• Welcome to The Tolkien Forum! Connect with fellow Tolkien enthusiasts and join a community that is over two decades old, and still going strong. We look forward to meeting you.  Register

Barliman Butterbur here, What's been going on?

Barliman Butterbur

Worthy Keeper/Bree Roué
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
2,762
Greetings all,

(Good God, the place looks so different!)

Believe it or not it's been so long since I posted, I forgot my password — until now. I haven't seen The Hobbit yet. I'm in no hurry. I'm sure it's completely shot through with gratuitous Jacksonisms. I'm waiting for it to pop up on my Netflix list. Blu-Ray is good enough for me; I don't need 48 fps nor 3D. It will be interesting to me to see how they worked in all that backstory from the LOTR indices.

It would be absolutely wonderful to hear from the old timers who "knew me when!" :*p

(If you're interested, I've been working on a blog called Archie's Place. You might like it. :*) )

Barley
 
Last edited:
Welcome, old friend! Nae saian luume' (it has been too long)

Wait 'til you see Radagast's Roscobel Rabbits! Your toes will curl.

I'm off to look at your blog now.
Many blessings!

Roscobel Rabbits? What the hell are they? My stomach is starting to churn... :eek:

(Some of the smileys have degenerated a bit, haven't they!)

Good to hear from you again, old friend! It's been ten years since I first registered here. :*)

Barley
 
Barley, I'm so glad to see you back!!

I was plenty wary myself of seeing the new Hobbit movie. Keep heart, though - it's failed to capture and thus steal the romance of the original work just as LOTR :D Just as PJ didn't depict Tom Bombadil in his first installment of LOTR, he somehow replaced The Hobbit's most unique scenes with his own and left the book ever unmatched! :*cool:

I hope to see you around as often as ever, Sir Barliman
 
Roscobel Rabbits? What the hell are they?

Barley

If you go and see the film, Barley, I strongly suggest you go expecting a children's film. Some of the characters are very well realised and it was a pleasure to watch them; but some of the action is, to be frank, a bit silly. It's as if they were half writing the computer game along with the film.
 
If you go and see the film, Barley, I strongly suggest you go expecting a children's film. Some of the characters are very well realized and it was a pleasure to watch them; but some of the action is, to be frank, a bit silly. It's as if they were half writing the computer game along with the film.

Well that's good news, most of it anyway! A children's film pretty much matches Tolkien's intentions. But I have heard that in the Battle of Five Armies, we are treated to gratuitous beheadings and disembowelings (actually the precedent for that was set in the first LOTR film when the Orcs had a falling-out). :*eek:

I haven't seen it yet, but I have a Rolling Stone special edition about it, full of really nice pictures. It's a bit jarring to see the dwarves so handsome as younger men, and have their looks fall apart so quickly as they age (bulbous noses, morbid obesity, eyes too close together [how they did that I don't know] — my God, that Bombur!). I had always pictured Thorin as at least a battle-hardened weather-beaten fairly dignified dwarf of 60 years old at least. But once PJ gets a grip on things, we're all at his mercy! (A computer game???) :mad: :*down

Barley
 
Barley, I'm so glad to see you back!!

I was plenty wary myself of seeing the new Hobbit movie. Keep heart, though - it's failed to capture and thus steal the romance of the original work just as LOTR :D Just as PJ didn't depict Tom Bombadil in his first installment of LOTR, he somehow replaced The Hobbit's most unique scenes with his own and left the book ever unmatched! :*cool:

I hope to see you around as often as ever, Sir Barliman

Salutations, Sir! Not sure I will be as active as I once was, but now that we have another round of movies to discuss, I'll be checking in. Meantime, the Prancing Pony is open for business! :*)

Barley
 
Meantime, the Prancing Pony is open for business! :*)

Barley
That's good news! I've had to make do with this (advantage is, it's nearby):
27904.jpg
 
They're not lederhosen; those dancers are Morrismen, wearing traditional stockings and britches (and bells). They're only there in costume for festive events.
The Trotting Horse is a traditional old pub at the crossroads near Bushton village. I've no idea how old it is, but its name reminds me of The Prancing Pony.

Alas, the profundity of my ignorance — it comes from never getting out of Bree more often... :*rolleyes:

Barley :*p
 
I wouldn't call it a children's film...

more like an over the top, cgi driven hyper=active adventure for teens and 20 somethings who can't put an IPAD down & carry on a conversation (and therefore have a 7 second attention span)..

Just like everything hollywood puts out these daze. :*rolleyes:
 
No, it's not a Children's film and that to me is essentially the problem. For me, the charm of the Hobbit was the fairy tale element of the story. If Jackson had focused on those elements, rather then trying to make the tone similar to The Lord Of The Rings he may have done better. I don't believe the film was a complete failure, some of the elements worked very well, I particularly enjoyed the Gollum sequence and the Dwarves singing. However the downfall came with all the additional material Jackson shoehorned in (God only knows what's in the Extended Edition). So for me, if the film had been aimed at and made for kids I feel I would have enjoyed it a lot more then I did.

I wouldn't call it a children's film...

more like an over the top, cgi driven hyper=active adventure for teens and 20 somethings who can't put an IPAD down & carry on a conversation (and therefore have a 7 second attention span)..

Just like everything hollywood puts out these daze. :*rolleyes:
 
Hello, Barley :*)

I actually enjoyed the film. I still can't sit through LOTR without throwing a fit, but I actually sat through and found myself enjoying the Hobbit quite a bit.

HERE THAR BE SPOILERS!

My only real complaint was that bringing in the Azog character to chase after Thorin & Co seemed a little overdone. I'd have preferred they just use nameless orcs/goblins (aside from the Goblin King, who was--sadly--not David Bowie) and let the real suspense lie in building up Smaug and the Necromancer.

I actually have no complaints about the Rada-sled. Seemed like a clever idea to me, that fit in with some of the bizarre fairy tales (like Baba Yaga traveling around in a bowl).

Seeing Guillermo del Toro's creature design was also lovely. It was nice to see his touch present in the film, even if he didn't get to direct it in the end (sadly).
 
*SPOILER* Peter Jackson had a problem. The 'true' story has Gandalf entering Dol Guldur, realising that Sauron is rising again, finding Thrain dying and rambling; from whom he obtains the map and ring. Unfortunately this tale is not in the books that the film-makers have rights to, so they can't use that bit of storyline. Instead, they decided to substitute Radagast for Gandalf, so that everyone knows who's moved in to Dol Guldur; and while they were at it, they used him to introduce the advent of Mirkwood, aggressive giant spiders, and conversations with cute animals (we have Beorn coming up!). Azog's life was extended, I think, to give a personality to the orc irritation on the journey. Why Bolg couldn't do this job, I don't understand; maybe PJ thought he had a more forceful character (or a cooler name) for film than his son.
 
Bolg does sound like something unpleasant that you find growing on your foot. Azog, on the other hand, sounds more...orc-y? So I guess that makes sense.
 
Barley! Good to see you're still around. :) I myself have been a slacking lurker of late, though I'm on a reading frenzy right now so I may reread Tolkien's works and end up back here picking everyone's brains.

In regards to the Hobbit...

I saw it...managed NOT to stomp out of the Theater....though it did cross my mind when the 'Rada-sled' scene came along. Oh god. :*eek:

Overall, the movie wasn't bad, and I am admittedly looking forward to the next one. There was one other major thing that perturbed me about it, other than the Rada-must-not-be-named malarkey.

I was disappointed in Thorin's characterization. For the record, dwarves should NOT be sexy. PJ did such a good job with the portrayal (physically) of Gimli, and that continued with the "Co" part of "Thorin and Co"...but as for Thorin himself, he was portrayed in a way that was obviously meant to attract teenaged girls to the film. Not a single other dwarf was portrayed as remotely attractive, yet Hollywood had to stick their idiotic noses into it and bastardize the character.

:*(

On the flip side of that, the Riddles in the Dark segment was PERFECT! Exactly as I'd hoped.
 

Today's events

Similar threads

Back
Top