"The Hobbit"

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

But obviously the eagles (the real heroes) were a vital plot hole, because it's been brought up several times by a majority of posters on this site

Several times by a majority of posters? Really? Aren't there like 10,000 members on CP? I think it's been brought up a couple of times, at which point someone has pointed out why that "easy solution" would have been extremely risky and probably failed, which is not ideal when the fate of the world is on the line. As far as the Hobbit goes, it's a kids' story, and you might as well ask why Gandalf doesn't just single-handedly slaughter all of the Orcs given that he's basically a demigod.

Which brings up the elephant in the room in terms of making this story a movie - the perhaps less than satisfying explanation as to why the deus ex machina is as it is in the Hobbit is that you never really get the sense that Gandalf is taking the quest all that seriously. When #### gets real, he steps it up and bails everyone out so they don't die (i.e. calling in the eagles), but in general it's all "this one's up to you guys, I'll lend a hand but you have to do the heavy lifting for yourselves". This is something that has to be gotten used to because the middle earth world is one in which the gods and demi-gods are literally present. They don't necessarily intervene and when they do they only do so to a point. The difference between the Gandalfs and Galadriels of the world and your Boromirs and Frodos and Bilbos is not necessarily well translated on film.

if the eye can't see Frodo, why would it see the birds and furthermore, if the eye doesn't assume the birds are working against it, why would it know they have the ring but whatever

The eye can see Frodo. It just doesn't pay attention because Frodo's just a little duder wandering across the world, and there are major war-theatre events going on with real players, some of whom have been enemies of Sauron for several thousand years and in his view are probably the ones he's going to have to contend with. He sneaks by. If you send fifty giant flying eagles, led by their king, straight into Mordor, yeah, no ####, someone's going to notice. Those are the kinds of moves Sauron is expecting - big time players matching their strength against his. It doesn't necessarily come through all that clearly in ROTK, but the whole point of Aragorn et. al. going to the black gate in the end is that they know they'll probably all die, but it will make Sauron think that Aragorn has the ring (following in Isildur's footsteps), and will shift his focus there, because that's how Sauron is. It works, because earlier Aragorn had touched the Palantir from Isengard (the big marble looking dealy - again this did not happen in the movies) which led Sauron to be aware of him and assume that he'd have the ring. It's a weakness that the good guys exploit.

And yes, saying that the fact that it does not come across clearly in the movie is a valid criticism. But it's a complicated story, and you only have so much running time, so he was bound to trip over a few things. I think there are worse issues but then I wanted the movies made for me, i.e. a fan who knows this #### inside and out.

and Jackson does himself no favours by fortifying the viewers confusion by subsequently having a little bird fly to the mountain at the end.

Yeah, that's fair.

Finally, the argument that there is only so much time to tell a story, that's BS too because a) somehow other movies explain stories and b) why waste so much useless screen time on random unexplained scenes when you have a story to tell.

b) is fine, but a), come on, different stories are different stories... middle earth is an incredibly complex world with histories between the on-screen characters that stretch back millenia. So when you complain that stuff gets confusing because X had a feud with Y over a jewel 2000 years ago, well okay, but it's pretty tough to explain all of that stuff in a fulsome way and you end up spending half the movie explaining the movie, which no one wants and which is already a problem.

AR, I tend to generally agree with you on the riddles in the dark scene, I agree the acting was great. My only complaint was like I said, it dragged on and on and on and on.

Meh, didn't feel long to me, probably because more of a good thing doesn't hurt in my books. I liked the extended LOTR editions much better than the theatre releases (though it still didn't fix Two Towers).

[AR_Six]

It's a little more complex than that in that he's more like a demi-god who is sent as a hand of the gods (the Valar) into middle earth to oppose Sauron. Really, the entire story of LOTR was unnecessary - at any time, the handful of Valar sitting over in the undying lands could have decided they weren't down with Sauron's BS and simply ended it, but they didn't intervene directly, they sent agents - Gandalf, Radagast, Saruman, Alatar and Pallando (the last two of whom are in the east and aren't heard from) to influence events. That's just how they choose to intervene. So, Gandalf's purpose isn't to personally run the world, it's to assist and counsel and influence events without being the direct cause of them (though at times he arguably oversteps himself).

Really, the question of who happens to have control of Erebor at any given time is trivial politics to an immortal being who is thousands of years old. The issue is that Smaug could cause serious issues if he was involved in the war against Sauron and the western powers had to contend with him as well as Mordor (and as it turns out Isengard). Spurring on a quest to re-take the mountain is a way to fix that and thereby influence events to the detriment of Sauron, but it's only part of a larger purpose, which is why in the book Gandalf frequently disappears for long stretches of time to "attend to other business".

[JD]

Before LOTR came out, I knew nothing of it. I saw FOTR and was completely, utterly confused yet fascinated by it. I think all the unexplained depth to the world and stories adds to the movies. After seeing it, I went out and read and watched everything I could because I was interested in learning more of the back stories and motivations of the groups and individuals involved. To me, Jackson's vague and even non-existent explanations of things adds to the intrigue and mystique of the world he's depicting.

[octothorp]

I know the Eagles have been discussed a lot in this thread, but mostly in regards to their use in LotR. So apologies if this has already been said, but there's another important aspect for not getting the eagles to take them all the way to the Lonely Mountain: it's probably safe to assume that the Eagles would frown on the potential scenario of waking up a dragon: a fire drake is probably the only creature in middle earth that would kick the eagles' asses in battle. Just as they're not eager to tell the elves about their intent, it makes a lot of sense to accept the eagles' help when they need it, but avoid divulging the nature of their quest or even their end destination.

[zamler]

Mr.Coffee were you dragged into the movie? I assume you knew at least a little bit about Peter Jackson and his LOTR trilogy, and knowing that, you would have a good idea of what to expect from The Hobbit. So assuming this, why did you go see the movie? It sounds like you simply don't like Tolkien, and especially hate how Jackson has translated his work onto the big screen.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

It's a little more complex than that in that he's more like a demi-god who is sent as a hand of the gods (the Valar) into middle earth to oppose Sauron. Really, the entire story of LOTR was unnecessary - at any time, the handful of Valar sitting over in the undying lands could have decided they weren't down with Sauron's BS and simply ended it, but they didn't intervene directly, they sent agents - Gandalf, Radagast, Saruman, Alatar and Pallando (the last two of whom are in the east and aren't heard from) to influence events. That's just how they choose to intervene. So, Gandalf's purpose isn't to personally run the world, it's to assist and counsel and influence events without being the direct cause of them (though at times he arguably oversteps himself).

Really, the question of who happens to have control of Erebor at any given time is trivial politics to an immortal being who is thousands of years old. The issue is that Smaug could cause serious issues if he was involved in the war against Sauron and the western powers had to contend with him as well as Mordor (and as it turns out Isengard). Spurring on a quest to re-take the mountain is a way to fix that and thereby influence events to the detriment of Sauron, but it's only part of a larger purpose, which is why in the book Gandalf frequently disappears for long stretches of time to "attend to other business".

However, that's a common theme in spirituality and mythology all over the world. If you do what is right the gods will help you, but you gotta be prepared to make sacrifices and try your hardest. The gods won't do it all for you.

They often send their messengers, or their helpers, or their angels too. They don't directly intervene. So it is a theme and feeling that feels natural and right, as it goes directly to our ancient stories and even our morals.

So the eagles in The Hobbit WERE in the book? I couldn't remember that. But it's been a long long time since I read the book. I did notice a lot of extra stuff, backstory stuff, and Similarion stuff.

[Wormius]

The eagles significance in the book amounts to about half-a-dozen pages of the book in their presence (which is why I suggested the eagles play a pretty minor role in the whole Hobbit scheme of things).

[Daradon]

^^^ Do they help the party in the books the way they do in the movie? From what I recall there was a lot of extra/new fighting so far.

[Wormius]

Yes, pretty much. The book only discusses them plucking everyone out of the trees, the party thinking they are going to be eaten by the eagles, and then some discussions with the eagles afterwards, which I can't recall but something about being indifferent to Orcs and disliking man.

That's not saying they aren't a deux ex machina mechanism, but I think that they are probably the least heinous example in the movie / books.

[Coys1882]

Going to the 11:30am showing today at the Chinook IMAX - looking forward to it.

[V]

WTF? Riddles in the dark was 20 minutes too long? Give your head a shake. That scene was fantastic.

I thought they could have gotten rid of the rock 'em sock 'em rock giants, but outside of that I didn't think it was necessary to cut anything from the movie.

I did think it was weird that the butterfly was so quick to get the eagles. But it was also weird that 14 people could evade 80 billion goblins. There were times where you just had to sit back and enjoy the show.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Matata

The eagles used to be allied with the good guys (elves, dwarves, humans, etc.) and used to fight in their wars against evil (the armies of Morgoth). The eagles motivation for getting involved was that Morgoth had a pile of dragons which could destroy the eagle's nesting areas, and dwarves and elves were pretty good at killing dragons.

Sauron only has a handful of drakes, which aren't enough to pose a real threat to the eagle's nests and the eagles don't see the point in dying for someone else's cause. Due to their ancient relationship with Gandalf, they were willing to help him out, but only when he faced certain death. They did save Frodo at the end, but that was only when Mordor had been emptied of it's armies and Sauron utterly defeated.

Asking the eagles to fly the ring across a continent, at the same time Sauron was using the bulk of his might to find the ring, would have been a very tall order and very risky. It's unlikely that they could avoid the gaze of Sauron or his agents for the whole trip, at which point Sauron could intercept them and/or fortify mount doom, and end up with the ring.

In the movie, the only way Frodo and Sam were able to get to Mount Doom was when the armies of Gondor/Rohan distracted Sauron. I'm not sure how accurate that is according to the book, but it explains why the eagles wouldn't have been able to just fly them up there. Sauron would have seen it coming.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by octothorp

I know the Eagles have been discussed a lot in this thread, but mostly in regards to their use in LotR. So apologies if this has already been said, but there's another important aspect for not getting the eagles to take them all the way to the Lonely Mountain: it's probably safe to assume that the Eagles would frown on the potential scenario of waking up a dragon: a fire drake is probably the only creature in middle earth that would kick the eagles' asses in battle. Just as they're not eager to tell the elves about their intent, it makes a lot of sense to accept the eagles' help when they need it, but avoid divulging the nature of their quest or even their end destination.

And to add to that, a side story of the Hobbit was that Gandolf realized that 'Sauron' was still alive, and didn't want him to get involved with Smaug. I know they didn't explain it very well, but I'm not sure how you could. At the 'council' Saurman was actually aware of the 'one ring'...and wanted to find it for himself which is why he denied the existence of the Necromancer in Dul Guldur.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Azure

And to add to that, a side story of the Hobbit was that Gandolf realized that 'Sauron' was still alive, and didn't want him to get involved with Smaug. I know they didn't explain it very well, but I'm not sure how you could. At the 'council' Saurman was actually aware of the 'one ring'...and wanted to find it for himself which is why he denied the existence of the Necromancer in Dul Guldur.

That was all in the book too? I thought for sure that was back story, Similarion type stuff. Cause when Tolkien was writing The Hobbit, he had no idea the LotR was coming.

I didn't think Sauruman was in The Hobbit at all. And not even an idea in Tolkien's head at that point.

[Inglewood Jack]

Ok, am I the only person in the world who enjoyed the stone giant scene? No, it didn't really contribute much to the plot, but for me it was a great addition to the overall fantasy of Middle Earth.

What about those giant statues that they sailed past in FOTR? I loved that too even though nobody would know who they were unless they read the book. No plot advancement there either. But it helped remind you that this was a fantastic, magical realm where there's things to be in awe of around every corner. The films need more of that, not less.

Stone giants and other big epic things in LOTR are cool. Complain more about other things, like trolls who used to be badass, but now sound like tipsy football fans from some East End pub.

[MarchHare]

I love how everyone in this thread acts like deus ex machina is just an everyday term in our vocabulary.

It's not? Anyone familiar with literary, theatre, or film criticism should be familiar with the term.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Daradon

That was all in the book too? I thought for sure that was back story, Similarion type stuff. Cause when Tolkien was writing The Hobbit, he had no idea the LotR was coming.

I didn't think Sauruman was in The Hobbit at all. And not even an idea in Tolkien's head at that point.

I'm in the process of reading the books now, so I'm not sure. Just going by some of the reading online I've done in the past few weeks.

[AR_Six]

Originally Posted by Azure

In the movie, the only way Frodo and Sam were able to get to Mount Doom was when the armies of Gondor/Rohan distracted Sauron. I'm not sure how accurate that is according to the book, but it explains why the eagles wouldn't have been able to just fly them up there. Sauron would have seen it coming.

It is accurate to the book but leaves out the important point that Sauron was under the impression that Aragorn was carrying the ring. He had earlier touched the Palantir and Sauron saw him - at that point he assumed that Aragorn was his enemy. Aragorn is of Numenoran descent and Sauron has a bit of history with Numenor (being forced to surrender to them when at his most powerful, and subsequently contributing to their destruction). Not to mention the modus operandi of men is to want to keep the ring and use it to oppose Sauron head-on.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

It's not? Anyone familiar with literary, theatre, or film criticism should be familiar with the term.

I doubt that would be the majority on a hockey forum.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I doubt that would be the majority on a hockey forum.

Well, to be fair they named a character in the Matrix that achieves that purpose. Might have led to it becoming more popular term amongst us unsavvy movie goers.