Peter Jackson to make The Hobbit (1 Viewer)

[VA703]

Character gallery

wowsome of those look stupid

Yikes. They're going to the final cut with that?

you would think they could be alittle original with the names

 

[EYLive]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

Yeah how many hit rock songs by Led Zeppelin has Fire and Ice influenced? But seriously I read Fire and Ice. I like Martin's work. But I doubt seriously he would compare them. These are some of the best selling books of all time. Lord of the Rings has sold over 150 million copies. I am not a huge fan of Elvis. But I can recognize that he revolutionized music. Tolkien revolutionized fantasy genre literature and everyone doing it now is standing on his shoulders to some degree.

I can accept that Tolkien revolutionized the fantasy genre, and that subsequent writers followed his lead. But as a first time reader of the series, it just doesn't hold up that well over time. I will finish Two Towers and ROTK, then revisit this topic. Maybe my opinion will change.

 

[Todem]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

Yeah how many hit rock songs by Led Zeppelin has Fire and Ice influenced? But seriously I read Fire and Ice. I like Martin's work. But I doubt seriously he would compare them. These are some of the best selling books of all time. Lord of the Rings has sold over 150 million copies. I am not a huge fan of Elvis. But I can recognize that he revolutionized music. Tolkien revolutionized fantasy genre literature and everyone doing it now is standing on his shoulders to some degree.

I can accept that Tolkien revolutionized the fantasy genre, and that subsequent writers followed his lead. But as a first time reader of the series, it just doesn't hold up that well over time. I will finish Two Towers and ROTK, then revisit this topic. Maybe my opinion will change.

The books are only as good as you let your imagination run. If you read them as a young lad....they were amazing. And I loved them when I read them at age 14, then again at 17 and again at 21....hell loved writing songs (like a zillion other bands) with Tolkien images etc.

I can see them not holding up for an older reader today. And if you already saw the movies...you already have a pre-concieved visual of all the characters that were represented in the films.

Frodo looked nothing like I envisioned in the movies. Nor Golum for that matter. But I loved the movies as much as the books. That's how good of a job Peter Jackson did.

 

[Ranethe]

People saying the books suck, that might say more about you than about the books. Not trying to be insulting, some people want more immediate gratification. The books were great, read them around 13-14 and loved them. I was bummed when I finished them.

This might be why. Similar to how Star Wars fans generally love episodes 4-6 as kids, but can't stand 1-3 as adults.

I've read the series several times as an adult, though not in the last 15 years or so. Still thought they were great. Any art is subjective but it is inane to say the books "sucked" (I know you didn't say that).There are people who prefer action movies to character studies (not saying LOTR is a character study). There are people who like Brittany Spears and Justin Bieber but hate Led Zeppelin. nothing wrong with that...I guess.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

People saying the books suck, that might say more about you than about the books. Not trying to be insulting, some people want more immediate gratification. The books were great, read them around 13-14 and loved them. I was bummed when I finished them.

This might be why. Similar to how Star Wars fans generally love episodes 4-6 as kids, but can't stand 1-3 as adults.

I've read the series several times as an adult, though not in the last 15 years or so. Still thought they were great. Any art is subjective but it is inane to say the books "sucked" (I know you didn't say that).There are people who prefer action movies to character studies (not saying LOTR is a character study). There are people who like Brittany Spears and Justin Bieber but hate Led Zeppelin. nothing wrong with that...I guess.

I had almost stated... some people dont "get" why a 6-course meal is great and prefer Pizza Hut.

 

[Amused to Death]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

Yeah how many hit rock songs by Led Zeppelin has Fire and Ice influenced? But seriously I read Fire and Ice. I like Martin's work. But I doubt seriously he would compare them. These are some of the best selling books of all time. Lord of the Rings has sold over 150 million copies. I am not a huge fan of Elvis. But I can recognize that he revolutionized music. Tolkien revolutionized fantasy genre literature and everyone doing it now is standing on his shoulders to some degree.

I can accept that Tolkien revolutionized the fantasy genre, and that subsequent writers followed his lead. But as a first time reader of the series, it just doesn't hold up that well over time. I will finish Two Towers and ROTK, then revisit this topic. Maybe my opinion will change.

The books are only as good as you let your imagination run. If you read them as a young lad....they were amazing. And I loved them when I read them at age 14, then again at 17 and again at 21....hell loved writing songs (like a zillion other bands) with Tolkien images etc.

I can see them not holding up for an older reader today. And if you already saw the movies...you already have a pre-concieved visual of all the characters that were represented in the films.

Frodo looked nothing like I envisioned in the movies. Nor Golum for that matter. But I loved the movies as much as the books. That's how good of a job Peter Jackson did.

Frodo, Don't Wear the Ring

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

People saying the books suck, that might say more about you than about the books. Not trying to be insulting, some people want more immediate gratification. The books were great, read them around 13-14 and loved them. I was bummed when I finished them.

This might be why. Similar to how Star Wars fans generally love episodes 4-6 as kids, but can't stand 1-3 as adults.

I've read the series several times as an adult, though not in the last 15 years or so. Still thought they were great. Any art is subjective but it is inane to say the books "sucked" (I know you didn't say that).There are people who prefer action movies to character studies (not saying LOTR is a character study). There are people who like Brittany Spears and Justin Bieber but hate Led Zeppelin. nothing wrong with that...I guess.

and without LOTR we probably dont have a LZ.

 

[Gr00vus]

Character gallery

wowsome of those look stupid

Yikes. They're going to the final cut with that?

you would think they could be alittle original with the names

The names are straight from the book - it's the costumes/makeup I was commenting on.Remember, Tolkein wrote the Hobbit as a story for his little kids - hence the simplistic names.

 

[Gr00vus]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

Yeah how many hit rock songs by Led Zeppelin has Fire and Ice influenced? But seriously I read Fire and Ice. I like Martin's work. But I doubt seriously he would compare them. These are some of the best selling books of all time. Lord of the Rings has sold over 150 million copies. I am not a huge fan of Elvis. But I can recognize that he revolutionized music. Tolkien revolutionized fantasy genre literature and everyone doing it now is standing on his shoulders to some degree.

I can accept that Tolkien revolutionized the fantasy genre, and that subsequent writers followed his lead. But as a first time reader of the series, it just doesn't hold up that well over time. I will finish Two Towers and ROTK, then revisit this topic. Maybe my opinion will change.

If you're going in to reading these expecting Martin or the movies you're going to be disappointed. Silmarilion + Unfinished Tales + The Hobbit + LOTR is my favorite collection of literature of all time, but I can understand how it doesn't appeal to everyone. Tolkein had an affinity for history, genealogy, geology and horticulture, all of which are prominently represented in his works as much as story telling. His dialogue is anachronistic as well. There's little to no soap opera, and everything that happens happens for a reason - people don't get offed every other chapter just for shock value. Things are pretty slow through the Bombadil chapter in LOTR, and even I have started glossing over his detailed description of brambles and moss after repeated readings.But as I said, to me, there's no better set of fiction.

 

[Mjolnirs]

The names are straight from the book - it's the costumes/makeup I was commenting on.Remember, Tolkein wrote the Hobbit as a story for his little kids - hence the simplistic names.

If you're going in to reading these expecting Martin or the movies you're going to be disappointed...Tolkein had an affinity for history, genealogy, geology and horticulture, all of which are prominently represented in his works as much as story telling. His dialogue is anachronistic as well. There's little to no soap opera, and everything that happens happens for a reason - people don't get offed every other chapter just for shock value.

His affinity for languages shows as well.

 

[Gr00vus]

The names are straight from the book - it's the costumes/makeup I was commenting on.

Remember, Tolkein wrote the Hobbit as a story for his little kids - hence the simplistic names.

If you're going in to reading these expecting Martin or the movies you're going to be disappointed...Tolkein had an affinity for history, genealogy, geology and horticulture, all of which are prominently represented in his works as much as story telling. His dialogue is anachronistic as well. There's little to no soap opera, and everything that happens happens for a reason - people don't get offed every other chapter just for shock value.

His affinity for languages shows as well.

 

[mad sweeney]

Try the Silmarillion if you've seen the movies and are struggling with the books.

oof. Tough reading there.

The books are kind of boring, too descriptive. They don't add enough detail to be worth the effort if you've already seen the movies. Then again, my opinion might be different if I had read the books first. Nothing like experiencing a great story for the first time.

Ever read 'Dune'?

Every one of them, including the prequals.

As much as I love the 'Dune' books (read up through the middle of book 5), they are extremely dry and descriptive at times. Took me far longer to read than LotR, which I never thought was too descriptive or boring.Not to hijack, but the Sci-Fi channel's mini-series in 2000 was far superior to David Lynch's 1984 attempt, imo. 'Dune' and later 'Children of Dune' (which covered through book 3 iirc).

You're out of your mind about the miniseries. Godawful. Looked like crap, like they were just sitting in a greenscreen stage going through emotions. Massive disappointment. The Lynch version is odd but is pretty true to the book.

 

[Todem]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

Yeah how many hit rock songs by Led Zeppelin has Fire and Ice influenced? But seriously I read Fire and Ice. I like Martin's work. But I doubt seriously he would compare them. These are some of the best selling books of all time. Lord of the Rings has sold over 150 million copies. I am not a huge fan of Elvis. But I can recognize that he revolutionized music. Tolkien revolutionized fantasy genre literature and everyone doing it now is standing on his shoulders to some degree.

I can accept that Tolkien revolutionized the fantasy genre, and that subsequent writers followed his lead. But as a first time reader of the series, it just doesn't hold up that well over time. I will finish Two Towers and ROTK, then revisit this topic. Maybe my opinion will change.

The books are only as good as you let your imagination run. If you read them as a young lad....they were amazing. And I loved them when I read them at age 14, then again at 17 and again at 21....hell loved writing songs (like a zillion other bands) with Tolkien images etc.

I can see them not holding up for an older reader today. And if you already saw the movies...you already have a pre-concieved visual of all the characters that were represented in the films.

Frodo looked nothing like I envisioned in the movies. Nor Golum for that matter. But I loved the movies as much as the books. That's how good of a job Peter Jackson did.

Frodo, Don't Wear the Ring

Oh lord. LOL.

 

[Amused to Death]

Try the Silmarillion if you've seen the movies and are struggling with the books.

oof. Tough reading there.

The books are kind of boring, too descriptive. They don't add enough detail to be worth the effort if you've already seen the movies. Then again, my opinion might be different if I had read the books first. Nothing like experiencing a great story for the first time.

Ever read 'Dune'?

Every one of them, including the prequals.

As much as I love the 'Dune' books (read up through the middle of book 5), they are extremely dry and descriptive at times. Took me far longer to read than LotR, which I never thought was too descriptive or boring.Not to hijack, but the Sci-Fi channel's mini-series in 2000 was far superior to David Lynch's 1984 attempt, imo. 'Dune' and later 'Children of Dune' (which covered through book 3 iirc).

You're out of your mind about the miniseries. Godawful. Looked like crap, like they were just sitting in a greenscreen stage going through emotions. Massive disappointment. The Lynch version is odd but is pretty true to the book.

I thought the Lynch version was far more confusing and disjointed. The 2000 Sci-Fi version was much more complete.

 

[inca911]

Holy crap, Nori looks a heck of a lot like Geddy Lee (bassist and lead singer of Rush)!!

Non-Spoiler: I'm glad that Gloin looks like he's the dad of "that other character" in the LOTR series.

 

[Amused to Death]

Looking at the promo photo of Bilbo, I thought he looked a lot like Arthur Dent. Then I looked it up on IMDB....

 

[EYLive]

Holy crap, Nori looks a heck of a lot like Geddy Lee (bassist and lead singer of Rush)!!Non-Spoiler: I'm glad that Gloin looks like he's the dad of "that other character" in the LOTR series.

Ori looks like he's enjoying a buttplug fashioned from dwarven steel.

 

[attaché case]

 

[Maelstrom]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

I do prefer both the SOIAF and WoT series to LOTR. But I will still stand by my statement that the books were better than the (admittedly great) movies. And that the series is a classic. Of course, just because it is a classic, doesn't mean everyone will like or enjoy it.

 

[glumpy]

Try the Silmarillion if you've seen the movies and are struggling with the books.

oof. Tough reading there.

The books are kind of boring, too descriptive. They don't add enough detail to be worth the effort if you've already seen the movies. Then again, my opinion might be different if I had read the books first. Nothing like experiencing a great story for the first time.

Ever read 'Dune'?

Every one of them, including the prequals.

As much as I love the 'Dune' books (read up through the middle of book 5), they are extremely dry and descriptive at times. Took me far longer to read than LotR, which I never thought was too descriptive or boring.Not to hijack, but the Sci-Fi channel's mini-series in 2000 was far superior to David Lynch's 1984 attempt, imo. 'Dune' and later 'Children of Dune' (which covered through book 3 iirc).

You're out of your mind about the miniseries. Godawful. Looked like crap, like they were just sitting in a greenscreen stage going through emotions. Massive disappointment. The Lynch version is odd but is pretty true to the book.

I thought the Lynch version was far more confusing and disjointed. The 2000 Sci-Fi version was much more complete.

Been awhile since I saw them but I remember feeling that way too. Seemed like too much to jam into a movie in any case and you had to really know the tale to follow. Got 'em all myself. Really psyched that they managed to produce the Hobbit after LOTR.

 

[mad sweeney]

The books do not suck. They have been worldwide classics for decades for a reason. Now could he have used an editor in spots? Sure. But they do not suck.

Not sure what that reason would be. Was there nothing comparable when they were first published?I really want to like this series, but it's not doing much for me. Maybe reading them as an adult after the Song of Ice and Fire books made them bland in comparison.

I do prefer both the SOIAF and WoT series to LOTR. But I will still stand by my statement that the books were better than the (admittedly great) movies. And that the series is a classic. Of course, just because it is a classic, doesn't mean everyone will like or enjoy it.

As much as I can't stand LotR, I appreciate it for it's influence in popularizing and in many ways inventing the epic fantasy series genre. I've read a majority of them probably and it's been a gigantic building block in my lifelong love of reading. That said, like I mentioned earlier, I had them for over 25 years or so and never finished them until right before and only because the movies came out. I did like the Hobbit and am on the fence about reading it again before the movie came out. I thought the movies told the story of LotR better than the books and were visually stunning as well as innovative. Very excited for the Hobbit because two of my main gripes about LotR will be largely fixed: No excessive use of homoerotic, lingering closeups of Maguire and the issue of using kids every once in a while in long shots which really didn't match most of the rest of the movies' spatial relationships with the hobbits' smaller size. Really threw me off and took me out of the "realism" of the movie. Since most of the characters in the Hobbit are small, shouldn't be too much of an issue. Plus I like Dent infinitely more than Maguire. Can't wait.

 

[netnalp]

I've never read any of the LOTR books. Should you read the hobbit first?

That's what I'm doing. After finishing A Song of Ice and Fire, Tolkien reads like Dr. Seuss.

That's because The Hobbit was written as a childrens book. If you're looking for more mature (read: dry) writing, LOTR is what you want.

1/3 into Fellowship and those all those idiot hobbits do is walk around and talk about how scared they are.

You have page long descriptions of leafs to look forward to. The LOTR movies are better than the books.

Not even a little true.

I finished reading Fellowship then rewatched the movie. The movie is way better than the book.

I can't tell you how strongly I disagree with that statement. Movies were good. Books were better, each time I've read them.

I can't tell you how strongly I disagree with you and agree with him. Books were over indulgent, meandering and overly gay (older definition of word). Took me almost 25 years to read them, never getting past halfway through book 2. And this is from an avid fantasy reader. The ONLY reason I finished them was wanting to actually finish them before the movies. The movies were technically well done, though with some annoying contrivances (like major differences in height between the actors and the children/midgets used for long shots). No matter what though, extensive use of homoerotic closeups of Elijah Wood>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Tom Bombadil.That said, I liked The Hobbit.

+1. I read the Hobbit to my 9 year old son earlier this year. We both loved it. We couldnt wait to read the LOTR series. I wanted them to be epically great - so did my son, but the first book was very slow and we abandoned it about 2/3rds of the way through. I was relieved when he asked me if I could read something else instead. LOTR movies >>>> LOTR books, IMO.

I've read The Hobbit 3 times. LotRs, I've been trying to finish for 30 years. It's just too easy to set those books down and not comeback to them for a few days, months & years. Hated Tom Bombadil.

The slow pace of the books.

Frodo is a #### to Sam.

Characters bursting into song or poetry at inappropriate times. For example, just last night I read the part where Sam, Frodo and Gollum are hiding from the army of men from the south marching into Mordor. Sam asks Gollum if he sees any oliphants. Gollum asks what those are. So Sam stands up, "putting his hands behind his back (as he always did when 'speaking poetry')" and performs a poem about oliphants.

Aragorn, the great ranger, can't track a small force of urakai through open plains, because it is getting dark.

I haven't read anything so far int he books that I wish was in the movies.

I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.

I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.

Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

 

[netnalp]

Character gallery

wowsome of those look stupid

Yikes. They're going to the final cut with that?

you would think they could be alittle original with the names

The names are straight from the book - it's the costumes/makeup I was commenting on.Remember, Tolkein wrote the Hobbit as a story for his little kids - hence the simplistic names.

I don't care for the look for Kili, Fili, Ori, Bofur and Thorin. A few look too human and a couple look more like how I envision gnomes.

 

[Maelstrom]

I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I found the Narnia books to be similar when I picked up the full collection as an adult. It was probably one of my first introductions to fantasy, and I read and re-read the series when I was younger. I've yet to make it through all 7 books as an adult, and the book (all 7 in one volume) is currently sitting on the bookshelf again.I like the Shannara series, but only read the initial trilogy (I think?) I found it to be remarkedly similar to the LOTR, and having read LOTR first, that was a bit unfavorable in my mind due to the similarities. Not that I didn't enjoy it, as I enjoy many decent Fantasy stories even if they are similar to others, just that when I first read it I didn't feel the urge to pick up more or re-read it.I really need to read the Drizzt series, but have never been able to get into it.

 

[beer 302]

I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.

I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.

Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I found the Narnia books to be similar when I picked up the full collection as an adult. It was probably one of my first introductions to fantasy, and I read and re-read the series when I was younger. I've yet to make it through all 7 books as an adult, and the book (all 7 in one volume) is currently sitting on the bookshelf again.I like the Shannara series, but only read the initial trilogy (I think?) I found it to be remarkedly similar to the LOTR, and having read LOTR first, that was a bit unfavorable in my mind due to the similarities. Not that I didn't enjoy it, as I enjoy many decent Fantasy stories even if they are similar to others, just that when I first read it I didn't feel the urge to pick up more or re-read it.

I really need to read the Drizzt series, but have never been able to get into it.

Re-read LOTR 7-8 times, have read through the Shannara series a few times (all of them and they are equally as good as the first ones) and highly recommend the the Deryni series by Katherine Kurtz which led to reading her Knights of the Blood books. I'd also recommend the the Thomas Covenant Chronicles by Stephen Donaldson.

 

[El Floppo]

I've read The Hobbit 3 times. LotRs, I've been trying to finish for 30 years. It's just too easy to set those books down and not comeback to them for a few days, months & years. Hated Tom Bombadil. The slow pace of the books. Frodo is a #### to Sam. Characters bursting into song or poetry at inappropriate times. For example, just last night I read the part where Sam, Frodo and Gollum are hiding from the army of men from the south marching into Mordor. Sam asks Gollum if he sees any oliphants. Gollum asks what those are. So Sam stands up, "putting his hands behind his back (as he always did when 'speaking poetry')" and performs a poem about oliphants. Aragorn, the great ranger, can't track a small force of urakai through open plains, because it is getting dark.I haven't read anything so far int he books that I wish was in the movies.I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I mostly agree with these, although I liked and still like LOTR a lot. LOL about the Sam poetry thing.Funny- I remember reading the Shanara books as a kid after reading LOTR, and thinking they were absolute embarrassing crap. As a 12 year old.

 

[snore]

I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.

I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.

Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I found the Narnia books to be similar when I picked up the full collection as an adult. It was probably one of my first introductions to fantasy, and I read and re-read the series when I was younger. I've yet to make it through all 7 books as an adult, and the book (all 7 in one volume) is currently sitting on the bookshelf again.I like the Shannara series, but only read the initial trilogy (I think?) I found it to be remarkedly similar to the LOTR, and having read LOTR first, that was a bit unfavorable in my mind due to the similarities. Not that I didn't enjoy it, as I enjoy many decent Fantasy stories even if they are similar to others, just that when I first read it I didn't feel the urge to pick up more or re-read it.

I really need to read the Drizzt series, but have never been able to get into it.

Re-read LOTR 7-8 times, have read through the Shannara series a few times (all of them and they are equally as good as the first ones) and highly recommend the the Deryni series by Katherine Kurtz which led to reading her Knights of the Blood books. I'd also recommend the the Thomas Covenant Chronicles by Stephen Donaldson.

I will second the thomas covenant chronicles. A little dark but enjoyable. I read some of yhe deryni and that was good too. I am pretty excited for the hobbit. Should be good!

 

[netnalp]

I've read The Hobbit 3 times. LotRs, I've been trying to finish for 30 years. It's just too easy to set those books down and not comeback to them for a few days, months & years. Hated Tom Bombadil. The slow pace of the books. Frodo is a #### to Sam. Characters bursting into song or poetry at inappropriate times. For example, just last night I read the part where Sam, Frodo and Gollum are hiding from the army of men from the south marching into Mordor. Sam asks Gollum if he sees any oliphants. Gollum asks what those are. So Sam stands up, "putting his hands behind his back (as he always did when 'speaking poetry')" and performs a poem about oliphants. Aragorn, the great ranger, can't track a small force of urakai through open plains, because it is getting dark.I haven't read anything so far int he books that I wish was in the movies.I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I mostly agree with these, although I liked and still like LOTR a lot. LOL about the Sam poetry thing.Funny- I remember reading the Shanara books as a kid after reading LOTR, and thinking they were absolute embarrassing crap. As a 12 year old.

I could be I like them because I hadn't read LotR before reading the Shannara books. At the time I knew the Sword of Shannara story was basically that of LotR, but it drew me in and was less dry than LotR. Could be that being reading Shannara first, they appeal to me more. So I need to re-read them to make a fair comparison.

 

[NCCommish]

I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.

I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.

Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I found the Narnia books to be similar when I picked up the full collection as an adult. It was probably one of my first introductions to fantasy, and I read and re-read the series when I was younger. I've yet to make it through all 7 books as an adult, and the book (all 7 in one volume) is currently sitting on the bookshelf again.I like the Shannara series, but only read the initial trilogy (I think?) I found it to be remarkedly similar to the LOTR, and having read LOTR first, that was a bit unfavorable in my mind due to the similarities. Not that I didn't enjoy it, as I enjoy many decent Fantasy stories even if they are similar to others, just that when I first read it I didn't feel the urge to pick up more or re-read it.

I really need to read the Drizzt series, but have never been able to get into it.

Re-read LOTR 7-8 times, have read through the Shannara series a few times (all of them and they are equally as good as the first ones) and highly recommend the the Deryni series by Katherine Kurtz which led to reading her Knights of the Blood books. I'd also recommend the the Thomas Covenant Chronicles by Stephen Donaldson.

Absolutely love this series.

 

[grateful zed]

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey releases on December 14, 2012;

its sequel Desolation of Smaug releases on December 13, 2013;

and the final film in the trilogy, There and Back Again, releases on July 18, 2014.

http://screenrant.com/hobbit-title-desolation-of-smaug-there-back-again-release-date/

 

[Charlie Frown]

Character gallery

wowsome of those look stupid

Yikes. They're going to the final cut with that?

What the Hell is sticking in Bifur's head?

 

[beer 302]

What the Hell is sticking in Bifur's head?

that's from a Nickelback song, right?

 

[Jackstraw]

I've read The Hobbit 3 times. LotRs, I've been trying to finish for 30 years. It's just too easy to set those books down and not comeback to them for a few days, months & years. Hated Tom Bombadil. The slow pace of the books. Frodo is a #### to Sam. Characters bursting into song or poetry at inappropriate times. For example, just last night I read the part where Sam, Frodo and Gollum are hiding from the army of men from the south marching into Mordor. Sam asks Gollum if he sees any oliphants. Gollum asks what those are. So Sam stands up, "putting his hands behind his back (as he always did when 'speaking poetry')" and performs a poem about oliphants. Aragorn, the great ranger, can't track a small force of urakai through open plains, because it is getting dark.I haven't read anything so far int he books that I wish was in the movies.I'm confident I'll get through them this year. Earlier this year I got through the Narnia books and those were a chore. They are easier reading than LotR, but the stories aren't nearly as good. Also, I didn't care for the style of writing of the Narnia books. The author writes it so it is like someone is telling you the story and putting in their own comments. He often spoils the story by letting you know ahead of time that a character gets through a dangerous event.I feel the books from the Shannara series are much better. Though I should re-read them so I can see if for me, they hold up from when I was a kid.Loved the Drizzt series but it's disappointed ever since it "jumped the shark" with a storyline that included a Trojan Horse like plan except it was a giant orc statue.

I mostly agree with these, although I liked and still like LOTR a lot. LOL about the Sam poetry thing.Funny- I remember reading the Shanara books as a kid after reading LOTR, and thinking they were absolute embarrassing crap. As a 12 year old.

I could be I like them because I hadn't read LotR before reading the Shannara books. At the time I knew the Sword of Shannara story was basically that of LotR, but it drew me in and was less dry than LotR. Could be that being reading Shannara first, they appeal to me more. So I need to re-read them to make a fair comparison.

Anybody ever read Lloyd Alexander's the Chronicle of Pyridan series? They were by far my favorite as a kid. Pretty quick reads compared to the LOTR series.

 

[Gr00vus]

As much as I generally don't like Jackson's treatment of the subject material so far, Freeman is a perfect choice to play young Bilbo. I'll probably see it just for his performance.

 

[beer 302]

Anybody ever read Lloyd Alexander's the Chronicle of Pyridan series? They were by far my favorite as a kid. Pretty quick reads compared to the LOTR series.

I love the LOTR but lets be honest, the Bible is a quick read compared to series.

 

[netnalp]

Character gallery

wowsome of those look stupid

Yikes. They're going to the final cut with that?

What the Hell is sticking in Bifur's head?

Don't consider it a spoiler myself, but just to be on the safe side:

Spoiler

"Born in the West, Bifur has the rusting remains of an Orc axe embedded in his forehead, which has rendered him inarticulate and occasionally feisty! He communicates only with grunts and hand gestures. Unlike most of the others in The Company of Dwarves, Bifur is not related to Thorin, nor is he of noble lineage, but rather is descended from miners and smithies – simple folk with simple tastes."

Info from LotR wiki

 

[BigSteelThrill]

New post production video with lots of entertaining tidbits...

 

[Maelstrom]

New post production video with lots of entertaining tidbits...

That is a really cool look at the "making of" process behind a film like this. Thanks!Note: for anyone who hasn't read the Hobbit, spoilers do abound.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Can't wait for this. I am avoiding as many trailers /features as possible.

Wifey, daughter, 4 nephews and myself will all be attending on the 14th.

I am going to get tickets probably in the week of December 1st or so.

 

[Maelstrom]

Can't wait for this. I am avoiding as many trailers /features as possible. Wifey, daughter, 4 nephews and myself will all be attending on the 14th. I am going to get tickets probably in the week of December 1st or so.

I bought tickets about a week or so ago

 

[grateful zed]

Hobbit quiz

 

[EYLive]

Beard capture.

 

[Cheese and Crackers]

Ori looks like he's enjoying a buttplug fashioned from dwarven steel.

Ori's quest is to find the legendary mithril buttplug.Durin's Other Bane

 

[El Floppo]

I still dont get making three movies out of a relativwly slight book, but I'm still jonesing to see all of them.

 

[saintsfan]

I have read all the books and I think the Hobbit is the best of the books. The Hobbit is what LOTR could have been had it been edited down. I know the Hobbit was written for children, but to me, it moves along at a good pace.

LOTR could have probably been edited in half.

 

[netnalp]

I still dont get making three movies out of a relativwly slight book, but I'm still jonesing to see all of them.

Maybe there is stuff that fills in some of the gap between Hobbit and LotR.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I still dont get making three movies out of a relativwly slight book, but I'm still jonesing to see all of them.

Maybe there is stuff that fills in some of the gap between Hobbit and LotR.

Yeah I think from everything we have read the movies will extend well beyond just the limited text of the Hobbit. Jackson said early in the process that they would be going deep into The Lord of the Rings appendix to help build the story. I am not expecting these to come in at over 10 hours like the LOTR extended editions did but I would not be surprised if these three were stretched to over 7.5 hours in some form of extended edition (assuming he does that again).

 

[Reepicheep]

I still dont get making three movies out of a relativwly slight book, but I'm still jonesing to see all of them.

Maybe there is stuff that fills in some of the gap between Hobbit and LotR.

It's up to three now??!? I thought it was two.Pretty sure they are just milking the thing for all it's worth if they are going with three.

 

[NewlyRetired]

I still dont get making three movies out of a relativwly slight book, but I'm still jonesing to see all of them.

Maybe there is stuff that fills in some of the gap between Hobbit and LotR.

It's up to three now??!? I thought it was two.Pretty sure they are just milking the thing for all it's worth if they are going with three.

They announced the trilogy back in late July after they saw how much footage Jackson shot.Dec 2012: An Unexpected JourneyDec 2013: The Desolation of SmaugSummer 2014: There and Back Again

 

[beer 302]

I still dont get making three movies out of a relativwly slight book, but I'm still jonesing to see all of them.

Maybe there is stuff that fills in some of the gap between Hobbit and LotR.

There isn't enough that happens and the time period isn't that great. It's relatively peaceful and Frodo is only a few years younger than in LOTR.Two movies maybe but three is a moneygrab in my opinion. There is a fairly obvious cut in the book that makes for a good stopping place similar to how Frodo & Sam split from the fellowship in the LOTR series but I still don't see the need for 3 movies.