Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!
"A perfect title thrown out the window in order to attract the masses with promises of overblown action.
That's why it was changed. Make no mistake.
Not saying you're wrong, I just don't think it's that terrible. Or that it's terrible that both LOTR and the Hobbit made a healthy profit and yet so much is true, or pays respect to, the source. If WB etc. were really appealing to the lowest common denominator I'm sure they would have hooked Thorin up w. some female who happens to have a big chest and looks "hot", Kili and Tauriel would already have been making hay so to speak, Gandalf would have invented explosives and there would be a lot more fight scenes, the dwarves would all look like male models, and Bilbo and Smaug would have become good friends w. Smaug giving rides to the kiddies *sniff*.
The argument canon vs. not has gone round and round, but even PJ has said - and I can't remember if he was talking about AUJ or FOTR - that if they had failed, w. the second films he wouldn't have had to worry so much essentially. There's a burden of sorts that comes w. worldwide success, and from the sound of it re TABA, PJ is already feeling the heat of fan expectations. So there's a title that instantly tells ALL the public a pinnacle within the film - actually IMO it's wise in general to have a title for a book or film that denotes a meaning of some kind. I don't consider "There and Back Again" to be a perfect title, unless you have read the book and understand all the nuances (e.g. to me it's more than an actual journey, it's Bilbo's emotional arc "and if you return, you will not be the same". But I wouldn't know that if I hadn't read the book). The Battle of the Five Armies to me might not be the most interesting title in the world, but it certainly tells me immediately something of what to expect.
Also, no PR campaign is just going to have Bilbo skipping happily back to his hobbit-hole. It's going to have (possibly) themes of madness, war, sorrow, danger - so the title needs to tie into that.
the problem with BO5A is that it reeks of action flick. TABA at least nodded towards the books little guy on a journey against all odds type story.
This is a serious journey, not a hobbit walking-party.
Where you can find perfect grammar and high quality conversations taking place.
I have never been dead set against the Hobbit movies. I am sorry you consider my recent posts "Dramatic" for they are honest expressions of my growing disappointment with what Peter has done. It is not the disservice to Tolkien that bothers me. It is the over stuffed adaptation of the story that is told by "The Hobbit".
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
every single even slightly derogatory (or sometimes not even particularly derogatory) remark about the TH films has increasingly been responded to with the same outrage, dismissal and blaming of the poster. So no, I haven't. And "Intense" isn't the adjective I would have gone with this trend, though it does indeed start with the same letter.
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
I recall being one of the biggest cheerleaders of TH films before the trilogy decision, attempting to explain to posters who were bemoaning little details or complete unknowns (IE the crap in Radagast's hair or the existence of Itaril/Tauriel) that we should reserve judgement considering the job that was done by PJ and company with LotR. Funny, that, I believe goes the expression.
I must be confusing you with another poster who literally is dead set against anything related to a Hobbit movie and is quite dramatic about it.
You just seem to not deem PJ's changes as a good thing and tend to lean towards a "truer" book adaptation, yes?
...he gets to the "Argumentum ex Silentio" section of his textbook really soon.
And yet every single even slightly derogatory (or sometimes not even particularly derogatory) remark about the TH films has increasingly been responded to with the same outrage, dismissal and blaming of the poster. So no, I haven't.
"every"? Exaggerate much?
And "Intense" isn't the adjective I would have gone with this trend, though it does indeed start with the same letter.
And an "Ad hominem" to boot!!
You're doing well! Can't wait for the contextomy!!
There are many of us who have expressed many disappointments, shortcomings, etc with the films, and have done so civilly without triggering a firefight.
You implied that PJ&Co did LotR right, but now are artistically bankrupt. This implies that PJ&Co have "changed" from quality filmmakers to artistically bankrupt like the likes of Michael Bay or Lucas. Darkstone brought up how even in the PROLOGUE for LotR there were some less-than-artistic genius lines, implying that perhaps he hasn't really "changed" a whole lot.
I'm not sure why this particular issue sparked this flurry of angry remarks.
Edit: I think it's still possible to be artistic while including (seemingly negative) buzzwords such as: spectacle, blockbuster, action-packed, heavy CGI, fun. The CGI, for instance, takes a ton of skilled work and IS an art medium in itself.
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Glad somebody understood what I posted.
I mean, I love the films and I think PJ did good.
I have no idea what CS is on about.
Maybe it's just past his bedtime and he needs his winkie.
I, personally, still see much of the book in the films, and in places I think it even improves on it, but that's just my opinion. The only major gripe I really have so far is the final cat-and-mouse Smaug chase shenanigans at the end of DoS. I wished they would've stuck a little closer to the book on that.
I did mind the healing scene, though.
BTW I was always confused with these acronyms, I read TABA as The Battle of 5 Armies, and get used to call the 3rd film like that while speaking and thinking. I remembered about There and Back Again only when I run into BOFA (like "oh yes, this is the acronym for the army thing, not TABA!"). I hope it will bring more people to the cinemas, to prove WB and other studios that it is worth to make films about Middle Earth.
...I used to read TABA as To Be Announced, but I couldn't figure out what the extra "A" stood for.
Unlock the doors, what reason more could we ever need?
...I've always found the book immensely tragic. Bilbo loses so much. It seems like parts of him die during each stage of the journey. If he was a young hobbit the changes wouldn't be so bad. But the entire book seems like it's all about the old Bilbo dying. It makes me sad.
I can see how Tolkien might indeed have intended a deeper adult subtext what with his own entrance into middle age.
I mean, I don't hate it. The engineer in me just has a hard time dealing with Thorin strolling down molten gold in a metal wheelbarrow and not getting toasted alive lol.
I guarantee it. I saw it happen with LOTR.
This seems further away from the "feel" of Tolkien and closer to a title that might sell movie tickets to the public that hadn't read the books. Oh well, I will see it regardless.
But while reading Boards now (I started this year) I suspected that the same things were written about LOTR And that now the same people are praising LOTR in contradiction to The Hobbit.
I guarantee it. I saw it happen with LOTR.
I understand that. I was disappointed after watching TT and ROTK (I liked FOTR because I read the book after seeing it in cinema). But after few months I started to like it and now I love those films.
Oddly enough, that was one of my first impressions after learning about the new title.
There, I've fixed it!
On a less nitpicky note, I'm actually happy with the change and agree with PJ's reasons for it. "There and Back Again" is a lovely title but just doesn't fit with the third movie. It's better as a subtitle for the trilogy as a whole, I think.
Orcs are mammals!
Want to chat? AIM me at Yami Liokaiser!
Which one would Tolkien have chosen and how do we know this?
Orcs are mammals!
Want to chat? AIM me at Yami Liokaiser!
I think it's good that something connected with professor Tolkien will be presented to a wider audience. It will increase the chances that people who are not familiar with his books will start to read them.
This seems further away from the "feel" of Tolkien and closer to a title that might sell movie tickets to the public that hadn't read the books. Oh well, I will see it regardless.
