Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
"Three Films" News will have No Effect on Film One
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 11:13am

Post #76 of 120 (582 views)
Shortcut
But 'in discussion' [In reply to] Can't Post

Is very different from 'known all along and kept it secret', isn't it?

Obviously they discussed how many films it would run to since the first plan of one Hobbit film, one bridge film, was taken over by two Hobbit films. Maybe at that point someone raised the possibility of two Hobbit films plus one - but the decision then must have been for two films, mustn't it? Else why announce that it would be two, knowing it wasn't?


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Aug 4 2012, 3:52pm

Post #77 of 120 (506 views)
Shortcut
True [In reply to] Can't Post

They didn't know for sure going in that it'll be 3 films and kept it secret, the initial plan was 2 movies with the option for a 3rd.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 5:19pm

Post #78 of 120 (549 views)
Shortcut
The rough cut was in existence by early May. [In reply to] Can't Post

 How do I know? Well, back in May there was an article in which Sir Ian McKellen said this:


Quote
I spend a lot of my time at the moment adding my voice to the soundtrack and so I get to see the first cut of the film


The interview was posted here on May 17. So there was a rough cut of the first film in existence (and in ADR) by early May, possibly put together sometime in April. So, assuming what PJ said was true and they did get the idea of a third film only when they first saw the rough cut, by the time the hints were dropped at Comic-Con in mid-July they would have been in talks with the studio about it for two months or more. I'm guessing he only mentioned it then because they had got to the "hammering out the last details" stage and it was pretty much a done deal so he felt it was okay to hint. The studio can't/won't confirm anything until the dotted line has been signed, so by the time it was officially announced I'm thinking all involved had known about it for a while. Two to three months is fast work for studio negotiations but it was probably made easier by the fact that they could manage it by expanding the already-planned pick-up shoot.

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 4 2012, 5:28pm

Post #79 of 120 (513 views)
Shortcut
Nice catch, Silverlode [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree with everything Silverlode said except for accepting the notion that the very first time the idea of a third film was ever considered was after viewing the first rough cut in May.

A much more likely scenario was that the idea was on the table from the beginning but there was an understanding among all parties that the ultimate decision to do a third film or not would be delayed until Jackson, Walsh, and Boyens viewed a rough cut of Film One (plus the other footage shot or to be shot) .


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 6:11pm

Post #80 of 120 (494 views)
Shortcut
And I think Silverlode is absolutely right.... [In reply to] Can't Post

... and the interview with Ian McKellen confirms it. A couple of weeks may not have been enough time to sort out details but a couple of months was.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 7:05pm

Post #81 of 120 (499 views)
Shortcut
I think Estel's point is as significant [In reply to] Can't Post

but that is some fine connecting of dots Silverlode.

For the record here is what PJ said in the clip Estel linked to here:


Quote
From the very beginning of this project, two, two and a half years ago, a third movie has always been in discussion, and um... You know, my feeling with a third film is that it should be more -- it's not necessarily a bridge movie maybe -- but there's so much material in the appendencies that takes place around the time of The Hobbit that, um, there's certainly ways in which we could expand the story...


Is there any reason to believe the lawyers and agents haven't been in the background quietly hammering out the deal for a third film over the past 2 years? What else is there to keep them occupied? Furthermore might not the early release of film 3 be a compromise in order to shorten the actors' promotional commitment to the project, so they can get on with their careers?

Now I appreciate your concerns about cynicism, concerns you have expressed all along since we made each other's acquaintance (and I know that Lissuin has a heart that we should all get along). However, I think the point that this was part of the marketing strategy is not all that cynical. Perhaps it was intended to deflect attention away from the 48fps issue (and possibly the green tint Wink) at SDCC? Is this a cynical suggestion or is it an observation about a legitimate marketing concern?

Since we are witnessing history in the making, I know that many here are interested in being able to discern the truth of the story as it happens -- rather than waiting for it to be revisited and revised as is so often the case in History.

I know too that we disagree on the matter of PJ's integrity. But perhaps being a trickster or not being entirely forthright is what it takes to pull something like this off in the entertainment industry. People like PJ are the wizard's of the real world, though he prefers to identify himself with hobbits (who are also tricksy). Personally, I would that he be vindicated... but as I said in another post, there's a pattern of behaviour that is difficult (for me) to ignore.


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 4 2012, 7:13pm)


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 7:29pm

Post #82 of 120 (502 views)
Shortcut
It seems to me [In reply to] Can't Post

that we may refine too much on particular words used. It depends on what "in discussion" means. One reader may interpret that to mean "suggested" while another hears "in negotiation". It may be that the option was open for a third film (I imagine the studio sees nothing but $$$ in these movies and is happy to milk them for all they're worth) but they didn't plan to take it until they saw the rough cut. One point in favor of this view is the established behavior of PJ in writing and rewriting during filming. His comment that they kept thinking of other stuff they wanted to add fits right in with his modus operandi, both regarding rewrites and being constitutionally unable to make short films. So perhaps he saw his very long rough cut and still felt the story could be improved by additions rather than cuts, so he began to seriously entertain and discuss the idea of another film which he had previously resisted.

Frankly, I suspect that the "third film" originally discussed was the "bridge" film, which notion was scrapped when the plot got absorbed into the two Hobbit movies as they grew in the telling (and scripting) and it only made its return when the story grew even more than expected.

For all PJ seems energized and enthusiastic now, LOTR's several-year marathon left him seriously exhausted and I have always believed that he really thought he didn't want to do it again for The Hobbit until it was there in front of him, being worked on, and he just couldn't stay away. I can see him not wanting to sign on for another three-film marathon up front and just sort of arriving there as a process of degrees. I keep thinking of Andy Serkis commenting in one of the early blogs about the length of shooting for two films being nearly as long as for three. This story was bigger than we thought from the beginning.

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 8:08pm

Post #83 of 120 (468 views)
Shortcut
I believe you have discerned the truth in this situation Silverlode. [In reply to] Can't Post

This eliminates the clandestine Peter and replaces that image with one that seems much more familiar.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Aug 4 2012, 8:09pm)


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 8:14pm

Post #84 of 120 (449 views)
Shortcut
I suppose what it comes down to in the end... [In reply to] Can't Post

... is that I just can't buy into a world in which each time someone makes an announcement, or gives their reason for a decision taken, we immediately jump up and say "Ah yes, but what do you really mean - what really happened - what aren't they telling us?" - and then congratulate ourselves on our cleverness at not being hoodwinked and at fathoming out the 'real' truth. This isn't a Peter Jackson thing as far as I'm concerned - it just works out that way because this forum happens to be discussing his film and over the months - years now - I've seen the conspiracy theories harden into 'fact', and whole arguments - and judgements of a man none of us actually knows - based on a version of events which never really happened except in someone's imagination.

I simply can't see anything here which smells of fish, or is even faintly whiffy. The only argument which did make me pause was Voronwe's point about the contracts, but I think Silverlode's post cleared that up. And no one has explained what possible motive WB could have had for announcing with no shadow of doubt that there would be two films, and then going on to give titles and release dates for them - here's that link, from 30 May 2011 . Read it and ask yourself, is there anything here to suggest that even as this announcement was being made, the lawyers and agents were secretly working away at agreements for a third film? (In answer to your question, BTW, I would hope the lawyers and agents have been kept busy these last two years negotiating other contracts for other films and other clients, else they can't be very good at what they do!)

I meet this kind of thing a lot in my working life, which is usually history, and writing history. People seem to have this longing for everyone's motives to be more complicated and more devious than first appears - and because history is documented it's almost always possible to prove that in most cases, they're not. Not that the conspiracy theorists believe little things like documents if they work against the theory.

I suppose when it comes to it I just like honesty and trust, and find them a much sounder basis to work from. I hope people believe what I say so I extend the same courtesy to them. As a Russian friend of mine once said, "If you give to a beggar in the street and he's only pretending to be poor, the loss is his, not yours."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 8:15pm

Post #85 of 120 (447 views)
Shortcut
Exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry to interrupt this fascinating discussion on the meaning of conspiracy, but I think where film 1 concludes is still very much up in the air. It could end in Mirkwood, or on the River Running, or in the air with the eagles. This is certainly not set in stone.

Based on rumbling I've heard, there is a decent possibility that Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire is being considered as the dramatic conclusion to film 1. If you believe the story will still ultimately be centered on Bilbo, this cutoff point makes a lot of sense.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 8:53pm

Post #86 of 120 (441 views)
Shortcut
PJs announcement suggests nothing [In reply to] Can't Post

While watching film 2, they may have thought:

"Man, some of film 1 should be in this, and some of this should be in a film 3...."

We just don't know where film 1 will end. It is not set in stone.


Lissuin
Tol Eressea


Aug 4 2012, 9:25pm

Post #87 of 120 (493 views)
Shortcut
Ok ok (grumble grumble), and thanks, Sir Dennis. [In reply to] Can't Post

Naivete loses this time to common sense. I must stop quibbling with wording since I have Estel's post on the interview in front of me this morning, an interview which I had conveniently forgotten that I myself posted a link to some time ago while making a saucy point of my own. Can't have it both ways.

Nothing really insulting here if I breath before reading it, BlackB.


Quote
1) First off, I don't believe this was a spur-of-the-moment decision. Jackson and the studios have likely been privately discussing this since early in the shoot (or, more likely, since pre-production.) So the filming took place with the specter of three films already out there.


And this is perfectly logical.


Quote
The appearance of a third film has nothing to do with the end of filming celebration. Even with a third film, there isn't going to be a ton of new scenes. A month or more of pick-up shots were already in the works for 2013 so what has actually changed? A few more weeks maybe? That's all.



I'm still with Dormouse in that I find the cynicism, which others would call "realism", in the wider world very disheartening at times. Phrases like "carefully orchestrated" and "rumours planted deliberately" I suppose are just a fact of life in some circles, and rumour is certainly in the air one breathes at a movie studio, I found, but it does make me want to crawl into her teapot with her for the next few months. Any room in there for me, Dormouse?

While I've been writing, Silverlode has posted an explanation which takes into account PJ's style of creating movies and has not a whiff of the "c" word. I believe you have, indeed, discerned the truth, Silverlode, at least one I can relate to. Thanks. http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=476693#476693

I learned rather a lot from many of the posts here, not all of it I liked, but that is what happens when we're exposed to new ideas. It's not productive to only applaud the ideas we already hold dear. You have given me things to think about, which is why I'm on TORn in the first place.

PAX everyone?


Magpie
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 9:43pm

Post #88 of 120 (429 views)
Shortcut
wow [In reply to] Can't Post

you just leaped up a couple of levels in esteem for me. (not that you faltered before... you were just one of many before. you have now risen out of the pack)

well said.


LOTR soundtrack website ~ magpie avatar gallery
TORn History Mathom-house ~ Torn Image Posting Guide


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 10:08pm

Post #89 of 120 (406 views)
Shortcut
Yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

..any time you like. The teapot has room enough for all!


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 10:08pm

Post #90 of 120 (431 views)
Shortcut
I've been saying something similar [In reply to] Can't Post

for years...


Quote
As a Russian friend of mine once said, "If you give to a beggar in the street and he's only pretending to be poor, the loss is his, not yours."


... though usually it takes the form of: "If someone asks me for money to buy food and I give it to them, it's between them and God what they do with it." The only thing we have control over in such situations is how we respond to a stated need. (This comes up a lot more than I care to admit, often among acquaintances who should know better.)

Anyway, I think what we are witnessing is the logical outcome of Relativism. Yes it is important to develop our faculties for critical thinking. However, our ability to think critically does not mean that truth is not absolute. My sense is that relativism has lead to a general belief (ironic, I know) that no one with anything to gain from telling a lie will tell the truth. This also may be related to moral decline, but I really don't want to get into that discussion right now (if ever).

We are talking about marketing here. There is no shortage of examples of subterfuge in marketing. Some would argue the entire practise is defined by showmanship and slight of hand. That we are often sold something that isn't quite what we thought we were paying for has become normalised. As such, and lofty philosophical arguments aside, people have become sensitive to being mislead.

In spite of this we believe such things as SDCC is put on for fans, when clearly it is put on for people with something to sell. How we have lost sight of this, I do not know... in a world where people routinely pay a premium to wear company logos it may not be such a mystery after all. Is that cynical of me to say? Or is it simply an unpleasant observation to make in a public forum?

I really get what you are objecting to. And like you, I would that things could be different. It doesn't help matters that twists and turns have been a defining feature of the production. Remember, initially PJ said he didn't want to make The Hobbit?

"He changed his mind, so what?" I can hear people say -- I've said as much myself.

Perhaps it all comes down to people wanting something they can count on not changing? They are looking for it from PJ when, like all humans, it is not his to give... not without sacrificing his own freedom to do what he thinks is best.

The question becomes then, do people really trust that what he thinks is best, really is best? After all, he is working with something that is important -- excruciatingly at times -- to more than just himself. Without even being fanatical about it, his LOTR and Tolkien's work in general have shaped the world as we know it... they occupy space in our collective sense of the world, as well as physical space. They have impacted the global economy during our lifetime. The importance of "this thing" is flippin huge! As such, like many here, I hope to be able to say one day that it was right to trust Peter Jackson.


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 4 2012, 10:14pm)


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 10:29pm

Post #91 of 120 (393 views)
Shortcut
thanks // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 4 2012, 11:40pm

Post #92 of 120 (393 views)
Shortcut
A carefully orchestrated response =) [In reply to] Can't Post

Lissuin wrote: I'm still with Dormouse in that I find the cynicism, which others would call "realism", in the wider world very disheartening at times. Phrases like "carefully orchestrated" and "rumours planted deliberately" I suppose are just a fact of life in some circles, and rumour is certainly in the air one breathes at a movie studio...

I must confess I'm rather taken aback by the negative reaction here to the phrase, "carefully orchestrated" when it comes to marketing a movie. Marketing a film is about building the audience's anticipation for its release and minimizing any negatives that might be associated with it. Everything about marketing a product is carefully orchestrated. Why should that elicit cynicism? It's just what marketing is.

Peter Jackson's video blogs about the making of the Hobbit films have been carefully orchestrated. The decision to make them as well as the decisions about what to cover and when to release them are all part of a marketing plan. Does that make them somehow dishonest? Does it mean that Peter Jackson doesn't really care about the fans after all? Of course not. But when you have a production with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, nothing is done on the whim of the director.


carrioncrow
Lorien

Aug 5 2012, 12:18am

Post #93 of 120 (376 views)
Shortcut
thanks [In reply to] Can't Post

this seems like a reality-based summary.
no way was this announcement out of nowhere


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 5 2012, 2:05am

Post #94 of 120 (361 views)
Shortcut
Exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

I think people are confusing the concept of 'planning,' with 'conspiracy.'

Projects of this size, and decisions of this magnitude, do not normally happen overnight.

That is a very sane perspective to have, and should not be confused with the insanity of conspiracy theories.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 5:08am

Post #95 of 120 (371 views)
Shortcut
Just to gauge the degree of separation on this point [In reply to] Can't Post

Not too long ago, on another film board where I am not always as polite as I am here Wink, I had this to say about fan reaction to Promethus (which I still haven't seen):


Quote
You know sometimes I think geeks/nerds/fans/whatever are their own worst enemies. I mean I care, in fact I care first and foremost, if a film is well made... if it adheres to conventions of the medium and displays more than a basic knowledge of the language of cinema. If all that is in place, everything else is gravy. I know the audience pays for these things in the end. But if people don't learn how to control their nerd rage and be more measured in their criticisms no one is going to want to make films in typical geek genres anymore.



(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 5 2012, 5:08am)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 6:45am

Post #96 of 120 (349 views)
Shortcut
Not all conspiracy theories are insane. lol [In reply to] Can't Post

Certainly history is filled with actual conspiracies that have later been unmasked. Some failed before coming to fruition, some succeeded, some were later exposed.. But certainly plotting does actually sometimes happen. lol

In Reply To
I think people are confusing the concept of 'planning,' with 'conspiracy.'

Projects of this size, and decisions of this magnitude, do not normally happen overnight.

That is a very sane perspective to have, and should not be confused with the insanity of conspiracy theories.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 7:00am

Post #97 of 120 (350 views)
Shortcut
I doubt this. It is TOO open an ending. The audience would feel like they were [In reply to] Can't Post

sailing along in the middle airs, clutched in Eagle talons, right a long with the dwarf. IF it is going to end prior to the barrels, with The Lonely Mountain in sight, Gandalf's departure at Mirkwood seems more likely. That actually marks a real transitory period in the book. The Wise and Powerful Guide and Counsellor who began the mission and has been watching over Thorin and company, more or less, and pulling their asses out of fires, caverns, sacks and cauldrons, and who has rather definitively been their leader (even if occassionally absentee) is now offically parting ways with them for what will be an extended time period. They are on their own. Bilbo will lead them or Thorin will, but entering an even more dangerous phaze of their journey, they are without the Wizard and on their own. It is a quiet and sobering moment, with adventure behind, and danger ahead. Yet it does not leave the audience with their feet completely dangling in mid air.

In Reply To
My guess is that film 1 will end with the eagle rescue from the burning trees, meaning that Goblins and Wargs will be the key threats. Likely it will end with the camera panning up revealing Mirkwood in the distance, and the Lonely Mountain off in the far, far distance, as at the end of FOTR. I think Bilbo's heroic moment for film 1 will be his confrontation with Gollum, and his daring escape from the goblin tunnels.

This means no Beorn until film 2.

That's my guess.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 7:02am

Post #98 of 120 (326 views)
Shortcut
WHOLE heartedly agree. [In reply to] Can't Post

It may happen exactly thus, but I too would really hate it. Your post voices my thougts as well.

In Reply To
I truly detest the idea that Gandalf discovers the identity of the Necromancer withing the timeframe of the films. Prior to the announcement of the third film, I could see the assault on Dol Guldur occuring either late in part one or early in part two. Now I am certain that it will be in part two with the consequences still playing out into the third film.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


phredegar
Bree

Aug 5 2012, 7:34am

Post #99 of 120 (339 views)
Shortcut
Shake and Bake [In reply to] Can't Post

The only thing that's upset me about all this is a possible Summer release of movie number 3. I loved the year's end nature of the LOTR releases. When I heard of a new Hobbit movie my first reaction was, to paraphrase Walker and Texas Ranger Bobby: "Yay! Three Christmases!"


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 5 2012, 2:32pm

Post #100 of 120 (303 views)
Shortcut
xmas present [In reply to] Can't Post

phredegar wrote: The only thing that's upset me about all this is a possible Summer release of movie number 3. I loved the year's end nature of the LOTR releases. When I heard of a new Hobbit movie my first reaction was, to paraphrase Walker and Texas Ranger Bobby: "Yay! Three Christmases!"

You can have the EE DVD of the third film for your 2014 Christmas present.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.