The Hobbit Movie

2

Comments

  • edited December 2012
    Harry Potter is garbage masquerading as writing, whereas the Hobbit and LOTR are very well written indeed, YES, INDEED!
  • LOTR is a good story but it's certainly not well written. At least a third of it is pointless crap and seems like filler.
  • edited December 2012
    LOTR is a good story but it's certainly not well written. At least a third of it is pointless crap and seems like filler.

    I'll take J.R.R.T.'s filler any time of the day over that Harry Potter dribbling drivel.
  • edited December 2012
    I think most books have a huge % of filler.

    Jimmy stepped out of the elevator into the sun which shone on him like a 10,000 headlights, he craned his neck and shielded his eyes amazed at the luminosity he'd missed while working in the mine that day.

    Could have been

    Jimmy stepped out of the elevator at the end of his shift and went to the pub.
  • edited December 2012
    beanz wrote: »
    I think most books have a huge % of filler.

    Jimmy stepped out of the elevator into the sun which shone on him like a 10,000 headlights, he craned his neck and shielded his eyes amazed at the luminosity he'd missed while working in the mine that day.

    Could have been

    Jimmy stepped out of the elevator at the end of his shift and went to the pub.

    Which doesn't help you imagine how bright the lights appeared to be after working in the mine??

    Descriptive text in books is what is used when making the films...
    My test signature
  • edited December 2012
    fogartylee wrote: »
    Which doesn't help you imagine how bright the lights appeared to be after working in the mine??

    Descriptive text in books is what is used when making the films...

    Most people are aware of how bright the sun is...

    The toast tasted like toast, if it had had butter on it it would have tasted like toast and butter...thought jimmy as he ate his toast.
  • edited December 2012
    Most people aren't aware of how bright the sun can appear to be after hours underground....
    My test signature
  • edited December 2012
    fogartylee wrote: »
    Most people aren't aware of how bright the sun can appear to be after hours underground....

    Of course they are....darkness is darkness...be it underground or darkened room on the 10th floor of a highrise...

    I'd imagine most people at some point in their life has been in a darkened environment and then stepped out into the sun....stepping out of your door and going to work after kipping all night for example!

    Tongue in cheek of course. Books of course have to be descriptive, my point was some take it to extremes. I think generally they need to be more descriptive in the early chapters...setting the scene, describing characters etc...but if you are on chapter 13 and the main character is still being given the "her golden locks flowed over her shoulders like water over a waterfall as she glided like a swan though the frozen pea section at walmart"...it's a bit much.
  • edited December 2012
    I think, dear beanz, that you may just be reading crap books. Put down the Mills and Boon and walk away. ;-)

    Neither Tolkien nor Rowling are particularly good authors although both managed to tell very compelling stories, even despite the flaws in their writing.
  • edited December 2012
    AndyC wrote: »
    I think, dear beanz, that you may just be reading crap books.

    ..and then...
    Rowling managed to tell very compelling stories, even despite the flaws in their writing.

    A twilight series reader too perhaps? :lol:
  • edited December 2012
    The Hobbit : There and back again Beanz Special Edition.

    Bilbo was a hobbit. He was small and had big feet. 13 Dwarves turned up and Gandalf the wizard who could do magic and ****. They went on a journey. They went there, a big mountain, by walking and it took ages and was probably tiring. On the way there they went through a mountain, found a ring, run away from Goblins, went through a forest with big spiders. Got to the mountain, oh a dragon, killed, big fight, and then went back home again.

    They all laughed.

    The End.
  • edited December 2012
    Except The hobbit and LOTR have been amongst my favorite books since I was a kid.

    Don't see I mentioned anywhere I thought either was long winded...

    /insert tongue out emote.

    90% of my reading these days is non fiction though...with the odd Biography here and there. I think the last fictional book I read was....Can't even remember....maybe the Rama Series.

    I have Stephen Kings "under the dome" sitting on a shelf that I suppose will be read at some point...just looking at it make me think "bloated" though...1100 pages indeed.
  • edited December 2012
    redballoon wrote: »
    The Hobbit : There and back again Beanz Special Edition.

    Bilbo was a hobbit. He was small and had big feet. 13 Dwarves turned up and Gandalf the wizard who could do magic and ****. They went on a journey. They went there, a big mountain, by walking and it took ages and was probably tiring. On the way there they went through a mountain, found a ring, run away from Goblins, went through a forest with big spiders. Got to the mountain, oh a dragon, killed, big fight, and then went back home again.

    They all laughed.

    The End.
    far too descriptive, sure it can be shortened a tad
    Professional Mel-the-Bell Simulator................"So realistic, I found myself reaching for the Kleenex King-Size!" - Richard Darling
  • edited December 2012
    The Hobbit : There and Back Again.

    The hobbit went there and back. End.
  • edited December 2012
    far too descriptive, sure it can be shortened a tad

    e
    e
    n
    wa
    wa
    s
    pickup key
    n
    unlock door
    get sword and rope
    s
    tie rope to tree
    hang oneself.
  • edited December 2012
    The Hobbit movie is going to break box office records...


    For having the most amount of people walk out before the film is finished.

    What an utter waste of film making. Peter Jackson should be locked up. He killed it, he's died on his arse on this one. The Hobbit is a quick read, and doesn't move half as slow as this film.
  • edited December 2012
    beanz wrote: »
    e
    e
    n
    wa
    wa
    s
    pickup key
    n
    unlock door
    get sword and rope
    s
    tie rope to tree
    hang oneself.

    you missed thorin singing about gold
    Professional Mel-the-Bell Simulator................"So realistic, I found myself reaching for the Kleenex King-Size!" - Richard Darling
  • edited December 2012
    Just seen it. Fantastic.

    It's certainly not slow nor padded, though it does contain MANY more events and is all the better for it. It actually moves at quite a pace and looks 'n' sounds totally gorgeous.

    A great film indeed. The Hobbit could not have been done any better. It's (almost) perfect.
  • edited December 2012
    FrankT wrote: »
    The Hobbit movie is going to break box office records...


    For having the most amount of people walk out before the film is finished.

    What an utter waste of film making. Peter Jackson should be locked up. He killed it, he's died on his arse on this one. The Hobbit is a quick read, and doesn't move half as slow as this film.

    Did you see it in HFR or standard?
  • edited December 2012
    fogartylee wrote: »
    Most people aren't aware of how bright the sun can appear to be after hours underground....

    And you should know, what with your extensive research into the matter
    (read: people lured into Fogartylee's dungeon.)
  • edited December 2012
    beanz wrote: »
    A twilight series reader too perhaps? :lol:
    Even I have standards. :-P
  • edited December 2012
    beanz wrote: »
    I have Stephen Kings "under the dome" sitting on a shelf that I suppose will be read at some point...just looking at it make me think "bloated" though...1100 pages indeed.
    Superb book, I read it in about 4 days, didn't seem like 1100 pages at all...
    I wanna tell you a story 'bout a woman I know...
  • edited December 2012
    LOTR is a good story but it's certainly not well written. At least a third of it is pointless crap and seems like filler.

    Riiiight. The equivalent of one entire book in the trilogy is pointless crap filler? I agree that some of it could easily be discarded without affecting the story one iota (Bombadil being the prime example, Scouring of the Shire another), but not well written?.....!
    beanz wrote: »
    Except The hobbit and LOTR have been amongst my favorite books since I was a kid.

    Me too!
    beanz wrote: »
    I have Stephen Kings "under the dome" sitting on a shelf that I suppose will be read at some point...just looking at it make me think "bloated" though...1100 pages indeed.

    Stephen King. The very definition of pointless filler. Still enjoy his books though.
  • Vampyre wrote: »
    Riiiight. The equivalent of one entire book in the trilogy is pointless crap filler? I agree that some of it could easily be discarded without affecting the story one iota (Bombadil being the prime example, Scouring of the Shire another), but not well written?.....!



    Me too!



    Stephen King. The very definition of pointless filler. Still enjoy his books though.
    I think there must have been a point in King's career when his agent managed to wangle him a per-word rate on his novels. His books just seem to get longer and looonger.

    Not sure I agree that Bombadil should have been left out. I thought it was a good section in Fellowship. It's also a point in the story when The Hobbit-style lightness is being replaced by the darker themes. I also like the Bombadil mythos. What is he? What part does he play in the Middle Earth? How powerful is he? Why doesn't he get involved (discussed at the Council of Elrond for a while)? I wanted Bombadil in the film!

    The scouring of the shire section seemed tacked on though definitely and I think was Tolkein trying to bookend the story and bring the hobbits new 'hard-man' style into focus.
  • edited December 2012
    Vampyre wrote: »
    I agree that some of it could easily be discarded without affecting the story one iota (Bombadil being the prime example, Scouring of the Shire another), but not well written?.....!

    If you look at it objectively, it really isn't that well written. There is a lot of clumsy phrasing, bits of "plot" that drag on and should've been subjected to heavy editing, over reliance on footnotes to try and make bits make sense and so on. And that's before you consider the unbelievably one dimensional and poorly thought out female roles in the books (sparse as they are).

    Don't get me wrong, I loved them as a kid and I still enjoyed the LotR films (not seen Hobbit yet, but I will). However they aren't great writing by any stretch of the imagination (much like Star Wars!)
  • edited December 2012
    AndyC wrote: »
    If you look at it objectively, it really isn't that well written. There is a lot of clumsy phrasing, bits of "plot" that drag on and should've been subjected to heavy editing, over reliance on footnotes to try and make bits make sense and so on. And that's before you consider the unbelievably one dimensional and poorly thought out female roles in the books (sparse as they are).

    Don't get me wrong, I loved them as a kid and I still enjoyed the LotR films (not seen Hobbit yet, but I will). However they aren't great writing by any stretch of the imagination (much like Star Wars!)

    Oh, you won't get me disagreeing with the female roles (even Eowyn is essentially a bloke warrior in female form in the books) and even though I found Arwen a bit pathetic for most of the films, what Jackson got spot on was booting out Glorfindel in favour of her to add some female interest.

    I just don't get the "not well written" comments. I'm not "well read" by any stretch of the imagination as I don't read a wide enough variety of books, but I have read a lot over the years. Tolkien's writing to me is as good as anyone I've read in the fantasy field. Donaldson, Le Guin, King, Eddings, all the usual suspects, they're no better and usually far worse. Maybe I'm comparing it incorrectly!

    Part of the problem is I can't look at Tolkien objectively ;-) And the Star Wars writing is awful - doesn't stop them being wonderful films though :-)
  • edited December 2012
    tolkien was an academic, and should be read as such.

    if you want something more pacey and simpler, try john grisham.
  • edited December 2012
    mile wrote: »
    tolkien was an academic, and should be read as such.

    if you want something more pacey and simpler, try Readers Wives.


    Agreed.
  • edited December 2012
    ZnorXman wrote: »
    Harry Potter is garbage masquerading as writing, whereas the Hobbit and LOTR are very well written indeed, YES, INDEED!

    yup. HP is unfortunately a pretty damn good story invented by a poor women who cannot write. in my personal opinion, she's just miserable at rhetorics and her blasphemic crime was to keep the story fot her to write it down.
    she should find a decent storyteller to make it for her, that would be glorious.

    when I'm judge I'd forbidden her any writing for a lifetime (including sms, mails and shop lists) and take her identity card. mean it!
    G! - That makes sense in BASIC 0:1
  • edited December 2012
    yup. HP is unfortunately a pretty damn good story invented by a poor women who cannot write. in my personal opinion, she's just miserable at rhetorics and her blasphemic crime was to keep the story fot her to write it down.
    she should find a decent storyteller to make it for her, that would be glorious.

    when I'm judge I'd forbidden her any writing for a lifetime (including sms, mails and shop lists) and take her identity card. mean it!
    She's worth ?600M, do you think she really cares?
    I wanna tell you a story 'bout a woman I know...
Sign In or Register to comment.