Ian McKellen Shoots Final Scene as Gandalf
- Thread starter StewShearerOld
- Start date
The Hobbit is not Tolkien's greatest work. Tolkien himself was dissatisfied with it and said that if he could, he'd go back and rewrite the novel to no longer be a children's story.RJ Dalton said:
See: Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien [http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/booksabouttolkien/letters/description.htm].
Which is interesting, considering that it's the only thing he's written that doesn't read like someone pumping cement through your eyes. The emphasis on simplicity and brevity did a lot of good to that work, at least in my opinion.
But then again, I genuinely like the Hobbit, book and film, a bit more than The Lord of Et Cetera. I am now scum. :3
But then again, I genuinely like the Hobbit, book and film, a bit more than The Lord of Et Cetera. I am now scum. :3
The Hobbit was Tolkien's greatest work? It's pretty much a Children's book, saying it's Tolkien's greatest work is like saying the best part you enjoyed of a 5 course meal was the mint to clear your pallet at the beginning. It included barely any of the Darker undertones or metaphorical writing of his other works, it's a nice story but it's just not even in the same league as his other books and unfinished works.RJ Dalton said:
Being a bit melodramatic at the film as well, an opinion is plain and simple someone's individual thoughts, but pissing on it, really? Going a bit over the top.
On the topic of the films, I thought the Hobbit was pretty solid, tbh if you compare the LOTR book and the film they have no more changes than they did with this film, if not more, there were a shed load of changes in the original trilogy, it's just everyone has forgotten that now as they were dam fantastic films. I don't think it's quite on par with the original LOTR films atm, but it's quite hard to judge as was a teen watching the originals so always going to have the rose tinted glasses for it as I sat in awe for everyone at the cinema. I'll reserve judgement till after I have seen how they handle the battle of the five armys I think!
And to this "News" story, this happened days ago, this isn't news, this is looking back several days.
You should try reading The Children of Hurin. It was edited together by Tolkien's son after his death but it's a pretty good read and somewhat similar to The Hobbit in being a simpler, smaller story. A hell of a lot darker though.Muspelheim said:
It's not completely devoid of depth. For instance, I can't remember what I read this from (was back in college) but The Hobbit is actually a fairly clever retelling of Beowulf, told from the perspective of a non-warrior. Bilbo and Beowulf both leave home, face a monster that this arguably their equal and opposite and, at the end, have to face a dragon.Jedi-Hunter4 said:
I'm not arguing against it being a children's story, but it does have some layers.
No, just you wait ~5 years until somebody announces the epic 3 part (3h each) movie adaption of the Silmarillion, because of.... well, money.StewShearer said:
That's assuming McKellen is alive at that point. I don't want to be morbid, but the man was born in 1939.Kiwi the Tortoise said:
And the Silmarillion would need more than three movies. Gods, there must already be studio executives drooling over the prospect of all those potential sequels.
The guy's been making a movie for, what, the past three years straight?BanicRhys said:
I'm surprised he doesn't look worse.
It is not "just a children's book." It is an excellently written children's book. There is no reason that we should discount children's literature just because it was written for children. More than anything else in the series, The Hobbit captured the feel of an old folktale with cues from epic poetry. The Lord of the Rings may have its high points, but it's not nearly as well written and it has a tendency to get bogged down in the world building to the detriment of the story.Jedi-Hunter4 said:
And it's not just that they changed things. I'm not precisely a purist about Tolkien's work and I don't think any of his works is without flaw. But the way they changed things for the movie was done in profoundly stupid ways.
Consider this example:
Trolls: Surrender, or we'll kill this one person!
Thorin: Okay, we surrender.
Trolls: Great, now we'll kill all of you!
Thorin: Oh, balls, I totally didn't think of that!
Things were changed for the sake of putting action into the plot, but The Hobbit is not about action and was never about action. LotR was a book about war, but The Hobbit was about the journey and the growth of the character. Trying to change it to make it action oriented just made everything profoundly stupid because, at the end of the day, they had to backtrack on all that action to bring it back to where the plot was in the book. It makes the film a mess.
I used the Children of Hurin as an example to someone who said GRR Martin has broken 'some unwritten laws' on acceptable context in reaction to the Red Wedding. Most of the Silmarillion is far darker than people think, if the only Tolkien they know is LotR. But it really does help you understand why, by the Third Age, the Elves are such a reserved and sad people.StewShearer said: