![]() |
Re: The Hobbit
2 films
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by arminius
(Post 11053012)
You are correct. I reread The Hobbit last month. They had ponies for a large part of their journey and lost some and others were eaten by Smaug.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by resinrats
(Post 11053249)
Over at AICN, an article written while filming said that the dwarves do ride ponies. They film on normal horses because they are supposed to be smaller and would look as a regular adult looks on a horse. If they used ponies, they'd be gigantic compared to the pony.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by davidh777
(Post 11052820)
I'm all in favor of giving this the same look and feel of LOTR. As long as you have the same teams available, why not make the movies a unified whole. Save a new vision for a new generation (and yes, I know that a new generation would preclude certain talent from participating and that it'd be pretty tough to greenlight a new version when this highly regarded one is still available).
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Hokeyboy
(Post 11053155)
^ SPOILERS! :mad:
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by covenant
(Post 11053177)
2 films
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by arminius
(Post 11053382)
Sorry, fixed.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by covenant
(Post 11053177)
2 films
|
Re: The Hobbit
I find it ironic that the lightest book of the four (in tone and scale; don't know about page length) is going with the two-movie trend. Kind of boggles the mind how long the trilogy could have been. I know stuff was left out, but I liked the scope and pacing of those and would have had a tough time with any more length.
EDIT: I'm talking about the EEs, of course. |
Re: The Hobbit
There's actually only two books: The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Groucho
(Post 11053542)
There's actually only two books: The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
So The Hobbit is one book and two movies, and LOTR is one book and one movie. :) |
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Groucho
(Post 11053542)
There's actually only two books: The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Hokeyboy
(Post 11053402)
LOL I was just funnin' ya ;)
|
Re: The Hobbit
<object width="600" height="455"><param name="movie" value="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/50345"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.traileraddict.com/emd/50345" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" wmode="transparent" width="600" height="455" allowFullScreen="true"></embed></object>
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by troystiffler
(Post 11053325)
Absolutely. I think it's a given. Keeping it in the same universe was a great way to go. Changing it up this quick would have been akward. Kind of like when I watched the animated movie a few years ago, after being such a fanboy about the new trilogy. Those animated movies just ain't right.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Jason
(Post 11053796)
Well, it doesn't help that the animated films really aren't that good...
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Dr. DVD
(Post 11055221)
I have to agree that they aren't that great. I once thought they were, but that was more or less because they were all that existed if you wanted to see a visual presentation of a Tolkien story. The Hobbit was pretty faithful overall , but they changed ROTK to where it was unrecognizable. The animators chose to make Gollum some amphibian creature with no explanation for his appearance, and the dwarves looked like silly old men more than anything else.
|
Re: The Hobbit
I seem to recall the Bakshi cartoon portrays Elrond as a dude that walks around with a cape draped over his pajamas.
|
Re: The Hobbit
The Bakshi cartoon was quite a travesty in retrospect. It started out quite faithful, but then fell apart due to rotoscope overkill. I would have been interested to see how Bakshi would have finished the story. The Rankin-Bass version of ROTK, which was allegedly made to pick up where Bakshi's left, scrapped everything and omitted a lot of the characters.
|
Re: The Hobbit
I've never even seen it but in the trivia section of imdb or maybe it was the faq...in any event, the studio made them change Saruman to Aruman because Saruman and Sauron were too similar. That decision was later reversed, but there are still a couple references to Aruman in the movie.
:wtf: |
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by whoopdido
(Post 11056516)
I've never even seen it but in the trivia section of imdb or maybe it was the faq...in any event, the studio made them change Saruman to Aruman because Saruman and Sauron were too similar. That decision was later reversed, but there are still a couple references to Aruman in the movie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saruman#Adaptations |
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Jay G.
(Post 11056537)
This is in reference to Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated LOTR. Wikipedia has info on this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saruman#Adaptations |
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by whoopdido
(Post 11056576)
Wow. Christopher Lee is going to be 90 years old next May. I hope he survives long enough to finish his scenes for the Hobbit.
http://www.bleedingcool.com/forums/f...bit-today.html http://www.reelz.com/movie-news/1117...peter-jackson/ |
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by whoopdido
(Post 11056576)
Wow. Christopher Lee is going to be 90 years old next May. I hope he survives long enough to finish his scenes for the Hobbit.
|
Re: The Hobbit
Originally Posted by Artman
(Post 11056727)
I thought he was ten years younger, what a full life! Hopefully he sees the finished film(s). Gotta be nice to know you'll live on in such a significant series.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:38 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.