Re: script writing for the Hobbit...

by azriel Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:23 pm

Looks a lot better than the 'thing' got dragged out of a whaling net ! should have harpooned her then ! Very Happy

by Mrs Figg Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:31 pm

agreed and I thought nuclear Galadriel in FOTR was quite effective at the time.

by Sinister71 Tue Mar 24, 2015 8:18 pm

well in my script there is no Galadriel glowing in the dark or turning all twisted like PJ did :brows:

by bungobaggins Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:51 am

Is there a Galadriel in your script?

by RA Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:31 am

bungobaggins wrote:Is there a Galadriel in your script?

Maybe for the best

by bungobaggins Wed Mar 25, 2015 12:55 pm

If Sin takes out the White Council BS, then I'll be more interested.

by Mrs Figg Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:42 pm

yeah the less PJ crapola the better it will be imo Nod

by Sinister71 Fri Mar 27, 2015 12:49 am

bungobaggins wrote:Is there a Galadriel in your script?

I'll say lady Galadriel is getting an honorable mention at the table of Lord Elrond, as does Saruman. But neither are making a physical appearance. If I were to ever write a LOTR script having her in the Hobbit just takes away from the Fellowships time in Lothlorien IMHO. Her meeting with Frodo and the rest of the company is something I wouldn't want to spoil by having her be in the Hobbit.

Nope no white council on screen...There is however a mention of a white council meeting between Gandalf and Elrond, where Galadriel, Saruman, and Glofindel are mentioned briefly as is Arathorn (since it was rumored he also may have been a part of the White Council). But they are mentioned so fast it would make your head spin. Gandalf mentions that "it has been almost 100 years since our last council meeting, with Lady Galadriel and Saruman".... Elrond replies "Yes, the years have been quiet Gandalf, I would say no news is good news". Later Gandalf asks Elrond "Has there been any news from Glorfindel or Arathorn about our burden" to which Elrond replies, "I have heard naught, since our last meeting" " Gandalf says "Ahh" (in a somber mood)to which Elrond replies more cheerfully, "Again old friend, all has been quiet".. they walk out of frame talking more.

Just something to acknowledge the White Councils existence While being crammed in the middle of Book dialogue and scenes. Gandalf obviously would have spoke to Elrond about these matters without the dwarfs. Kind of breaks up the dwarfs scenes at Rivendell. I like the fact they stayed there for a couple weeks not just quickly over night like Jackson would let us believe.

During a scene with the dwarfs in Rivendell, I have written a couple scenes with a human boy, about the age of 10, "peeking and spying" on the Dwarfs. He is never mentioned by name, or given any real screen time. He is just there, so if someone sees him they should recognize him for what he is. Estel.... Just a young boy being curios about adventurers. I actually have Gloin notice him and give him a sly wink. To which the boy acts like he was caught at something embarrassing and darts out of the scene and is not seen again, Gloin chuckles though, shaking his head at the boy. Next scene is the dwarfs departing Rivendell

So yeah there is a bit of fan fiction in there but I really am trying to keep that to a minimum.

by Eldorion Fri Mar 27, 2015 3:41 am

I was actually rather fond of the idea of a (very subtle) Estel cameo in Rivendell before I realized that the timeline alterations meant Aragorn was 27 at the time of PJ's The Hobbit. That's one fanficcy moment that I don't mind at all. Smile

Regarding the White Council, I generally agree with the approach you seem to have taken. The dates you mention match up with Tolkien's, though I'm not sure I'd describe the decades prior to the Quest as quiet. Nothing quite on the scale of the sack of Erebor or the War of the Dwarves and Orcs, of course, but the Necromancer was active and the orcs of the Misty Mountains were starting to spread again.

by Sinister71 Sun Mar 29, 2015 3:55 am

Yeah I agree the Necromancer was active and there were signs but I'm kind of down playing it a bit though. Suspect

The task at hand is the dwarfs and Bilbo getting to the mountain. Who and what the necromancer truly are are not for this story Wink

by halfwise Sun Mar 29, 2015 4:22 am

Actually I thought the concept of having the White Council appear in the Hobbit was kinda cool, but the execution was a disappointing mess.

And it shouldn't have been tied up with the Quest at all - only Gandalf should give a rat's ass about the dwarves and Bilbo, the others wouldn't have thought it worth mentioning, or at most roll their eyes at it. Actually that would have been a nice way to play it: Gandalf explaining maybe he's a day late because he was helping Dwarves to back to the Lonely mountain, and the others seem somewhat bemused he'd waste his time with it. Dire warnings and trying to forbid it was just stupid.

by Eldorion Sun Mar 29, 2015 5:07 am

Sinister71 wrote:Yeah I agree the Necromancer was active and there were signs but I'm kind of down playing it a bit though. The task at hand is the dwarfs and Bilbo getting to the mountain. Who and what the necromancer truly are are not for this story

Yeah, I'm the last guy to want the Necromancer to get a major role in the story, but something that I noticed when re-reading TH around the time AUJ came out was the shadow the Necromancer casts over the beginning of the quest and the plans that are made. It's all very vague, of course, but everyone (most of all Gandalf) is intimidated by him and that affects the direction the story goes in. Whereas in the movies, the whole "watchful peace" thing means that the Necromancer actually has less influence in AUJ than in the corresponding chapters of the book. Though the reverse is true in the latter two movies, as we all know...

halfwise wrote:Actually I thought the concept of having the White Council appear in the Hobbit was kinda cool, but the execution was a disappointing mess.

I'm skeptical that there was ever any way it could have been done well. It's inherently a distraction from the core story, and giving that much time to Gandalf only makes sense if you're already drastically increasing his importance to the narrative. In the book he's very much a supporting player, and the White Council element is only significant insofar as it leaves the Company without a guardian (filling the same plot role as Gandalf's fall in Khazad-dum does in LOTR). I understand that Gandalf is a fan-favorite and no one wants to waste an actor like Ian McKellen, but he's not who the story is about. And even if they had given more time to the White Council plot and fleshed things out a bit more, it would only further highlight how much more important those events were to the grand sweep of Middle-earth history than the Quest of Erebor was. I can only imagine that making Sauron the prime mover behind the Battle of Five Armies was a preemptive attempt by the screenwriters to avoid this problem, but that in turn introduces its own problems. Better to just not muck with the storyline in such ways in the first place, IMO.

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Mar 29, 2015 10:33 am

With the narrative for TH I dont see there is a way of including Sauron in the tale and not have it overshadow Bilbo going to see a dragon.
Everything about the Necromancer story- once exposed- undermines the core story of TH. Which is why Tolkien wisely didn't try to expose it at the time but just used it as a handy get rid of Gandalf plot line. And that is crucial as Gandalf's main role in the tale is as a character arc assist for Bilbo. So if you focus on what Gandalf is up to you not only set up a bigger more important parallel tale to Bilbos that ruins Bilbo's tale, but you take away Gandalfs actual purpose in the story- which is to be mysteriously absent whenever its time for Bilbo to step up to the plate and learn something new about himself and the world.
Gandalfs absences are gaps in which Bilbo shines- but thats no good if instead of there being a Gandalf gap in which Bilbo can come to the fore the audience goes off with Gandalf instead and just leaves Bilbo, and his story, behind.

by Mrs Figg Sun Mar 29, 2015 2:24 pm

I think the Dol Guldur storyline could have worked out ok in TH if Mirkwood had been portrayed as a kind of Old Forest with a vague distant threat kind of thing in the background. In Mirkwood we could have got the odd flash of the spooky castle and some weird black creatures/animals that sometimes pop out in the Dwarves path, just hints of some unknown power in the forest, a bit like Old Man Willow and the Withy Windle but without actually meeting anything specific. I wanted Mirkwood to be a bit like the Old Forest but it wasn't to be, what we got was a plastic looking non scary funfair ride. The forest in the Wizard of Oz is far creepier and that film was made 60 years ago. Rolling Eyes

by Sinister71 Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:42 am

The hard part with including the Necromancer is knowing where to draw the line between showing and not showing him. i think seeing him gives some validation to Gandalf leaving the dwarfs at the edge of Mirkwood. But too show him using any creatures or servants of evil didn't work for me. Even showing what Gandalf was doing during his excursion was problematic. I fought with myself back and forth about including what Gandalf did during his departure from the dwarfs but after doing it one way and looking at it from the other side. I opted to not show where Gandalf went. I ended up writing it both ways and found that it added to Gandalf's mystery leaving his side adventure out of the Hobbit. His comings and goings should be a mystery, after much careful deliberation.

I do have a scene with the Necromancer however it is just to show an visual image of him. It is however vague as to whether it is a memory of Gandalf's or a present day flash of who Gandalf goes to face. The scene has Gandalf telling Thorin of the Necromancer while we see the character on screen. All hints are visual and he is never ever referred to as Sauron.

The scene I originally wrote had Gandalf showing up with elves to an abandoned DolGuldur, but after trying to make it work in a couple different ways. I found the story flowed better just leaving it alone. I figured having Gandalf and Elrond reference the White Council and DolGuldur, reference that there is something urgent that has already been addressed, while never revealing things that are not necessary in the story proper of the Hobbit

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 2:53 am

I think you have made the right decision there Sin Nod

by Sinister71 Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:00 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote:I think you have made the right decision there Sin

after reading it through I think so too. Gandalf is supposed to be mysterious, it mentions hims sending young hobbits on adventures but never telling of those adventures. Besides this is supposed to be Bilbo's story and Gandalf should be left as a mysterious figure who just intertwines within it.

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 31, 2015 3:04 am

I think with Gandalf you have to treat him as a new character- not Gandalf everyone knows from LotR's- in TH he is both mysterious and at times potentially sinister- you are never sure what he is up to or what is motivating him- as you say its important to mention he has sent others off before- for me Id also try to find a way to fit in the visual of him in Bag End with all the glowing smoke rings round his head making him look like a sorceror.
But the important thing is that Gandalf should come across as a mysterious unknown quality whose activities we are only glimpsing.

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 9:54 pm

halfwise wrote:Actually I thought the concept of having the White Council appear in the Hobbit was kinda cool, but the execution was a disappointing mess.

And it shouldn't have been tied up with the Quest at all - only Gandalf should give a rat's ass about the dwarves and Bilbo, the others wouldn't have thought it worth mentioning, or at most roll their eyes at it. Actually that would have been a nice way to play it: Gandalf explaining maybe he's a day late because he was helping Dwarves to back to the Lonely mountain, and the others seem somewhat bemused he'd waste his time with it. Dire warnings and trying to forbid it was just stupid.

Hmm...why wouldn't the council be at least slightly concerned Thorin and Co were going to Erebor? Sure in TH book it's more of case of getting some treasure first and thinking of what to do to Smaug second, but even so I would expect Gandalf to inform Galadriel and co of the basics, the Istari were sent to Middle Earth to aid it citizens however they could, In The Quest Of Erebor Tolkien retroactively connects Gandalf's fears of alliance between Smaug and The Necromancer after all.

Jackson couldn't really please anyone with this subplot, if he didn't explain where Gandalf went, casual audiences would be confused and dissapointed (show not tell in a film after all), if he did it could make the Quest for the mountain seem smaller and too tied into the wider scheme of things (or alternatively if he kept the Doggle Door storyline mostly seperate it could end up seeming tacked on), he was leaning on the LOTR nostalgia alot to sell tickets so it made sense to include Galadriel and co from a buinsess point of view-indeed most readers seemed excited to see Doggle Door on screen, but on the other hand it would basically be fan fiction so wouldn't please everyone.

Shrugging

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:12 pm

Sinister71 wrote:The hard part with including the Necromancer is knowing where to draw the line between showing and not showing himIf you are going to mention him as more than a sinister one off reference I think some sort of visual is needed, I always felt The Necromancer's influence could be felt at the very edges of the story. i think seeing him gives some validation to Gandalf leaving the dwarfs at the edge of Mirkwood. But too show him using any creatures or servants of evil didn't work for meI never completely understood how The Necromancer would comunicatr anyway? He has no body...PJ's idea of a shapeshifting ball of smoke was probably the only solution...but it still looked...odd. Even showing what Gandalf was doing during his excursion was problematic. I fought with myself back and forth about including what Gandalf did during his departure from the dwarfs but after doing it one way and looking at it from the other side. I opted to not show where Gandalf went. I ended up writing it both ways and found that it added to Gandalf's mystery leaving his side adventure out of the HobbitI was open to a little bit of exploration in the films, but too much kills the mystery I think. In an ideal world the Dol Guldur stuff might have worked best as flashbacks in a potential FOTR film following after TH . His comings and goings should be a mystery, after much careful deliberationyes agreed.

I do have a scene with the Necromancer however it is just to show an visual image of him. It is however vague as to whether it is a memory of Gandalf's or a present day flash of who Gandalf goes to face. The scene has Gandalf telling Thorin of the Necromancer while we see the character on screen. All hints are visual and he is never ever referred to as SauronNice idea.

The scene I originally wrote had Gandalf showing up with elves to an abandoned DolGuldur, but after trying to make it work in a couple different waysI guess the problem is, you either show alot or you show pretty much nothing, it's meant to a mystery at the edges of the story (looking at TH as a standalone book at least) going into too much detail would disrupt the flow of the story, it's not something an audeince needs to see. I found the story flowed better just leaving it alone. I figured having Gandalf and Elrond reference the White Council and DolGuldur, reference that there is something urgent that has already been addressed, while never revealing things that are not necessary in the story proper of the Hobbitsave it for a LOTR script

by Sinister71 Tue Mar 31, 2015 11:43 pm

PJ's idea of a shapeshifting ball of smoke was probably the only solution...

The version of the necromancer I have written is very ghost like, lots of low angles looking up, lots of mist and fog. The necromancer I imagine is hood covered in a robe made of similar material to burlap. There are holes in the fabric and covered in dirt and mud. Like they are torn or rotted away. There is armor underneath the robe seen through the holes, but it is rather rusted and dirty, his face hidden from view. I also thought of other visual clues to his identity which if a LOTR script would be done would become obvious who he is. Details like missing fingers on his ring hand, filagree designs in the armor indicating some sort of beauty. All the while feeling like death.

I think it would give insight into his past beautiful form, while the look of him would indicate death and decay. The way I would want the scene shot is as though it were uncertain whether it was a real physical being or a ghost with no physical form to speak of.
Showing the being while Gandalf is telling of him gives the audience something visual to see what Gandalf must leave to deal with, but leaving that part of the story out adds to the mystery of Gandalf's character. I am making it very adamant that Gandalf is a mysterious being whom not even Bilbo understands.

by malickfan Tue Mar 31, 2015 11:54 pm