Do you think we'll ever find out more about Del Torro's plans for The Hobbit?

On a tangent I was rewatching the opening AUJ for editing purposes and I finally worked out why they made such an arse of the look of old Bilbo- if you remember a lot of folk complained that he obviously has a different wig on- in AUJ his hair is longer and flatter, and very slightly darker than in the shots in FotR supposedly the same day.
There was even talk I seem to remember about lost wigs- but that never explained why they couldn't make a new one that looked at least like the original.

Well the answer lies in the drawing of young Bilbo old Bilbo looks at- take a look- they have given old Bilbo young Bilbo hair style. Choosing to make this visual link in this one scene over their own continuity and premise they expect us to buy that its the same day.
They didn't trust their audience would believe they were the same person unless they had the the same hairstyle.
I think one of the reasons the writing seems like its been written by two imbeciles is partly because they are writing it for imbeciles as their starting point.

And it didn't even work as instead of people making a subliminal connection they were already too busy wondering why they screwed up Ian Holm's wig so badly.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:On a tangent I was rewatching the opening AUJ...

Your ceaseless dedication to being annoyed with these films continues to impress me Petty

There was even talk I seem to remember about lost wigs- but that never explained why they couldn't make a new one that looked at least like the original.

Maybe they didn't have nay photos to hand? I doubt Jackson would be willing to go back and watch the previous films for minutae such as this.

Legolas has different coloured eyes to LOTR, Beorn's magic dissapearing shackles, Tauriel's costume changes completely halfway through a scene in DOS and there are numerous examples of shots being flipped or tinkered with  for no apparent reason(the day/night thing you previously pointed out about the opening of DOS being most notable)...with a $600 million budget and a very hectic shooting schedule you'd have thought they would employ at least one continuity assistant...but in the greater scheme of things it's probably not a priority

I think one of the reasons the writing seems like its been written by two imbeciles is partly because they are writing it for imbeciles as their starting point]

Bit harsh, TH may be blockbusters aimed at the masses, but they are reasonably competent and self aware of cinematic conventions, there's rather more artistry at display in these films than say Transformers etc, it's partly down to the talent at display in the acting, design etc departments that the writing falls all the more flatter at times    

In fairness not all the audience would have seen LOTR, so they would have been a bit confused by the opening without some heavy handed explanation.

azriel wrote:I thought, looking back, ( oh the vanity of hindsight ) that Lee Pace was not necessarily the right person for the job. He oozed self confidence, big headedness, touch of narrow mindedness, stubbornness...... ...All the qualities someone needed for...Thorin ! Tho Lee Pace ( ) would have needed CGI to lower his height but, would HE have made a decent Thorin ?
( er burn the wig 1st lovey, blonde is so NOT your colour )  

I hated Pace's take on the character, frankly, partly because of the fact that there even was a take on the character. I simply despised the faux Tolkien of it all.

Like FS says, he's too youthful and comely in appearance to play Thorin. As far as looks, Pace is right for the part to play an elf. Sure, they could have made him up to look like a dwarf but then there'd be no point in casting Pace. Someone on this board (I forget who) suggested Ian McShane, who I think would have been brilliant, in theory at least (this is a PJ movie we're talking about).

On a side note, I'm impressed with the makeup on Thorin. I don't see a whit of resemblance between him and Richard Armitage.

In theory I don't mind the idea of meeting Old Bilbo in the intro but he looked so weird that it took me out of the moment. Frodo was even weirder. He looked like Michael Jackson on the cusp of Bubbles fiddling.

Mrs Figg wrote:In theory I don't mind the idea of meeting Old Bilbo in the intro but he looked so weird that it took me out of the moment. Frodo was even weirder. He looked like Michael Jackson on the cusp of Bubbles fiddling.

I remember when Elijah Wood was first announced to be returning there were a few interesting suggestions-some suggested they could have expanded the bridging sequences and cross cut younger Bilbo's story with his older narrating the story to Frodo, this would have been very intrusive and ruined the pace, but as it stands I don't know why he was in the finished film, utterly pointless, the audience must be pretty thick if they don't realize it's a prequel...if thye were going to the bother of bringing him back for a cameo they could have done something more interesting with it.

Yeah right Bilbo looked my nan, that wig was dreadful & Frodo looked odd. He had lost that rosy faced baby fat & looked like he'd been released from Dachau.

Radaghast wrote: Someone on this board (I forget who) suggested Ian McShane

Though it was actually GDT who first floated the idea, I think Armitage is a decent actor, but I didn't like the way they wrote Thorin in the films.

malickfan wrote:

Mrs Figg wrote:In theory I don't mind the idea of meeting Old Bilbo in the intro but he looked so weird that it took me out of the moment. Frodo was even weirder. He looked like Michael Jackson on the cusp of Bubbles fiddling.

 

I remember when Elijah Wood was first announced to be returning there were a few interesting suggestions-some suggested they could have expanded the bridging sequences and cross cut younger Bilbo's story with his older narrating the story to Frodo, this would have been very intrusive and ruined the pace, but as it stands I don't know why he was in the finished film, utterly pointless, the audience must be pretty thick if they don't realize it's a prequel...if thye were going to the bother of bringing him back for a cameo they could have done something more interesting with it.

Yeah, I got the impression that it was going to be a framing device, a "bookend" scene, but from what I understand, there was no closing bookend.

malickfan wrote:

Radaghast wrote: Someone on this board (I forget who) suggested Ian McShane

Though it was actually GDT who first floated the idea, I think Armitage is a decent actor, but I didn't like the way they wrote Thorin in the films.

Yeah, it's not Armitage's performance I really have a problem with either. Well, it is, sort of, but I blame PJ more than Armitage for that. Of course, I think he's totally wrong for the part, age-wise.

[/quote]
Yeah, it's not Armitage's performance I really have a problem with either. Well, it is, sort of, but I blame PJ more than Armitage for that. Of course, I think he's totally wrong for the part, age-wise.[/quote]

As I've said before I actually liked Thorin more in the book, because he was a very arrogant, forceful and morally grey (and rather idiotic at times) king in exile, rather than a 'oh so noble' flawed hero, the more sympathetic and tragic they tried to make Thorin in the films the less I liked him...but I'm probably kinda weird like that. Casting an older actor would worked well with Thorin's inner failings as a character (and tie's in with the idea Armitage had-Thorin's inner fire is dying, it's now or never, and he's consumed with the quest because he knows it will probably fail) and you could re-work fili and kili as the young action hero's.

Armitage sold his role reasonably well, but I never really got a sense of Thorin as a character (the book version may not have depth, but he's a clearly written character)...and 90% of the time Thorin was grouching around in slow motion...not particularity interesting...

Nor even vaguely interesting

Not interesting at all