a screening (with Peter Jackson in attendance, actually) last Monday and was PROFOUNDLY disappointed. He said it was "Star Wars prequels bad".

The early critical reviews are a mixed bag, but the consensus is that it's far too long and has far too much exposition.

Not surprising, given that they're stretching it out over three movies.

The movie isn't out, and you already hate it. Jump to conclusions much?
*Appearance* is nowhere near as important as story, character and acting. I'm less concerned about what he looks like and more about whether he believably can match the complexity of Thorin— a gifted leader and warrior, who is nevertheless often hotheaded, vengeful, calculating and overly prideful. That's no mean feat to accomplish. If the actor does it well— and I like what glimpses I've seen— I couldn't care less about whether or not he has a long silver beard.

As it is, as written Thorin is a notably athletic part— he's the dwarf that puts up the best fight against the trolls (single-handedly), leads the battle against the goblins, and wades into the fray at the Battle of Five Armies like a four-foot tall Conan. So I'm not surprised they went with a somewhat younger actor for the part. In any case, he looks to be in the 50-60 range (for a human), which, given dwarven lifespans, is probably the appropriate comparison level. Thorin in the novel may have been "old," but he wasn't an octogenarian.

(Seriously, William Shatner? "Your love for the halflings' leaf has clouded your mind…")

I have a reviewer's showing tonight.
I'll let you know.

We made an action packed whimsical kid's book into a long ponderous tortured expanded blockbuster trilogy for adults who liked LOTR. Y'know, as ye doooooo.

I always thought that the guy who played Gowran in star trek would make a good dwarf.

Why am I reminded of people who hated "Patton", because the tanks were wrong?

If Peter Jackson gets Bilbo's tank wrong he will receive a very sternly worded letter from me John, fear not!

Okay, I would like to recant on William Shatner, but if I had the money and time that Jackson had I would certainly have cast a more veteran looking person.

(Seriously, William Shatner? "Your love for the halflings' leaf has clouded your mind…")

Speaking of Patton. George C. Scott would have been perfect for the role of Thorin!

No, I think Shatner would have been perfect.

Whine Whine Whine! You will enjoy the movie with what you take into it….or not. Some people have to many sticks and only one place they can keep them…iykwim!

This is not just the Hobbit. Yes Jackson is expanding it with the Apenddixes. Remember this is his vision of it not yours so to compare it with what you imagined is just setting yourself up to be disappointed. Sheesh!

I'm looking forward to it and escape. Not gonna critique it to death.

I am just glad that in my lifetime two of my childhood dreams came true (a LOTR movie and a Hobbit movie). Not many people get that!

I think the op has a point, Tolkien describes the dwarves quite well so to have them nothing like that is not on. What would people think if Jackson made a film about Patton but had him as an 18 year old wearing a totally wrong uniform?

It seems to me that Jackson seems to think that Middle Earth was created by him now…

Mick

Star Wars prequels bad

The first thing I thought of when I saw a picture of the Goblin King was Jabba The Hutt. And a release from GW where most of the box is wooden planks. I am sure that one will sell like hotcakes.
But there is a load of genuine Tolkien material that could be included in the three films. More than enough for three films. Unfortunately living in Australia the films never get released until after Christmas, which must cost a small fortune in lost merchandise sales.

I think Mick A is right. Jackson seems to think he created Middle Earth or at least is smarter and can do better than Tolkien. I never expected everything to look exactly how I pictured it when read the books. But I didn't expect Star Wars prequel gimmicks and World of War craft looking dwarves either.

It is unfair to judge a film unseen, but the early word isn't good and you'd be foolish to ignore some of the clear criticisms that have come out. The best I read was on Aint It Cool news where Mr Beaks said the story is being stretched too far, and you get cartography as narrative.

But for me the biggest warning sign was this:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tauriel

Let us not forget that Tolkien based his "histories" on the notoriously halfling-centric "Red Book".
It shamelessly ignores events hapening elsewhere and to other races.
If Tauriel is ignored in the Red Book, there may be sinister reasons for this.

Harrumph.

We have to remember if the film studio took some of these comments into action then box office sales would be low = NO Hobbit movie.
In book to film with different fans sacrafices have to be made. I am glad dwarfs do not have coloured hoods with all singing like Disney. The Hobbit better made more matyre IMHO.

Something that's overlooked as well is that Jackson and co only have the rights to the Hobbit and the LOTR books, not the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales etc. They can only use materials found in those two books for the films.

Nah, its been established that Jackson is weaving in the Quest of Erebor from Unifinished Tales to link Hobbit to LOTR.

I have also seen in the previews, the dwarves declaring in Bag End that they were going to reclaim Erebor. I thought they were going to steal as much of their treasure back as possible. I know they have to turn a movie, but I always thought Thorin's coolest moment is when he turns from thief/adventurer into the King under the Mountain.

is the introduction of a female elf in the Hobbit worse than the sidlining of Glorfindel in the Lotr storyin favour of Arwyn?

Meanwhile, elsewhere on TMP, people complain that Hollywood never gives us anything new, just re-hashes old movies.

They managed to make 3 movies out of a Disneyland ride FCOL.

Meanwhile, elsewhere on TMP, people complain that Hollywood never gives us anything new, just re-hashes old movies.

In this case, they're re-hashing an old TV special instead. While the Hobbit may deserve a chance on the big screen (although three chances seem a bit much) it's still retreading old ground. Rather see something more original instead – how about an Elric movie? Or one of the other Eternal Champion incarnations? Or some of the Jirel of Joirey stories?

Heck, even a Sword of Shannara film would be more original than a Hobbit trilogy – and that's saying something.

Elric would be good – but you can keep yer Shannara.

I accept The Hobbit won't be as I would wish it – but I'm damn keen to see it. At least we should be spared Jackson's dire take on thje soldiers of Gondor (like his Easterlings – credit where credit is due).

Elric would be good – but you can keep yer Shannara.

Aw, c'mon, you know you want to see the mass riots when a Hobbit movie opens the same weekend as Sword of Shannara and their respective fans try to murder the unbelievers en masse.

And yes, while I've never really understood why, Brooks does have fans. :)

I'd actually rather have Jirel than Elric, but how about Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser? Hollywood sort of understands how to do buddy movies, might be easier for them.

Elric has his Monnglum, all the Eternal Champions have an eternal companion. I think Fafhrd would make the more up beat buddy movie though…

Jackson seems to think he created Middle Earth or at least is smarter and can do better than Tolkien.

He's got a contract to that effect, yes. LOTR would not have been made without changes, for better or worse, and although the Hobbit was more filmable as it stands, we'll just have to wait and see what he's done. It's not like PJ has let us down before.

Apart from King Kong, of course.

'It is his vision of it, not yours…'
Indeed, and safe to say it is not Tolkien's either, and that is the real shame. Typical: If you can't write your own story, use somebody else's and modify it to suit your own uninspired tastes because as an 'artist' (see: 'hack') you are above the judgement and tastes of all others (including the author of the story that you just 're-envisioned'). In the following debate, objectivity and reason are then swapped back and forth freely with subjectivity and blind loyalty (the old 'All absolute statements are false' gag, followed by some sort of personal attack or red-herring).
'Owning the rights' does not make one infallible, nor does it turn Jackson Pollock into Michelangelo.
Based upon the portrayal of Thorin (Aragorn Oakenshield), PJ's past record, and the three movies deal, I think it is a safe bet to say that these movies will be a farther cry from 'The Hobbit' than the LOTR movies were from 'LOTR'… without reading the reviews of 'experts' or having seen the movie yet. Still, I really hope it is not 'StarWars prequels bad'… That would be a tragedy of an even greater magnitude.

I think that a successful book can be "tweaked" to turn it into a movie as is always done and usually makes a successful movie. But to significantly change a successful book, I don't know about that. I don't have a problem with naming and creating a sub background for a wood elf warrior who is unnamed in the book. But to drastically change the appearance, motivation and backstory of one of the main characters (Thorin) concerns me. I will say to those that have disagreed with me, that I will still see the movie probably 3 times and I am hoping that it is fantastic. I hope that Richard Armitage is the the best version of Thorin.

Some of you make good points, but for me, this wins:

KTravlos: I am just glad that in my lifetime two of my childhood dreams came true (a LOTR movie and a Hobbit movie). Not many people get that!

I wonder if Jackson gets the irony, these films have turned him into a creative Saruman.

Elric has his Moonglum, all the Eternal Champions have an eternal companion. I think Fafhrd would make the more up beat buddy movie though…

Yeah, doing the Elric series right would make the inevitable "stabbed my pal to death with a demon sword and then blew up the universe and died" a bit of a downer for Hollywood's audiences. :)

Fafhrd, OTOH, I can see him doing beer endorsements, no problem.

Hopefully we have seen the worst. I'm not crazy about the dwarf casting and costumes, but I like Bilbo a lot, and Andy Serkis' Gollum and Ian McKellen's Gandalf are unrivaled. So on balance it still looks pretty good.

My expectations have already been somewhat lowered, and maybe that's a good thing. So, I think I will avoid the reviews from here on, and try to let the movie take me where it will.

"But now Tolkien sat and hearkened, and for a great while it seemed good to him, for in the music there were no flaws. But as the theme progressed, it came into the heart of Peter Jackson to interweave matters of his own imagining that were not in accord with the theme of Tolkien; for he sought therein to increase the power and glory of the part assigned to himself."

I'd actually rather have Jirel than Elric, but how about Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser?<\q>

Horrywood would be hard pressed to make this into a family movie I would want to see see. And even if they would make a decent movie out of it they would probably pull a John Carter on it and call it The Dynamic Duo or something…

Just wait 'til Mel Brooks makes "Bored of the Rings".

""But now Tolkien sat and hearkened, and for a great while it seemed good to him, for in the music there were no flaws. But as the theme progressed, it came into the heart of Peter Jackson to interweave matters of his own imagining that were not in accord with the theme of Tolkien; for he sought therein to increase the power and glory of the part assigned to himself."

And Peter Jackson was cast out beyond the doors of night, where his substantial royalty and licensing checks were sent. And he bought lots and lots of wonderful stuff with them. Thus ended the 6th age.

Some of you make good points, but for me, this wins:

KTravlos: I am just glad that in my lifetime two of my childhood dreams came true (a LOTR movie and a Hobbit movie). Not many people get that!

But we've had the Rankin-Bass and the Bakshi movies!

"Typical: If you can't write your own story, use somebody else's and modify it to suit your own uninspired tastes because as an 'artist' (see: 'hack') you are above the judgement and tastes of all others (including the author of the story that you just 're-envisioned')."

I guess Dvorak was a "Hack" because he took peasant songs and turned them into symphonies.

I understand your point, but the two media are so different you have to expect Jackson to imprint his own artism on Tolkein's story.

I have enjoyed what I've seen in the trailers and am quite looking forward to seeing it in a few days. No doubt I too shall notice small things I would have rather seen done differently. But 'twere foolish in the extreme for me to deny myself pleasure, great pleasure, by NITPICKING!!

Lafayette1834, Brilliant!!

Murvihill: yes, in that sense Dvorak could be considered a 'Hack'. There are two important differences, however:
1) Dvorak's music is at least as beautiful (albeit different from) the original melodies, and not in opposition to the content of those melodies (which is nowhere near as concrete as the storytelling of literature and movies, etc…) As such we are able to forgive his plagarism. The line between inspiration and plagarism has always been and will always be a fuzzy one. That's okay, it's the final product's form AND content (and where the credit is given!!!) that matters.
2) Language is full of connotations that are essential for communication concerning topics like this. Obviously I have a higher opinion of Dvorak's work than PJ's and the word 'hack' has been applied in a negative sense to the latter. If PJ had created a 'Hobbit' movie in accordance with the vision of the author (easily understood and well documented) then this negative analysis would not apply. Once again, content matters.
I fail to see how just because two mediums are different I should expect (allow?) Jackson to 'imprint his own artism' (imprint his own theme and content?)on the work. I am not trying to be snarky, but am genuinely trying to impress upon the reader that being an artist (and I love artists, believe me!) does NOT give one license to alter the vision/content/theme of a work that is advertised as another man's work but then 're-envisioned' by said artist… Write your own story! Many many fantasy films/books/stories have been inspired by Tolkien's work, but if you are going to stick so close to the original as to use the same title/plot/characters/etc… then departure from the authorial intent is an artistic failure ('hack').
Anyway, I hope that we all get some enjoyment out of PJ's film …. despite its failures. Indeed, I enjoy the old Hobbit cartoon, despite ITS failures (which are many, but not on the same level as PJ)… I better stop before I get mugged.

Seeing it on Sunday, made the mistake of watching some clips! Gah! Had to watch 'The Hunt for Gollum' to wash away the ridiculous goblin town fight footage.

"Where there's a whip, there's a way!"

YouTube link

Lost Pict

Oh god! Curse you to death and darkness! That tune's lodged in my head now! De dum dum dum, dum dedah!