Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit trilogy has been concluded for barely a month, but already one ambitious Tolkien fan has recut the bloated, eight-hour adaptation into a much more manageable affair clocking in at a little less than four and a half hours. How did the anonymous TolkienEditor do it? By cutting out the Tauriel/Legolas/Kili love triangle and by bringing us back to the movie’s star, who we forgot to care about along the way: Bilbo Baggins.
TolkienEditor smartly made major and minor cuts to the film: trimming filler scenes that audiences forgot about the moment they left the theater; removing early appearances by Lord of the Rings characters like Saruman and Galadriel; and cutting early orc fight scenes, in order to heighten the stakes of the later orc showdowns. TolkienEditor provides a point-by-point rundown of all the changes on their blog.
Their cuts also offset the “narrative filibustering” of Peter Jackson’s movies by changing the narrative from one loooong flashback to set in the present:
The prelude with old Bilbo is gone. As with the novel, I find the film works better if the scope starts out small (in a cosy hobbit hole), and then grows organically as Bilbo ventures out into the big, scary world. It is far more elegant to first learn about Smaug from the dwarves’ haunting ballad (rather than a bombastic CGI sequence). The prelude also undermines the real-and-present stakes of the story by framing it as one big flashback.
However, that doesn’t mean that TolkienEditor took a scalpel to every single of the 464 minutes of the original theatrical releases. In clarifying some scenes that they streamlined, they also highlighted the ones that they didn’t touch at all:
Several of the action scenes have been tightened up, such as the barrel-ride, the fight between Smaug and the dwarves (no molten gold in this version), and the Battle of the Five Armies. Though, it should be noted that Bilbo’s key scenes—the encounter with Gollum, the battle against the Mirkwood spiders, and the conversation with Smaug—have not been tampered with, since they proved to be excellent adaptions (in no small part due to Freeman’s performance), and serve to refocus the film on Bilbo’s arc.
Check out the tightened-up barrel ride sequence, minus Legolas and Tauriel’s “gymnastics routine.” It clocks in at a refreshingly short but well-paced three minutes:
[via The Verge; post slightly edited to reflect the fact that Tor.com in no way supports or condones piracy in any form.]
Nifty!
Just wish it could fix the one detail from TBot5A that just stuck out at me: Sting should have been lit up like a damned lightsaber from all the orcs in close proximity, and in nearly every scene that I recall it’s fairly dull/nonglowy. Kinda nitpicky, I guess, but there you go.
No thanks. I read over the laundry list of things that were cut, then browsed through the edited film itself, and in general I think it shows a bit of a disregard for good storytelling. And the fact that this guy accomplished the whole thing on a weekend when he had nothing else better to do (by his own admission) doesn’t lend much confidence that he knew what he was doing.
I’m certainly not saying that the trilogy wasn’t bloated. It very much was. But fan edits rarely solve the problems they purport to tackle, and this is no exception; it just takes out the least popular parts, often indiscriminately, leaving behind numerous holes in logic and consistency.
And it may not be a popular opinion, but The Hobbit book, while a great and famous work of children’s literature, is a flawed novel at best. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a huge fan, but as somehow who has studied literature and drama, even the book loses track of its protagonist (the most common problem everyone seems to throw at Jackson’s adaptation). Like most authors, Tolkien got better later in his career, and no doubt there are issues in The Hobbit — both in the area of story and writing technique — which probably wouldn’t have happened if it hadn’t been one of his first books.
So I’ll just take the trilogy, warts and all. For the most part I’m quite happy with it.
I did wonder how three movies came out of one (albeit, quite long) book. Someone tried to remedy that.
What everyone seems to forget is that there was no perfect way to make a movie adaptation of The Hobbit. The source material was an episodic adventure with a sparse and lightweight overarching story. That’s fine if you’re reading one chapter a night, but when you’re expected to sit through the whole thing in one sitting, it gets mighty tiresome (as this fan edit proves). If you instead spread the episodic adventures over multiple films, you’re left with almost no weighty overall plot to tie them together – so you have to artifically add/invent it, distracting from the rest of the story (which is what Jackson et al attempted). Neither approach is ideal.
@3, The book is quite small, actually. A lot of the additional material came from The Silmarillion.
@3. TaliaG
Oh, it’s so hard to tell if people are being sarcastic in text form. Ahh, 320ish pages is not a long book, well, for most readers.
@5, The Silmarillion CAN’T be used as a source of material for the Peter Jackson films, though (Christopher Tolkien won’t let it be optioned), so Jackson basically had to extend stuff or hints given in the original 4 novels first
Sigh… the added stuff was adapted from the appendices of the Lord of the Rings. C’mon nerds, get it together!
Sigh…the added stuff came form Jackson’s fevered dreams, as would be clear upon inspection of the appendices. C’mon nerds, get it together!
:p
I can’t say I dont agree with the main premise behind this (although I personally loved the flashbacks and other LOTR setup stuff) but…it’s kind of easy (even for me – I’ve written several comments and blog posts about what the movie SHOULD have done in a given scene or with a given arc) to say, ‘well, obviously, this is what the movie should have been like’ when starting with a pre-existing movie.
Not saying this isn’t a cool experiment to do or attempting to come down hard on the guy (I’m assuming he just did it for fun), but if he (or others) are trying to pass him off as some superior filmmaker…well…he’s kind of standing on the shoulders of others here.
That said…if somebody could kidnap David Wenham and make a fan cut of the Two Towers where he tells Frodo he wouldn’t touch the Ring if he saw it on the wayside…I’d eat that shit up ;)
Personally, I’m waiting for the 16 hour Director’s Cut boxed set. There are a few points that I need Jackson to elaborate on.
And, yes, “being sarcastic in text form.”
I’m hesitant to put much stock in fan cuts by internet people who claim to know better than the actual filmmakers. Still, considering my two biggest issues with the trilogy were 1. action scenes that outstayed their welcome and 2. taking the focus away from Bilbo, I might check this one out.
so… exactly what is Tor’s position on copyright infringement?
if some tor books were re-edited and posted in somebody’s blog, could we expected an excited post about it, along with a reminder to check torrent sites after they’d been taken down?
I’m going to venture forth with some wildly unpopular opinions. Enjoy!
– Tauriel and Galadriel (+BardKids) are important because without them, there are no women in this tale and that is inexcusible. If Jackson did not use them correctly, that’s one thing, but their inclusion is important for representation alone. And they were badass.
– I love the Tauriel/Kili thing because besides being a bit of B-plot to give some characters depth and interest, Kili is THE Damsel in Distress in this from start to finish and I find that refreshing and amazing. Even his sickness in the bed is very close to the “woman giving birth” movie trope. Now you can’t unsee that. You’re welcome.
– I like Bard, for the simple reason (besides looks, let’s be real) that he is the same as Tauriel. With him we see the human element and stakes otherwise left unrepresented. Plus all his disgruntled looks are worth it alone.
– I ROOTED FOR ALFRID TO WIN. I’m not ashamed. BotFA convinced me. Consider that in Game of Thrones, Ned Stark is the one ridiculous, moralistic soul in a sea of realistic, greedy bastards. Alfrid is the one realistic, greedy guy in a sea of unrealistic, fantastical, “honorable” nobility. We are watching a movie about a bunch of hyper-super-powered, bred-for-destiny, always-righteous people. They’re completely unreal and it’s easy to forget that. Alfrid is that one guy in all this nonsense that says, “Look, I’m poor as dirt, my house and meager (by Tolkein standards) ambitions burned down, and I am NOT a warrior. I’ll grab what I can and get the hell out alive if possible.”
Let’s be real, we’d be Alfrid. If we were brave enough to wear a corset, anyway. You guys are rooting for the nobility causing war over a rock/necklace/adventure/welfare. I’m rooting for the guy who thinks that’s plain nuts. ;)
In all seriousness, the movie needs trimming of specfic scenes, not necessary entire deletions. Snippets of character building are important, over-long battle scenes that make you bored are not. There’s also plot to consider. In any other movie where the plot is not known beforehand, Gandalf just disappearing would be ridiculous.
What @14 said. Is Tor corporate really okay with Tor.com advocating piracy?
Perhaps after Peter Jackson releases the ineviteable extended battle of the five armies, he might consider a compressed, “Mercy on me aching bum”, edition.
@15 – oh, I loved Bard and his kids. Total aside, turns out they are both the children of the actor who played Bifur, and his wife got to be Belladonna Took in one of the cut scenes :)
I actually even warmed up quite a bit to Tauriel, although I did have some problems with the way here character was used and the way the romance was developed.
As for Alfrid, sorry, I can’t agree there – I get your point (and I think – even in the books – Tolkien is pretty clear that the ‘heroes’ are not necessarily in the right. Everybody is suffering from ‘dragon sickness’ to some extent). And I can’t promise I’d be heroic, either, in a situation like that. But Alfrid is hardly some champion of the cause of the common people – he was willing to take advantage of them for his own gain, in any circumstance.
That said, I actually did not mind him as much as others did, simply because I really enjoyed the performance of the actor, Ryan Gage. I think he did a good job.
@16 – I wouldn’t say it’s so much an advocacy of piracy, as much as it is an embracing of things popular (unless it specifically impacts their bottom line – like the agency model). What’s good for me is good for me, etc.
In the present case (or should it be done with a book), I would argue that it should fall under fair use. It was a transformative effort, taking the underlying material and improving upon it. If someone were to do the same with WoT, including cutting out certain wife-captured-husband-brooding arcs, I would look at them in the same way. I’d like to think the best of our hosts, but I suspect they wouldn’t.
@18: Bofur.
@15: Speak for yourself, I wouldn’t be Alfrid. He was pretty much a jerk throughout (though I agree with 18 that I enjoyed his scenes because the actor was very good). I certainly wouldn’t advocate war with the dwarves, especially since in the movie, the Elf-king is doing it over jewels as you mention (though at least Bard in the film was wanting his just and promised payment, and still seemed hesitant to go to war). But once the Orcs show up, then that is a just war. I may not want to fight myself in that kind of situation, if I wanted to protect my family or something…but in Alfrid’s case it just seems more than someone being justifiably afraid…he’s a selfish person throughout the film. And also a jerk to other people.
Also, as for being “realistic”…I can’t honestly say how many Alfrids there are out there and how many Ned Starks, but in any case, I don’t think the point of this story is to be “realistic.” It’s obviously a fantasy. The point of virtuous characters is to give us something to aspire to, and we use stories to do that. The point of making people like Alfrid “the bad guy” is to remind us that yes, being selfish isn’t a desirable behavior. If we find ourselves being like Alfrid, we should maybe realize that and try our best to stop, even though that may be very difficult sometimes. And I actually like how in the movie that Bard doesn’t come down too hard on him–he keeps giving him chances to redeem himself, and at the end, lets him go his own way with only stern words of warning.
As for copyright infringement…I don’t think this necessarily falls under fair use. He’s not providing bits of it as a part of a criticism, or creating an original work that “reimagines it,” but rather is representing the whole film with merely some parts cut out. The FBI warning at he beginning of home videos is pretty clear that reproducing it in whole or in part, even without financial gain, is illegal. Even TolkienEditor seems to know this, as the blog is being extremely cautious about actually posting the link outright, but tries to “hide” it.
As for this particular TOR post….if they are merely saying that some guy did this and posted it on his blog, I don’t think they have any fault there. I see that they did now take out the line saying that he posted the link and advised people to check torrent sites (noting that it was TolkienEditor who advised that, not Tor). However, this is not the first time Tor has skirted this line…reporting things about upcoming films which were said to be leaked, posting tidbits based on things from the Sony hack, etc.
As for the edit itself, the editor says cutting the Dol Gulder stuff was the most obvious cut, but I find it to be the most obvious addition. Back when we were all fantasizing about the Hobbit film back in 2002 that was the one scene I wanted to see added. As puck @15 said, Gandalf disappearing for half the movie just doesn’t make sense. And it’s not like it wasn’t in the book–Gandalf explains it at the end, we just don’t see it. Honestly, I think that’s a weak part of the book–it was very much and rightly strengthened by Lord of the Rings making the necromancer Sauron and making Gandalf’s sole task in life trying to defeat Sauron, because otherwise the necromancer is no more than a contrivance to get Gandalf to leave the story and have Bilbo become the leader. It may work on some level for a children’s fairy tale, but without that larger world purpose established by Lord of the Rings, it’s kind of of lazy writing. So the Dol Gulder stuff most definitely needs to be in there.
In addition, I feel like a little bit of that plot helps give Gandalf a motivation for helping the dwarves in the first place, as “The Quest for Erebor” explains that Gandalf saw this as part of a larger move against Sauron anyway. So I’m kind of fine with some of the added orc plot too…I just don’t like that everything had to be made into a personal battle, or that they had to attack Lake Town, or the barrels, or move about in daylight, or that Legolas had to be in it at all.
Ah yes – Bofur then…the one with the hat :)
“narrative filibustering” LOAO. That is classic and made my day. Normally I’m not that big on fan fic and fan edits, but I’m going to have to check this out. I certainly can’t argue with the points made.
I can’t help thinking the film distribution network should punish TolkienEditor rather more severely than merely tracking him down, grinding his bones to make their bread and whatnot in the charming and friendly manner we have come to expect from companies that derive a significant part of their income from conscripting the public domain and proscribing it to the public … they should make him the editor for a Fans’ Series for the entire TLoTR and The Hobbit, and get him issuing TE Cuts for anyone who wants one, cut to the shape and size so desired. For a fee, natch.
Facetiously, the film industry issues as final statements, waystations along the journey of interpretation. Heck, that is the writer’s stock-in-trade as well – any time you imagine you can deny that, take a look at HoME, have a talk with Moorcock, even read some of the atrocities in the
laterposthumous Dunecannon carronade big gun makes loud bangseries. And it so happens that readers and viewers can differ from the interpretations offered. It is well within TolkienEditor’s rights to offer a Fan’s Cut, now that it is within a fan’s capability (heck, enyone can duplicate this feat through judicious playing around with the DVD player and/or computer at home with their own copy of the DVD.). It is thus ultra vires (beyond their powers/rights) for the film industry to deny this right to viewers. Anything further and the film industry will no doubt learn some rather sharp lessons on the limits of their powers. It would make much more sense to offer some precuts and show methods of making Fans’ Cuts to movies, and thus remove at one fell step the incentive to release your own cuts thus potentially undercutting the film industry’s profits.’nuff sed?
@23: Why is it a right? You seem to be saying that because they can, they’re entitled to.
@@@@@#23
It is not within TolkienEditor’s rights to offer a fan cut. We don’t have the right to fan cuts. The people who own the rights to films can shut anyone down like TolkienEditor. Learn about copyright before tossing out such nonsense.
If he gives out his cut, that is copyright infringement. If he is just saying ‘I did this’, that is not, sense he is not distributing. At least I believe that is how it goes