Good Afternoon Brego. From what I understand, the 3rd installment will not be part of the Hobbit story line, correct?? If that be the case, then I agree with you. I too, am very interested in the Green Elves. I also wouldn't mind seeing more of the story behind Celeborn and Galadriel.
Aylee I think the second movie will end with the destruction of Smaug and Lake Town. The third will therefore be mostly about The Battle of Five Armies.
I'm hoping to see more about the history of the Nazgul, the regrowth of Sauron and The Council of The Wise's assault upon The Soucerer of Dol Guldur. Also what Gandalf is upto during his disapearences during The Hobbit book.
Due to the ridiculous limitations put upon PJ by CT and co, PJ will need to be creative without straying too far from Canon, as he is strictly forbidden from using info from The Sil. Silly really as this forces non cannon rewrites, which truly is not what we and possibly PJ want.
Ill be interested to see how PJ shows the Dearves first vision of the Woofland Elves. In the book of course the Dwarves stumble across a festive gathering at night. Lights and music in the dark forest which "pop" disappears into the dark as soon as the Dwarves make themselves known.
I wonder if we'll see this?
Enter Peter Jackson first, from his latest interview with Empire Magazine:
Those intimate with The Hobbit might be wondering what Legolas and, for that matter, a stinking orc are doing at Laketown. We are deep into the expanded universe of Jackson's trilogy now, and as the Dwarves arrive, by barrel, at the waterborne human habitation within trading distance of Erebor, so the orcs have tracked them, pursued in turn by our nimble elf, having made his entrance in the elven halls of Mirkwood.
'This will probably get me struck off The One Ring party list, but I am enjoying deviating from the book,' says Jackson, his ranks of Middle-earth artisans re-setting for the next orc-hunt through Lake Town.
"We introduce a lot of Appendices material, more than in the first film. We introduce Legolas and Tauriel, who are not characters from the book. In fact Tauriel is not even a character from Tolkien. But as a filmmaker that is a refreshing thing. We are able to go places which ultimately will be surprising.'
Peter Jackson, Empire Magazine
Jackson doesn't seem too worried about deviating from the book in any case.
Maybe he can likewise enjoy the freedom that copyright has given him, with respect to anything in The Silmarillion.
Given the following description of 'purist' that I found on the web [at least Wikipedia currently states]...
The Lord of the Rings purists are fans of J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy novel The Lord of the Rings who dislike changes in New Line Cinema's film trilogy adaptation. Again, the use of the term varies extremely widely; it may be used offensively, in a complimentary way, or neutrally. The term may be meant to connote more sophisticated appreciation than that of "fangirls."
The definition especially refers to those who adamantly detest the Peter Jackson directed trilogy for deviating even in minor detail from the original text.
... if I was a film director I wouldn't be worried about pleasing anyone who took this stance either!
Then again I'm not currently aware of anyone who has taken such a position.
Not really sure why you felt the need to post a general definition of what a purist is. Pretty sure anyone who frequents Tolkien forums knows what a purist is. But thanks anyways I suppose...
Edit: In fact, I'm not really sure the purpose of your initial post before my last one. Are you saying PJ won't show what Brego asked because he "doesn't seem too worried about deviating from the book?"
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest