Thread: WHITE COUNCIL WILL WRECK HOBBIT
<<     >>
TH will be a better film if they leave as much of it alone as they can. You'd think they might have learned from LoTR that the poorest parts are the bits they went furthest from source. Yet they seem intent upon TH being nothing at all like source.
If they want to do a film based on TH and LoTR where they can make up loads about Frodo's upbringing, and then do White Council stuff fine, do it seperatley. But its not TH.
Where'd my optimism go?
"I was thinking they might most likely be brief cut-scenes rather than extended sequences--much like the few very brief scenes with Isildur in LotR--not much more than a few minutes altogether really. If so, it's not really worth anyone getting their Purist knickers in a bunch ."
Hey! Maybe they're going to explore the psychological ramifications it might have had on Frodo later in life. Hey! This lead to an extended extended version of the LotR movies:
Frodo: [i:3lk2rck6]"Oh if my Dear Mother had only lived, I wouldn't have ended up burdened with this #*^+#*@ ring!!!!" [/i:3lk2rck6]
Sam: [i:3lk2rck6]"Yes, Mr Frodo - and if you're old Dad had lived, he woulden'na let you go orf in the #*^+#*@ first place."[/i:3lk2rck6]
Actually, this Primula Baggins business must be a furphy. I wonder who is spreading the rubbish? And why?
Again, it's an artist's prerogative to shape an adaptation.
Feel free to check a dictionary but for me it means that techniques and devices used in writing differ from the techniques and expectations of a film audience. The job therefore is to, as successfully as possible, move the characters, story and setting across from one medium to another. Its a matter of finding out what will work using film narrative and seeing if you can find ways to make what won't work, work. If you can't make it work then, [b:3ta80a3g]and only then[/b:3ta80a3g] should it be discarded. At this junction it may be necessary to create a scene or instance which does not occur in the written version to bridge the loss.
What the Coven and PJ did with LotR and now it seems with TH, is to reach that junction before even bothering trying to get the original story to work in film. In fact the WC idea has been bubbling along pretty much since the film was announced, or at least was present in very early versions of their story for TH. That means they planned to add and change all this before even trying to adapt the actual book. Which I doubt they ever even intended to do. They would rather massage their own egos and make it [i:3ta80a3g]their[/i:3ta80a3g] story. We've all felt like that about LoTR, that's its somehow special to us, that we want to be a part of it somehow, but it's not an excuse to bugger the films!
Changes made in LoTR to characters and plot have no basis in either necessity or the source material. It is an entire contrivense. When you deviate as far as they did from these basics of adapting then you are no longer engaged in adapting. You are engaged in invention.
Thats not your job if you are seriously adapting someone elses work, especially as long a processed work as LoTR and TH were for their author. It is disrepecful to the origianl work and its creator. (and its fans)
By that logic they should, or at least reasonably could include all sorts of other parts of the backstory from the Appendices. The history of the Northmen and the Wainriders is at least as relevant to the story of [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] (telling part of the history of the Men of Dale) as Frodo's parentage, which has only the connection of his father being related to Bilbo. While the historical passages are not in the same timeframe as [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a], neither is Frodo's parentage, though there is of course a difference of scale.
My point goes beyond faithfulness to the book. [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] should tell a story. If they want to just make [i:2onmfc8a]The Backstory to The Lord of the Rings[/i:2onmfc8a] they should make a miniseries with a different topic each week (who knows? it might even be good). What they shouldn't try to do is shove all sorts of unrelated stories into one pair of movies.
Considering faithfulness, the filmmakers, any filmmakers, definitely have a right to interpret and make cuts, changes, etc. It's quite simply necessary - you can't just use the book in place of a screenplay. There are even some cuts and changes to [i:2onmfc8a]The Lord of the Rings[/i:2onmfc8a] that I'm okay with (sorry petty). When I object is when the changes go beyond making the story fit a new medium and start trying to tell a new story. That's why I think the addition of new subplots to [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] (Dol Guldur and perhaps Frodo's backstory) would be "worse" than just about everything PJ did with LOTR. He was, in general, telling the same basic story. TH appears to be shaping up to tell a very different kind of story - a prequel to LOTR that covers what was happening to all the different characters - than the straightforward and wondrous Quest of Erebor that made the book a classic.
Ha! My point is: those damn Liberals showed just how Fascist they really were! Don't agree with us and we'll make veiled threats to kill you! (That was the subliminal meaning of the troll cartoon, you see). You know, I hope GB won't crush us down like some Fascist Tyrant, while pretending to be open minded! The hypocrisy! I suspect [size=150:16pbzr19][b:16pbzr19]HE[/b:16pbzr19][/size:16pbzr19] put that Primula Baggins business on the Netosphere and is in the [size=150:16pbzr19][b:16pbzr19]pay of [/b:16pbzr19][/size:16pbzr19]certain Warlocks and Witches! Let's face it, we can't trust Liberals! (Look at what's appening in Britain - Liberals merging with Tories... cunning... Labor people voted for those Liberals.... yes, very cunning...)
Mmmm... anyway, I agree with Mr Tyrant and Eldo - absolutely! -and that makes you wrong, GB (as usual! ) Wrong, wrong, wrong! My goodness you cause us some trouble on this forum... now where's that troll cartoon.... could use it just now...
NB: I'm also still trying to get my brain around the fact there was a Primula Brandybuck/Baggins who became Frodo's Mum - that's weird! I had no idea! But maybe I did, after all?
Hysterically pouting about it "ruining" your visions of the perfect adaptation isn't going to change that . Again, you guys are always welcome to do what others have, create your own version if you think you can do it better. The Fan Films created thus far show that it can be done. And I mean that sincerely without malice. Your opinions are always welcome, even though the relentless Purism can occasionally become tiresome , so perhaps we could lay off the "Liberals=Fascists" statements . We have quite enough of that sort of rhetoric here in the US at the moment without having it spill over into Middle Earth.
I, for one, trust Jackson and Del Toro to create another brilliant set of adaptations that capture the heart, the essence, and the imagery of Tolkien's works. And the fact is, as Odo found out, there are plenty of long-time and serious Tolkien Fans of the Books who agree with me (even if they are all at other forums ).
BTW, I don't think I've implied or stated that you're a Fascist (or not a true fan - I think there are many true fans who are not purists), so I'd appreciate it if you don't imply that I'm hysterical.
And who gets to be the Arbiter of "Truth" when it comes to Fanhood? I've been a "True" Tolkien fan longer than some of you have been alive.
I'm not really sure whether to take what Odo says as serious or not. It seems like he's just being silly most of the time, though who am I to judge a Banks? They're odd creatures, those ones.
Silly? How insulting! I try to bring the sweet rhyme of reason to this Forum, and what do I get? Abuse!
As to Liberal-Fascists (I'm not sure, but it might have been me who said it, I at least agree with the view!) I am indeed a Purist and will call a spade and spade, a shovel a shovel, and a Puerilist-Liberal-Fascist a Puerile-Liberal-Fascist when it's called for (I will also call a fish an underwater bird with fins not wings, but that's another story altogether! )
Now GB, whilst I love you dearly, I just as dearly hate, despise and detest you - passionately (it's only natural I should feel that way). I'll have you know, I have loved Tolkien from since long before I was born, indeed, long before Middle-earth was even a twinkle in Tolkien's eye. It was preordained that I be a True Fan (Wise Odo even channelled a poem about it, which I won't repeat - as you'll know by now I think Wisey's poems are shite). So you see, I have no choice but to be a True Fan. My point is: relatively speaking, you're a new comer GB, and not only that, a Liberal-Fascist as well. Remember, this was your choice, not mine!!!
Dear GB, I'm trying to [i:3g6vgbny]help [/i:3g6vgbny]you... Come back to the Light...
Sing along dong-derrio!
Oh a pretty kilt of finest silk,
Oh bongalong the merrio![/i:3as8gpr1]
[i:3as8gpr1]Who is that dapper Charlie, lads?
Who is that jolly Glaswegian?
Who is that bonny long haired lad?
Is he from the lowhung regions?[/i:3as8gpr1]
[i:3as8gpr1]Who can that rugged redhead be?
Wearing a silken kilt like that?
Is that a sporran 'neath his kilt?
Or a furry one eyed cat?[/i:3as8gpr1]
(Chorus. Repeat twice).
Traditional Ballad of Scothobbitland.
Surely everyone knows what's beneath a Scotsman's kilt; a spare sporran, a fold out camping chair, an umbrella in case of a sudden need for respectability and some lemon drizzle cake for emergencies.
[i:18v8zl9c]"A haggis can do it for hours, you know,
(Running round the hillside!)
Kilt a'flying in the breeze,
(The weight all on the frillside);
With one leg short and one leg long,
The haggis runs all the day,
Around about and down the hill,
Some say he's happy, some gay!
A haggis can do it for hours, you know,
With a smile and glinting eye,
But what goes roiling in his head?
Well, heathered hills and sky!
What can he do for hours and hours?
The people ask in dismay,
Well, he runs all day on his uneven legs,
Canoodling all the way!
Canoodling all the way!"[/i:18v8zl9c]
You know, I've always wondered what [i:18v8zl9c]canoodling[/i:18v8zl9c] meant. Do you know, Mr Tyrant?
Poor GB - what would we do without someone to bully... ahh... share a joke with....
I won't disagree with you there; I think that's in large part the purpose of adding the White Council. I don't think that the [i:1ocng5s1]The Hobbit[/i:1ocng5s1] should be more linked to [i:1ocng5s1]TLotR[/i:1ocng5s1] though, I'd rather it be left more or less its own (very good) story instead of being made into a more mature "prequel to LOTR".
Anyhow, welcome Mr Pilgrim. It's good (I guess ) to have a fresh face here. Though this [i:1ftetwc2]"looking at the forum for a cupla months"[/i:1ftetwc2] business sounds suspiciously like 'spying' to me, my good lad. But what would you expect from an obvious Liberal! Be warned! I'm not going to take it easy on you! No way, son! I'm trying to turn this into a [i:1ftetwc2]Respectable [/i:1ftetwc2]forum! Ship up or ship out, I say.
Err... never mind Biffo, Mr Pilgrim, we'll have a nice [i:14brtv4b]chat [/i:14brtv4b]with you later, what! That's if you decide to hang around - and that's[i:14brtv4b] totally [/i:14brtv4b]up to [i:14brtv4b]you[/i:14brtv4b]...