The Hobbit - starts filming March 21
- Thread starter nwjedidave
- Start date
Egon Spengler
Master Member
I'll be seeing it in 3D. I have nothing against that. If you don't want to see it in 3D then see one of the 2D showings.
I honestly find it difficult to seriously complain about anything in the LOTR trilogy. The whole piece is such an INCREDIBLE piece of filmmaking.
Cinema and literature are such utterly different media that things have to be altered in translation. The films would have been MONSTEROUSLY dull if they had been a direct transcript of the books.
Personally, I can live without Bombadil, Prince Imrahil and Glorfindel etc. I know people lament their exclusion, but for what we were actually given on screen, their loss is a small price to pay.
I could not be more excited about The Hobbit. :thumbsup
JediG60racer
Sr Member
Tom Bombadil did absolutely nothing but sidetrack the storytelling. Good riddens!
SmilingOtter
Master Member
In the books Bombadil knows what the Ring is, handles it, yet has absolutely no desire for it. Jackson wanted to show (IMO) that just about anyone could be tempted by the ring, especially once they've gotten their hands on it. Hence Gandalf's utter refusal to touch it.
I'm looking forward to this greatly. I am. Everything looks superb. I cannot wait.
.
..
...
Before I go on, let me reiterate. Everything I said up there is the truth. With that done, what the heck is with Tolkein and his utter lack to incorporate any female characters outside of that one wise one?! I know it's what the book had, but gawddangit! I hate this crap.
Sorry. I couldn't resist. For such a rich world that takes place in a fantasy setting, I would hope that it wouldn't set expectations so low for women to the point where they don't do jack until the very end (with the help of a male hobbit no less).
Argh. Again, my sincerest apologies. It's just one of those things I hate having to live with.
.
..
...
Before I go on, let me reiterate. Everything I said up there is the truth. With that done, what the heck is with Tolkein and his utter lack to incorporate any female characters outside of that one wise one?! I know it's what the book had, but gawddangit! I hate this crap.
Sorry. I couldn't resist. For such a rich world that takes place in a fantasy setting, I would hope that it wouldn't set expectations so low for women to the point where they don't do jack until the very end (with the help of a male hobbit no less).
Argh. Again, my sincerest apologies. It's just one of those things I hate having to live with.
Realism, I guess? It's a more or less Dark Ages cultural setting. Women didn't GET to do much. At all. The ones who did were extreme exceptions.
Or it could be authorial blind spot, which itself would reflect culture of the times. Tolkien had this small handicap of not having been raised with 21st century cultural sensibilities, poor chap.
And then, he was writing adventure stories. Worse, adventure stories based on lost Anglo-Saxon yarns of days of yore, the legends the Christians deemed too pagan and wiped out. Not generally noted for their feminist sensibilities, the old sagas.
Or it could be authorial blind spot, which itself would reflect culture of the times. Tolkien had this small handicap of not having been raised with 21st century cultural sensibilities, poor chap.
And then, he was writing adventure stories. Worse, adventure stories based on lost Anglo-Saxon yarns of days of yore, the legends the Christians deemed too pagan and wiped out. Not generally noted for their feminist sensibilities, the old sagas.
Goodwolf
Sr Member
Dude... or perhaps Dudette, you have to take into account when these books were written and to the social structure of the books themselves.
I mean, if you watch the movies, you get the idea that Sam and Frodo were best buds, but if you read the book, it's more like master and servant. A trusted and valued servant, but servant nonetheless. Social classes were still very much The Done Thing when these were written and women weren't really considered to figure into it unless it was the wife of some important personage. And their roles in life were pretty well confined to social events and the like.
Given that, it's hardly surprising that the women in Tolkien's works were rather limited in comparison to today's social roles.
CelticRuins
Sr Member
I'm going to beg to differ with the feminist crap here, and I'm a girl.
Yes, Tolkien didn't write too many women into his works, but he did have a good amount, and those he created were beautiful, strong and wise. Lemme sum up:
Galadriel: Wise, immortal, fair; and to add a bad ass. Not only did she stand up for what she believed in, she was all-powerful. She took down the walls of Dol Guldor single handedly, and she was the queen of her realm, above her husband Celeborn.
Éowyn: Another beautiful bad ass. Strong, emotionally perplexing yet still interesting. She had all the inner turmoils of a normal women, yet she was stronger and braver than most of the men surrounding her.
Luthien: The most beautiful elf to ever been born. She was graceful, but not so delicate. One of her best friends was A GIANT WOLF! She turned herself into a vampire in order to save her loved one, Beren. She seduced and battled the first dark lord Morgoth.
Arwen: Not a heroine in the battle sense, but she stands as a beacon of hope to her kind and her loved ones. She never falters in believing in Aragorn's destiny, and because of that, she turns tides and makes the ultimate sacrifice to save the race of men. If it weren't for her, Aragorn would have no heir. Think about it.
Lobeila Sackville-Baggins: Talk about strong-willed and hard-headed! She never let up until she got what she wanted. On top of that, during the Scouring of the Shire, she was the strongest hobbit around.
Here is a pretty good article about Middle-Earth females: The Women of Middle Earth (Great Article!)
Let us not forget that Tolkien himself was a hopeless romantic. Not only did he create believable, heart breaking and adventurous love stories within his stories, but he loved his wife and cherished her until their end.
Also, let us not forget that LotR revolves around a war. Even in todays sense of war, women aren't the high percentile in combat; it's men. And while we have a ton of amazingly brave women out there, sometimes it just ends up that way. Why? Well we don't live in Amazonia for one...other than that I don't have the answers. War is usually a man's start; as it is in these stories. It also shows the greedy side of the male sex. What are the dwarves after in The Hobbit?? Territory and treasure. What are the males in LotR after? Territory and treasure. What are men after in our world??? Exactly.
It's not that women don't essentially want these things...we just are the far wiser sex and tend to keep out of these silly, meaningless battles
.
Yes, Tolkien didn't write too many women into his works, but he did have a good amount, and those he created were beautiful, strong and wise. Lemme sum up:
Galadriel: Wise, immortal, fair; and to add a bad ass. Not only did she stand up for what she believed in, she was all-powerful. She took down the walls of Dol Guldor single handedly, and she was the queen of her realm, above her husband Celeborn.
Éowyn: Another beautiful bad ass. Strong, emotionally perplexing yet still interesting. She had all the inner turmoils of a normal women, yet she was stronger and braver than most of the men surrounding her.
Luthien: The most beautiful elf to ever been born. She was graceful, but not so delicate. One of her best friends was A GIANT WOLF! She turned herself into a vampire in order to save her loved one, Beren. She seduced and battled the first dark lord Morgoth.
Arwen: Not a heroine in the battle sense, but she stands as a beacon of hope to her kind and her loved ones. She never falters in believing in Aragorn's destiny, and because of that, she turns tides and makes the ultimate sacrifice to save the race of men. If it weren't for her, Aragorn would have no heir. Think about it.
Lobeila Sackville-Baggins: Talk about strong-willed and hard-headed! She never let up until she got what she wanted. On top of that, during the Scouring of the Shire, she was the strongest hobbit around.
Here is a pretty good article about Middle-Earth females: The Women of Middle Earth (Great Article!)
Let us not forget that Tolkien himself was a hopeless romantic. Not only did he create believable, heart breaking and adventurous love stories within his stories, but he loved his wife and cherished her until their end.
Also, let us not forget that LotR revolves around a war. Even in todays sense of war, women aren't the high percentile in combat; it's men. And while we have a ton of amazingly brave women out there, sometimes it just ends up that way. Why? Well we don't live in Amazonia for one...other than that I don't have the answers. War is usually a man's start; as it is in these stories. It also shows the greedy side of the male sex. What are the dwarves after in The Hobbit?? Territory and treasure. What are the males in LotR after? Territory and treasure. What are men after in our world??? Exactly.
It's not that women don't essentially want these things...we just are the far wiser sex and tend to keep out of these silly, meaningless battles
.
Last edited:
SmilingOtter
Master Member
Nicely put.
And she (with some assistance by Merry) killed the Witch King, something no man could have done.
And she (with some assistance by Merry) killed the Witch King, something no man could have done.
N2darkness
Sr Member
Production diary #5
The Hobbit - Production Video Part 5 - YouTube
The Hobbit - Production Video Part 5 - YouTube
CelticRuins said:
While I understand your approach in asking me this question, it does disappoint me when one assumes I'm not a guy simply because I like stories that really involve female characters who mean more to the story than to their leading men. Even Celtic's points on Arwen are restricted to her relationship with Aragorn. There*really is nothing more to her character outside of that. If there was more, she should have been a part of the Fellowship. But than again, why would the Fellowship need anyone who stood up against the nine wraiths at once, won, and got Frodo to Rivendell just in time to save him? Yep.
I'm not going to call this series, Tolkein or anyone involved with the films sexist. They're not. This material is what it is, and it's really good material! Honest. It just sucks that when writing a fantasy storyline, Tolkein still conformed to, as you have said, the social structure at the time. That's one of the reasons I don't like the new Star Trek movie by JJ Abrams. It conformed to the social structure on how women are depicted. Eye candy and the main character's love interest. At least Lord of the Rings wasn't the "short skirts and stripping scenes" kind of eye candy.
CelticRuins
Sr Member
Wasn't me who said that... twas Goodwolf.
twas Goodwolf.
firesprite
Master Member
Tolkien himself said that Bombadil had no real place in the story. It wasn't a loss.
Wasn't me who said that...
I'm having a hard time quoting properly these days.
CelticRuins
Sr Member
All I have to say is if you don't like the lack of female presence...don't read the books or watch the movies? I'm the kind of girl that doesn't mind flowery or feminist girls clogging up my screen. I like a good storyline, a good battle sequence, and add a few dashes of magic...I'm happy!
And to be honest...Lord of the Rings had a fair amount of eye candy for us girls
! Also, The Hobbit is a CHILDREN'S STORY. It was written for kids between the ages of 6-11 at the time. On top of the fact Tolkien was heavily influenced by his stint in WWI; a war entirely populated by men, watching men die, etc. I don't think he ever meant to not add more women, it was merely what he was influenced by.
