Jackson to do The Hobbit, after all?

[tomchick]

Five Armies Extended Edition rated R!?

http://filmratings.com/downloads/cara_rating_bulletin.pdf

What? Why?

I’m guessing CG blood.

-Tom

[Brad_Grenz]

Extended flashback to the skinny dipping at Rivendale.

[mok]

You will all be disappointed at this marketing trick when you discover Gandalf uses the F-Word…

[Dave_Markell]

I love/hate seeing this thread bumped. It contains some of my all-time favorite QT3 discussions, but it’s also about the most disappointing films I’ve ever seen. Well, I saw two of them, anyway, and only paid for one. As a huge Tolkien nerd, I’ve been waiting for a great treatment of this book for more than 40 years. I’m still waiting.

[TimElhajj]

You will all be disappointed at this marketing trick when you discover Gandalf uses the F-Word…

Frodo?

[Rightbug]

I love/hate seeing this thread bumped. It contains some of my all-time favorite QT3 discussions, but it’s also about the most disappointing films I’ve ever seen. Well, I saw two of them, anyway, and only paid for one. As a huge Tolkien nerd, I’ve been waiting for a great treatment of this book for more than 40 years. I’m still waiting.

The fan edit that someone posted up thread was 2/3’s amazing. His handling of the first two movies was pretty much exactly what I wanted out of a film adaptation. It was a masterful bit of editing fixing almost everything I hated. At times it almost felt like magic (He fixed the flight from Goblin Town which I would have thought was impossible using existing footage.) Unfortunately, his edit of the third movie was done before the Blu-Ray released and feels rushed and incoherent. I hope he comes back to it now that the Blu-Ray is out.

Here’s the link:

"There and Back Again" - A Hobbit's Cut

I have not seen the other three hour edit:

http://definitivehobbitcut.tumblr.com/post/109584038137/there-and-back-again-big-update

I may check it out at some point but I’m so enamored with the first one I linked, I haven’t gotten around to it yet.

Edit: Ah ha! I just read the second link and discovered that these two fan editors decided to collaborate on their final draft, taking the best of both edits, so that seems to be the one to download.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

I love/hate seeing this thread bumped.

I’ve enjoyed reading your comments, not to mention John’s and Desslock’s.

The series was such a missed opportunity.

[lordkosc]

Ah yes, extended editions, I am ready!

[Don_Quixote]

Rightbug, thanks for the links. I was so disappointed in the first two that I never got around to seeing the third. I knew some enterprising fan editors would take up the task of doing a “just the book” version, which is what I want to see. This sounds like just the ticket.

[Daagar]

Had no idea these fan edits existed. Grabbing the one from the second link to check out this weekend. A Bilbo-focused movie with no Kimli/Freckles stuff? Yes please.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

I’m an hour into the fan edit - it’s vastly improved, but you’ll notice a few continuity issues.

edit1,

I’m at 1:33 and I’ve experienced only two cringers. The plate throwing scene, and Beorn’s introduction. Dislike of those aside, it’s possible to actually enjoy this version of the Hobbit.

[Dave_Markell]

I’ve enjoyed reading your comments, not to mention John’s and Desslock’s.

Thank you, o burning citrus. It’s been a fun thread.

The series was such a missed opportunity.

That it was.

[Dave_Markell]

Today’s bumping of this thread made me want a refresher on its history. Start to finish, it’s a great read, and there were some dead-on predictions about how the films would turn out. Desslock and that Dave Markell guy really nailed it, even when they thought there were going to just be two movies and no bridge film instead of three:

The Hobbit is well-suited to be a stand alone film. A single movie wouldn’t cram the storyline of the book at all, whereas two films will stretch it out. The content of the extra events also worries me now. There’s a great deal of material in Tolkien that could be used to make a “bridge film” faithful to the books. By contrast, the only event that occured offscreen during the course of The Hobbit is the White Council’s attack on Dol Guldur. I’m fearful that Jackson will decide that’s not enough and pad it with a bunch of bad “Gandalf falls off a cliff” scenes of his own invention, much like the the bad “Aragorn falls off a cliff” scenes we got in the LOTR trilogy.

My main concern with this movie isn’t the casting - it’s a fear that Jackson has gone Lucas.

He made a really solid Fellowship of the Ring, and directors cut of Two Towers - like Lucas and Star Wars/Empire.

Return of the King had some of the best stuff in the series, but all of it was filmed pre-release of Fellowship of the Ring – the stuff Jackson added in afterwards was all terrible (the bouncing on the bed scene, some of over-the-top Denethor stuff) and his cuts were nonsensical and damaged the film (removing Saruman’s fate, when he was the only “tangible” villain in the story; removing the confrontation between Gandalf as leader of the Minas Tirith forces and the Witch king, leader of the attackers).

…and then came King Kong, in which Jackson really continued his indulgences to the detriment of the film (and his edits for the theatrical version were, again, strange and weakened the film - like the swamp scene, which was perhaps the best creature scene in the movie). King Kong was just a bloated, self-indulgent mess that was far worse than the movie it was remaking.

So I’m really concerned that the Hobbit(s) will be a Star Wars-prequel level disappointment. Bah.

[AustinArlitt]

I love/hate seeing this thread bumped. It contains some of my all-time favorite QT3 discussions, but it’s also about the most disappointing films I’ve ever seen. Well, I saw two of them, anyway, and only paid for one. As a huge Tolkien nerd, I’ve been waiting for a great treatment of this book for more than 40 years. I’m still waiting.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who was so apathetic I didn’t even bother to see the third film.

[tomchick]

The third one is actually the best, and arguably worth seeing if you were bored out of your skull by the first two. It’s just wall-to-wall CG fighting sequences, some of them pretty cool.

-Tom

[Woolen_Horde]

The third one is actually the best, and arguably worth seeing if you were bored out of your skull by the first two. It’s just wall-to-wall CG fighting sequences, some of them pretty cool.

-Tom

Ugh, I finally saw the third one on Blu-Ray a couple months ago. Those “battle scenes” bored the hell out of me. The movie simply would not end.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

Ugh, I finally saw the third one on Blu-Ray a couple months ago. Those “battle scenes” bored the hell out of me. The movie simply would not end.

Si.

Do you remember the lense flare era? It was the overtop feature of the week for a while there. Every game had to have it.

Eventually we realized that it was a bit silly and toned it down to something sensible. You don’t even notice it’s there anymore.

I feel that way about film CGI, the Hobbit being a good example of that.

We haven’t realized that restraint is a virtue yet.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who was so apathetic I didn’t even bother to see the third film.

I rented the Hobbit when it hit release, and even then I fast forwarded through a fair bit of it.

The fan edit certainly makes it much more watchable, but you do run into continuity issues. The bigger issue is that it remains a Jackson film with the swelling music and over the top directorial cues. More critically, those battle scenes at the end are a bit of a mess. If you like CGI - you’ll be entertained, but if you’ve grown weary of it. You’re going to tune out immediately.

When I hit that bit I started thinking about my laundry.

By the time I came back the movie was done, but that was fine with me.

[Profanicus]

I feel that way about film CGI, the Hobbit being a good example of that.

We haven’t realized that restraint is a virtue yet.

I think we may have, finally and thankfully. The backlash has started, with a couple of recent examples trumpeting the return to more practical effects including Fury Road and The Force Awakens.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who was so apathetic I didn’t even bother to see the third film.

I haven’t seen the third film yet either, and I’m not sure I ever will.

[tomchick]

I think we may have, finally and thankfully. The backlash has started, with a couple of recent examples trumpeting the return to more practical effects including Fury Road and The Force Awakens.

Wait, what? Practical effects in Force Awakens? Actually, I don’t think I want to know. I’ll wait and find out for myself. But at this point, I flat out don’t believe that they’re doing it with practical effects instead of CG.

But I do think people would be pretty surprised at how much CG was in Fury Road. Warner Bros. really sold this idea that it was all practical effects as part of the marketing, but that’s a lot of hooey. The thing about Fury Road is that the CG is just really well done.

-Tom

[AustinArlitt]

I think Star Wars is just like Fury Road, in that they actually built lots of physical props & sets (even that little BB-8 guy is a real droid who can roll out on set & everything), and then they layer the CG on top of that.

As opposed to the prequels, which were literally filmed with actors on green screens for the most part.

The third one is actually the best, and arguably worth seeing if you were bored out of your skull by the first two. It’s just wall-to-wall CG fighting sequences, some of them pretty cool.

-Tom

The only scenes I can even recall liking, or recall at all for that matter, were the unexpected party, the riddles in the cave, and the opening conversation with Smaug, which petered out (pun intended?) into boring action all too quickly.

I don’t think I can handle any more forgettable action.