"New Hobbit spoilers" Topic

link

Oh man, a giant rabbit-drawn sled. AWESOME! Peter Jackson is brilliant! This movie will be so much better than a boring old book!

…

No, seriously: giant rabbits pulling Radagast's sled. , Jackson, do you just hate Tolkien so much you wanted to destroy his works from the inside?

Giant…Rabbits?

Erm, I know Mr Jackson has to change some things and invent a lot of others… and I know Radagast was the Istari of the wild – he loved his wildlife did our Radagast…but RABBITS?! Really Peter?

It's Middle-earth old chum, not the Tellytubbies.

Now to be fair, The Hobbit has much more of a children's story/fairy tale feel to it than the later much darker LOTR, so perhaps, maybe, Peter is trying to tap into that – but GIANT BUNNIES??!!!!

Slightly OT: When I think of a film adaptation of The Great Gatsby, I usually do NOT think of a cross between Moulin Rouge (I am assuming the writer means the recent musical mash-up) and Hugo. I'm just saying.

That said, will the rabbits have nasty, big pointy teeth and a vicious streak a mile wide?

Now,
Playboy Bunnies would have been a tad more 'Howardish'.

Radagast with birds in his beard. Check.

Driving a rabbit-drawn sled. Check.

Bifur with an axe-head permanently embedded in his skull.

Check.

For Jackson, there is no "top" to go over, so he keeps sailing upwards into the ether.

I already miss Guillermo del Toro.

Of course there are giant rabbits! Whaddya think those giant eagles eat?

I personally love the 1980's metal band that is the dwarves…
*shrug*

Remember Scutatus that the Hobbit did originate as a tale Tolkien told the children at bed-time. Crafted to fit in the 'history' he was creating for Middle Earth.

As to the OP – Good Grief!

Yes – but there were no giant rabbits !

Giant Eagles – yes.

Giant Wolves – Yes.

Giant Spiders – Yes.

Giants – yes.

Giant Rabbits – what's up with this picture Doc ?

And Radagast's giant rabbits didn't get a mention in LOTR either !

I was actually starting to think they'd just film it "straight" this time. Oh well, I'll still go and see it so if he wants he can leave in the scene of the trolls on the giant communal lavatories……..whjat, you don't remmber that scene ? But it was hilarious…..

Giant Eagles gotta eat something.

I know how it started Goragrad. I know that Tolkien just set out writing a light fairy tale book on a whim, having doodled some words on a page, and had no idea where it would go when he started. I know it was published because a ten year old read it and loved it. It was only later, when writing the sequel, that Tolkien used some of the set up in the Hobbit to link it all up – and conceived the larger story arc that became LOTR. The lack of forethought with the Hobbit (and the gradual darkening of his style) resulted in certain discrepencies between the Hobbit and LOTR.

Mr Jackson does not have Tolkien's excuse of not knowing what world is being created yet. Having made over ten hours of Middle-earth epic already he is well aware of the setting, mood and style people will be expecting to see. I know the Hobbit is a different beast from LOTR but it's going to be very jarring (and could lose a lot of audience who think they know what to expect) if Mr Jackson takes the "children's story" too far. If viewers go in thinking they are watching LOTR the prologue, epic movie light vs darkness stuff in the sinister world of Middle-earth – and instead get dance routines and giant fluffy bunnies… well, let's just say I don't see many people taking that well (as indeed they're not). If giant bunnies pulling sleds are typical of too much content in these two films I fear they're unlikely to be the massive hit LOTR was.

Unless you are ten.

Oh get over yourselves! Jackson is the only director that could get this picture made. I love the book, but the movie does not need to be copy of it. Besides, it can't be. A book is a story imagined in the reader's mind. You as reader have envisioned a world that Jackson nor any other director could ever reproduce. This movie will be his vision, not yours or mine. Enjoy the product for what it might be. I will go with an open mind and see what he comes up with. No other film has moved me the way Jackson's version of LOTR did. It was epic, monumental and important. It was not everything I imagined from my reading of the books, but I didn't expect it to be!

Of course changes have to be made – I've always been the first to argue that myself (check my posts, you'll see).

But come on, giant bunnies?

For the record I think LOTR was a true epic, and for me some of the best movies ever made (it's certainly hard to find other films with such passion, creativity and attention to detail) – despite the fact that Jackson made so many changes (especially in ROTK). They're not entirely faithful to the books – but he made it great regardless (mostly).

Similarly, I know the Hobbit is his baby to do with as he wishes, and the two films are not going to be a carbon copy of the book by any means ( they couldn't be – it just wouldn't work) but he needs to be careful too. Not everyone liked what he did with LOTR – he got away with it because he produced such an epic masterpiece. But if LOTR made him, the Hobbit could just as easily break him. He needs to be careful. There's too much being invested for it to be a laughing stock and/or a flop. He needs to deliver and I'm not sure introducing giant bunnies is going to do him any favours.

I was going to rant about Jackson's supposed "visionary genius" in including giant bunnies and how we're going to have to pony up twice for this, but it gave me a headache and made me sad.

Giant Bunnies??????????????????????????????????????
I mourn, I truly mourn.

I can only hope that these reports of sled pulling giant bunnies are inaccurate. Perhaps those who have actually seen the material…er, misinterpreted what they saw? Maybe they weren't actually rabbits?

I can only hope.

P.S. Peter Jackson has a particular vision of Middle-earth – and it is indeed the one we all now think of when we think of Middle-earth on the big screen. But I doubt very much that he is the only Director/Producer in the world with vision enough to pull it off. For one thing he had a lot of help from the likes of WETA and John Howe and Alan Lee, amongst others – it was the team Jackson got together that gave us those masterpieces – not the one man alone. (Surely they can't all be letting him use giant rabbits?) And for another, with someone else at the helm the vision would be different – but that different vision would not necesarily be any more wrong than Jackson's – it might even get it more right! (at times, that would not be difficult).

Peter Jackson is an incredibly talented artist and he has made Middle-earth "his own", but he is not the one and only option. Others could and would make Middle-earth "their own" just as well instead of him – and may well do so after him.

For my money, it is actualy WETA that is the all important factor that makes these movies. So long as WETA is involved, with their passion and their attention to detail and their amazing creativity and craftsmanship, I am reassured that it is more likely to be ok.

Yes – but there were no giant rabbits !

Just because we didn't hear about giant rabbits doesn't mean they don't exist.

I would agree on WETA. They make the vision come alive. Amazing work! I would so like to carve trees for these guys. Some things can get cut by the editor, so the step that comes at the end of the process could include some tightening and trimming.(especially things that don't add to the story) Of course, we will get the directors cut later that might include scenes of giant bunnies. :)

"Bunnies", jack rabbits are not. And ROUS can be very creepy. I think half a dozen ROUS that are not fluffy bunnies would look very scary. Imagine what a giant jack rabbit could do! It would start resembling Tenniel's Jabber Wock….

Did somebody say giant jackrabbit?

one rabbit to rule them all

YouTube link

I'd like a sled pulled by giant bunnies myself, personally. And I'd like it as a mini to use for my command figures.