He's filmed/is filming a lot of the Hobbit and Lotr appendices stuff though, Dol Guldur and Necromancer etc. He'll make it work.
The Hobbit (Movie)
- Thread starter Oburi
- Start date
Grail
Feel the funk blast
What a weird feeling... This is the first time I've ever been worried that an adaptation will have too much time to work with, rather than too little. Obviously, a big part of the added time will be due to their coverage of the whole Necromancer subplot that wasn't really discussed in the book, but I can't picture it warranting a whole extra 3ish-hour film. As a big big fan of the original novel though, I don't want to complain... it's just more movie to love, right? 
NightCrawler
Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless
Walter said:
I like The Hobbit better as well, because its not completely bloated by Tolkien telling us about shit we don’t need to know, and now we have Jackson turning it into a bloated trilogy.
Remember, this is the man who turned the simple pulpy story of a giant gorilla climbing the Empire State Building into an overblown, self-indulgent 200 minute bore. He just doesn’t know how to get to the point.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
NightCrawler said:
I agree with you on King Kong, as I hated it. But, I still have high hopes for this newfound trilogy.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
Walter said:
It is a little off-putting, I know. But, I love Jackson (minus KK, and LB), so I'm excited. I never read the Hobbit or Lord of the Rings books, so it's hard for me to be disappointed in what's being translated onto the screen.
Oburi
All praise Grail
This doesn't bother me as much as I thought it would now that its happened. I've always said that The Hobbit should be one movie. The book is short and simple and a film should try to capture that within its 2-3 hour timeframe. However, seeing as how they using as much of the material they have licence to that fits in during that period, its not really just the hobbit movie anymore. Its like The Hobbit + appendices + some short stories. I stil kind of wish they stuck with the smaller tale of Bilbo and made just one adventure film. But if they are going to take the big prequel trilogy road, they might as well go all out.
Lithrael
Remember, always hold your apple tight
Hm? So it's not just an adaptation of the book as a movie miniseries?
Not sure where some of you are coming from with the idea that because it's a straightforward adventure book it HAS to be knocked out as a single movie. There's enough stuff in the book that you wouldn't have to go inventing anything to make it last six hours. Is it that since the book is 'yay, we went on a adventure!' that it should aim for that sort of 'yay!' as a single-evening moviegoing experience? Maybe it's just that I'm used to TV miniseries-es rather than movies for single book adaptations.
However King Kong did indeed ramble on forever for no good reason, so.
Not sure where some of you are coming from with the idea that because it's a straightforward adventure book it HAS to be knocked out as a single movie. There's enough stuff in the book that you wouldn't have to go inventing anything to make it last six hours. Is it that since the book is 'yay, we went on a adventure!' that it should aim for that sort of 'yay!' as a single-evening moviegoing experience? Maybe it's just that I'm used to TV miniseries-es rather than movies for single book adaptations.
However King Kong did indeed ramble on forever for no good reason, so.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
NightCrawler said:
On the other hand, there's not too many Oscar winning directors putting out mainstream bestiality epics these days. =)
Anyway, it's lame, would have been fine in the two movie format since it fit the way the book was split, now this is just totally unnecessary and out of proportion (especially compared to the Rings Trilogy). I imagine that, at least from what I can remember from a decade ago, the movies are going to have no natural flow or structure and will just sort of go from scene to scene until one stops and another begins, plus the potential for a clusterfuck has greatly increased with all the other crap not even Tolkien fit into a narrative (would be best as DVD extras, really). I think after his failures since the LOTR movies Peter Jackson has realized this is all anyone cares to see him do. So, he should milk it for all its worth. Then everyone will go see them, ooh and aah and praise him, and never watch these movies again. But, people that were for it already are going to still be for it, people that weren't are just going to groan a little louder. I can't say I really care(d) either way.
H
hellrasinbrasin
Guest
I love The Lord of the Rings Trilogy like I Love the Original Star Wars Trilogy... That being said I have no intention of watching The Hobbit Trilogy. From my perspective if anything was worth in the telling it would have been done so during The Lord of the Rings Trilogy. That having been said this is one film series I'll be taking a pass on.
3 movies ... more chances for - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjEdWTk1l9o
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
hellrasinbrasin said:
That's a lot that's been said without saying much. If you liked the last ones, which concluded just nine years ago, why is this so offensive to you in particular? It's not like Star Wars where it's a beloved childhood property being dumped on 25 years after the fact.
Oburi
All praise Grail
hellrasinbrasin said:
What?
Griffith said:
I don't think so. He seemed to be perfectly fine sitting along as producer and letting del Toro take over director duties. I think there's a lot more going on than just the simple "Jackson is milking this material because he fails at everything else" mindset. I don't even think it's fair to say he's been a failure since LOTR's. And not enough time has passed for him to be a Lucas (not yet).
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
hellrasinbrasin said:
That's like saying Alien should have explained more about Prometheus.
H
hellrasinbrasin
Guest
Walter said:
I'm not arguing that I know that the Hobbit Films/Book is completely different from the Lord of the Rings films/Books. I'm saying that I think we're all suffering from Hobbit overload.
Johnstantine said:
Except the difference here is that one is a series of books where as the other is a series of films. The world of Alien vs the World of Tolkien. With Tolkien a writer director has a wide birth of material to use for films. With Alien you can only enhance or expand upon pre-existing materials or create a new story that changes all notions of what was a known fact where the pre-existing material is concerned.
Johnstantine
Skibbidy Boo Bop
hellrasinbrasin said:
I'm not suffering from Hobbit overload. At all. In fact, I would like to have some more.
What the fuck are you talking about?
Alien has countless comic tie-ins, novels, prose, you fucking name it. If anything, it has MORE source material than the Hobbit/LotR trilogy even has. It's been well-established that the Space Jockey (Engineer) and basic idea of what Prometheus would entail was formed before Alien received its final script--it just had not received its name/direction (the comics pretty much took care of that, though).
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Oburi said:
Yes of course, he didn't even want to do it, it was going to take too much out of him, his arm was twisted, he was dragged kicking and screaming, his hand was forced... oh, and now he's poised to make Hobbit movies until the cows come home. It was only ever going to be two, right?
Anyway, I think everyone agrees it's for the best that he's doing it, it's what everyone wanted, and I wouldn't begrudge him if it's what he wanted too. Even Del Toro fans didn't understand why he was doing it instead of Jackson when Jackson was literally there (and I'm sure that had NOTHING to do with Del Toro's departure).
Oburi said:
Of course there's more to it, but that doesn't mean it's not still true. Also, I think that mildly pro-Jackson perspective is more demonstrative of a mindset than my frank assessment of his post-LOTR career.
Oburi said:
Yeah, but to be fair, he hasn't directed, produced, or written anything as good as Lucas in his transcendent years (Star Wars, Indiana Jones), and he's made a lot more stinkers. It didn't seem that way back in the early aughts when Jackson was ascending, LOTR was King, and Lucas was embarrassing himself and Star Wars alike, but with a little time and perspective...
Oburi
All praise Grail
Griffith said:Of course there's more to it, but that doesn't mean it's not still true. Also, I think that mildly pro-Jackson perspective is more demonstrative of a mindset than my frank assessment of his post-LOTR career.
Well, my very mild pro-jackson mindset is mainly because I was really into the LOTR's when I was younger and those movies were crack to me (keep in mind I was 13-15 when they came out). Also the extensive "making of" docs on the dvd and these recent production diaries really give me a little appreciation for how these kind of movies are made. It's still Hollywood, but not really. With so much shit getting thrown at us it's hard for me to not want a movie like this to succeed. But being a fan whose really rooting for it to be good means I'll also be the first one to not make excuses for it if it sucks.
Of course I still wish they did just one movie, that would be ideal. But I do trust Jackson. I'm not necessarily a fan of his in particular, but I do think he makes better blockbusters than a lot of the other big name directors today.
Griffith
With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
I too have faith in Jackson to at least do a competent job here, probably a lot better than that technically speaking. I feel like he could do 200 hours of LOTR material at the same quality as the trilogy (and maybe he will =). I think I've said it before, but consistency is what sticks out to me about those movies, for better and worse.
H
hellrasinbrasin
Guest
Bekul said:I'll say at this point I'm looking forward to these there a hell of a lot more than I am the three Berserk... films.
And on the subject that Bekul has brought up Hollywood should have asked Peter Jackson to adapt Berserk for the big screen since he's The King of Fantasy films.
But to sum up what I've said about this new trilogy while it will almost certainly be a success for New Line + MGM Studios I just have no intention of seeing the films. But it does appear that Peter Jackson is stuck in Tolkien film wonderland.
