The Hobbit movie(s) anticipation thread

[fluiddruid]

I'm super pumped for this movie. I have been for awhile, but in October I was in New Zealand and managed to be on the Hobbiton set the day after filming completed. It really changed the look of the trailers for me to have sudden jolts of "Hey, I was standing right there!" </brag>

I loved the song and the hint of the trolls that we got. I do think Thorin looks a bit weird -- awfully young and not all that dwarvenly -- but I'll give the actor a chance. No looks at Smaug but that's not surprising, they wanted to tease with Gollum who more people are familiar with. I also think it's awesome that Stephen Fry is in it.

[teela brown]

Originally Posted by GuanoLad

As we hadn't seen too many Tolkien dwarfs in LOTR, we have very little to compare.

By the way, is it dwarfs or dwarves in Tolkien's writing?

dwarves

Thorin Oakenshield is almost handsome - not something I'd expect in a Tolkien dwarf.

[Quasimodem]

I'm jealous that my friend Icewolf lives in such a beautiful country and gets to see all that wonderful scenery!

Hey, sweetie!

Q

[teela brown]

Originally Posted by N9IWP

There is definitely a glimpse of troll feet / shins.

TORN's frame by frame analysis:
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...5769820&type=3

Brian

Some dedicated fan actually managed to capture a full image of one:

Stone troll

[N9IWP]

Originally Posted by GuanoLad

As we hadn't seen too many Tolkien dwarfs in LOTR, we have very little to compare.

By the way, is it dwarfs or dwarves in Tolkien's writing?

Originally Posted by JRRT

It may be observed that in this book as in The Hobbit the form dwarves is used, although the dictionaries tell us that the plural of dwarf is dwarfs. It should be dwarrows (or dwerrows), if singular and plural had each gone its own way down the years, as have man and men, or goose and geese. But we no longer speak of a dwarf as often as we do of a man, or even of a goose

Brian

[Quasimodem]

I miss Tom Bombadil and Goldberry!

Q

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Quasimodem

I miss Tom Bombadil and Goldberry!

Q

Tim Benzedrine and Hashberry.


oh god oh god the rush

[Quasimodem]

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant

Tim Benzedrine and Hashberry.


oh god oh god the rush

"Give me Librium or give me Meth!" ------ unknown, the 60's.

Quasi

[Untoward_Parable]

Has someone linked the trailer here yet? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=BDUhRWwta7E Looks sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by Untoward_Parable

Has someone linked the trailer here yet? http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=BDUhRWwta7E Looks sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!

Uh, yes. A few times.

[Silophant]

Originally Posted by kenobi 65

That's my current understanding, as well. That would explain certain scenes in the trailer (I suppose I should spoiler them)...

SPOILER:

Gandalf walking around in ruins by himself, staff in one hand, and the sword Glamdring in the other. Also, the presence of Galadriel in the trailer...she doesn't appear in the book at all, but other canon established that she was in the White Council.

Along the same lines,

SPOILER:

Christopher Lee's been confirmed as Saruman, and he's also in the White Council, but not The Hobbit.

[Bridget Burke]

Originally Posted by fluiddruid

I'm super pumped for this movie. I have been for awhile, but in October I was in New Zealand and managed to be on the Hobbiton set the day after filming completed. It really changed the look of the trailers for me to have sudden jolts of "Hey, I was standing right there!" </brag>

I loved the song and the hint of the trolls that we got. I do think Thorin looks a bit weird -- awfully young and not all that dwarvenly -- but I'll give the actor a chance. No looks at Smaug but that's not surprising, they wanted to tease with Gollum who more people are familiar with. I also think it's awesome that Stephen Fry is in it.

Benedict Cumberbatch is "playing" Smaug. Not just supplying the voice, but also doing motion-capture. Just as Andy Serkis "played" Gollum.

He's been busy with other projects & will apparently head to New Zealand just after new year's day. So Smaug doesn't really exist, yet....

[Quasimodem]

Andy Serkis has certainly carved out his own place in cinematic history, and it couldn't have happened to a nicer or talented man!

I hope no one "pigeon-holes" this talented young performer, because, in my opinion, he has owned every character he has ever portrayed.

Thanks

Quasi

[GuanoLad]

Originally Posted by Quasimodem

I hope no one "pigeon-holes" this talented young performer

He's 47.

[Quasimodem]

I'm 61, and I have never known anyone who fought for the part of Gollum as Andy did.

If not young, then certainly unique and very special.

I concede Andy is middle-aged, and I believe I let my respect for his talent influence my opinion.

Thanks

Q

[GuanoLad]

Originally Posted by Quasimodem

If not young, then certainly unique and very special.

I suppose I should be fair; he was 35 when he was offered the part back in 1999.

[Maserschmidt]

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant

Tim Benzedrine and Hashberry.
[/size]

Ah, poor Frito. Thanks to Tim, plantus interruptus....

[Ratcatcher]

Can't wait. Genre fantasy movies are so rare, that I'll likely be impressed if it's even 1/4th as good as the LOTR trilogy. Hope the score will be as good.

[Lasciel]

Originally Posted by Silophant

Along the same lines,

SPOILER:

Christopher Lee's been confirmed as Saruman, and he's also in the White Council, but not The Hobbit.

I have a feeling that a lot of the events alluded to in LoTR dealing with "The Necromancer" in Mirkwood and all that will be either flashbacked or dealt with directly as a cut-away in the Hobbit. Sort of a counter-narrative of what the Big People are dealing with while the Little People are sorting out their own problems. That explains much of the casting, and also helps to make the primary quest narrative spread more evenly throughout two films. I may be dead wrong about this, but hoping so - it's my preferred construction possibility.

SPOILER:

I am very much looking forward to seeing certain people try to pretend to be good, honest, upstanding wizards during the Council meeting(s).

[mlees]

Originally Posted by Lasciel

I have a feeling that a lot of the events alluded to in LoTR dealing with "The Necromancer" in Mirkwood and all that will be either flashbacked or dealt with directly as a cut-away in the Hobbit.

In the linked trailer a few posts above, at about the 1:17 to 1:20 mark, I think you see Gandalf checking out some ruins, which I would like to speculate is/are Dol Guldur.

Edit: lotr.wikia.com has that screenshot, and labels it as Gandalf at Dol Guldur.

[Omniscient]

Is Radagast part of the White Council?

[MrDibble]

Originally Posted by Omniscient

Is Radagast part of the White Council?

Yes. Also Galadriel, Elrond, Cirdan, Glorfindel and Saruman as the leader.

[Omniscient]

No Celeborn?

[Lasciel]

Originally Posted by Omniscient

No Celeborn?

Nope, he's just the trophy husband.

[Grey]

Originally Posted by mlees

In the linked trailer a few posts above, at about the 1:17 to 1:20 mark, I think you see Gandalf checking out some ruins, which I would like to speculate is/are Dol Guldur.

Edit: lotr.wikia.com has that screenshot, and labels it as Gandalf at Dol Guldur.

But it makes no sense since there is an elven/numenorean statue in the background. Dol Guldur was always Sauron's and he's more of a Black Watcher statue type of guy.

I wonder if it is suppose to be Gandalf's imagining/dreaming of Rivendell after being attacked by Smaug.

[Lasciel]

Originally Posted by Grey

But it makes no sense since there is an elven/numenorean statue in the background. Dol Guldur was always Sauron's and he's more of a Black Watcher statue type of guy.

I wonder if it is suppose to be Gandalf's imagining/dreaming of Rivendell after being attacked by Smaug.

That was my thought as well - I figured that the various sites pinning it as Dol Guldur were perhaps just guessing, instead of having actual film source backing for the label?

Dol Guldur is the Necromancer's hidden tower of EEEVIL. I was expecting it to be more... you know... evil? (as opposed to creepy and demolished and ominous, which isn't quite the same thing)

I really am expecting something more like the way Minas Morgul had that awful greenish cast to it. Not the architecture, mind, just that filmic treatment where it's all really sickly and a little wavery like heat-shimmer, with that soul-sapping light and ghostly feeling of watching you all the time while it thinks about how it's going to torture you best...

Those few shots didn't lend that same wrongness to the area, and I would hope that the Necromancer's stronghold that almost ate Gandalf would be just a little on the creepy side. I mean, really. Jackson's Isengard was creepier than that ruin, and that even when Saruman was supposed to still be pretending to be the good guy!

[kenobi 65]

Originally Posted by Grey

But it makes no sense since there is an elven/numenorean statue in the background.

Though, Sauron spent considerable time in Numenor. Maybe he's longing for the old days with his decorating sense.

[Grey]

I suppose it could be Eregion - Gandalf looking for Thrian, could have passed through Hollin and into Moria before exiting and heading to Dol Guldur.

[mlees]

Originally Posted by Grey

But it makes no sense since there is an elven/numenorean statue in the background. Dol Guldur was always Sauron's and he's more of a Black Watcher statue type of guy.

Well, the lotr.wikia says Dol Guldur was originally the location was the former capital of the Mirkwood elves.

Originally Posted by wikia

Dol Guldur was originally known as Amon Lanc (bald hill), and had been the capital of Oropher's Silvan realm.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Dol_Guldur

In the four seconds of the trailer I mentioned, everything is grey and colorless. Then they cut to a shot of Rivendell, which is shown in rich golden tones. So, yeah, I still think it's supposed to be Dol Guldur.

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Lasciel

Dol Guldur is the Necromancer's hidden tower of EEEVIL. I was expecting it to be more... you know... evil?

You mean statues of Palin or Obama, depending upon his political orientation?

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

While Amon Lanc was a sylvan realm, Oropher was Sindarin. So he probably would have wanted nice statues around his halls. Those who looked on the face of Melian the Maia would definitely be counted on to acquire a taste for finer things in life, like statuary, jewels, lembas, and probably even raw oysters (what with the Telerin influence.)

And IIRC, Sauron used to have this thing for Melian, back in the day (well, before days, actually.) She was the only one who could get away with calling him Mairon.

So I'd not be surprised if Sauron kept some statuary around, especially if it reminded him of the fallen kingdom of his rival, Thingol.

(Just random speculating, but it feels right!)

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by Lasciel

I really am expecting something more like the way Minas Morgul had that awful greenish cast to it. Not the architecture, mind, just that filmic treatment where it's all really sickly and a little wavery like heat-shimmer

I hope not. The sickly-green stuff Jackson used to represent ghosts and the necromantic was one of the biggest drawbacks to the trilogy, one I hope Jackson won't inflict on us again.

Which isn't to say that it's bad by itself: it just doesn't go well with the rest of the cinematography at all.

[Grey]

Originally Posted by mlees

Well, the lotr.wikia says Dol Guldur was originally the location was the former capital of the Mirkwood elves.



http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Dol_Guldur

In the four seconds of the trailer I mentioned, everything is grey and colorless. Then they cut to a shot of Rivendell, which is shown in rich golden tones. So, yeah, I still think it's supposed to be Dol Guldur.

A few things seem wrong to me though. Dol Guldur is typically framed as being raised by Sauron, not occupied like Minas Tirith in the 1st age. Further, the silvan elves of southern Mirkwood were related to the elves of Lorien and there they typically lives in flets (tree borne platforms). Now I can see the Nolodrian refugees from Eregion coupled with Galadriel's influence leading Lorien to a more settled and permanent lifestyle than they had known before.

That implies that while Amon Lanc may have the the central settlement for elves in southern Mirkwood, it would be unlikely that permanent structures existed.

Or I may be over thinking this - typically a good bet.

[mlees]

Originally Posted by Grey

A few things seem wrong to me though. Dol Guldur is typically framed as being raised by Sauron, not occupied like Minas Tirith in the 1st age. Further, the silvan elves of southern Mirkwood were related to the elves of Lorien and there they typically lives in flets (tree borne platforms). Now I can see the Nolodrian refugees from Eregion coupled with Galadriel's influence leading Lorien to a more settled and permanent lifestyle than they had known before.

That implies that while Amon Lanc may have the the central settlement for elves in southern Mirkwood, it would be unlikely that permanent structures existed.

Or I may be over thinking this - typically a good bet.

According to the lotr.wikia (I am not a scholar like others on this board, so my research skills are rudimentary), Oropher became king of the Mirkwood elves early in the second age.

The second age lasted roughly 3400 years.

Sauron's claims on Amon Lanc were not established until 1000TA (Third Age).

Dunno when Oropher established his capital on Amon Lanc, but he may have been there as long as 4000 years. That's a long freakin time. Oropher himself had come from Valinor, and that place had permanent structures.

I think that it would be unlikely that such a location (Amon Lanc) NOT have permanent structures.

[Quartz]

Originally Posted by fluiddruid

No looks at Smaug but that's not surprising, they wanted to tease with Gollum who more people are familiar with.

Won't they be saving Smaug for the second part anyway?

[Elendil's Heir]

The trailer looks good and I can't wait for the movie... although I suppose I must!

[kenobi 65]

Originally Posted by Quartz

Won't they be saving Smaug for the second part anyway?

Good point. I would guess that the first movie will end before the Company even reaches Lake-town, much less encountering Smaug.

[mlees]

Based on the new trailer, would you say that Jackson appears to be trying for a "serious" action/adventure fantasy?

I ask, because I felt that The Hobbit, as written, to be more of a young'un fairy tale than the more serious Lord of the Rings or the Simarillion.

[Quartz]

Originally Posted by mlees

Based on the new trailer, would you say that Jackson appears to be trying for a "serious" action/adventure fantasy?

With the dwarves falling through the door? And the dwarves singing?

[mlees]

Originally Posted by Quartz

With the dwarves falling through the door?

Yes. There was (limited) dwarf humor in the LOTR movies too. So?

Originally Posted by Quartz

And the dwarves singing?

I thought the singing was a somber dirge... Did I miss some other song?

Let me repeat: I felt that the BOOK, The Hobbit, to be more.... aimed at kids... than LOTR. The style of writing, the language used. It's been 5 or 6 years since I've read it, but I do remember having that opinion when I finished it.

The movie (based on the trailer) may not match the tone (I described) of the book.

You think it will be a mad cap comedy?

[Lasciel]

Originally Posted by Ludovic

I hope not. The sickly-green stuff Jackson used to represent ghosts and the necromantic was one of the biggest drawbacks to the trilogy, one I hope Jackson won't inflict on us again.

Which isn't to say that it's bad by itself: it just doesn't go well with the rest of the cinematography at all.

I don't mind Minas Morgul so much. I like that sort of visual creepitude.

The whole Way of the Dead section (especially the extended edition version) I do my level best to forget happened in the film at all.

"Scull Avalanche" sounds like the name of a marginally creepy island inhabited by a crochety old ex-sailor who pretends to ex-piracy in a Hardy Boys Adventure novel, not an action-point description for what should have been a rather serious side-quest with a decent expectation of death and utter spiritual desolation - and that's if it ended WELL!

[Ratcatcher]

Originally Posted by mlees

Yes. There was (limited) dwarf humor in the LOTR movies too. So?



I thought the singing was a somber dirge... Did I miss some other song?

Let me repeat: I felt that the BOOK, The Hobbit, to be more.... aimed at kids... than LOTR. The style of writing, the language used. It's been 5 or 6 years since I've read it, but I do remember having that opinion when I finished it.

The movie (based on the trailer) may not match the tone (I described) of the book.

You think it will be a mad cap comedy?

No "opinion" here, The Hobbit was aimed at children. However, I think they decided to make the movie more in line with the LOTR films. The basic story will be followed, but it'll be less fairy tale-like. I don't even expect the eagles to speak in the film.

[mlees]

Originally Posted by Ratcatcher

No "opinion" here, The Hobbit was aimed at children. However, I think they decided to make the movie more in line with the LOTR films. The basic story will be followed, but it'll be less fairy tale-like. I don't even expect the eagles to speak in the film.

Thanks.

I apologise to everyone if I worded my question poorly.

[Lasciel]

Originally Posted by Ratcatcher

I don't even expect the eagles to speak in the film.

Oh bother. I hope they still have the Elder Raven speaking to the Dwarves. That would be a real bummer to me if he didn't.

[teela brown]

Originally Posted by Lasciel

Oh bother. I hope they still have the Elder Raven speaking to the Dwarves. That would be a real bummer to me if he didn't.

Yeah - "old Carc", wasn't he? Ancient and bald.

I want to read The Hobbit again, but I'm going to wait until late-ish next year to do so.

[Elendil's Heir]

Originally Posted by kenobi 65

Good point. I would guess that the first movie will end before the Company even reaches Lake-town, much less encountering Smaug.

Smaug could certainly still appear in the first movie, though, such as in a flashback of how he drove the Dwarves out of Erebor and secured his vast hoard.

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Lasciel

Oh bother. I hope they still have the Elder Raven speaking to the Dwarves. That would be a real bummer to me if he didn't.

Wagner had the woodbird speak to Siegfried. Let's hope Peter Jackson has heard the Ring.

[Mahaloth]

Originally Posted by kenobi 65

Good point. I would guess that the first movie will end before the Company even reaches Lake-town, much less encountering Smaug.

Perhaps with Bilbo getting the ring? Is that far enough for the first movie?

Originally Posted by mlees

Based on the new trailer, would you say that Jackson appears to be trying for a "serious" action/adventure fantasy?

I ask, because I felt that The Hobbit, as written, to be more of a young'un fairy tale than the more serious Lord of the Rings or the Simarillion.

I hope he keeps some of the tone of book. It's hilarious.

[Mrs. Cake]

If they wrap up the first movie with a brief lull following a major action sequence the way FotR and TTT did, maybe the first movie will end at Beorn's house? That puts three fairly major action sequences (plus whatever non-Hobbit backstory bits in the first film leaving three majors action sequences in the second.

And they should definitely leave any reveal of Smaug for movie two. He's the major money shot - no sense in diluting the first reveal. If is very effective in the book - should be even more so visually.

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Mrs. Cake

And they should definitely leave any reveal of Smaug for movie two. He's the major money shot - no sense in diluting the first reveal. If is very effective in the book - should be even more so visually.

Yep.