Coremodels
Really close to Explorer's Club.
Login to Send PM
As much as I loved the LOTR trilogy as directed by Peter Jackson, I really can't think of anyone better suited to make an excellent, creepy, awe inspiring version of the Hobbit (especially with Jackson still in the mix as producer). I thought Pan's Labyrinth was exceptional and hope he brings that same style to this!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/arts/26arts-DIRECTINGBIL_BRF.html?ref=arts
Horse Chestnut
Merion Village
Login to Send PM
Yippee! I love his stuff. Del Toro is the reason I'll be standing in line to catch Hellboy II when I comes out in theaters.
I wonder if they will re-cast Andy Serkis as Gollum? I know McKellen wants to reprise the role of Gandalf.
But Ian Holms, I'm afraid, is too long in the tooth to come back as Bilbo.
KSquared
Literally Hell
Login to Send PM
Second that on Hellboy II.
I am thrilled to death to hear this news! I cannot imagine a better team than Jackson and Del Toro. I loved LOTR trilogy and Pan's Labyrinth was amazing.
I am so excited to the see the Battle of Five Armies, that is going to be awesome. Sorry, my inner geek is showing :)
UncommonSense
Hilliard
Login to Send PM
Looks like they are really going to milk the Tolkien Cash Cow for all its worth... This will be a 2-part series. Anyone heard if they will eventually do any Silmarillion stories? They could get another 10 movies out of that stuff easily.
honavery
Arizona
Login to Send PM
Looks like they are really going to milk the Tolkien Cash Cow for all its worth... This will be a 2-part series. Anyone heard if they will eventually do any Silmarillion stories? They could get another 10 movies out of that stuff easily.
Seriously. If they're going to mine the Appendices of LOTR for a movie they could make some movies out of The Silmarillion. Actually, I'd be all for that. I've tried to read that thing about 4 different times and I could never get into it. It reads like a history book but I'm sure it could be turned into a cool more traditional narrative story.
TimFitz
Clintonville
Login to Send PM
Since I first read the Silmarillion back in 2003, it's the only book to have never left my bedside. They'll never make a movie out of it though, way too dense. I would guess our best hopes post-Hobbit would be the Children of Hurin or something similar from the Silmarillion: a one-shot story from the tome.
BTW, The Hobbit is supposed to be released as two films that will be shot at the same time and it won't fill in any gaps between the end of the book and the beginning of the Fellowship. Just the Hobbit from what I gather. Think they'll show Sauron as the Necromancer?
Bear
The woods
Login to Send PM
UncommonSense wrote Looks like they are really going to milk the Tolkien Cash Cow for all its worth... This will be a 2-part series.
TimFitz wrote BTW, The Hobbit is supposed to be released as two films that will be shot at the same time and it won't fill in any gaps between the end of the book and the beginning of the Fellowship. Just the Hobbit from what I gather.
The Hobbit, Part I: There
The Hobbit, Part II: Back Again
johnaesthetica
Wilmington
Login to Send PM
omgyes.
They can milk the cash cow as much as they want. Obviously it works, and for a reason.
UncommonSense
Hilliard
Login to Send PM
Is it possible that I am the only Tolkien fan on this board who was disappointed by Peter Jackson's trilogy? The first one was good, though it left out too much (Tom Bombadil). By the second movie, I was sick of Arwen AND Gimli. I didn't feel Tolkien's work was improved by emphasizing a romantic plotline and using the dwarf as comic relief. The third was better. The Ride of the Rohirrim made me weep, it was so perfect. But then they left out The Scouring of the Shire.
OK. I know I sound more than a little crazy, but LOTR meant that much to me. I dreamt of making these movies myself, so anything else was bound to be imperfect. For me there were just too many little (and BIG) things wrong. All of that being said, I still love having and watching these movies, if that makes sense. And I am definitely looking forward to The Hobbit and any other movie that comes along with more stories from Middle-Earth, as long as the high production standards are maintained. Beren and Luthien, Akallabeth or the story of Feanor and the Silmarils all seem likely candidates.
Seriously, am I crazy?
honavery
Arizona
Login to Send PM
The Hobbit, Part I: There
The Hobbit, Part II: Back Again
LOLZ
Is it possible that I am the only Tolkien fan on this board who was disappointed by Peter Jackson's trilogy? The first one was good, though it left out too much (Tom Bombadil). By the second movie, I was sick of Arwen AND Gimli. I didn't feel Tolkien's work was improved by emphasizing a romantic plotline and using the dwarf as comic relief. The third was better. The Ride of the Rohirrim made me weep, it was so perfect. But then they left out The Scouring of the Shire.
It sounds like you mostly liked them. I guess when I heard they were making movies back in like 1997, I was kind of dreading it. Maybe cuz I just didn't think they could do it justice. The fact that they turned out as good as they did and were such a success both commercially and critically is way more than I could of hoped for.
P.S. Tom Bombadil was always my least favorite part of the books. I'm glad they left it out.
P.P.S. How much ass are the Smaug scenes going to kick?
UncommonSense
Hilliard
Login to Send PM
honavery wroteThe Hobbit, Part I: There
The Hobbit, Part II: Back Again
LOLZ
Is it possible that I am the only Tolkien fan on this board who was disappointed by Peter Jackson's trilogy? The first one was good, though it left out too much (Tom Bombadil). By the second movie, I was sick of Arwen AND Gimli. I didn't feel Tolkien's work was improved by emphasizing a romantic plotline and using the dwarf as comic relief. The third was better. The Ride of the Rohirrim made me weep, it was so perfect. But then they left out The Scouring of the Shire.It sounds like you mostly liked them. I guess when I heard they were making movies back in like 1997, I was kind of dreading it. Maybe cuz I just didn't think they could do it justice. The fact that they turned out as good as they did and were such a success both commercially and critically is way more than I could of hoped for.
P.S. Tom Bombadil was always my least favorite part of the books. I'm glad they left it out.
P.P.S. How much ass are the Smaug scenes going to kick?
Yes, I did mostly like them. But nothing Peter Jackson did could compare with the vision the books put in my mind. I couldn't care less for its commercial or critical success, however. Unless everyone who saw them without reading Tolkien, was inspired to read them as well. Some people are impressed by anything with good special effects or CGI and I am less than enthused about the prospect of dumbing down a masterpiece to appeal to the lowest common denominator. I don't mean to sound elitist. I just don't want to see a Saturday morning cartoon or Sci-Fi Channel series spinoff, or any of dozens of ways that Newline Cinema (sp?) and Tolkien Enterprises may conceive of making bajillions more dollars.
p.s. Bombadil sticks out like a sore thumb in the book, but I think he was important in Tolkien's mind, so who am I to argue?
p.p.s. much ass will probably be kicked :wink:
Coremodels
Really close to Explorer's Club.
Login to Send PM
UncommonSense wrote Some people are impressed by anything with good special effects or CGI and I am less than enthused about the prospect of dumbing down a masterpiece to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Actually, one of the things that most impressed me about the films was how little CGI was actually used.
honavery
Arizona
Login to Send PM
I couldn't care less for its commercial or critical success, however. Unless everyone who saw them without reading Tolkien, was inspired to read them as well.
You can tell me you weren't even a little bit excited to see the charachter of Gandalf nominated for an academy award? Or to see the final film win 12 academy awards? I don't know, it was exciting for me, and I think while not everyone who saw the movies read the books, probably thousands did.
But I agree, the movies were not as good as the books. I don't think it is even possible to make a movie that would do complete justice to the books. But to get something as good as what was put out was more than I was hoping for.
Now, JJ Abrams take on the Dark Tower series, that should be interesting....
UncommonSense
Hilliard
Login to Send PM
Coremodels wroteUncommonSense wrote Some people are impressed by anything with good special effects or CGI and I am less than enthused about the prospect of dumbing down a masterpiece to appeal to the lowest common denominator.Actually, one of the things that most impressed me about the films was how little CGI was actually used.
you mean how little CGI you noticed apparently... :wink:
Coremodels
Really close to Explorer's Club.
Login to Send PM
UncommonSense wroteCoremodels wroteUncommonSense wrote Some people are impressed by anything with good special effects or CGI and I am less than enthused about the prospect of dumbing down a masterpiece to appeal to the lowest common denominator.Actually, one of the things that most impressed me about the films was how little CGI was actually used.
you mean how little CGI you noticed apparently... :wink:
No, I mean how little was used. There's a ton of things in the movie that could have been CGI'd and instead they used old school, real stuff like camera positioning, etc.
When he did go heavy CGI it was applied with amazing results (gollum, Shelob, etc.)
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus. Click here to visit TheMetropreneur.com.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
