Lotr

[Kev]

Perhaps the eagles were migratory and out of the region during the first part of the journey.

That would be as stupid an explanation as the all powerful Tom Bombadil who could control nature and was immortal not being able to take care of the ring because he was too forgetful....

The best thing Peter Jackson did was to remove that entire Old Forest/Old Man Willow debacle from the film, oh and the poetry and singing of course.

The LOTR is a lot like the Bible imo, epic is scale, fantastic characters and history but full of some fucking weird shit.

I couldn't read it now, it would just ruin my childhood memories when I could overlook such gaity.

I'm guessing Jackson will ditch the sing songs from the Hobbit movie too. If the dwarves start singing 'chip the glasses, crack the plates, that's what Bilbo Baggins hates!', the film will bomb.

They had best change the name of most of the dwarves as well, or at least remain silent on the topic. Fili, Kili, Dori, Nori, Oin and Gloin, Bifur and Bofur, Bomber (HattontheHammer) etc will make for a shit film.

I'm rather dreading it to be honest, it could be great, but it also turn out to be a Phantomn Menace type disaster.

I hate so much the last Star wars that I still haven't seen the last one.. and apparently it is the best of the 3... I can't stand Jar Jar Bing and the stupid jokes they make during the whole thing (especially when they are in the sea with the pathetic joke about the fishes). As for LOTR, Tom Bombadil has another problem: He's more or less bound to the forest where he lives. He's mighty powerful because he knows a lot of the songs that were used during the creation and can easily control a lot about the nature but he's bound to the place where he comes from. He's also quite mad on the side after all these thousand of years of living alone with his babe and because he's older than the ring itself, which means that possibly, he has no clue of all the where about that happened, he's just there disconnected from reality.

Do you not agree with me though that the The Fellowship of the Ring would be a better book without Bombadil in it at all? Some stupid dancing leprachaun in bright yellow boots singing 'Hey Nonny Nonny' no wonder Jackson kept him the fuck out of the films. Awful, awful character.

Trouble with the Hobbit is that it's full of these kind of character disasters.

The talking trolls at the start who argue over how to cook Bilbo. The dogs and cats that walk on two legs and lay out the cutlery and do the dishes in Beorn's home.

The 14 dwarves with the ridiculous names and their singsongs.

I'm just worried there is too much awful material that could bomb on film.

The spiders in Mirkwood could be fun, and I imagine the Battle of Five Armies will be specactular though.

The trouble is though the goblins, wargs and wood elves in the Hobbit are more like the Lion, Chronicles of Narnia type child fare than they are the fearsome Urak Hai and tall, handsome noble Elven race of the LOTR books which were aimed at an older audience.

I'm just a bit dubious about Jackson's ability to carry it off, especially after the Lovely Bones, which was a disaster.

[Nameless]

Perhaps the eagles were migratory and out of the region during the first part of the journey.

That would be as stupid an explanation as the all powerful Tom Bombadil who could control nature and was immortal not being able to take care of the ring because he was too forgetful....

The best thing Peter Jackson did was to remove that entire Old Forest/Old Man Willow debacle from the film, oh and the poetry and singing of course.

The LOTR is a lot like the Bible imo, epic is scale, fantastic characters and history but full of some fucking weird shit.

I couldn't read it now, it would just ruin my childhood memories when I could overlook such gaity.

I'm guessing Jackson will ditch the sing songs from the Hobbit movie too. If the dwarves start singing 'chip the glasses, crack the plates, that's what Bilbo Baggins hates!', the film will bomb.

They had best change the name of most of the dwarves as well, or at least remain silent on the topic. Fili, Kili, Dori, Nori, Oin and Gloin, Bifur and Bofur, Bomber (HattontheHammer) etc will make for a shit film.

I'm rather dreading it to be honest, it could be great, but it also turn out to be a Phantomn Menace type disaster.

I hate so much the last Star wars that I still haven't seen the last one.. and apparently it is the best of the 3... I can't stand Jar Jar Bing and the stupid jokes they make during the whole thing (especially when they are in the sea with the pathetic joke about the fishes). As for LOTR, Tom Bombadil has another problem: He's more or less bound to the forest where he lives. He's mighty powerful because he knows a lot of the songs that were used during the creation and can easily control a lot about the nature but he's bound to the place where he comes from. He's also quite mad on the side after all these thousand of years of living alone with his babe and because he's older than the ring itself, which means that possibly, he has no clue of all the where about that happened, he's just there disconnected from reality.

Do you not agree with me though that the The Fellowship of the Ring would be a better book without Bombadil in it at all? Some stupid dancing leprachaun in bright yellow boots singing 'Hey Nonny Nonny' no wonder Jackson kept him the fuck out of the films. Awful, awful character.

Trouble with the Hobbit is that it's full of these kind of character disasters.

The talking trolls at the start who argue over how to cook Bilbo. The dogs and cats that walk on two legs and lay out the cutlery and do the dishes in Beorn's home.

The 14 dwarves with the ridiculous names and their singsongs.

I'm just worried there is too much awful material that could bomb on film.

The spiders in Mirkwood could be fun, and I imagine the Battle of Five Armies will be specactular though.

The trouble is though the goblins, wargs and wood elves in the Hobbit are more like the Lion, Chronicles of Narnia type child fare than they are the fearsome Urak Hai and tall, handsome noble Elven race of the LOTR books which were aimed at an older audience.

I'm just a bit dubious about Jackson's ability to carry it off, especially after the Lovely Bones, which was a disaster.

I do agree on the Bombadil Idea. He's kind of a mad hatter with a colorblind tastes to dress. Not exactly interesting neither convincing as a super being older than any (or almost) creatures of its universe. I just like the idea that a greater power is here but can't do nothing due to his inability to adapt and being part of all another reality though, but this character could be warped off the LOTR and it would be just better. I wonder what would happen to him with the human's ages coming though because he definitely doesn't fit in the portrait.
Beside the name of the dwarves which I wouldn't mind too much (to be authentic to the book), there is a couple of potential aspects that could drive the hobbit into something disastrous but I am more than certain that Jackson will be able to overcome that and to make it a dark prelude to what's coming.

[Gandalf]

The films are good, but I think a little overrated. They are better than a lot of films, but given the choice between the Godfather 1 and 2 or TLOTR's 1 and 2, the Godfather wins every time. Some of the battle scenes bore me because I am not a fan of heavy CGI usage and it all gets a little earnest for me and some of the characters around those battles don't hold my interest. I think a lot of the scenes with Gollum are very good. Frodo gets annoying after the first film, which is understandable, but Sam is the real trooper who gets the hard work done. I wasn't too keen on that treebeard chap either nor a lot of the hair do's in the film. They all looked a bit daft. There should have been more Gandalf with scenes showing him walking around the countryside looking pensive.