United Artists is only thing blocking The Hobbit movie

[Barliman Butterbur]

The Lord of the Rings is the central story, following on from the rich history of Middle Earth. The Necromancer is Sauron and, as Tolkien said, the Hobbit 'fitted'. I love writing screenplays - it's so much quicker than writing books! Here's a scene I have shared before, that I would like to see included in some form:-

My God! Another version of LOTR, coming right from within our midst! Another PJ/Walsh/Boyens clone wannabe!
***CLANG CLANG CLANG*** (That's the purist alarm going off) Red lights flashing, sirens and bells sounding, gates automatically locking... ...and not a bad script, either!

Lotho

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

Christopher Tolkien has no say in the movie version of the Hobbitt, nor should he. He may cash in on royalty checks, but he did not write The Hobbit or Lord of the Rings and even if he is Tolkien's son, he should keep his nose out of things.

Whoa! What's YOUR problem? I know if MY father had produced such a masterpiece, you can bet I'd be as protective of it as CT is.

Lotho

 

[Sarah]

So unless UA and New Line can c...[/QUOTE] And don't forget the Gollum Frog.

 

[Eledhwen]

Of course the stories are entwined.......

Why don't we just make the audience study the family trees of the Tooks, Brandybucks, Baggins, Boffins, Bracegirdles & Proudfoots when they enter they theatre while we're at it?

Instead of 'movie trivia' on the screen, we can show 'Hobbit Family Trees' & 'Appendix A Rulers Of Gondor, Arnor, Arthedian & Cheiftains of the Dunedain of the North', plus 'Kings of Rohan', 'House Of Durin'......

Don't you get it?
What JRR Tolkien thought, in all due respect - and I've read the books 25 times - does not matter to Joe Average Moviegoer who wants to be entertained for 2.5-3 hours & couldn't care less that Glamdring

A. Belonged to the King Of Gondolin, let alone that
B. Turgon was that King of Gondolin and
C. Gondolin was the hidden city in the first Age that was the last Kingdom to fall to Morgoth, who was
D. The first Dark Lord, "of whom Sauron of Mordor was merely a servant", who's true name was Melkor, who was
E. One of the Valar, who were the......

See what I mean?

Your first three points are straight out of the text of The Hobbit, and your last two points have nothing to do with my point, which was that The public wanted more Necromancer, so Tolkien gave them more. And what's all that about family trees etc? What's your point?

My original point was that a linear, childish story (a style Tolkien regretted) could be avoided in the film by including the sub-plots that Tolkien either mentioned in the Hobbit or wrote out in full elsewhere.

And Lotho, I'd thank you not to ring that bell too loud - I have a reputation as a NPW, and this thread is ruining it! I have actually written an entire Hobbit screenplay, but you lot aren't ever going to see it.

 

[Bucky]

The public wanted more Necromancer, so Tolkien gave them more. And what's all that about family trees etc? What's your point?

The READING public, not the MOVIE public.

What's my point?
Are you reading my posts?
I've been making the SAME point for about 3 days now.

Joe Average Movie goer couldn't give a damn about the Necromancer or where Sauron is in The Hobbit

The plot is trying to recover the Dwarve's treasure & exact revenge upon Smaug & how a simple homebody of a Hobbit gets dragged into helping & in fact leading the Dwarves.
In the accomplishing of this, a bunch of different folks want a piece of the pie & have a huge battle at the end.

NOTHING else.

As a movie, it's not a further lesson in the History of TLOR or The 3rd Age of Middle-Earth.
Although you may want to fantasize about it developing into one, it won't because it makes no sense from an economical or promotional standpoint.

 

[Eledhwen]

The READING public, not the MOVIE public.

Joe Average Movie goer couldn't give a damn about the Necromancer or where Sauron is in The Hobbit

... and the research that allows you to make this sweeping statement can be found where?

 

[Barliman Butterbur]

... and the research that allows you to make this sweeping statement can be found where?

Don't confuse me with facts!

Lotho

 

[Bucky]

... and the research that allows you to make this sweeping statement can be found where?

Where's your's to DENY it?

You have any freinds who haven't read Tolkien's work?
Talk to THEM & ask them......

I have a feeling that unlike Barliman Butterbur, you aren't going to see through this brick wall in time.

Let me give you an example:

My best freind, I've been trying to get him to read TLOR for 20 years.
He reads alot of books, but hates fantasy/Sci Fi......

Doesn't like Star Wars either.....

We took our daughters to see FOTR.
He thought it was good but overinvolved.

I want him to go to ROTK but told him he has to watch both FOTR & TTT EE's 1st with me.
He was here Thursday & I wanted to put on TFOR......
He was saying at 9:30, "It's too late, it takes a half hour just for the Ring just to roll down the mountain." (The part where Galadriel gives the background in the beginning).

Another example:

Freind of my wife's, read the books, went to ROTK 1st night.....
He told her, "They didn't explain where Denethor burned himself clearly enough, it was confusing."

And He READ the books.

People want it simple & clear, not involved to the point of ridiculous.
If you don't believe my 'sweeping statement', ask some people.....

Take my Aunt.
Never read Tolkien.....
LOVED the movies.....
Christmas Eve:
"Where was Frodo going at the end of the movie? It was confusing."

So, let's take a simple story like The Hobbit & complicate it with a bunch of made up & embelished stuff from UT & the Appendices that isn't even in the book.,,,,,

How absurd is that?

 

[Eledhwen]

I'm sorry your friends and relatives didn't understand these blockbuster, successful films. I've had to explain bits like the Grey Havens to people too, but not to anyone who didn't think the whole thing was completely wonderful. You can't deny the statistics - eleven hours of very watchable cinema - complicated plots and all!

If the Hobbit is less watchable, you can bet the critics will slam it.

Unsubscribing.

 

[Bucky]

No, The Hobbit will be QUITE watchable either way......

I'm quite sure of that.

To me, the big question is:

Can PJ live with killing off the 'Main Attraction', i.e, Smaug the way & when the book describes it?

I have my doubts.