case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2016-02-17 06:37 pm

[ SECRET POST #3332 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3332 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
(David Bowie)


__________________________________________________



03.
(Great British Bake Off for Sports Relief, Ed Balls)


__________________________________________________



04.
[Pokemon]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Star Wars: TFA]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Damian Lewis, Dick Winters, Band Of Brothers]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Daughter of the Lilies]


__________________________________________________



08.
[David Eddings]


__________________________________________________



09.
[Sengoku Basara]


__________________________________________________



10.
[JJBA]


__________________________________________________



11.
[Men In Black I, II, III]
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 022 secrets from Secret Submission Post #476.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-17 11:45 pm (UTC)(link)
I agree. I mean, from the start, I wondered how they could possibly make a successful Hobbit movie because I feel the plot is too episodic and not climactic enough to suit epic Hollywood tastes. It just doesn't lend itself to a movie well. I actually was excited to hear they'd be adding Appendix stuff and altering some stuff for that exact reason. But in the end, they basically made every worst possible choice. It was unnecessarily long, ridiculously boring and all the original dialogue was painful as fuck.

Though, I don't think they actually did badly at the box office. They must have made money, surely? So Silmarillion might also come some day... though I'm not sure how that would make a successful movie, either.
philstar22: (Default)

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-02-17 11:50 pm (UTC)(link)
This pretty much. And the Silmarillion wouldn't work as a movie or even a film series either. There are some stories that I think would work well. The Akallabeth for example I think would work well as a really dark movie. But for the most part I could only see it working in TV format, and then you could never have the budget to do it justice.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 00:17 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 00:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-19 05:41 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 12:27 am (UTC)(link)
Never saw it, though I was wondering why the hell there were three movies.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 00:33 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 12:31 am (UTC)(link)
It could have made a perfectly good single movie. But the moment it was going to be a trilogy, it was all over.

There were occasional good parts in the first movie, where they stuck closely to the book (the dwarves at Bilbo's house, the entire scene with Gollum) but it was so bloated and awful.

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 00:35 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 00:41 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 03:52 (UTC) - Expand

How to make a Hobbit movie...

[personal profile] cbrachyrhynchos 2016-02-18 12:37 am (UTC)(link)
Easy questions:

1. Is this scene about Bilbo? If no, cut it without mercy.
2. Is Bilbo the focal character? If no, cut every other line.
3. Does it involve Bilbo being Bilbo? Keep and polish it until it glows.

Re: How to make a Hobbit movie...

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 00:44 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-17 11:46 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm pretty sure the Silmarillion was never going to happen in any capacity period. Christopher Tolkien owns the rights to it and he doesn't want to see a film.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-17 11:48 pm (UTC)(link)
He actually hated even the Lord of the Rings films, apparently. (which I personally really loved, though the third film got slightly wonky with Jackson original material, overall I think they are a pretty amazing interpretation of the books and better paced, too) I hope for his sake he didn't see The Hobbit trilogy.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-17 11:49 pm (UTC)(link)
Sure, but... well, no disrespect, but the man is 91. I have no idea how the rest of the family feels about it, but whoever inherits the management of the estate may feel differently.
ypsilon42: (Default)

[personal profile] ypsilon42 2016-02-17 11:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I completely agree. I was super happy to hear that they were making a Hobbit movie and the first trailer had me definitly hooked, but the movie itself was kind of a dissapointment (with possible exceptions for the soundtrack and the scenes with Gollum in the cave). And then it pretty much just went downhill from there.

I don't want to begrude anyone their love for the movies, but I genuinely do not understand it. Not only are they bad Hobbit movies, they are just bad movie in general, :/.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-17 23:59 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] cbrachyrhynchos - 2016-02-18 00:38 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 02:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 04:21 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 12:00 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-19 23:03 (UTC) - Expand
philstar22: (Default)

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-02-18 12:14 am (UTC)(link)
I agree with this. I liked them for a while. It was the hype and the happiness to be back in Middle Earth and my love of some of the characters. But I've come to realize that while there are bits that I really like, as a whole they are very disappointing.

(no subject)

[personal profile] ketita - 2016-02-18 01:53 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 01:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] ketita - 2016-02-18 02:02 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 12:19 am (UTC)(link)
Idk, man, like they're far from perfect even though I love them but I have a hard time seeing how someone could do way better... Like, the book never seemed well suited to become a movie without extensive mucking about. Like Voyage of the Dawn Treader in the Narnia series... I was a bit bummed that my favorite book of the series became my least favorite movie, but at the same time I couldn't figure out how they could have done better given the format of the book.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 02:14 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 12:20 am (UTC)(link)
I didn't even have the slightest desire to watch it, especially not after I heard it was going to be made into a trilogy.
tabaqui: (Default)

[personal profile] tabaqui 2016-02-18 12:30 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, it was really, really disappointing after the awe i felt watching LOtR. I love the Hobbit book, it's fun and silly and has some neat scenes, but this movie.... Meh.

a_potato: (Default)

[personal profile] a_potato 2016-02-18 12:56 am (UTC)(link)
I feel like this is not at all a controversial opinion.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 01:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] a_potato - 2016-02-18 02:07 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 12:57 am (UTC)(link)
Image

Once I heard Guillermo del Toro had to leave the project, I knew it was doomed. And by doomed, I don't mean "a flop". More, PJ's heart wouldn't be in it, and he wouldn't have the time he needs to do it well. Thus, we got utter mediocrity and Elf Girl. Ugh.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 01:14 am (UTC)(link)
Oh well. More Tauriel for the rest of us.

PS -- Really glad Silmarillion will never see the screen because TBH that book fucking sucked.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 01:47 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 01:54 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 14:45 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 14:45 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 04:23 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 04:27 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 09:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 14:26 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:29 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:32 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:42 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:50 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:12 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-19 23:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-19 23:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 12:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 14:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:13 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:23 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-19 23:08 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-19 23:18 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 06:30 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 12:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 14:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:27 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:33 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:35 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:58 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:59 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:03 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:07 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:09 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:13 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 17:20 (UTC) - Expand
nightscale: Starbolt (Kingsman: Gazelle)

[personal profile] nightscale 2016-02-18 01:26 am (UTC)(link)
Much as I did enjoy them at the time, and still like certain bits in the movies, stretching them out to three was a mistake. If it had been two instead they might have been able to pace it better as the second and third movies had dragging spots.

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 01:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] nightscale - 2016-02-18 01:57 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 01:40 am (UTC)(link)
I was also really excited for this and have been very disappointed. What bugs me the most is how the movies dictate the "look" of Tolkien now. Art depicts "hot" dwarves. Thranduil is ALWAYS drawn with those ugly-ass eyebrows (and it's a crapshoot what kind of characterization you're going to get in a fic with him). Bard is a poor bargeman instead of a guard. All the choices of the movie are now imbedded in the Tolkien fandom. It's clear that PJ has no real sense of this world. The Hobbit has made me look anew on the LOTR films and now I see some huge issues with those (though at least those aren't as consistently cringeworthy as Hobbit).

This film has actually made me glad they're not going to do the Silm. I can only image what they'd do with such epic material, and how they'd fuck it up. There are a few "moments" I'd like to see get a big screen treatment (like seeing some of the battles brought to life, the Two Trees, etc.) but there's so much they'd have to add to the material to make it a workable script and it's clear that PJ and company can't do it. It would be a mess.

Maybe if there was a different creative team. It would be great if the Tolkien films weren't so tied to New Zealand anymore, so they can find locations that suit the story. I've always said a GOT tv series might work, especially if it was done AHS-style. I mean, the movies made so much money that the studios will probably put something else out there at some point. I'm braving for a Hunt for Gollum/young Aragorn film. CT will die eventually and I think if they give his heirs enough money, they'll let the Silm get made. I just hope someone new will get a chance - someone who loves the SIlm paired with someone who can adapt something coldheartedly to make it work in a film.

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 01:43 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 01:58 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 02:03 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 15:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:13 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 16:25 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 15:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 15:57 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 01:46 am (UTC)(link)
The movies made money, so no matter how much you dislike them, from a film studio perspective there's nothing wrong with making more movies.

The real issue with the Sil is getting the film rights. Cross that bridge first.

I'm not sure it would make a good movie anyway. A high-budget TV series would suit it better, I think.
lentils: I wouldn't be worth much if I couldn't feel (Default)

[personal profile] lentils 2016-02-18 01:51 am (UTC)(link)
I'm not going to disagree that these are not good movies, because holy gods they're not.

I am going to disagree that a film adaptation of the Silmarillion is a good idea.

(That being said, I'd pay an obscene amount of money for a really good Beren and Luthien adaptation. I think there are certain chapters that could be great. But you can't make a movie and call it The Silmarillion - it would be like filming a history textbook.)

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 01:55 am (UTC)(link)
But how do you feel about the soundtrack?

(no subject)

[personal profile] philstar22 - 2016-02-18 02:05 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 02:09 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 02:18 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 04:25 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 03:31 am (UTC)(link)
This movie is pretty much the Star Wars prequels of Middle Earth. It's just bad.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 03:24 pm (UTC)(link)
It was marginally better than the LOTR films, every one of which put me to sleep like knock-out drops.

On the other hand, they made so many wads of cash I can't imagine they wouldn't make more of them.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-18 06:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Christopher Tolkien wouldn't let them make a Silm adaptation anyway, Hobbit movies or no. He didn't even like the LOTR adaptation that much.

And damn, some people here have no chill.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2016-02-18 18:17 (UTC) - Expand