The Official "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" movie thread *SPOILERS*

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I don't know how much closer to Middle earth you can get than lifting the title directly off of Thror's map? It's kinda central to the whole ding-dang Hobbit movie. Their whole Joie-de-vivre for the entire adventure (so to speak) is to reach that point on the map labeled "desolation of Smaug". :gah: :lol


ooooooo.......:dance


:pfft:


:peace
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I don't like the title. That's like Having Star Wars titled:

Star Wars: A New Hope
Star Wars: Darth Vader and ****
Star Wars: The Return of the Jedi

Just doesn't fit.
Lol, Darth Vader and ****! That should be the title of the prequels. :lol


Anyway, I think the title works, but it doesn't have nearly as nice of a ring to it as the other two. It's out of place. Now, you may cite that the phrase is from the book or whatever, but it doesn't change the fact that the book is now three films long and these titles aren't taken directly from a cover of any particular book, but phrases and content from within a single source. So, they can be subjective.

"An Unexpected Journey" and "There and Back Again" were nice choices, albeit the latter was kind of obvious. However, the "Desolation of Smaug" sounds a bit off. Hell, I would've liked "The Ruin of Smaug" better and it's the same damn thing. It would've been a far more ironic sounding title, as Smaug "left so many villages in ruin."
 
Last edited:
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

It's represented in the books and works for that purpose, but the wording just simply doesn't have the ring to it that the other titles have, specifically the final film.
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I hope they have a credit flash up at the start with this on it for those moaning about the title:lol

des·o·la·tion
   [des-uh-ley-shuhn]
noun
1.
an act or instance of desolating.
2.
the state of being desolated.
3.
devastation; ruin.
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I don't think anyone's complaining about what it means. It's more about how it rolls off the tongue.

Although, now that you mention it... I highly doubt a lot of people going to see the film will even know what the hell that word means, lol. Which is kinda sad actually.
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I don't think anyone's complaining about what it means. It's more about how it rolls off the tongue.

Although, now that you mention it... I highly doubt a lot of people going to see the film will even know what the hell that word means, lol. Which is kinda sad actually.

Yeah it's jarring but it's kind of a badass title at the same time, the two fairy story sounding ones will bookend this beast in the middle.****s gonna go down in the middle part and the last thing I'll be thinking of is the title when I'm watching it:rock
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

Yeah it's jarring but it's kind of a badass title at the same time, the two fairy story sounding ones will bookend this beast in the middle.****s gonna go down in the middle part and the last thing I'll be thinking of is the title when I'm watching it:rock
I hadn't thought about it like that. Actually, that softens the mood a little, lol. I was looking at it the wrong way I guess.

Still, I bet some people are going to go into the theater and turn to the person next to them and be like, "hey buddy, what does Desolation mean?" Or they'll google it on their iPhone. :lol
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

Anyway, I think the title works, but it doesn't have nearly as nice of a ring to it as the other two. It's out of place. Now, you may cite that the phrase is from the book or whatever, but it doesn't change the fact that the book is now three films long and these titles aren't taken directly from a cover of any particular book, but phrases and content from within a single source. So, they can be subjective.

See thats where you're 110% wrong. The now third films title is the exact subtitle of the actual novel and I've stated the reasons for the other two. All the titles have some kind of tie to the books or items within those books. That's one of the great things about Jackson is that despite some changes he understands you respect the material. So no these titles have never been subjective. If you're going to try and tell me this kind of stuff you really need to learn the subject matter better. :peace
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

See thats where you're 110% wrong. The now third films title is the exact subtitle of the actual novel and I've stated the reasons for the other two. All the titles have some kind of tie to the books or items within those books. That's one of the great things about Jackson is that despite some changes he understands you respect the material. So no these titles have never been subjective. If you're going to try and tell me this kind of stuff you really need to learn the subject matter better. :peace
You misunderstood my point entirely. The Hobbit has been split into three films. It's not like with the LOTR trilogy where each movie already had a corresponding title. :wink1:

By the way, I know why the third film is titled "There and Back Again." I know the reasons for why the title is used for the second film. That doesn't change the fact that there aren't three Hobbit books featuring each of those titles. Which is why I said they "can" be subjective. They don't have a title already set in stone.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

You misunderstood my point entirely. The Hobbit has been split into three films. It's not like with the LOTR trilogy where each movie already had a corresponding title. :wink1:

Yes, The Hobbit has been split into three movies. However, Jackson stuck with how the LOTR was done and used items that tie it directly to the source material (IE: An Unexpected Party (Chapter 1 of the book) is now An Unexpected Journey (small play on words), the second movie is now called The Desolation of Smaug (which refers to not only his death but what he did to that region of the north), and the third film There and Back Again (which is the subtitle of the actual novel). So his choices are dead on as I said because of their exact ties to the source material. Not some random lets make something up. Thankfully Jackson has more respect for the source material than that.:pray:
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I'm pretty sure Jackson is looking for more than respect, turning one novel into three films. :D

And I don't see anything wrong with changing ONE word around. You mentioned the "An Unexpected Journey" alteration and commented that it was a play on words. It is. It also changes it into a new meaning. So why then, could a title, or word, not be changed for the second feature? Not seeing how that's disrespectful of the source material, all things considered. >.>
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I can't wait to see what Smaug looks like, won't be for some time though:monkey2 I always say I'll avoid pics and spoiler stuff but I end up looking!
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I'm not sure they will show him, unless it's leaked. That will be one of the big things in the film, his full unveiling. We might see bits and pieces of him in some of the trailers, but I really doubt we'll see much.
 
Re: The Official "The Hobbit" movie thread

I've laid out exactly why everything picked works and why it works based on the subject matter. If you feel differently more power to you. :peace I think I hear Kenny Rogers right now singing The Gambler. :lol
 
Back
Top