The Hobbit Movie Trailer!

[davem]

Interesting fan edit of the trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0550B...layer_embedded

[Lalwendë]

I've been watching a HD version of the trailer and I think that it could possibly be Aidan Turner in Bag End who looks Mannish. At any rate, I'm happy to go on thinking that it is, in order not to worry about the plot being tampered with too much...

Not sure why people are reading something saucy into the scene with Gandalf and Galadriel, I don't get that at all! In fact it makes me smile a bit because it's ripe for funny captions.

One other thing I'm happy about is that all the smoking hasn't been edited out. I've read countless things in the past ten years about how Hollywood is incredibly anti-smoking to the extent that they were going to label any films with it in as 18 cert. I'd like to think that would-be censors could credit audiences with some intelligence, that they won't be inspired by scenes of hairy men smoking unfeasibly long pipes.

[Kuruharan]

Not sure why people are reading something saucy into the scene with Gandalf and Galadriel, I don't get that at all!

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?

[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?

[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.

[Morthoron]

After viewing the trailer, I must say I was not aware of that many shades of gray in the color palette. Having read the book more times than I can recount, I can honestly say that gray is not the color that comes to mind. Perhaps because I don't think in black and white.

[Galendor]

After viewing the trailer several times, I'm sure our general reaction to the actual movie will be similar to that of LOTR. We'll be exicited to see our beloved book presented (again) in film. We may generally like it, but we will have many small and larger problems with the portrayal.

Galadriel is in the trailer because she is portrayed by a famous actress. It is advertisement. I was surprised that Elrond was not shown.

There will be a lot of time devoted to making this movie "fit" with the LOTR movie storyline, obviously. Much of the movie will deal with Gandalf's adventures figuring out who the Necromancer is (i.e. Sauron), foreshadowing LOTR. I suspect that is where Gandalf is wandering among stone ruins. He has to get the map that shows the secret door on the Lonely Mountain.

Regarding film portrayal of the "humor" of The Hobbit: I did notice that towards the end of the trailer there is a momentary scene that looks like the "cleaning up" scene that occurs after a meal in Bilbo's home in the book. I wonder if Gandalf will ask for cold chicken and pickles?

[Mithalwen]

What is there to be excited about? We know the plot and we know how PJ does things in ME - ad the trailer has confirmed it will be moulded to fit LOTR. The only variables are the additions and changes hinted at by casting which is more the macabre curiosity that inspires folk to rubberneck at a car crash rather than excitement.

While obviously we all know the books and perhaps the vast majority of Hobbit viewers will have seen LOTR but... even if you know what the story is with a film you sort of put that on hold and appreciate they don't know what will happen to them. Somehow the whole film being done as a flashback to Frodo is a handicap to that. Even within the context of the trailer, even if you went to that trailer in complete ignorance of Tolkien and the Jackson films you are informed instantly that everything is going to turn out alright in the end because Bilbo is telling it from the perspective of a safe and prosperous old age. It just makes all that portentous "will I return? I can't guarantee it.. I am not responsible for his fate " stuff utterly pointless

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Let's not let the physical embodiments of these beings lead us astray: Gandalf and Galadriel have known each other for thousands of years and I think Tolkien let's us understand they have a close relationship (which doesn't have to mean anything sexual to be sure) and they seem to admire each other... and they're the guardians of the rings... So bringing that part of their mutual history forwards looks like a decent addition (comparing to many other ones others and I have already said we hated in the LotR).

Indeed. They're very old friends so why wouldn't they be touchy-feely? Personally, I got over my shock that they weren't doing The Hobbit 'straight' a long time ago and I admit I'm quite interested and even excited to see how this stuff with The White Council pans out. I'm sure this scene is something to do with that. And aside from anything else, it might give me a chance to see Chris Lee as Saruman on screen again.

The new cast members chosen really are good choices. People outside the UK might not know them all very well or even at all because most of them are best known from TV shows in the UK. Richard Armitage is a fantastic actor and can turn his hand to any number of different roles. He's outshone anything Colin Firth could do in a costume drama lead role and stole the show in Robin Hood. Though I have to say in response to the dubbing of Aidan Turner as 'Kiligolas' that here you have pinpointed the wrong man. It's Armitage that has the fanatical following, including 'The Armitage Army'.

Aidan Turner himself is a great choice. He was vampire Mitchell in Being Human. I tend to think that he was chosen not for his looks but because Being Human has a devoted cult following and his presence will reel in the SF geeks.

Martin Freeman I've said all along would make the perfect Bilbo. In The Office, the whole series ended up not being about the Ricky Gervais character but about Freeman's character Tim, and his relationship with Dawn.

This is without even considering Ken Stott, James Nesbitt, Sylvester McCoy (another geek pleasing choice) and Benedict Cumberbatch. The only choice that I hate is Barry Humphries as the Great Goblin which reduces the role to pure pantomime, and I'm not convinced Stephen Fry won't chew up the scenery.

[Galendor]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

What is there to be excited about? We know the plot and we know how PJ does things in ME - ad the trailer has confirmed it will be moulded to fit LOTR. The only variables are the additions and changes hinted at by casting which is more the macabre curiosity that inspires folk to rubberneck at a car crash rather than excitement.

I agree, good analogy. I also don't fully like of Jackson's "vision" of Middle Earth, nor the liberties he takes, and especially the silly parts designed to appeal to the masses. We will undoubtedly get boat-loads of the same in this movie. Sigh. I wish there had been a different director for The Hobbit, at least then we could expect something different. But there's nothing to be done about it, so despite it all I still look forward to this movie.

[Araréiel]

Almost three years after my last visit and here I am lamenting having to wait a year! It's like the good ol' days all over again, waiting for December!

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Kuruharan above is correct on the LotR movies (parts 2 and 3). On balance FotR was fine, it's the only one I can rewatch through. It's hard to say what the worst PJ screw up was, messing with my favorite characater (Faramir), Gandalf ignoring the specific ban on wizards physically assaulting M-E people, the Green Slime, etc.

As to the preview, so far the movies seem to be better then I had thought they'd be. PJ does have the difficult task of making TH movie more attuned to LotR then the book Hobbit and LotR. As noted above, the music and scenery seem still the best part of the project.Little touches, lots of the dwarves piling in at once seems a necessary alteration going from book to movie. The problem with a troll fight is not its existence (there was one between Thorin and Bilbo with them, but rather the way PJ will almost certainly go over the top.

An under control PJ (a rather unlikely scenario) would confine each movie to one BIG battle each---at the end of Part I Dol Guldur, and Part II the Battle of Five Armies,
with a minor scuffle with the wolves and goblins with the Eagles swooping in in Part I.

As for Bombur, reread The Hobbit and you'll see he was very much comic relief constantly.

[Kuruharan]

I have found something brilliant on the Interwebz that sums up Jackson's dwarves perfectly.

Dwarves

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

I have found something brilliant on the Interwebz that sums up Jackson's dwarves perfectly.

Dwarves

THIS.

[Legolas]

Originally Posted by Araréiel

Almost three years after my last visit and here I am lamenting having to wait a year! It's like the good ol' days all over again, waiting for December!

As for the latter statement, isn't that great though? Puts the world as it should be.

There ought to be a Tolkien-based film released every December for us to anticipate.

Originally Posted by Kath

Are we going to get more trailers given it's still a year away?!

As memory serves, we weren't given much more in the year leading up to each of the first three films. That was a decade ago, mind.

If more was given, I avoided them like the plague.

I loved first 'teaser' trailer for The Fellowship Of The Ring which was mainly landscape shots, particularly the pan along the Anduin, but as for actual book scenes and such, I prefer to see the film in its entirety without any spoiling. Anyone with me on that?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Legolas

There ought to be a Tolkien-based film released every December for us to anticipate.

Thy tongue. Bite upon it.

Originally Posted by Legolas

I loved first 'teaser' trailer for The Fellowship Of The Ring which was mainly landscape shots, particularly the pan along the Anduin, but as for actual book scenes and such, I prefer to see the film in its entirety without any spoiling. Anyone with me on that?

PJ's already done the spoiling.

Honestly though, I probably won't see it in the theater unless my daughter expresses interest.

[JolyV]

Thanks for this video, Im a big fan of Lord of the ring, Im very excited waiting The Hobbit

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by JolyV

Thanks for this video, Im a big fan of Lord of the ring...

*The Dark Elf raises an eyebrow*

So, you liked the video, did you? Yes, it was quite germane to the subject.

*Smells a faint hint of spaminess in the air*

Originally Posted by JolyV

Im very excited waiting The Hobbit

You are? Which pub in the Shire? And do they tip well?

[Mithalwen]

http://www.cpaglobal.com/newlegalrev...ts_brand_war_o

This one?