The Hobbit: Style over Substance

I dont get it ? WHY use make up to replicant age when, as was said previous, theres plenty of dam good actors of the age required ! But praps Boyens was feeling lonely who can say
"Oceans" worked because each character had a role, & knew to keep to that role, keep the character flowing, not deviant into something or someone else & it all gelled together to make the story as a WHOLE. The Hobbit ? everyone thought they could be all & everything & it looked like they were nothing. No definition, no clarity. I wonder if the actors knew the characters they were MEANT to be at all ? my guess is, NO, they didnt. They looked as lost as I was watching this shower of shit !

Yeah, I'd rather they cast an older actor. But they wanted the character to be younger even though that went against the source material, and that's what gets me most.

He looked the same age as when he was meant to be a Young Prince doing menial jobs as he did at the end. Now you would have thought a few nights with Boyens would have aged him beyond hope, poor sod so, maybe she didnt get close as she wanted ?

Actually that pissed me off big time too. There seemed to be hardly anything that was even similar to the book ? Dwarves that were too young, too stupid, too handsome. Bilbo hardly active, inclusion of characters invented, story lines & plots imagined from some bad baccy that they must have smoked, I shake my head in regret.

I've pointed out my views about film Thorin *Cough should have been Ian Mcshane* before, but I do understand their reasoning for casting a younger actor-the films central story is Thorin's redemption as a warrior and a quest to recliam his kingdom, it would be rather harder to sell the idea as Thorin as a heroic warrior, if he were a man in say his late sixties-audiences would just assume straight away he's too old to be sucessful, and you would loose some of the parallels between Bilbo and Thorin-Freeman and Armitage are the same age give of take a year or two.

It is worth pointing out Thorin's apperance in the films may actually be closer to the canon than you'd imagine from Tolkien Gateway:

The Dwarves were created by Aulë to be strong, resistant to fire and the evils of Morgoth. They were hardier than any other race, secretive, stubborn, and steadfast in enmity or loyalty.

The lifespan of Dwarves was varied depending on their ancestry. The Longbeards were particularly long-lived, but by the Third Age their lifespan was diminished and they lived, on average, 250 years. Until they were around 30 years of age, Dwarves were considered too young for heavy labor or war (hence the slaying of Azog by Dain Ironfoot at age 32 was a great feat). By the age of 40, Dwarves were hardened into the appearance that they would keep for most of their lives. Between the approximate ages of 40 and 240, most Dwarves were equally hale and able to work and fight with vigor. They took on the appearance of age only about ten years before their death, wrinkling and greying rapidly, but never going bald. Occasionally they would live up to 300 years of age, and Dwalin reached the rare lifespan of 340 years (comparable to a Man living to 100). [6]

Add in insurance reasons, and the punishing schedule of the films, and I can see why they might have cast an younger actor.

Personally, as a fan of book Thorin (a bit of a dick at times, largely ignorant of tactics, but a proud, noble and corteous king in exile, sure he's very forceful and flawed but that is precisely why I like him, he's as proud and strong willed as I'd expect a fallen king to be, Armitage did give a good performance, but I never felt his Thorin was overly dangerous or flawed, it was almost too 'easy' to sympathise with him-not grey enough for me) I think a hybrid solution would have been an interesting idea-keep an older Thorin for the most part, but have a younger Thorin in his prime cross cutting with the later one, showcasing the parells between Thrain, and his sons later descent into madness, there would be rather more power i.m.o seeing an fallen king on his last hurrah, trying to redeem himself before he dies, by showing how far he had fallen from his prime, rather than have him start out as a hero from the start, it's the opposite to what Hollywood normally does, casting a older actor suits the book's character more i.m.o (and would make Thorin more of a father figure to Bilbo, rather than a parallel) and would have been at the least an interesting gamble.


Richard Armitage has pointed out the impact 'dragon sickness' and Thorin's years in exile having a powerful affect on his state of mind, Tolkien references the 'embers in Thorin's heart (can't remember the exact phrase) going hot with rage in his later years, add in his arrogance, and we know his father Thrain went mad at a similar age, and its easy to see why Thorin acts so forceful, he's spent decades in exile broodng over his heritage and the mistakes of his ancestors, knowing he comes from a flawed bloodline and that this is his last shot at restoring Erebor and reclaiming his stolen treasure.

I'm rambling but basically I always saw Thorin as a 'wounded lion' of sorts, trying to protect his 'pride' in a terrible time, but worn down with age and and rage, his arrogance and forceful nature being a shield of sorts and a result of the 'ember in his heart' slowly drying up, his pride being basically of that was left of his lineage.

azriel wrote: Dwarves that were too young, too stupid, too handsome.

Well in fairness, I can't see thirteen hairy old men wearing multi coloured hoods being very interesting from a design point of view, if you have to build almost all of their personailty from the ground up, you might as well give the actors something visually unique to play off. The Dwarves in the book are kinda stupid anyway, cheerfully aware of the fact they have no plans to deal with smaug and are mostly on a jolly romp for treasure, time and again they prove rather useless and Bilbo saves their neck on multiple occasions (not that it bothered me in the slightest), the Dwarves in the film at least have a plan (badly thought at one admittedly), and Jackson deliberately changed the focus of the film to be more concerned with killing Smaug, so it made more sense for the film to have younger 'warriors' to root for, though I agree the film often paints them as stupid in a wholey different manner...

Bilbo was plenty active in the film, Martin Freeman barely stopped twitching...

Richard Armitage bored my pants off. He glowered and he posed, and he was like a million other interchangeable noble heros. Just blah!

At long last I have got my computer back... and the first thing I want to say now I'm returned is: I STILL haven't seen Movie 3!

malickfan wrote:I've pointed out my views about film Thorin *Cough should have been Ian Mcshane* before, but I do understand their reasoning for casting a younger actor-the films central story is Thorin's redemption as a warrior and a quest to recliam his kingdom, it would be rather harder to sell the idea as Thorin as a heroic warrior, if he were a man in say his late sixties-audiences would just assume straight away he's too old to be sucessful, and you would loose some of the parallels between Bilbo and Thorin-Freeman and Armitage are the same age give of take a year or two.

It is worth pointing out Thorin's apperance in the films may actually be closer to the canon than you'd imagine from Tolkien Gateway:

The Dwarves were created by Aulë to be strong, resistant to fire and the evils of Morgoth. They were hardier than any other race, secretive, stubborn, and steadfast in enmity or loyalty.

The lifespan of Dwarves was varied depending on their ancestry. The Longbeards were particularly long-lived, but by the Third Age their lifespan was diminished and they lived, on average, 250 years. Until they were around 30 years of age, Dwarves were considered too young for heavy labor or war (hence the slaying of Azog by Dain Ironfoot at age 32 was a great feat). By the age of 40, Dwarves were hardened into the appearance that they would keep for most of their lives. Between the approximate ages of 40 and 240, most Dwarves were equally hale and able to work and fight with vigor. They took on the appearance of age only about ten years before their death, wrinkling and greying rapidly, but never going bald. Occasionally they would live up to 300 years of age, and Dwalin reached the rare lifespan of 340 years (comparable to a Man living to 100). [6]

Interesting, though The Hobbit describes Balin with a white beard and he hadn't yet reached the age where he would have begun to age rapidly.[/quote]

Orwell wrote:At long last I have got my computer back... and the first thing I want to say now I'm returned is: I STILL haven't seen Movie 3!

Looks like we're in the same club!

Much of my Tolkien experiened has been marred - but not all!

Orwell wrote:Much of my Tolkien experiened has been marred - but not all!

I was actually really worried about having my mental images of The Hobbit corrupted or lost because of the films, but I've been happy to find that didn't happen. This was probably made easier by how un-Hobbitish the films were.

Hello Orwell I wondered where you got too
How is the Eco Warrior life style going ?

Orwell!

Radaghast wrote:
Interesting, though The Hobbit describes Balin with a white beard and he hadn't yet reached the age where he would have begun to age rapidly.

It's worth noting the stuff about Dwarven aging is Taken from The Peoples Of Middle Earth (HOME Volume 12) from memory it was from a draft background essay Tolkien intended to include in the appendices, I'm not sure if it was scrapped for reasons of brevity or being overwritten by later drafts, but I suppose the nature of Balin's appearance depends on how canonical you consider the HOME stuff in relation to The Hobbit (which has several inconsistencies with LOTR anyway).

Getting geeky here, my head canon is it's a stress related thing due to all the battles and stuff(I don't think Balin was in the line of descent from Durin, who was known as the deathless, maybe the dwarvish 'royal houses' aged slowly) just as I kinda assumed Cirdan's aged appearance is both down to sheer age, and being stressed by the inner 'sea longing' of the Teleri. It's weird even though Thorin is described as white bearded and is only about 20 years older than Balin, Balin just comes across as kinda old and feeble in TH book.

Yeah, Balin is described as being "very old-looking" iirc, so it doesn't seem as if Tolkien was following the bit from PoME, at least as far as appearances. I forgot Gloin's age if it was ever given but I think he was described as looking old in "The Council of Elrond".

azriel wrote:Hello Orwell  I wondered where you got too
How is the Eco Warrior life style going ?

Must do another mobile vid methinks. Survivaling is all GO, Azzy.

Mrs Figg wrote:Orwell!

None other!

Radaghast wrote:Yeah, Balin is described as being "very old-looking" iirc, so it doesn't seem as if Tolkien was following the bit from PoME, at least as far as appearances. I forgot Gloin's age if it was ever given but I think he was described as looking old in "The Council of Elrond".

If only people would stiop talking about PJ - maybe his movies could fade away altogether leaving only Tolkien to talk about.

Orwell wrote:

Radaghast wrote:Yeah, Balin is described as being "very old-looking" iirc, so it doesn't seem as if Tolkien was following the bit from PoME, at least as far as appearances. I forgot Gloin's age if it was ever given but I think he was described as looking old in "The Council of Elrond".

If only people would stiop talking about PJ - maybe his movies could fade away altogether leaving only Tolkien to talk about.

I dunno...I don't like his movies, but they're good conversation starters...as long as you're not on TORN

They serve as conversation-enders on TOR.N.