Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 28, 2024, 9:08 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Hobbit
#31
RE: The Hobbit
(December 18, 2014 at 1:25 am)thesummerqueen Wrote: I cried. And by cried I mean I sat in my chair, trying to be silent, squeezing my hands together and weeping uncontrollably.

Because Peter Fucking Jackson butchered the story so badly? What an asshole he is.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
#32
RE: The Hobbit
(December 19, 2014 at 10:42 am)Chas Wrote:
(December 18, 2014 at 1:25 am)thesummerqueen Wrote: I cried. And by cried I mean I sat in my chair, trying to be silent, squeezing my hands together and weeping uncontrollably.

Because Peter Fucking Jackson butchered the story so badly? What an asshole he is.

Erm, no.

And just so anyone who wants to get on here and shit on The Hobbit knows, I reread Lord of the Rings and its appendices at least once a year. The Hobbit, not so much, and The Silmarillion, only in parts, but still. I think Jackson did a bang up job adapting all the moving parts to screen, and I don't say that lightly. I hate it when people fuck up a beloved book.
[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]
Reply
#33
RE: The Hobbit
(December 19, 2014 at 10:45 am)thesummerqueen Wrote:
(December 19, 2014 at 10:42 am)Chas Wrote: Because Peter Fucking Jackson butchered the story so badly? What an asshole he is.

Erm, no.

And just so anyone who wants to get on here and shit on The Hobbit knows, I reread Lord of the Rings and its appendices at least once a year. The Hobbit, not so much, and The Silmarillion, only in parts, but still. I think Jackson did a bang up job adapting all the moving parts to screen, and I don't say that lightly. I hate it when people fuck up a beloved book.

Yeah, well I think he fucked it up.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
#34
RE: The Hobbit
You're entitled.
[Image: Untitled2_zpswaosccbr.png]
Reply
#35
RE: The Hobbit
If PJ had regurgitated the books verbatim there would be people complaining that he didn't show any originality. These books are not sacred, so get over it. I'm glad he made a movie out of the books, and not just a rote recitation.
Reply
#36
RE: The Hobbit
That's a complaint with book to film adaptions that will always be there. Much like everything though, you can't please them all.
Reply
#37
RE: The Hobbit
(December 20, 2014 at 9:01 am)Gawdzilla Wrote: If PJ had regurgitated the books verbatim there would be people complaining that he didn't show any originality. These books are not sacred, so get over it. I'm glad he made a movie out of the books, and not just a rote recitation.

The books told a story, the story had meaning.

The movies told some different story.

Making a movie from a book can't possibly be a "rote recitation" - it is a very different medium. But butchering the story is not necessary to putting the story on film.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
#38
RE: The Hobbit
(December 20, 2014 at 5:04 pm)Chas Wrote:
(December 20, 2014 at 9:01 am)Gawdzilla Wrote: If PJ had regurgitated the books verbatim there would be people complaining that he didn't show any originality. These books are not sacred, so get over it. I'm glad he made a movie out of the books, and not just a rote recitation.

The books told a story, the story had meaning.

The movies told some different story.

Making a movie from a book can't possibly be a "rote recitation" - it is a very different medium. But butchering the story is not necessary to putting the story on film.

Okay, you didn't like it. Give me the home address of the person that made you watch all three of them and I will immolate him/her/it and their family and possessions. Then you can rest in peace.
Reply
#39
RE: The Hobbit
(December 20, 2014 at 5:18 pm)Gawdzilla Wrote:
(December 20, 2014 at 5:04 pm)Chas Wrote: The books told a story, the story had meaning.

The movies told some different story.

Making a movie from a book can't possibly be a "rote recitation" - it is a very different medium. But butchering the story is not necessary to putting the story on film.

Okay, you didn't like it. Give me the home address of the person that made you watch all three of them and I will immolate him/her/it and their family and possessions. Then you can rest in peace.

It is Peter Fucking Jackson who is in need of immolation.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Reply
#40
RE: The Hobbit
Waaaahmbulance has been called for you.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey Jackalope 12 2344 January 28, 2013 at 9:37 pm
Last Post: paulpablo



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)