Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: IS BEORN INCLUDED IN MOVIE?WHO SHOULD PLAY HIM

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Hobbit (Movie) > IS BEORN INCLUDED IN MOVIE?WHO SHOULD PLAY HIM   << [1] [2]
I heard you'd been lurking here long before you took over this forum, GP. If so, you should be well aware that the Beorn in The Hobbit should be drawn as close as humanly possible to the version in the book. That's the 'Right' approach! As to other ideas that might or might not be in the History of The Hobbit, I intend to research it myself. Not saying we can't trust what you say... it's just your power to interpret things.. err... 'respectably' that I have doubts about. Whether Tolkien had varying views in other works though will not change my response to any of your puerile suggestions. 'Undead' in The Hobbit. You've gotta be kidding! Btw I neglected to say something about your thoughts on certain 'tensions' which you mentioned somewhere. Well, I feel none. Do you?

Regards Odo Banks

Odo Lives!
This is very simple; read the description in the book and cast appropriately. There's no need to go looking around for extra source material when everything needed is in TH! I despair of this desire to tamper and alter for the sake of it. TH is not about connections to LoTR its about a hobbit going on a big adventure. Start with that in mind and you won't go far wrong.
Unfortunately, those marshmallow-bearing (gentle) barbarians confuse 'Right' for 'Wrong' (---- and vice-versa :?) Who knows what they might Dredge Up to IMPROVE Tolkien. If they can't Dredge Up anything, of course, they'll Make Up something, I'm sure. :x
If the sources of information are from The Silmarillion or LotR, then they SHOULD have some bearing for the sake of consistency and Primacy. Other writings of Tolkien may also be brought to bear secondarily, insofar as they might shed light on the finalized versions of the information, but not if they clearly conflict with The Hobbit--which should take precedence over other versions.

[b:143li0gk]GB[/b:143li0gk]
So Tom Bombadil should have taken precedence over Hyena-wargs, 'ey???? :? Or Scouring over Frodo sending Sam away, 'ey? :x You Libs! So inconsistent! :roll:
I actually would have appreciated Bombadil and the Barrow Wights inclusion. But I am only mildly disappointed they didn't make the cut as they would have disrupted the flow of the film (theatre version). I think they should have been included in the Extended Editions though. But I never cared for the Scouring anyway, so good riddance.

And it's rather specious for you to charge me with inconsistency Odo :P . I was simply relating the Canonical issues over which one's in the BOOKS and writings of Tolkien should take precedence over the other :ugeek: . Nowhere did I imply that the films should (or should not) do the same :roll: .

[b:3e2huurw]GB[/b:3e2huurw]
[quote="Gandalfs Beard":2hvys4as]But I never cared for the Scouring anyway, so good riddance.[/quote:2hvys4as]


[size=150:2hvys4as][b:2hvys4as]You Bastard! [/b:2hvys4as][/size:2hvys4as]

How could you say that!?!?

And Tom and the Barrow-wights? THey MADE that part of the book... Oh God... this is going to be harder than I thought... poor deluded Beard... You've got me weeping now! :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: (Are you as far gone as Gollum was? I just can't be sure anymore!)

(((((

It's worse than I thought, Mr Tyrant! Scouring was among my FAVORITE parts. The tying up of ends in an exciting classic fashion. Does this mean GB and I are irreparably estranged now? :cry: )

)))))
:? So me agreeing with you on one point doesn't counterbalance the point I disagree with you on???? :x

Why only quote the part where I disagree with you? Are just so blinded with rage that you can't see first part:[b:2liggk9s] "I actually would have appreciated Bombadil and the Barrow Wights inclusion.[/b:2liggk9s] But I am only mildly disappointed they didn't make the cut as they would have disrupted the flow of the film (theatre version).[b:2liggk9s] I think they should have been included in the Extended Editions though[/b:2liggk9s]."

Perhaps you just don't want to see something that contradicts your Narrative about "Pernicious Liberalism". :roll:

[b:2liggk9s]GB[/b:2liggk9s]
"Pernicious Liberalism"? My goodness me, how apt! And coming from your own mouth... And yeah, you would have loved to get your hands on Tom and the barrow-wights, now wouldn't you! I SEE things only too clearly, GB (especially after your latest admission... AND bold as brass about it! Oh my...oh my..... :o )
Del Toro is gone now, but he had a hand in the scripts he would have directed. He is on record as stating that Beorn would be included, so he will likely remain unless a new director chooses to exclude him.

Michael Duncan Clarke is actually an inspired idea Turin :idea: . But I insist that if he were cast he should practice a British Accent <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> .

[b:1gi664xa]GB[/b:1gi664xa]
Unfortunately, I don't think Beorn will show up. And I can see why from a film stand-point. It does nothing to progress the plot. It is just a beautiful scene in which Tolkien paints for the reader. The only thing that Beorn does in the story is give them a place to rest. Tom Bombadil is the same type of character and was passed over as well. There is enough action and resting in the nests of the eagles. As far as his role at the end, well, if there are elves in Helm's Deep in the movies, I can only expect they'll come up with something to turn the tides other than a skin-changer.

As for who would play it well enough... Ron Perlman or (no laughing) Michael Clarke Duncan. Voice, presence, could be a brilliant casting choice. Plus I could also playing an impatient, untrusting bear. With a deep throaty laugh at Bilbo. And then a shadow of fierce fury destroying the golbins and wargs.
I suppose if they remove Beorn they could fit the White Council in better. That would further the plot no end. <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />

Which now makes me wonder. What should the movie be? Two ideas come immediately to mind.

(1) Prequel to LotR?
(2) Bilbo and Company's Exciting (and at times Hilarious) Quest to Steal Treasure from an Awesome Dragon?
I think we already have threads to discuss those queries Odo! <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' />

[b:lk6weemm]GB[/b:lk6weemm]
...Oh sorry 'bout that. GB. As you get older you do get forgetful... I wouldn't want anyone to think I was trying to beat a dead horse or anything.... :?
I don't know if this is the place to say it or not, but I find the scenes at Beorn's house very discomfitting. Those magical creatures in animist form (disturbing archetypical creatures that originated in the mind of the most primitive societies) do have the aspect of being, to a child's eye, funny animals who serve dinner and walk upright on their back feet, but to a clear undazed adult eye, are seen as humans under enchantment, whether Black or White Enchantment, who can know? When I first read Queer Lodgings, the queerness was indeed disturbing. Even as a child, I was on the edge of my seat.

This was not some whimsical childrens tale, it was a scene with underlying darkness: danger, queer magic, things old from primeval depths; things only brought into sharp focus by the possibly whimsical idea that these creatures were the servants of an apiarist. In a surficial way, this arrangement might be seen as almost silly (to some), to those who do not think it grown-up to have a great powerful Man-Bear keep bees and have cute animals as his servants. How wrong. They are not his servants, they are his subjects. They are also under the same sort of queer enchantment Beorn is under himself!

Tolkien was a genius in the way he made the Real and the Unreal (darker things emanating and drerdged up from the subconcious) meld together to compile a truly unsettling set of scenes. Of course, some people, tied into ideas of The Hobbit being a Disney story, miss the point completely, and insult Tolkien's memory by calling these scenes, like they do most other scenes in the book, [i:zzuczfyq]whimsy[/i:zzuczfyq]. :ugeek:
:roll: Just when I thought you were finally getting it...

Of course everything you say is correct...except for the fact you still don't understand what Whimsy means. Sure, on one level it's all Archetype and Myth. But it ALSO Whimsical.

[b:2hlxibse]GB[/b:2hlxibse]
Nope! :mrgreen:
[img:2szll9y4]http://www.myemoticons.com/emoticons/images/msn/special-events/santa_mooning.gif[/img:2szll9y4]

[b:2szll9y4]GB[/b:2szll9y4]
Oh how rude! :shock:
And Whimsical! :mrgreen:

[b:2e6jh5mt]GB[/b:2e6jh5mt]
Aha! In the [i:14cvhewm]truest[/i:14cvhewm] sense of the word! <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
I should play him if as I am the only one of suitable stature capable. However I am unlikely to ever become an employee, even of the entertainment industry. I am sure Baron Verence could supply some bearded muscle bound bard.
Actually, the guy on your avatar would make a good Beorn <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
Hmmm, Gerard Butler? Actually, they CGI'd him a fair bit to make him look like that in 300. I remember seeing an interview with him where he said he wished he could keep the 12-pack abs the CGI artists gave him. :lol:

Still, he might just pull off the role.

[b:uluos61y]GB[/b:uluos61y]
So long as he could use a different accent from most of his films. Though I'm not really what his accent in [i:3msog0vg]300[/i:3msog0vg] was supposed to be. :?
He was quite clearly a Scottish Spartan Eldo, what's wrong with that? Mr Butler is merely following in Sir Sean Connery's footsteps who gave us a Scots Russian submarine commander, a Scots Egyptian and, well, a Scottish everything he's every played!
I don't think Eldo knew Gerard Butler was Scottish <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> . So there is really no need at all for Brother Gerard to change his accent.

[b:3t27uosj]GB[/b:3t27uosj]
Guess Sir Sean was right then GB. It works fine whatever nationality you play!Sparta via Edinburgh! (Although Butler sounds west coast to me).
Well it works fine in a Tolkien setting, that's for sure. They only accent that won't work is an American one.

[b:14izro4y]GB[/b:14izro4y]
I wasn't sure where he was from. :P Maybe I should go watch some of his trailers again to refresh my memory.
I would love to see Brian Blessed get the part, he used to be an adventurer, so he is great shape despite his age. Robbie Coltraine wouldn't be bad, but I think he is too much associated with Harry Potter. Gordon Kennedy would be a good candidate too.
[quote="Ally":25aww8cg]Robbie Coltraine wouldn't be bad, but I think he is too much associated with Harry Potter. Gordon Kennedy would be a good candidate too.[/quote:25aww8cg] Agreed. It would be like casting Daniel Radcliffe as Bilbo (that was a rumour that made its rounds a while back): while I think Coltrane is more fitted to Beorn than Radcliffe to Bilbo, anyone who's seen the HP films is just going to be thinking "oh look, there's Hagrid again - and he's still a big hairy guy who likes animals!"
He did a terrific job as Hagrid though, despite what else I might think of the movies <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' /> And he doesn't look muscular, just big. Beorn's gotta be beefcake :lol:
[quote="Ringdrotten":13f22esc]He did a terrific job as Hagrid though, despite what else I might think of the movies <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' /> And he doesn't look muscular, just big. Beorn's gotta be beefcake :lol:[/quote:13f22esc] A good Hagrid yes, though I thought he could have been a little a taller! Anyway I am sure he could beef up a bit. A long shot I know...
  << [1] [2]