I was originally on board with the idea of expanding the Hobbit to fill in the back story of Lord of the Rings. I always thought it was odd that Tolkien just threw in this world shatteringly important event that happens off page.

But so far the two movies have been disappointing. Too long and too many improbable chase scenes. The whole pointless "dwarves vs Smaug" fight scene was just awful.

Holmes and Watson were decent enough in their scenes, but yeah, there was just way too much filler.

The kind of sarcastic, awkward "The Office"-style humour they introduced into the first Hobbit movie was a real turn-off for me, as was the sloppy, rushed-looking CGI (there's a scene at Rivendell where they didn't even bother replacing the scale doubles' faces with the actors' faces) and the odd habit of having the characters fall hundreds of feet onto solid rock without breaking any bones (this happens at least three times in An Unexpected Journey).

The Hobbit is a children's book, and doesn't meet the tone of its sequel very well, even after Tolkien's revised edition. It is a lighter book than the Lord of the Rings, in every sense, and the first film showed that it really can't bear the weight of either the padding PJ has added to the story, nor the efforts to bring a more Rings-style feeling of epic seriousness to what is a small, selfish story about some dwarves looking for gold. The epic/serious tone constantly conflicts with the childish slapstick humour, meaning that neither really work.

It would have been much better as a single 2.5-hour film. I dread to think how much wandering about, awkward humour, diversions from the story, too-weighty extracts from the LOTR appendices and (oh goody) dull Elven love story padding is to come in the next 6 hours of this trilogy.

He's the fan of all time. He bested the Tolkien expert Peter Jackson hired for the LOTR trilogy. Jackson said, "I have never met a bigger Tolkien geek in my life."
http://www.accesshollywood.com/peter-jackson-stephen-colbert-is-the-biggest-tolkien-geek-ive-ever-met_article_71855

Captures my thoughts on Tolkien in general.

I don't know if he prepped for it or not, but he is a HUGE Tolkien fan, and its not out of the realm of possibility that he knew it off the cuff. Seems likely that it was real, given Franco's response.

As much as I was excited to see Guillermo Del Toro's take on the Hobbit, and it would have been a spectacular visual treat, I am so happy that it's in Peter Jackson's hands.

He has a deft touch of the light hearted next to the gut wrenching and epic.

The man was born to make all of the Tolkien movies.

I will be doing my damndest to find a theatre that shows it in 48fps too, f*ck off all those who can't handle watching things at anything other than 24fps

Tolkien actually wrote a lot of music for the books it was in one of the appendices I believe but this sounds totally awesome.

I don't know why the fuck he accepted the role when he dislikes Tolkien, probably much more than his regency-ish tone lets slip.

I liked Ian as Gandalf, although I thought the books were a bit better than the movies, however, I dont like that Ian is encouraging thousands (millions?) of people to deface the bible, a criminal act when it is other peoples property btw, and which is completely irresponsible and immature, not to mention ridiculous. What's going on is that Ian doesn't like that look in the mirror, so he tries to shatter the reflection.

>> ^holymackerel013:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Professor Tolkien would not approve. Ian obviously feels threatened by Gods judgement on his lifestyle, and well he should be, but to boast about defacing the bible on television takes it to a whole other level of criminality and rebellion. All I have to say is that you reap what you sow.

What?....Gandalf is...GAY!? OH NO...why did nobody ever tell me! I guess I'm not allowed to watch my favourite movies & I've been so excited about the upcoming Hobbit movies. Why God? Why does he have to be gay?

>"gods judgement?" You mean mans judgement.

No, I mean Gods judgement. Mans judgement is relative, Gods judgement is absolute.

It is clear beyond doubt that the bible was man made and the "morals" contained in it have, for the most part, been disgarded as bronze age fear mongering and control.

You have discarded them because you're suppressing the truth. God even proved to you that you have a soul and you pretend it was a mental artifact so you don't have to deal with reality.

However, if you still believe in stoning for adultery, working on the sabbath, females not being virgins on their wedding night, cursing your parents, "honour" killings, etc, etc, etc, then go live in a country that still practices such barbarity.

If you're going to criticize the bible then take the time to understand it. Go learn the difference between the levitical and melchizedek priesthood and then get back to me.

This is 2012CE not 12CE, and the morals we adhere to now are the product of concensus, debate and intellectual discourse.

What is good and evil do not change, and if you believe they could change, it means that anything that you consider evil could potentially become good. However, we all know some things are absolutely wrong and always will be, because everyone has a God given conscience which tells them that.

Of course they will change as we change, it's called evolving, you might enjoy giving it a try.

There is nothing new under the sun. Man is as unspiritual and worldly as he ever has been.


>> ^A10anis:
>> ^shinyblurry:
Professor Tolkien would not approve. Ian obviously feels threatened by Gods judgement on his lifestyle, and well he should be, but to boast about defacing the bible on television takes it to a whole other level of criminality and rebellion. All I have to say is that you reap what you sow.

"gods judgement?" You mean mans judgement. It is clear beyond doubt that the bible was man made and the "morals" contained in it have, for the most part, been disgarded as bronze age fear mongering and control. However, if you still believe in stoning for adultery, working on the sabbath, females not being virgins on their wedding night, cursing your parents, "honour" killings, etc, etc, etc, then go live in a country that still practices such barbarity. This is 2012CE not 12CE, and the morals we adhere to now are the product of concensus, debate and intellectual discourse. Of course they will change as we change, it's called evolving, you might enjoy giving it a try.

Pwned by intellect.>> ^A10anis:

>> ^shinyblurry:
Professor Tolkien would not approve. Ian obviously feels threatened by Gods judgement on his lifestyle, and well he should be, but to boast about defacing the bible on television takes it to a whole other level of criminality and rebellion. All I have to say is that you reap what you sow.

"gods judgement?" You mean mans judgement. It is clear beyond doubt that the bible was man made and the "morals" contained in it have, for the most part, been disgarded as bronze age fear mongering and control. However, if you still believe in stoning for adultery, working on the sabbath, females not being virgins on their wedding night, cursing your parents, "honour" killings, etc, etc, etc, then go live in a country that still practices such barbarity. This is 2012CE not 12CE, and the morals we adhere to now are the product of concensus, debate and intellectual discourse. Of course they will change as we change, it's called evolving, you might enjoy giving it a try.

Tolkien hated allegory.

Edit: Err, I should say he had an emphatic dislike for it, as far as his own writing was concerned.

>> ^A10anis:

>> ^shinyblurry:
Professor Tolkien would not approve. Ian obviously feels threatened by Gods judgement on his lifestyle, and well he should be, but to boast about defacing the bible on television takes it to a whole other level of criminality and rebellion. All I have to say is that you reap what you sow.

"gods judgement?" You mean mans judgement. It is clear beyond doubt that the bible was man made and the "morals" contained in it have, for the most part, been disgarded as bronze age fear mongering and control. However, if you still believe in stoning for adultery, working on the sabbath, females not being virgins on their wedding night, cursing your parents, "honour" killings, etc, etc, etc, then go live in a country that still practices such barbarity. This is 2012CE not 12CE, and the morals we adhere to now are the product of concensus, debate and intellectual discourse. Of course they will change as we change, it's called evolving, you might enjoy giving it a try.


Also, ironically, it is true that Tolkien & Lewis were indeed great friends as well as Christians; however, Tolkien used to give his friend quite a bit of crap about Lewis incorporating so many ideas/stories from the Bible into his own fantasy writings.