Critics review 'Desolation of Smaug' | POSSIBLE SPOILERS

Pettytyrant101 wrote:, the rest dont require deeper defining because your film has no reason to be nearly nine hours long so you shouldnt have all that time to fill anyway.   

Very very true.

malickfan wrote:Many people on TORn seem to have the attitude

'I didn't mind very much because it was a kids book, so I'm glad they changed it for us adults screw it's target audience , Professor Tolkien would agree with me as the films were awesome. I know all about Tolkiens thoughts on the hobbit due to some edited letters drafts published a short while ago which I haven't actually read, and oh yeah His Son's a money grabbing git, who does nothing but collect checks, oh if only Peter Jackson was the literary executor then I wouldn't have to read the boring Silmarillion and see a cool film totally in his spirit, and oh yeah Thorin is a fitty...'

You get the point.

I have a feeling that when Christopher Tolkien passes away there will be cheers from a vocal minority on torn, and rumors of a shadow in the far south-east. Whispers of a nameless fear. Peter Jackson acquiring the rights to the Silmarillion. I wouldn't be surprised if they threw some kind of a parade.

I have actually seen comments on TORn saying Christopher was being selfish in holding back the rights as the fans and Jackson deserved more films the implication being they know the book better than he does.

The thing is we don't know whether the estate could even sell the rights if they were inclined-legally if Tolkien put down a clause forbidding the sale of further rights in the trust deed then I guess his heirs would be bound to this until the copyright runs out (the copyright on the sil seems to have been extended several times, and Christopher might count as co author), if you add in the ongoing legal issues and the intrusions into their private life I don't think they have the time money or effort required to see a film through to production.

It never ceases to amaze me how much Tolkien trusted Christopher


http://sacnoths.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/tolkiens-will.html

Personally I'm hoping Christopher leaves the position of Literary executor to Hammond and Scull, as they have proven time and again they understand and admire Tolkien's work like no other (they weren't keen on the films either...)

You might have a point on Christopher Tolkien having his own copyright on the Silmarillion, Malick.

Though it would not be as co-author, but his assembly of his fathers work might in itself constitute an artwork and give him his own rights over the work from a copyright point of view. Wether it actually fills the requirements for an artwork is a question in itself of course.

It would mean anyone wanting to make a film of the Silmarillion would also need the consent of Cristopher or his heirs as copyright holders.

I completely agree with the comparison he made between Jackson and Lucas. Lucas though has always been an editing and effects guy rather than a character and plot guy. Jackson is more spectacle based, too, though I feel like he was different than Lucas from the get go. Now, since he has said 'toys' he's been indulged in a way I don't think he was able to have been before. Now he's so like Lucas that he's calling the Hobbit a Prequel. Next thing we know, he's going to be re-editing LOTR saying that "it's the way I always envisioned it!"  

Man but I enjoy the thought of that review being tossed into TORN like a firecracker into a roomful of sleeping rabbits.

this sums it up Lucas/Jackson. I know which I prefer   

azriel wrote:My God !   And where the fook have YOU been ? Just going out for ciggs you said ! 5 WEEKS AGO ! Men !!     
What could Peejers put in the EEs ? Ads for double glazing ? Info on how Thandypants keeps the shine & gloss in his hair ? Tips on washing yer smalls by the Dwarves ?

Well, I saw a sign that said 'Left to Alberquerqe' for those things you wanted, and I got lost...

Yep, I do wonder what pap will be shoehorned in. It's not like I don't want to see any more of Middle Earth than the book gives me, but what I see, I want it to be as described, and not 're-imagined' is all...

Tinuviel wrote:I completely agree with the comparison he made between Jackson and Lucas. Lucas though has always been an editing and effects guy rather than a character and plot guy. Jackson is more spectacle based, too, though I feel like he was different than Lucas from the get go. Now, since he has said 'toys' he's been indulged in a way I don't think he was able to have been before. Now he's so like Lucas that he's calling the Hobbit a Prequel. Next thing we know, he's going to be re-editing LOTR saying that "it's the way I always envisioned it!"  

At least Star Wars was Lucas's to edit in the first place though. Not that I necessarily approve of it.

Back to the same old thing, I should have had all I wanted when I paid six fooking English pounds bloody sterling Peejers !! Not have to have more fleshed out in an overly priced (which it will be ) EE ! It was the only way PJ could drag it out to 303 films, (which its starting to feel like) Its only a SMALL BOOK ! you dip stick ! Beorn was an absolute pile of shat I thought. The whole episode involving him was NOTHING like the book, well, praps mildly like the book, but it was shat ! Beorn looked ridiculous! For all the length of time "Beorn" was on screen we could have had an extra on Benefits tthat needed the money, not a well known actor reduced to a quick 5mins, & that God awful "outfit" he had on ?!  ? A moth chewed Halloween costume dragged from a skip from someones garden ! I wanted a fierce, commanding, powerful, magical BEAR, what the fook was SPYRO doing here ? oh yeah, I remember, of course, peejers wanted connections to LOTRs, & Elijah Wood played Frodo AND did voice for Spyro, there, I feel better now.

Tee Hee... ^^^^

My biggest issue with Beorn was the apparent implication he puts the shackles back on his wrists after everytime he transforms, perhaps he suffered Brain Damage during one of the concerts he played at? Beorn is The Grinch masquerading as a Rock Singer in these films, right?.

yeah those shackles give me the pip   

Its galadriel ! she secretly pops back & has a bit of S & M with Beorn & snaps the shackles on so she can get jiggy ! She evidently got bored with Celeborn & the outside romps so, seeing as Beorn was single & she fancied a "bit of rough" stuck at a lose end, no Gandy or Saruman about, ( they have nice long beards to hang onto ! yee ha!) ........................................ she's got to find SOMETHING to fill her days ?

The shackles actually didn't bother me that much. You could ask the same question about his clothes - do they turn into fur? It's an issue in most fantasy stories with shapeshifters, it's the same in Harry Potter.

And the Hulk, even with the latest films "Avengers Assemble", Hulks trews stay put.  He loses shirts socks shoes but, not his kegs. Im glad he's covered up, I dont wish to see full frontal  men in the buff , but, the point is, physics tell us when things expand other things often snap off ? burst ? split ? explode ? or, as in a shapeshifter, werewolf, whatever, their apparel is gonna change, whether it becomes "one" with them or splits away. Then, when the make up crew is out of camera shot, there is Beorn, shackles on, hair nicely back combed ? all attachments securely fixed in place.  

Ayup Boots...

As a man, I can indeed vouch that when wearing trunks or trousers, that there are actually times when one indeed feels 'as one' with them. In both times of Expansion and deflation... The trick is not to let the polite company around you notice, especially if you're sneaking a peek at his delightful wife...

And the 'Shapeshifter' thing ?  It's a kind of Magic...

I noticed that the shackle actually never came off, because when I watched it a third time I made sure to check. The shackle was on in bear form. And I don't know if I ever mentioned it here, but Bolg wears bear claws on his shoulders. So there is some continuity among the BS

although there are some nice people over at TORn the majority of posters are nothing more than a bunch of sheep. Following the shepherds over there who run the site. A supposed "Tolkien" website who in all honesty has more affiliation with Peter Jackson that it ever did Tolkien or the Tolkien society. It amazes me the amount of fanboy/girl mentality there is over there. All they can see is more film, more Jackson versions of Tolkien classic writings. Instead of finding their own vision of what was written by the professor himself. They embrace Jackson's deviations rather than appreciate the intricate design Tolkien created. Quite deliberately I might add... TORn would not exist if it weren't for PJ and all the suck ups who think his vision of middle earth is second to none. I have met many artists whom I feel has a better grasp on middle earth than Jackson does and am learning to appreciate what comes from the written page rather than an image forced upon me by a director who really has no grasp on the material he is adapting (terribly at that).

Many might have noticed I haven't been around much. I really have, after seeing DOS, lost almost all interest in Jackson's films, including discussing them. Obviously nothing is going to change including the disappointment I feel when seeing them. Realizing that I appreciate the literature of Tolkien's books. Which i enjoy the feel of in my hands as apposed to looking on a computer screen. I have done a lifestyle change which takes up much of my time. I spend more time with a flogger or rope in my hand, than anything else. Plus I am writing more on my own (fantasy and erotica) which is very time consuming.

At this point in my life Jackson has taken the enjoyment out of Tolkien on film for me. I do truly love LOTR and appreciate the artistry behind the scenes. however the finished product with the Hobbit, is nothing more than something mass produced. To cater to the morons of the world without real imagination. People who would rather not think and just have everything OTT and in their face. Which there is nothing wrong with that if it were anything but Tolkien. But then again what Jackson gave us is more made up content loosely based on Tolkien than actual Tolkien material.

I appreciate Tolkien as much as I ever have.

The trouble I feel Sinister is that those with brains of metal will never understand that romance elevates the soul, while not pretending that romance is Truth (however truhful at times), not a real thing like some folk believe the Holy Spirit is. Romance, of course, has no purpose other than to make us forget the harsh realities for a moment or two, and that's why it's so needed. Metal-minded folk like PJ will never understand that.

The main trouble with Jackson is that he has marred my mental imagery of Tolkien (not blotted it out, just marred it). Jackson is one of Morgoth's soldiers when it comes to the marring business.

I will watch the last of the trio. I have a morbid fascination. But I won't watch the first two movies again. The LotR movies are almost bearable by comparison. They were at least slightly more respectful and slightly less marring.

A great ache for me still is the start of An Unexpected Journey. Much of the opening (definitely not all of it!) was more than acceptable to me. I still wonder if Del Toro had a big hand in the most Tolkien-like bits at the start of film one.

Ringdrotten wrote:The shackles actually didn't bother me that much. You could ask the same question about his clothes - do they turn into fur? It's an issue in most fantasy stories with shapeshifters, it's the same in Harry Potter.

Re: clothes ... wasn't Beorn naked when we saw him turn back into a human? We didn't see him get dressed but it presumably happened between scene cuts. I don't remember if we saw him turn into a bear and/or if he would have had time to strip before transforming, though.

Sinister71 wrote:although there are some nice people over at TORn the majority of posters are nothing more than a bunch of sheep. Following the shepherds over there who run the site. A supposed "Tolkien" website who in all honesty has more affiliation with Peter Jackson that it ever did Tolkien or the Tolkien society.

Or maybe -- going out on a limb here -- there's just a lot of people on TORn who enjoy the films and the site attracts more such people because like-minded people often flock together (we've seen the same thing on this site, just in reverse).

Eldorion wrote:
Or maybe -- going out on a limb here -- there's just a lot of people on TORn who enjoy the films and the site attracts more such people because like-minded people often flock together (we've seen the same thing on this site, just in reverse).

Except that most of the people here were here before TH came out. We have a mix of opinions on LoTR, on the other hand - so that didn't serve as a self-selection criterion.

well that was fun, and probably the only time on TORn where people were allowed to be openly negative about the films, although it brought the pack of yappers out as soon as you tried, but that was to be expected. I noticed they have since shut it down.

halfwise wrote:

Eldorion wrote:
Or maybe -- going out on a limb here -- there's just a lot of people on TORn who enjoy the films and the site attracts more such people because like-minded people often flock together (we've seen the same thing on this site, just in reverse).

Except that most of the people here were here before TH came out. We have a mix of opinions on LoTR, on the other hand - so that didn't serve as a self-selection criterion.

Perhaps.  But there certainly is self-selection going on.  

I'd say that an openness to Purist values, even if not fully embraced, has been a part of Forumshire culture for a very long time.

Add to that a welcoming policy toward refugees from other sites, and a playful irreverence, and I think you're not far from the recipe.