Hobbit Trailer looks crap

[Arphen Silverhair]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Mostly this thread is about a little humour. If you knew us, you would be able to recognise the jokes. But that's the problem with internet communication. It's also very difficult for people well versed in Tolkien's books to take a Hollywood adventure/action/gaming flick in any way as a legitimate interpretation of Tolkien. We've learnt, as Agan says, from four previous ones.

One of the things we Downers pride ourselves on, besides our knowledge of Tolkien's books, is the way we conduct discussion here. We tend to avoid simple statements of opinion and favour explanation and argument to support our positions. Sometimes we even manage to persuade each other! Or exhaust each other.

So, given that we tend to listen to each other's reasons, I want to ask you what you mean by linking to that You Tube video. What do you think it proves in terms of your argument? That others are deeply impressed? That we should follow suit also?

Simply linking to that video does little to further your point that we are full of hate. We aint'. But let my give you one possible interpretation of that video to show how it needs a bit of explanation.

It shows some fangirls giggling and excited over the trailer. And it shows three actors' response to the you tube video.

Are the fans giving any kind of argument or debate? No, they are simply going gaga over the scenes they are seeing. They seem to be thoroughly excited by what they are viewing.

Why would Jackson choose this particular video to highlight in the marketing of the second Hobbit movie? Is it a way to forestall criticism? It is a way to demonstrate who he believes his audience is? Is it a way to titilate fangirls by showing them a reaction in the actors they admire?

Why show three actors reacting to the video--and in particular, these three actors? They are all in costume, so it is not likely an unrehearsed or unscripted response, but very likely part of the publicity that the actors must engage in as part of their employment in the film. Is it a way for Jackson to suggest a Middle-earth response? Is it too cynical to regard this as a mere merchandising ploy, using fans to further the marketing strategy?

I for one could never be one of those fangirls, so the entire video does not address me as a fan of Tolkien.

Really, I'm left with the comments, if not here then from one of our recent threads, which presented two of Jackson's writing team's defense of their work: "It's in the appendices!" "It represents the spirit of Tolkien."

Those two statements beg for critical analysis, and neither one of them can bear the scrutiny for long. Critical analysis is not hate. It is the response to the films from people who know the books well.

So, tell me, why did you link to that video? Do you have another "reading" of it that would enlighten us and make us regret our initial responses to the trailer?

Me linking that Video had nothing to do with my or your opinion about the Trailer. I just thought that it was somehow sweet to see these three elves watching those hilarious, giggling girls, because I've never seen that kind of "official" video response.
Although it certainly is some form of marketing.

[Nogrod]

Originally Posted by Arphen Silverhair

it was somehow sweet to see these three elves watching those hilarious, giggling girls, because I've never seen that kind of "official" video response.
Although it certainly is some form of marketing.

They have just been fast copying the format from the Game of Thrones who (or whose fans - I think we don't khow how far HBO-organized the initial video was) published videos of fan-reactions to the "Red wedding" - anyway then George Martin appeared on Conan's TV-show and watched the fan reactions.

Pretty much the same idea...

[Alcidas]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

They have just been fast copying the format from the Game of Thrones who (or whose fans - I think we don't khow how far HBO-organized the initial video was) published videos of fan-reactions to the "Red wedding" - anyway then George Martin appeared on Conan's TV-show and watched the fan reactions.

Pretty much the same idea...

Hmm. So its a staged video of Orlando Bloom and his co-stars, all dressed as elves, watching a staged video of a couple of fangals giggling while they watch some footage?

I suppose you can say that it is 'somehow sweet'. Like having seven spoons of sugar in your tea.

[Mithalwen]

Maybe merely demonstrating a ' mise en abyme" (literal translation not really helpful but a cultural version of the laughing cow cheesebox). Given that some advertisements are made to seem like youtube amateur efforts now it may not be surprising that this has been latched on to. My sister went to the opening ceremony of the Olympic games last year and a few weeks before she got an email from Danny Boyle saying that he would have wished his father to be at the games and inviting attendees to email picture of someone who they wouldmhave liked to have been there. So my late father was one of those shown in the memorial section. And that was touching. But Boyle wasn't selling something in the same way.

[Alcidas]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

...merely demonstrating a ' mise en abyme"...

Yes, I do agree that it is pretty abysmal...

[Mithalwen]

Well the literal meaning is pretty much the Gandalfian cast into an abyss...

[alatar]

Note that many of these same criticism aren't just about Peter Jackson's work. Below is part of a review of the new Superman movie (emphasis mine):

Originally Posted by Justin Craig

Little in this film feels natural or real, which Snyder seems to want to convey. The oversaturation of effects, which has become the norm in most blockbusters, completely overshadows any natural cinematography, which may create a schism between the audience and the film. Nolan’s “Dark Knight” trilogy was a massive success for its dark realism, and there are attempts to do that here, too, but the crew seems to have gotten a bit carried away with creating as many CGI shots as possible that all realism is lost. With Snyder, Nolan and Goyer sacrificing story for endless CGI action sequences, “Man of Steel” can be summed up by that great line Jeff Goldblum says in “Jurassic Park”: they “were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.”

Switch out the directors' names with Jackson et al, and swap Superman with Hobbit, and you have many of the posts on this thread.

And I doubt the writer is a Superman book purist...

[mark12_30]

Bethberry, I'm deeply touched that you remember my fascination with Roggie' s flameproof eyeliner. But I would never have noticed it but for the guidance of Lush the Cold and Fair. I will be curious to see whether whether Smaug and Roggie share makeup artists.

As a child I entertained myself by the hour singing: Puff a dwagon wiv by a sea an frolic inna Au'um miss.

There, Tauriel, beat that. Action smaction, let's all just sit in a toasty semicircle around the dragon's nose and sing Peter, Paul and Mary songs. No?

Never mind. Too bad they won't let me bring my Mirkwood bow into the theater.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by mark12_30

Bethberry, I'm deeply touched that you remember my fascination with Roggie' s flameproof eyeliner. But I would never have noticed it but for the guidance of Lush the Cold and Fair. I will be curious to see whether whether Smaug and Roggie share makeup artists.

I have many memories of you and of the lushious one. In particular, I remember the wall frescoes of trees you were painting.

Smaug reminds me too much, in the trailer, of the T-Rex in Jurassic Park, which to my mind does not make him decent competition for a balrog.