The J.R.R. Tolkien Topic (publications and adaptations)

[Forostar]

@CriedWhenBrucieLeft and other people who are interested. Did any of you read this yet or heard of it? I completely missed any news of it until today.

Looks like a huge difference with the Silmarillion story which was about 30 pages. This book is 10 times as much.
A new book by Lord of the Rings author JRR Tolkien is going on sale - 100 years after it was first conceived.

Never knew about the publications of these two either. Anyone has (heard of) these? Man, I have some catching up to do.

The Fall of Arthur (2013)

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/oct/09/jrr-tolkien-new-poem-king-arthur

Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary (2014)

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/29/beowulf-translation-commentary-jrr-tolkien-review


Mentioned below, I am looking forward in particular to the third book as well:
Beren and Lúthien standalone book
The story was published as a standalone book edited by Christopher Tolkien under the title Beren and Lúthien on 1 June 2017, being pushed back from its original publication date of 4 May 2017. The story is one of three contained within The Silmarillion which Tolkien believed warrants its own long-form narrative, the other two being The Children of Húrin and The Fall of Gondolin. The book is illustrated by Alan Lee and edited by Christopher Tolkien, in much the same way as the standalone version of The Children of Húrin (2007) in that it draws from different, often incomplete, versions of the story written by Tolkien to form a complete narrative with minimal editorial intrusion.

 

[LooseCannon]

I'm more interested in Beowulf than I am the other books. I was highly disappointed by The Children of Húrin, in that it did not feel like Tolkien wrote it. It felt like he wrote parts and someone else, with far less ability, filled the gaps.

 

[Cornfed Hick]

I'm more interested in Beowulf than I am the other books. I was highly disappointed by The Children of Húrin, in that it did not feel like Tolkien wrote it. It felt like he wrote parts and someone else, with far less ability, filled the gaps.

I have the Tolkien translation of Beowulf. It's OK, though I still prefer the Seamus Heaney translation. The Tolkien is more archaic but probably a more faithful translation, whereas the Heaney is easier to read and more poetic.

 

[CriedWhenBrucieLeft]

@CriedWhenBrucieLeft and other people who are interested. Did any of you read this yet or heard of it? I completely missed any news of it until today.

Looks like a huge difference with the Silmarillion story which was about 30 pages. This book is 10 times as much.
A new book by Lord of the Rings author JRR Tolkien is going on sale - 100 years after it was first conceived.

Yeh, I have all of these, including the new publication of B&L. Not read it yet. Haven't read anything to suggest there is any new or unpublished material in this though. I assume most of the material is from some of the History of Middle-earth volumes. To my knowledge this is about bringing together disparate material. The press around it has, as always, been inaccurate.

Never knew about the publications of these two either. Anyone has (heard of) these? Man, I have some catching up to do.

The Fall of Arthur (2013)

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/oct/09/jrr-tolkien-new-poem-king-arthur

Beowulf: A Translation and Commentary (2014)

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/may/29/beowulf-translation-commentary-jrr-tolkien-review

Yes, have both of these. Interesting in themselves, and certainly interesting from a Tolkien publication point of view.

Mentioned below, I am looking forward in particular to the third book as well:
Beren and Lúthien standalone book
The story was published as a standalone book edited by Christopher Tolkien under the title Beren and Lúthien on 1 June 2017, being pushed back from its original publication date of 4 May 2017. The story is one of three contained within The Silmarillion which Tolkien believed warrants its own long-form narrative, the other two being The Children of Húrin and The Fall of Gondolin. The book is illustrated by Alan Lee and edited by Christopher Tolkien, in much the same way as the standalone version of The Children of Húrin (2007) in that it draws from different, often incomplete, versions of the story written by Tolkien to form a complete narrative with minimal editorial intrusion.

No evidence Christopher is going to do this. He's 93 this year & apparently the intro to B&L says this will be likely his last thoughts in respect to editing his father's work.

 

[Night Prowler]

 

[Srogyy]

I've just finished rewatching Fellowship for the first time in years. What an absolute masterpiece. There is no other film that conveys the feeling of journey and adventure like this one. It blows me away how well it's made. The way it's shot, the design of the world, the music, the epic scale of it... Watching it brought back so many memories of the time when I was obsessed with LotR. This is my favourite part of the three, although the whole thing is pretty much even.

The Two Towers and Return of the King coming up... Damn, I love this trilogy.

 

[Srogyy]

Rewatched The Two Towers today. Got some pretty fresh perspective. It is a very good development of the story, but it makes the slowest film of the trilogy by far. It does what a middle chapter is supposed to do - we get to know characters better, they are placed all over the chessboard and they face tough challenges. However, there are many drawn-out scenes, which make it less exciting than FotR. TTT is also pretty heavy on the political/war aspect (which seems to replace the adventurous tone of FotR) but I find all of that very clear and nicely done. I like how we get a really good feel of the people of Rohan. Last but not least - the battle of Helm's Deep is a great payoff. It's just one of the greatest cinematic battles ever.

Some previously overlooked things which stood out to me during this viewing include the great performance by Bernard Hill (Theoden) and Faramir's arc (despite little screen time they managed to flesh him out by providing backstory, which made his decision at the end quite powerful). Another stand-out are musical themes. Although I've always loved the LotR score (duh), only now I pay a lot of attention to themes. Everything has one: Rohan, Gondor, Ents, Mordor, the Fellowship... They are wonderfully interwoven throughout the film.

 

[JudasMyGuide]

Rewatched The Two Towers today. Got some pretty fresh perspective. It is a very good development of the story, but it makes the slowest film of the trilogy by far. It does what a middle chapter is supposed to do - we get to know characters better, they are placed all over the chessboard and they face tough challenges. However, there are many drawn-out scenes, which make it less exciting than FotR.

Do you think that keeping the Shelob fight in TTT (as it is in the books) would improve this? And possibly make the last film less over-the-top?

great performance by Bernard Hill (Theoden) and Faramir's arc (despite little screen time they managed to flesh him out by providing backstory, which made his decision at the end quite powerful).

Although I never really liked how they changed Faramir's act (in the book he's actually one of the straightest and most noble characters, not being tempted by the Ring at all) for the movie, because they made him really similar to Boro in that regard, I get what you mean. The storyline, especially supported by the acting, works anyway.

Another stand-out are musical themes. Although I've always loved the LotR score (duh), only now I pay a lot of attention to themes. Everything has one: Rohan, Gondor, Ents, Mordor, the Fellowship... They are wonderfully interwoven throughout the film.

This. Shore's work there is absolutely the best score I ever heard and I don't think anyone else will be able to achieve anything remotely similar. Closest probably being Williams' Star Wars score (and I admit it's indeed quite amazing), and even that one pales next to this stuff. Even if the movies sucked (which they don't) I'd have been happy they were made if only because of the music. In fact, as I'm currently re-reading the books, I often play the score as an accompaniment. And it's awesome. BTW I also really like how he manages to use the themes in different settings and different moods, in different instrumental variations etc. 15 years later, I still discover new stuff there.

 

[Srogyy]

Do you think that keeping the Shelob fight in TTT (as it is in the books) would improve this? And possibly make the last film less over-the-top?

It's actually difficult to say, because while the plotline of Frodo & Sam is probably the least eventful and interesting out of all in TTT, I think it is really satisfying in RotK. If the third one started with Sam rescuing Frodo, there would be very little material left as far as they go to accompany other rich plotlines (there has to be balance). At the end of the day it was probably a good call to move Shelob. It made space for the development of Gollum in TTT, which was pretty important.

By the way - I haven't read the books so my perspective is definitely different. I tried to get through them, but never got far. I'm aware of some of the major differences, though.

 

[Srogyy]

Aaaand Return of the King... What can I say, it truly is an epic and satisfying conclusion. The scale of this film is enormous. The climax kept me on the edge of my seat even though I obviously knew what was happening. The imagery is so powerful there - it has this kind of doomsday quality to it. On a side note, I think RotK is the one that gained the most in the extended edition. It's pretty mind-blowing that Saruman and the Mouth of Sauron were cut from the original release.

It's an incredibly even trilogy, but, weirdly, my ranking is absolutely clear:
1) The Fellowship of the Ring - for that wonderful adventurous tone.
2) Return of the King - used to be my number 1 for a very long time, because of how epic it is.
3) The Two Towers - even though it's an essential and worthwhile instalment, there's no way around the fact that it's the slowest film out of the three and the least happens there.
Not counting Star Wars, LotR trilogy are probably my favourite films ever. Always thought so and now I know it still stands.

What a great (and emotional!) rewatch. Now I'm all nostalgic and stuff... As I wrote earlier, it brought back many memories and helped me recognise and appreciate brand new aspects of this trilogy. Some of them are very small details that have never resonated with me before. Here's one - a super tiny detail from RotK: when Faramir told Gandalf he had met Frodo and Sam two days prior, I genuinely felt Gandalf's enormous relief. It just opened my eyes to how unsettling the uncertainty must have been before and how empowering this sudden surge of hope was. Seriously, it's a small scene but it made an impact on me.

 

[Forostar]

Srogy are you also enthousiastic about Arwen's ridiculous role in The Fellowship? An annoying dominant, lengthy and ridiculous chase scene having Black Riders following her at equal speed.

Currently reading LOTR for my son. He reads The Hobbit himself and we do LOTR together. I am really into a lot of details in the book, the descriptions of all the places and parts of nature where they travel. Some people don't like this side but I think it contributes immensely. Some dialogues are less intriguing and seem to pass by slower than descriptive parts. Great to experience again that this is not just an action book. It is still a fantastic world with ancient history, shaped by Tolkien's thoughts and language. Helps to create excellent visions. Right now we are at the part where Gollum tells about the alternative route into Mordor ("The Black Gate is Closed").

 

[Srogyy]

Srogy are you also enthousiastic about Arwen's ridiculous role in The Fellowship? An annoying dominant, lengthy and ridiculous chase scene having Black Riders following her at equal speed.

Never bothered me, to be honest. But Arwen overall is one of the least interesting parts of the whole trilogy to me. Her storyline is quite confusing and some of her scenes seem overly dramatic (mainly in TTT).

 

[Forostar]

Hiya,

I am still a newbie when it comes to blu ray. I am about to buy the "The Battle of the Five Armies" extended edition (5 discs).
I'd prefer the blu ray over the DVD, but before I decide I need to know the following.

The product itself is advertised as
The Hobbit 3 (Extended Edition) (3D & 2D Blu-ray)

but the box itself just looks like this (only 3D), or at least it says: BLU-RAY 3D + BLU-RAY (no mention of 2D, does that mean the same?)

Do you guys own this one and/or do you think I can safely assume that it also has 2D? Are 2D and 3D just different playing options in the menus from the same discs?

I really want 2D. If I cannot be sure I should go for the DVD instead.

@CriedWhenBrucieLeft @Srogyy @JudasMyGuide @LooseCannon


EDIT:
I just saw that Blu Ray is (also) a different product:
But this one has "only" 3 discs. Do you know if it has the same amount of extras (and extra scenes etc.)?

 

[Srogyy]

Hiya,

I am still a newbie when it comes to blu ray. I am about to buy the "The Battle of the Five Armies" extended edition (5 discs).
I'd prefer the blu ray over the DVD, but before I decide I need to know the following.

The product itself is advertised as
The Hobbit 3 (Extended Edition) (3D & 2D Blu-ray)

but the box itself just looks like this (only 3D), or at least it says: BLU-RAY 3D + BLU-RAY (no mention of 2D, does that mean the same?)

Do you guys own this one and/or do you think I can safely assume that it also has 2D? Are 2D and 3D just different playing options in the menus from the same discs?

I really want 2D. If I cannot be sure I should go for the DVD instead.

@CriedWhenBrucieLeft @Srogyy @JudasMyGuide @LooseCannon


EDIT:
I just saw that Blu Ray is (also) a different product:
But this one has "only" 3 discs. Do you know if it has the same amount of extras (and extra scenes etc.)?

3D+2D package is pretty much standard right now. I don't think 3D-only releases are common. When you get 3D you always seem to get 2D. And "3D Blu-ray + Blu-ray" means the same. "Blu-ray only" is probably cheaper since it doesn't have the 3D disc. I can't help you when it comes to extras, because I don't own Hobbit. I'm sure you can find details online, though. Make sure before you buy, because I know that e.g. The Force Awakens 3D release had different extras (or just more of them)... Don't buy the DVD, there's no point if you have a Blu-ray player.

 

[terrell39]

I own TBOTFA extended edition on Blu-ray. Disc 1 is the extended edition of the film (+ optional commentary). Discs 2 & 3 are the Appendices 11 & 12

 

[Forostar]

Thank you guys! Will do the "normal" blu-ray option (not 3D), the 3 disc. Apparently 1 blu-ray disc takes as much as content as 2 DVD discs.
From all other LOTR and Hobbit films I have the DVD extended editions.

 

[Brigantium]

Srogy are you also enthousiastic about Arwen's ridiculous role in The Fellowship? An annoying dominant, lengthy and ridiculous chase scene having Black Riders following her at equal speed.

I thought they got Arwen the Eowyn the wrong way round. Arwen was supposed to be ethereal and elusive, always floating around in the background, Eowyn more of a shieldmaiden stereotype. Wasn't it supposed to be Legolas that the Hobbits met up prior to the stand-off at the ford with the Black Riders?

 

[Maturin]

I thought they got Arwen the Eowyn the wrong way round. Arwen was supposed to be ethereal and elusive, always floating around in the background, Eowyn more of a shieldmaiden stereotype. Wasn't it supposed to be Legolas that the Hobbits met up prior to the stand-off at the ford with the Black Riders?

It was an elf called Glorfindel in the book. (Yes, the same one from Silmarillion.) But like Tom Bombadil, he got the axe. The book simply has way too big of a cast, but I still find the changes made were quite poorly written. The Arwen part discussed is a good example. Embarrasingly bad.

Never bothered me, to be honest. But Arwen overall is one of the least interesting parts of the whole trilogy to me. Her storyline is quite confusing and some of her scenes seem overly dramatic (mainly in TTT).

I understand the need to include the female characters more, but they had no idea what they were going to do with Arwen. Eowyn turned out great though.

 

[Brigantium]

I don't think Eowyn of the films really carried it off well. She ought to have been more warriorlike and less like a simpering damp dishcloth. I'm extremely happy they wrote Tom Bombadil out, however! That was a seriously trippy section to the books, irritatingly punctuated with ultra-naive songs. Okay, I get that Tolkien was harking back to a naturalistic, rustic, old world which kind of predates the Sauron saga, and suggests that the ancients of this world have/had greater and more silently enduring power than any of the great men, wizards and necromancers that form the main LOTR story characters. But he just went a little bit nuts there.

 

[JudasMyGuide]

I'm extremely happy they wrote Tom Bombadil out, however! That was a seriously trippy section to the books, irritatingly punctuated with ultra-naive songs. Okay, I get that Tolkien was harking back to a naturalistic, rustic, old world which kind of predates the Sauron saga, and suggests that the ancients of this world have/had greater and more silently enduring power than any of the great men, wizards and necromancers that form the main LOTR story characters. But he just went a little bit nuts there.

Tom Bombadil (along with Treebeard and Sam) is among my favourite characters, more or less precisely for the reasons you mention.


Also, I have no idea how the 3D/2D BluRays are handled, sorry. I have yet to obtain the Hobbit BluRays at all. However the question's been already answered, so that's good.