The Dragon Awakens.

[Beran]

I hope this is kosher posting this.

If you haven't already check this out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnaojlfdUbs

[DavetheLost]

I think I saw just a little glimpse of Laketown in there, or it might have been the LM screen.

Either way it is going to be a long six months...

I like some of the things we saw, some left me scratching my head, and some confirmed that this is a Peter Jackson movie.

[Trollbait]

I know that Peter Jackson took some liberties with Lord of the Rings and is taking even more with the Hobbit and stretching it to a trilogy is asking a lot...

However, can you honestly say you have seen a better fantasy movie than any of the four he has produced so far?

I'm not a fan of 3D though and will just watch in good old flatovision!

[DavetheLost]

I cringe at some of PJ's liberties, aplaud others, but when I forget that it was Tolkien before it was Jackson I really enjoy these movies. Even some of the silly bits, like shield-surfing.

[Tolwen]

However, can you honestly say you have seen a better fantasy movie than any of the four he has produced so far?

They are indeed among the best Fantasy movies ever made so far - IMHO. And one (at least me) can enjoy them immensely if you take a step back and not expect to see a movie version of the books. For various reasons it's something different and independent from the books.

For me, when I watch them with them with the due mental distance (=realising this is a version from a director who has as his first priority making a multi-million dollar blockbuster and not someone aiming to visualize the books - which would be pointless anyway) I can enjoy them a lot and even find this or that fitting visual or contextual interpretation of Middle-earth I deem a good match with the books.

Cheers
Tolwen

[Rich H]

Not seen the first film all the way through - got as far as Rivendell and the 'White Council' and switched it off due to boredom. Found the first one (as far as I got) to be poorly paced, generally badly acted (with the exception of Martin Freeman), and fairly dull even as action movies go; which is all the PJ films are - not a bad thing in and of itself, I like lots of action films. Not the Hobbit though.

Doubt this one will be any different.

[Rich H]

However, can you honestly say you have seen a better fantasy movie than any of the four he has produced so far?

Excalibur as a film.

Game of Thrones as a series.

Both vastly surpass PJs films. In fact I even prefer the two Tolkien fan films; Born of Hope and Hunt for Gollum. I find those far more entertaining - especially considering their budget and resource limitations.

[SirKicley]

However, can you honestly say you have seen a better fantasy movie than any of the four he has produced so far?

They are indeed among the best Fantasy movies ever made so far - IMHO. And one (at least me) can enjoy them immensely if you take a step back and not expect to see a movie version of the books. For various reasons it's something different and independent from the books.

For me, when I watch them with them with the due mental distance (=realising this is a version from a director who has as his first priority making a multi-million dollar blockbuster and not someone aiming to visualize the books - which would be pointless anyway) I can enjoy them a lot and even find this or that fitting visual or contextual interpretation of Middle-earth I deem a good match with the books.

Cheers
Tolwen

Well said! I feel the same. It's not a perfect adaptation of the book - but it's close enough to perfect to provide a wonderful movie experience in and of itself. There is no equal that has been published yet (as far as fantasy genre is concerned). It provides a good enough glimpse into Middle-earth as written to appease most Tolkien enthusiasts (with varying degrees), and provide great movie experience to non-Tolkienites who don't have a dog in the fight.

Since it caters to both, it's a win-win for the audience to get "more" and for the filmmakers due to the profitability.

Finally - what is HAS done is created a WHOLE new generation of Fantasy and Tolkien fans. The whole genre and fans win as it perpetuates enthusiasm for other movies, books, RPGs, video games, etc. How is this a bad thing?

Commercial? Yes. Win? Yes. Perfect artsy adaptation? No Usually the more quaint artsy replications have little success outside the purists of the subject. Musicians suffer the same fate. You can stand on the street-corner or the subway platform and play your pure art music (well in fact) to your heart's content; but it won't make a difference to anyone outside that immediate circle until you commercialize yourself no matter how truly gifted you are. That's just economic facts. You have to cater to masses to have any globalizing effect.

In this case - globalizing Middle-earth to millions of people who never even considered reading the book or didn't know what a hobbit is....I'm more than okay with the creative liberties taken cuz I know it made an overall better product to the world and our interests and hobbies benefit - because Tolkien is the granddaddy of fantasy genre.

Robert

[Tolwen]

I have to differentiate somewhat though. Even with the necessary "mental distance" I found the LotR movies better made. The Hobbit (at least the first part) made a much less coherent and well-balanced impression on me. Many things were much too exaggerated even for a fantasy movie (and all the more for Middle-earth). Don't get me wrong - it is still a solid fantasy film IMO, but much less Middle-earth for me than the LotR movies - even with the mental distance.
My personal guess is that many of the things that bother me the most are leftovers from Del Toro ideas, though that needs a check later when we know more

Still I'll buy the DVD's (extendend version only) for collector's and reference purposes

Cheers
Tolwen

[Beran]

However, can you honestly say you have seen a better fantasy movie than any of the four he has produced so far?

Excalibur as a film.

Game of Thrones as a series.

Both vastly surpass PJs films. In fact I even prefer the two Tolkien fan films; Born of Hope and Hunt for Gollum. I find those far more entertaining - especially considering their budget and resource limitations.

I agree on your view of Excalibur...watched the other day, great film. Even if the armour was just wrong.

Can't agree with GoT (books or series)...though the story is an entertaining one I totally disagree with the ascertain that Martin is the American Tolkien.

The Hobbit was a little boring, I agree. However, I feel that the other movie (still don't know how PJ is going to effectively make a trilogy out of this) will be more exciting. They slay a dragon...always worth the price of admission. Well, maybe not the admission for 3D and whatever the 48 frames per second showing will be. In Ottawa the full version (3d and 48 fps) was over $20 CDN just for the ticket.

Either way Smaug looked great in the trailer; with luck it will be the version in the movie as well.