"The Hobbit Tolkien Edit" Topic

When I watched the Hobbit films at the cinema, my first thought was – I hope someone edits this into a single film, with all the pointless extra stuff (radagast, Tauriel, Dol Guldor, etc) taken out – and now somebody has. It is called the Tolkien Edit, as it sticks much more closely to the plot of the book, focusing on Bilbo's story.
I've just finished watching it, and I've been very impressed. The 9 hours has been reduced to about 4, and it is a much better telling of the story. Pretty much everything I didn't like about the films has been removed, and what is left is a good film. I have the original films on DVD, but I can't see myself ever watching them again, and when my children are old enough to watch it, this is the version they will see. If you like LOTR but didn't like the hobbit films, you will probably much prefer this version.
There are a few moments when there is a bit of a jump in the story (for example going straight from the trolls to rivendell) but mostly you would not know that this wasn't as the director intended. I highly recommend having a look at it.
You can download it from here:
tolkieneditor.wordpress.com

Fascinating. I agree one hundred percent. I've hoped aloud, not jokingly, that P. Jackson's "director's cut" version will be c. three to four hours long and excise all of the redundant, repetitive, bloated crap from his "trilogy", including everything that this "Tolkien Edit" purports to have achieved. I'm waiting as I tap away for my download to complete. My wife wants to watch the final movie, but I haven't been able to gather the fortitude to see it again. Perhaps this "good parts version" will suffice? Hope so!…

I really good idea. After experiencing all three letdowns in the theater, I'm not eager to repeat even part of the experiencing. However, this is intriguing. I think the LoTR trilogy was great largely because it condensed 3 great big books into 3 great movies. Maybe 3 mediocre movies can be condensed into one pretty good movie.

Also, I am surprised this guy hasn't been served with papers yet.

Thanks for the lead – looking forward to watching this (before it's taken down by a lawyer).

Doug

P. Jackson needs taking down a few big notches. He's the RL version of Thorin Oakenshield: too drunk on his success and he's lost his vision.

This fan edit is good. I just finished it in one sitting.

The only really weak bit is losing Fili and Kili without showing that they died in battle. They are simply missing at the end with no explanation….

@ MM

I am impressed by your efforts.

The only really weak bit is losing Fili and Kili without showing that they died in battle

That would only have needed a 10 second sequence to establish their fate: something PJ could have shot in half a day.

I am saddened by the fact that if PJ had of shot half a dozen bridging scenes, he'd have had a wonderful movie(singular) & not just for the die hard fans of the book but for kids, indeed for any movie goer.

… (before it's taken down by a lawyer).

This sort of bravery fascinates me. I am trying to work out how a court would find in favor of P. Jackson and Company. The fan edit used only DVDs that were purchased by the fan/editor. He used good equipment to excise the parts, tie over the edited sections with musical score, adjust the color so that it remains consistent, and voila! you have a completed edit that is smooth.

How exactly does this hurt P. Jackson and Company? How is it a copyright violation, exactly? All of the content is given full credit where credit is due, without adding a single "extra credit" to the fan who did the cutting, splicing and cleaning up, etc. He's not selling it, or undercutting P. Jackson's bloated "trilogy" in any way, because anyone seeing the "Tolkien Edit" first will be interested in seeing the "deleted scenes". In fact, it could be shown that the existence of the trimmed, "Tolkien Edit", increases sales for P. Jackson and Company, by increasing exposure to the original full-length versions. And nobody gets any monetary gain from that other than P. Jackson and Company….

How does it hurt PJ?

I've bought DVDs of the first two Hobbit movies. If I could access this I won't buy the moderately horrible Part 3.

Except a fair number of people can watch this for free only and never buy the DVDs themselves. That's nearly always the assumption made in court cases like this.

-Will

I bet that the ramifications of "take that down at once!", are widespread. A bit like suing gun manufacturers for how their products are misused, bleeding over into suits against car and knife manufacturers. "Nobody" wants to go there!

To make a "Torrent" illegal might be a bit more clear, vis-à-vis "this particular instance", but by the time this all clears the courts, there will be so many versions of "The Hobbit" on the Net that have been created and disseminated that any single court case will be like patching a tiny hole in a dike.

P. Jackson and Company only have themselves to blame. They overreached to make those big bucks, and ed off a few million Middle-earth fans in the process. So annoying is the bloat in "The Hobbit" films that it goads those with equipment and skills to "make it all better". They can't help it. If I had the skills and equipment, I'd have probably turned out half a dozen different permutations of a "Tolkien Edit" myself by now – and spread them all over the Internet to be enjoyed for free.

The ramifications of this kind of liberty are enormous. That is why the so-called gate-keepers of society (self-appointed at that) want to regulate the Net to virtual death, vis-à-vis the freedom of expression and access. That'd be the only way to eliminate this sort of "wild west" approach to the unpopulated and unexplored "frontier" that is the Internet. Get it civilized, under control, and paid for down to the minutest details/use, and there will be no more "piracy"….

What a great idea! I'd kind of thought that the movies could easily be distilled down to 1 volume of about 4 hours or less…same as each of the 3 books.

As for the legality, it is a bit suspect. Though none of the movies are shown in the entirety, they do show a good amount which may or may not constitute "fair use."

I do wish the dwarves in the kitchen "that's what Bilbo Baggins hates!" song had been left in … always liked that in the book, and though it worked out pretty well in the movie.

Doug

It's not just a violation of PJ's rights, it's also a violation of the scriptwriters' rights, the actors' rights, the score composer's rights, the various designers's rights and so on and so forth. Literally hundreds if not thousands of individuals are contractually due "residuals" (effectively royalty payments) for their work on the films. That payment is typically triggered *whenever* the films are sold or shown as a public performance (including television, etc.), though more likely there is a set legal license fee that covers any potential performances or use in a given year, and the residuals are simply derived from the total amount of licenses sold for a year. (Libraries, for example, will pay a license fee for productions they carry in their catalog, and may pay additional license fees for productions they potentially wish to show as public performances, such as on a family movie night or similar event.)

As for the short work, as it substantially uses the work of others, and In fact contains no original art whatsoever, except in the interpretation of the edit, it is indeed entirely in violation of the various copyrights held by the actors, directors, etc. who created the original films, and represents a potential loss of income to them through lost residuals which are their rightful compensation for their work. It is a violation of their artistic rights at every level, whether one likes or dislikes either the original films or the re-edit.
Frankly, what PJ has released is what PJ intended to convey, and it is his right to preserve that. Anyone wishing to produce a better film should do the effort and work at the same level as PJ's work and the work of his assorted colleagues and employees, not crib off of what he has done.
You want a better Hobbit? Then get the rights legally and do the work, paying the people involved for the work they have done.

As an excercise in editing, this may be interesting, but the individual had no legal or artistic right to do it.

As an excercise in editing, this may be interesting, but the individual had no legal or artistic right to do it.

Well, I would argue that he had every right to DO it, but no right to disribute it.

Doug

Myself and the family watched most of this at the weekend (at over 4 hours it was a little long for some of the younger ones) and loved it. I would really recommend this for anyone who loved the book and felt majorly let down by the trilogy.

I really disliked the trilogy and was amazingly surprised how good the core of the production is; this has probably become my all time favourite fantasy movie.

Perhaps down the road PJ can do this himself and the studios can release it so we can all watch it guilt free?

Perhaps down the road PJ can do this himself and the studios can release it so we can all watch it guilt free?

TBO I'm not overly scrupulous about watching it (I did buy the first two movies before I decided it wasn't worth it) but I'd also prefer if there was an official version.

So annoying is the bloat in "The Hobbit" films that it goads those with equipment and skills to "make it all better".

Exactly. The fact that the films could have hours removed, with only a few minor inconsistencies or jumps in the resulting film shows how much bloat there was.

TBO I'm not overly scrupulous about watching it (I did buy the first two movies before I decided it wasn't worth it) but I'd also prefer if there was an official version.

My thoughts also. I paid to see two of them at the cinema and have two of them on DVD, so I don't feel bad about downloading and watching a fan edit, whatever the legality of it.

I paid for and watched, in the theaters, all three films. So I don't feel the slightest "guilt" in watching this "Tolkien Edit".

I only hope the P. Jackson knows about this, and is smart enough to create his own bridge work to remove the inconsistencies, and releases his own "director's cut", unprecedented in its brevity instead of adding on further bloat. Alas, I believe my hope is vain. P. Jackson does not allow that he created a ponderous, over-lengthy POS. So he will sue those who cut up his wonderfulness and made something closer to what fans of the book wanted all along. Then release his "director's cut", making it even longer yet.

If P. Jackson in fact did something like this "Tolkien Edit", it would sell like crazy, and probably one of the first buyers would be the creator of this edit. "My work is done", he might as well say, in that event….