The Hobbit Movie Trailer!

[Ben K.]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Those of us who are making fun of it probably aren't taking our fears in this department too seriously...but can you look me in the eye and tell me with a straight face that a (at least implied) Galadriel/Gandalf make out session would be out of the realm of possibility from the crew that brought us all elves at the Hornburg for Christmas several years back?

Yes it is totally out of the question. Seems about as justified as sexually confused frat boys reading homosexuality into Frodo and Sam's relationship due to some tactility and concerned glances. It's complete hyperbole from overly critical fanboys.

It is in no way the same as inserting an alliance of men and elves into the LOTR proper, when several such alliances occured after the Last Alliance in the legendarium proper. Gandalf the Home-Wrecker is such an absurd reach by PJ haters that it discredits much else of what they complain about.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Ben K.

Yes it is totally out of the question. Seems about as justified as sexually confused frat boys reading homosexuality into Frodo and Sam's relationship due to some tactility and concerned glances. It's complete hyperbole from overly critical fanboys.

I believe Kuru is correct in that none posting here are really slagging the movie based on that single scene; we're just having fun with the potential for an eye-rolling viewing experience.

Originally Posted by Ben K.

Gandalf the Home-Wrecker is such an absurd reach by PJ haters that it discredits much else of what they complain about.

Again, if it's a "reach" that some are using to abuse poor, rich-beyond-the-dreams-of-avarice PJ and Co., I don't think it's anyone here doing it.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Ben K.

Yes it is totally out of the question. Seems about as justified as sexually confused frat boys reading homosexuality into Frodo and Sam's relationship due to some tactility and concerned glances. It's complete hyperbole from overly critical fanboys.

Are you serious...

It is in no way the same as inserting an alliance of men and elves into the LOTR proper, when several such alliances occured after the Last Alliance in the legendarium proper. Gandalf the Home-Wrecker is such an absurd reach by PJ haters that it discredits much else of what they complain about.

It is exactly the same in the context of Jackson having no respect for the story or characters that Tolkien created, a lack of respect he demonstrated time and time again throughout the original trilogy. The elves at Helm's Deep were merely the most comical example of when Jackson went off the rails and into Loonyland.

Other more serious examples include (but aren't limited to) the destruction of the character of Faramir, the mutilation of the character of Theoden, the mutilation of the character of Gandalf (referring to the beat down he laid upon Denethor), the mutilation of the character of Arwen, the misplacement and misuse of the army of the dead...which was brought on by the abuse done to the course of the Battle of the Pelennor by Jackson, the silly antics of Legolas, the absurd detour Frodo was forced to make as a result of the destruction of Faramir, the stupidity of the side trip Aragorn made on the way to Helm's Deep, the degradation inflicted on the quality of the dialogue by Jackson and the destruction to the general public's conception of the Balrog by Jackson deciding to go with Howe's ludicrous depiction of it.

And those are just the things I can think of off the top of my head without really trying.

While I'm certainly just having some laughs at the Gandalf/Galadrial romp possibility, there is no character or story defacement that can be *completely* put past Jackson and Company at this point. They destroyed their own credibility through their own actions, nobody else had a hand in it.

Oh, and...

when several such alliances occured after the Last Alliance

This is certainly news to me.

The only possible example I can think of is the Woodelves helping the Lakemen at the Battle of Five Armies but that wasn't the same sort of thing at all.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

While I'm certainly just having some laughs at the Gandalf/Galadrial romp possibility, there is no character or story defacement that can be *completely* put past Jackson and Company at this point. They destroyed their own credibility through their own actions, nobody else had a hand in it.

While it's highly unlikely there'll be any sort of spicy Istari romance in the movie, if PJ did deign to insert that into the story, he'd be well deserving of all the insults and rotten tomatoes I could throw.

[TheGreatElvenWarrior]

Can I just say that Martin Freeman just looks like a hobbit?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by TheGreatElvenWarrior

Can I just say that Martin Freeman just looks like a hobbit?

You're not alone.

[Eönwë]

Originally Posted by TheGreatElvenWarrior

Can I just say that Martin Freeman just looks like a hobbit?

He looks like Watson to me.

[Dilettante]

All of you previous took the words right out of my mouth. Martin Freeman looks like a Hobbit, I said that to myself when I first saw him. He looks more like a Hobbit than Elijah Wood ever did.

Originally Posted by Eönwë

He looks like Watson to me.

*cough* Ok, well, that too, but in context of Middle-Earth, he looks like a Hobbit. Watson has a Hobbit in his family tree somewhere.

I saw The Hobbit movie trailer over Christmas and squealed with delight, despite some of it's flaws, it looks magnificent. I LOVE the Dwarves' song in Bag End.

The Dwarves do look a little too handsome, not that Dwarves are supposed to be ugly! I never mean that. My pet peeve with Hollywood these days is that it tends to hire actors for their looks rather than their acting ability, and this may be another example of that.

I am almost certain that the scene between Galadriel and Gandalf is innocuous. Don't make be bring up the whole Too-Much-Arwen song and dance again. Is she going to ride through Mirkwood with the Dwarves? I hope PJ hasn't thrown in some romance just because modern writers/producers think they need romance to tell a good story. And I am not necessarily referring to Galadriel/Gandalf. I mean throwing in any random Elf/Dwarf/Hobbit maiden to add some romantic tension.

What I want to know is: Why is Galadriel there in the first place? Because there were not enough women in the original story? Because they could not get Hugo Weaving in as Elrond so PJ gave Galadriel the part instead?

[Pomegranate]

I didn't read the whole topic, but just have to comment on the last post: in fact, there is not a single named female character in the whole book as far as I can recall (not among the actually active characters, anyway). In a book it is not that significant, especially given the time when it was made, but a movie in the present world with no women at all would definitely be extraordinary. It could be interesting, and would be more canon and more right especially to us who can pretty much cite the book by heart, but I guess the movie is not just for us. But I agree with you in the wishes for no added romantic tension, it would feel... wrong.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Pomegranate

In a book it is not that significant, especially given the time when it was made, but a movie in the present world with no women at all would definitely be extraordinary.

I thought that was their reason for making a part for Legolas.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Dilettante

I am almost certain that the scene between Galadriel and Gandalf is innocuous.

But can a character do something arguably outnocuous and simply claim that it's in

[Dilettante]

Originally Posted by Galin

But can a character do something arguably outnocuous and simply claim that it's in

Heh, point taken. That was a good one.

I didn't read the whole topic, but just have to comment on the last post: in fact, there is not a single named female character in the whole book as far as I can recall (not among the actually active characters, anyway). In a book it is not that significant, especially given the time when it was made, but a movie in the present world with no women at all would definitely be extraordinary. It could be interesting, and would be more canon and more right especially to us who can pretty much cite the book by heart, but I guess the movie is not just for us. But I agree with you in the wishes for no added romantic tension, it would feel... wrong.

Rubbish! There's plenty of women in The Hobbit. There's uhh......well what about...no....and then there's uh.....or....hmmmm.....How about?....no, that's no good.

Bilbo's mother is mentioned several times, and I bet some of Beorn's animals were female! And the wolves! Maybe there was a female wolf or two! ....What?......

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Dilettante

Bilbo's mother is mentioned several times, and I bet some of Beorn's animals were female!

You raise a good point: there were thousands and thousands of females on Beorn's property, making his life sweeter every day.



That's the buzz anyway

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Dilettante

Rubbish! There's plenty of women in The Hobbit. There's uhh......well what about...no....and then there's uh.....or....hmmmm.....How about?....no, that's no good.

They don't HAVE to make every woman a warrior-princess, though. That and the ugly old hag are not the only roles women can play. Why can't they just make her an interesting attendant, or a counsellor? Something a little intellectual or emotional rather than I'M LITTLE MS. KICK-YOUR-BACKSIDE AND I'M SO ICKLE-CLEVER THAT I CAN TRACK BETTER THAN ARAGORN!

Sorry.

[Galadriel]

http://www.theonering.net/

So. Tauriel is a warrior. Head of the guard. I knew it. Making a woman strong without giving her a weapon is impossible for filmmakers.

[narfforc]

So we have Marvel meets Middle-earth now in the form of Taurielektra..... pathetic..

[Galin]

No Necrodancer then? But wait, she wouldn't reveal that!

Excelsior!

[Boo Radley]

Originally Posted by narfforc

So we have Marvel meets Middle-earth now in the form of Taurielektra..... pathetic..

Ouch!

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

http://www.theonering.net/

So. Tauriel is a warrior. Head of the guard. I knew it. Making a woman strong without giving her a weapon is impossible for filmmakers.

"Deadly" and "lethal". See, that's why her role upsets me the most. She's such a Mary Sue she doesn't even deserve to be named after Merisu. Knows how to wield any weapon, she does. Has purple eyes too, I bet.

[Oddwen]

Has anyone ever played Seirra's The Hobbit game for pc and consoles? There's a lady elf character in there who Bilbo rescues from the troll caves, and who then helps Bilbo into the caves of the Elvenking and with several quests therin. I'm hoping that Tauriel fits somewhere along those lines.

She'll probably be the Head Elf in charge of the hunt for the white stag, or she'll rescue the dwarves from the spiders or capture the party-crashing dwarves or something.

Originally Posted by Galin

Necrodancer

Heee.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

"Deadly" and "lethal". See, that's why her role upsets me the most. She's such a Mary Sue she doesn't even deserve to be named after Merisu. Knows how to wield any weapon, she does. Has purple eyes too, I bet.

Purple? Nah, they'll change colour when she's angry - then everyone can see how goddess-like she is. I bet the Dwarves will unjustly insult her for being a woman and head of the guard and then she'll throw them in the dungeons (at Thranduil's order).

Sigh.

Am I overreacting?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by TheGreatElvenWarrior

Can I just say that Martin Freeman just looks like a hobbit?

Can I just say that Martin Freeman looks more like a Hobbit than half the Dwarves look like Dwarves? They're more of a Star Trek convention than a party of Naugrim. But someone on another forum made the case that the younger members appear as hawt dorfs to give the mindless audience some eye-candy until the film can get to Orly in Mirkwood.

Somehow, I don't think the summation is far off.