Fanedits and Purist editions

Where it's not Ranger related. Rankin Bass, Bakshi, PJ, or independent. If it's not specifically ranger related, let's talk movies (or TV)!

Moderator: caedmon

Post Reply
User avatar
caedmon
Balku'npâ
Posts: 962
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:30 am
Location: Palmer Alaska

Fanedits and Purist editions

Post by caedmon »

Oh,, wow, how did I never hear about this?



I tip my hat to the intrepid souls who did this. And my hope for a SINGLE good version of the The Hobbit movie is restored.
-Jack Horner

----------------------------
Impression: Cædmon Reedmace | bronze founder living in Archet, Breeland. c. 3017
Straelbora
Haeropada
Posts: 937
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:00 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN USA

Re: Fanedits and Purist editions

Post by Straelbora »

I already fast-forward over certain parts of "The Hobbit." I can imagine an edit that would make the trilogy much more pleasing to me.
Vápnum sínum skala maðr velli á
feti ganga framar því at óvist er at vita
nær verðr á vegum úti geirs um þörf guma
Hávamál
Eärendur
Dúnadan
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 12:11 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Fanedits and Purist editions

Post by Eärendur »

This is a start: http://www.fanedit.org/ifdb/component/c ... ne-edition

On their forums they are already discussing an edit of Desolation; and I believe the same editor plans to do a "purist" cut of all three hobbit films into one film. I've been looking forward to that since I saw Unexpected Journey in the theater.
User avatar
Manveruon
Thangailhir
Posts: 2582
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:11 am
Location: Littleton, CO
Contact:

Re: Fanedits and Purist editions

Post by Manveruon »

I would definitely enjoy a "purist" edition of the Hobbit movies better, I must admit. Funny thing though, I'm really not a purist at all, myself. I believe changes must be made to successfully adapt most works of print into films, and I was totally behind 90% of the things PJ changed in the LotR trilogy. The other ten percent, not so much, but still, that's a pretty big portion that worked, in my opinion. The Hobbit movies on the other hand... ugh. I actually really, REALLY liked "An Unexpected Journey." Yes, I had my nits to pick, but overall I thought it was a very successful adaptation. Could it have been shorter? Definitely. Could some of the changes have been... toned town? Big time. But really, I thought it worked.
"Desolation" however... yeesh. I just had SO MANY problems with the ways he chose to adapt it, and with how much new material he decided was important, while paring down the stuff that actually WAS in the book to almost nothing at all. And what really irritates me is that so much of it was just completely unnecessary. Unnecessary and just plain BAD. Like, the worst kind of young-adult Hollywood drivel bad. In the end, it just smacked of arrogance and ignorance, and the lack of a strong editor (which is probably PJ's #1 problem as a film-maker).
So with that in mind, if some brilliant fan out there was to use the marvelous technology that has become publicly available over the last decade or so to make the Hobbit films slicker, sleeker, shorter, and closer to the source-material, I definitely wouldn't mind. I don't necessarily need ONE single film, but I wouldn't mind two three-hour films, or even three two-hour films, as long as they were cleaned up, and worked better as decent pieces of cinema. I don't even care if they leave some of PJ's weird changes, as long as the majority of the fat was neatly trimmed (e.g. No bathing dwarves, no pointless 10 minute stone giant battle, no CGI-video-game-bonanza Goblin Town, fewer random orc-battles, no moronic elf-dwarf-elf love triangle, no half-hour dragon fight, no surfing on a river of molten gold, no splitting up the dwarves' party, etc.)
Maerondir Perianseron, also called “Mickel,” Halfling Friend - Ranger of the Misty Mountains
Post Reply