To Prof. Tolkien, wherever he may be...

[Manveruon]

On behalf of the fans of your stories, I would like to apologize for Peter Jackson.

[Eledhwen]

Yeah. You kind of have to regard the movies, mostly the Hobbit movies, as someone's odd fantasy story derived from The Hobbit. It certainly isn't 'The Hobbit' itself. Far too many liberties for no other reason than they thought it would somehow make an awesome story 'better' or something. Lots of things that never needed changing. *shrugs*

As in the first one, I will get the disc since the movie as a generic fantasy movie is all right, but they don't get housed with the Lord of the Rings discs...which have their own problems, but nothing like these recent ones.

Personal opinion of course, and no more than that.

Eledhwen

[Cinead]

Enjoy it for what it is.....

A story that is told by two different story tellers...

[Straelbora]

I have yet to see the second "Hobbit" film, but it seems that these three will suffer in excess of the stuff that I didn't like from his take on "The Lord of the Rings," mostly, Jackson's penchant for 'more, more, more- over the top' and his sort of middle schooler 'fart joke' sense of humor. That and his reliance on CGI is so much more. And the worst part, that he and Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsch think that they are better story tellers than Professor Tolkien.

[Ringulf]

Ouch!
You know I am looking forward to seeing part 2, but in my heart I have been reconciling the PJ story with the book by saying "well any time you make a three movie series out of one book you have to use a lot of filler." But the way he is making media meatloaf out of literary sirloin is rather disconcerting.

I love the fact that we are getting a well thought out background of extrainious material that is not canonical but based on the conjecture of peripheral information. I think that adds a bit to the imagination of what was on the outskirts of the story that Tolkien did not write but could have. Very much like the Expanded Universe material of Star Wars gave us all more ways to live the story within the same setting.

I like forums and fan fic that allow authors to jump into the parameters of a particular setting and tell the stories that were not main stream. there had to be many other stories in the world of Middle Earth (else we would not have the Silmarilion and all of the unfinished tales) and not just the big earth shattering ones but the ones about the 1st through 3rd level characters and the miller's son and that one hobbit that liked to hunt and play on boats.

Guess it is just the writer or gamer in me, but scholarly study of cannoical material is the historian's side of the Tolkien writings and has it's place as the heart of the hobby, but the world of Professor Tolkien's devising, to me, is just as much of a wonder as the storyline written in it.

Yeah I'm smellin what PJ is cookin, but I try not to confuse a rich boy playing in a sandbox with the guy who built the playground.

[mcapanelli]

Eh, I liked it all so far. I don't really hold his work to the books though and much like Eledhwen regard the films as separate stories derived from the Professor Tolkien's works. All I know is my 4 year old son LOVES the movies and its sparked an interest in him. Now he wants me to read him "The Hobbit" at bedtime. To me, that's really the hidden gem in all of this. Like the films or not, its sparked the imagination of a new generation and will keep doing so in to the foreseeable future, driving more and more to read the books and keeping our beloved stories alive for generations to come. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a 12 year old reading the hobbit right now that will, in 25 years time, helm the reboot of the films and continue to spark the minds of future young viewers. I also wouldn't be surprised if stories from the Silmarillion start popping up in the desks of executives if these films match or top what the original trilogy did at the box office and home DVD sales.

[Eledhwen]

My only real issue is that people who have never read the books (and many probably never will now) think the movie story *IS* the story, and it isn't. I don't mind folk writing inside a story of things that happened but were not recorded, but taking the history of that world and then rewriting it for no really good reason (in many cases) goes over the top for me. I have had far too many folk tell me of late that I have the story wrong because the movie has it differently. Sad, just sad.

Other than that, to each their own. That stuff is all that really aggravates me. People are thinking that the movies *are* The Hobbit. They aren't just another storytellers version of the same story, they are essentially rewritten history. Example; Azog, father of Bolg of the North, Azog was slain by Dain Ironfoot in Moria (under the East Gate) during the Dwarf-Goblin wars, the last battle of the war in fact (Azanulbizar TA 2799), well before the Ring was found by Bilbo. As related by Gandalf himself.

PJ will do what he does; make grand entertainment movies. I enjoy them as movies and as his weird 'parody' of the books, nothing more.


Eledhwen

[Laothain]

I haven't seen it yet either but it saddens me to know that there are those out there that truly believe that they watched the Lord of the Rings or now the Hobbit with out realizing that what they saw was a seemly shadow of the books or a very lose adaptation that has marred the beauty of the books. That said let us watch and enjoy them and hold them as two different things that are similar but different all at the same time.

[Yavion]

I saw the first and hated it.

This sums up my feelings nicely.

[Ringulf]

I agree with you Eledhwen, about people thinking that the movie IS the story. Frustrating!
But really when you think of it, that seems to always be the shallow, narrow, lazy 'cause I don't want to read it, veiw of most great peices of literature that are adapted for the screen.
All you can say is that many times those folks get drawn into the culture and want to know more, (like the little ones Chris is speaking of) then, hopefully, they go into the books and get the depth and clarity that we readers had all along and become true fans.
In some ways, like with the Game of Thrones stuff, I am with them because then I lessen my disappointment and there is nowhere to go but up!

[Straelbora]

Eh, I liked it all so far. I don't really hold his work to the books though and much like Eledhwen regard the films as separate stories derived from the Professor Tolkien's works. All I know is my 4 year old son LOVES the movies and its sparked an interest in him. Now he wants me to read him "The Hobbit" at bedtime. To me, that's really the hidden gem in all of this. Like the films or not, its sparked the imagination of a new generation and will keep doing so in to the foreseeable future, driving more and more to read the books and keeping our beloved stories alive for generations to come. I wouldn't be surprised if there's a 12 year old reading the hobbit right now that will, in 25 years time, helm the reboot of the films and continue to spark the minds of future young viewers. I also wouldn't be surprised if stories from the Silmarillion start popping up in the desks of executives if these films match or top what the original trilogy did at the box office and home DVD sales.

It will take the kind of world-changing events that sunk Beleriand under the waves to imagine the Tolkien Estate releasing materials from "The Silmarillion" or any other of the Professor's works for film. Tolkien sold the film rights to "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" because he was afraid of saddling his family with huge inheritence taxes. He sold to United Artists and later, Saul Zaentz ("Tolkien Enterprises") bought them from UA. Zaentz already had a reputation for cheating creative people out of their royalties. Zaentz not only got the cartoon versions made as well as the current films, but is in large part responsible for the commoditization of Tolkien's works (e. g. , "Trollshaws" tm).

[Chris Russo]

I've attained a sort of legendary status among my friends...

See, whenever we're watching LOTR or the Hobbit, and something doesn't make sense, they turn to me and say, "Why did X do Y?" (Why is Arwen dying? Why is Frodo showing the Ringwraiths the Ring? Why doesn't Gandalf just cast Feather Fall and step off the edge of Orthanc? Why can't a man kill the Witchking)

And I say to them, "Well, see, that's not quite how it happened in the books. In reality, (blah blah blah), and then he (blah blah blah)."

I've become the Wise LOTR-Explainer Sage or something, to the point where several don't want to watch the movie unless I'm there with them to answer questions.

[Ringulf]

Yeah I have had the same experience with my nieces and nephews as well as my own kids.
It is interesting and now that more folks are exposed to the genre through the movies it happens more and more to those of us who are "Bearers of the Secret Knowledge" (ie: we read books)

[Eric C]

We watched the Desolation of Smaug last night. As a fantasy movie, it was good and entertaining. I think he NAILED Smaug. As the Hobbit.... it wasn't. I do appreciate PJ's works for a couple of reasons. I had never read the books until I saw FotR. So for me personally, they sparked an interest in the books that has led to some good times and a new hobby/culture for my family. Not to mention my Middle Earth family here. In my personal opinion we have the BEST forum on the internet. Will the movies do this for everyone? Most likely not. Most folks just won't sit and read the comics page of the local paper anymore, much less a book the size of the Prof's works.

[Alvin]

I have very much enjoyed reading Tolkien's Middle Earth books .... and I have very much enjoyed viewing Jackson's LOTR trilogy and THE HOBBIT movie of 2012. I am now awaiting the date when I can order THE DESOLATION OF SMAUG DVD from Amazon next year.