|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The One Ring Forums:
Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Lord of The Rings:
Meh:
Edit Log
|
|
Chen G.
Mithlond
Feb 16, 6:46am
Views: 649
|
The precedent of The Hobbit movie trilogy does not fill me with confidence. I know the main fault lies with the studio for demanding an epic fantasy trilogy on a quick schedule.
Not really. The whole issue about the preproduction period is a kind of red herring, that has been propped-up on YouTube in what Michael Pellerin, the director of the making-ofs, had denounced both to TORn and elsewhere as editing his footage in a misleading way to make the point seem more melodramatic than it was.
Whatever the faults of those films may be - and they're very much in the eye of the beholder, and clearly far from fatal given the success of the trilogy, including fairly good reviews - they were things that Peter made as conscious aesthetic choices, not things borne out of a shortage of time, nor out of some (non-existent) studio bugbear pulling the strings.
I just refuse to give into a kind of creative equivalent of cancel culture, whereby when you make one bad film (yes, The Hobbit is three entries but they're cut from the cloth of one long shoot) in a beloved series, you're bad, will always be bad, and have always been "secretly" bad and your successes have to be explained away. Just because one didn't like The Hobbit doesn't mean Peter and Andy can't spin something more like Lord of the Rings out of this.
And yes, I know that's probably not where you were going with this, but I was on a roll. 
I see three likely options for what will likely follow The Hunt for Gollum. 1. A film about the battles in the North (Mirkwood, Lorien, Dale & Erebor) bringing back many actors and characters from the Hobbit films. 2. The Journeys and Errantries of Aragorn as previously discussed. 3. Going farther back in the Third Age to the end of Arthedain and fall of Angmar. Introducing many new characters and situations unfamiliar to movies-only fans.
Basically the way I see it as well. I think they'll want to do either [1] or [2], or both, first. They have several reasons to do so:
They want to fill-in the period of The War of the Ring, which is the substance of their film series. If all these films are courses in a single meal, an Angmar trilogy would be a different meal, in a different sitting and different courses, in a different branch of the same restaurant chain.
They want to get out of the way, as it were, those premises that rely on the vintage cast, while that's still feasible. Angmar you could make whenever.
Ditto with the original crew, insofar as these films are more closely knit into the times, places, people and events of the existing films.
If they won't make those interquels, they know the studio eventually will, with other filmmakers and at an even greater time remove, so better do it now themselves.
Some of these story premises are ones they had toyed with making for a while: The Hunt for Gollum since 1997, The War in the North since around the same time as well. Young Aragorn came on their radar more during the early period discussing with Amazon.
Certainly with Gollum, they prize the opportunity to do a kind of "victory lap" over the set of films they've made. It must be an appealing concept.
These films allow them to take bite-sizes of the apple instead of a big gulp, as would be represented by an Angmar trilogy. So it's less daunting, and less risky, especially with the precedent of The War of the Rohirrim, and the "competition" from Rings of Power.
By putting out nine or ten films with a strong narrative and stylistic congurence, they're effectivelly creating a strong "bedrock" upon which other films, set at greater time remove from the War of the Ring, can be built.
(This post was edited by Chen G. on Feb 16, 6:57am)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:47am
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:48am
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:50am
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:52am
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:53am
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:54am
|
|
Post edited by Chen G.
(Mithlond) on Feb 16, 6:57am
|
|
|
|
