[ SECRET POST #3434 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3434 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.

__________________________________________________



03. [tb]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 48 secrets from Secret Submission Post #491.
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.

Comments

[kallanda_lee]

As a movie, it as pretty bad.

i mean it had all these lovely elements and characters - but it just messed up suspense, timing, pacing, story.

I was one of the rare creatures who had actually not read the book going in...so yeah.

[(Anonymous)]

I think the fact that it had several very worthwhile and promising elements that were all callously flushed down the toilet in a cloudy swirling maelstrom of diarrhea was the worst part of that movie tbh.

[kallanda_lee]

Yeah, it had all the elements of something I could deeply love...but it did not deliver.

[(Anonymous)]

See, while I had read the book, it wasn't a book comparison that bugged me. I expected changes. I hoped for changes, because a) I don't think The Hobbit book has the right pacing to be a successful movie and b) I think a smoother transition to LOTR was absolutely necessary.

The trilogy was awful totally independent of being different from the book.

[(Anonymous)]

As someone who read and loved the book first, I agree. I never expected or wanted a perfectly faithful adaptation because the book is not the type of book that can be adapted faithfully in a watchable way. It definitely had to be different.


Unfortunately they just adapted it in an non-faithful but STILL unwatchable way. The first half of the first movie, with its expanded focus on the dwarves, seemed to be going in the right direction. Then it just...????? What happened?

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt - This. I never expected the movie to be a purist adaptation of the book. That just doesn't seem realistic to me. But the changes that were made weren't good ones and the final movie in the trilogy was the worst of the bunch.

[kallanda_lee]

I believe you...they should have focused on making it a good screenplay, first and foremost.

Tank Girl

[(Anonymous)]

I don't know. I thought it was well made for a product movie, as opposed to something like Tank Girl. Hewlett described the studio meddling as something like, "The Italian job in reverse, digging down from a bank vault into a pile of shit." Key scenes didn't even get out of post-production.

Re: Tank Girl

[kallanda_lee]

Not saying it's the maker's fault, per se. It's mostly just money-grabbing, I think. It probably should just have been one movie.