Will The Hobbit do damage to the books?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by littlemanpoet

Maybe this is not harsh enough, but after viewing Hobbit 2 by PJ, my sense was "hyper Baroque". Plastered thick. So dense with extra stuff, none of it needed, that you can barely see the architectural design underneath. A pity, since the architecture is of such high quality.

Yes, if it aint Baroque, don't fix it.

[Galin]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Yes, if it aint Baroque, don't fix it.

Still, I rather wish Arthur Nouveau had directed these films, although that's just my impressionism from seeing the trailers.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Would it really have been too much to ask, or to expect, that when somebody finally made a serious attempt to film Tolkien the goal would have been cinema that fell into the category which might be roughly defined as "cerebral epic" or "big-budget art film," a category which would include, say, 2001, Apocalypse Now and Ran?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Would it really have been too much to ask, or to expect, that when somebody finally made a serious attempt to film Tolkien the goal would have been cinema that fell into the category which might be roughly defined as "cerebral epic" or "big-budget art film," a category which would include, say, 2001, Apocalypse Now and Ran?

Your query resonates with me. It would require the right kind of director. I just can't imagine those who do art film being interested in LotR.

[Mithalwen]

How about Ang Lee?

[littlemanpoet]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

How about Ang Lee?

Want to ask him if he'll do it in about twenty years? Or will he be dead by then?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

How about Ang Lee?

How about Spike Lee? I can see it now:

The Lord of the Rings: Do the Wight Thing

[FerniesApple]

will the Hobbit movies do damage to the books? yep I think they will. All this cheap merchandising, lacklustre publicity, cash grabbing worthless EE versions, the garbage coming from Jackson and Boyens as regards the appendices, 'female energy' clap trap coming from E. Lilly, the actual movies themselves, that abysmal travesty, it all adds up to a pile of steaming poo.

Pity the poor fool who first watches those films and then buys the book thinking its about a Dwarve called Thorin and his dreary quest to reclaim his homeland. Why on earth did Tolkien call it the Hobbit? I hear him/her ask. Theres hardly any Hobbit in the movies.

[Belegorn]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

How about Spike Lee? I can see it now:

The Lord of the Rings: Do the Wight Thing

Funny.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Yes, if it aint Baroque, don't fix it.

And if you do, at least don't make a hobbit of it!

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

Would it really have been too much to ask, or to expect, that when somebody finally made a serious attempt to film Tolkien the goal would have been cinema that fell into the category which might be roughly defined as "cerebral epic" or "big-budget art film," a category which would include, say, 2001, Apocalypse Now and Ran?

I never wanted these big time PJ blockbusters made because it was clear from the start, with all the merchandising buzz even before filming was complete, that giving the movies the feel of the books was not in the least a goal. It was about "translation" and "adaptation", and to this day I feel that those who have only seen the films have no inkling of the deep meaning and real resonance of the books, infused by the author.
I fervently hope they never get the rights for Beren and Lúthien, or anything else to do with Middle-earth or Tolkien.