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:
Jackson comments on Del Toro's vision of The Hobbit

There&ThereAgain
Rohan


Aug 24 2012, 10:36pm

Post #1 of 216 (7712 views)
Shortcut
Jackson comments on Del Toro's vision of The Hobbit Can't Post

and how much was salvaged or taken over when Jackson became director.

http://io9.com/5937177/peter-jackson-tells-us-how-much-of-guillermo-del-toros-design-dna-is-in-the-hobbit

I have not seen this posted anywhere yet! Don't hurt me if it has Crazy

"The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair; and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater."-J.R.R. Tolkien

"Thanks for the money!" -George Lucas


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 24 2012, 10:39pm

Post #2 of 216 (5052 views)
Shortcut
You beat me to it by seconds! [In reply to] Can't Post

My thread said the same thing - I don't remember seeing this before.

It's a very interesting interview, and one that was obviously much longer. I wonder what else they discussed.

And if I'm totally honest, I'm probably glad PJ got rid of some of GDT's vision. I want the 3 new films to at least feel like the same Middle-earth. And I know many, many will disagree.


(This post was edited by DanielLB on Aug 24 2012, 10:42pm)


There&ThereAgain
Rohan


Aug 24 2012, 10:42pm

Post #3 of 216 (4972 views)
Shortcut
apologies! [In reply to] Can't Post

I was thinking about waiting to see if someone else was going to post it, but have to take risks sometimes....


I think Peter is being very diplomatic here, but in the best way possible. I think of course they liked what Del Toro did and probably reused some things conceptually, but probably aesthetically, a complete overhaul.

I do hope the DVDs have a feature on Del Toro's involvement.

"The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair; and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater."-J.R.R. Tolkien

"Thanks for the money!" -George Lucas


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 24 2012, 10:44pm

Post #4 of 216 (5008 views)
Shortcut
Such a shame to miss out on a different vision [In reply to] Can't Post

It bothers me that filmic interpretation of Tolkien has thus far been monopolized by PJ and company.

However, what I am most interested in is how much of Del Toro's influence is still in the scripts, as he was an equal partner on those.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 24 2012, 10:46pm

Post #5 of 216 (4924 views)
Shortcut
I hope so too [In reply to] Can't Post

Even if nothing (or very little) still exists, past concepts must have shaped the final designs they went for in the end. And it will be interesting to see what still exists. Make for a brilliant DVD extra.


Carne
Tol Eressea

Aug 24 2012, 10:48pm

Post #6 of 216 (4969 views)
Shortcut
I understand Peter's decision. [In reply to] Can't Post

GDT spent 18 months designing the world, and PJ was not planning to direct, so it's obvious that he changes what he wants. After all it became his vision again and not GDT's.


(This post was edited by Carne on Aug 24 2012, 10:49pm)


TomthePilgrim
Rohan


Aug 24 2012, 11:00pm

Post #7 of 216 (4851 views)
Shortcut
I'm with you . . . [In reply to] Can't Post

I would have enjoyed seeing the different take GDT had . . . especially as the Hobbit is written in such a different style.


The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,

"Thorin sat up with a start. 'Something is not right,' he muttered to himself as he stood up and
looked towards the mirror . . . . . . . . . 'Durin's bones', he gasped, 'what's happened to my beard?'"


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 24 2012, 11:02pm

Post #8 of 216 (4857 views)
Shortcut
Agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

It would have been a mistake for PJ to attempt to ape GDT's style. So the decision was a correct one, once he decided to helm the films.

I just wish GDT had been able to stay on and finish the job. Now instead of something new and fresh, we will likely get comfort food for PJ's fans.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Aug 24 2012, 11:26pm

Post #9 of 216 (4790 views)
Shortcut
It's a good thing [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
we will likely get comfort food for PJ's fans.


There's millions of us. Sly

King Arthur: You know much that is hidden oh Tim.

Tim: Quite.


TomthePilgrim
Rohan


Aug 24 2012, 11:28pm

Post #10 of 216 (4765 views)
Shortcut
But some of us like a little variety . . . [In reply to] Can't Post

. . . not the same thing over and over again. Wink


The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,

"Thorin sat up with a start. 'Something is not right,' he muttered to himself as he stood up and
looked towards the mirror . . . . . . . . . 'Durin's bones', he gasped, 'what's happened to my beard?'"


Gorbag
Rivendell


Aug 24 2012, 11:34pm

Post #11 of 216 (4942 views)
Shortcut
The Hobbit wasnt the time for a ''New Vision''. [In reply to] Can't Post

When i first heard GDT was directing, i was a little Unsure. I love his previous work, but i wasnt sure about him doing The Hobbit. I personally think GDT can tend to go a little over-board on designs of creatures, and the whole talk of Smaug design directions he mentioned (Like a battle-axe or something was it?) got me worried.

Also thought/still think having two different visions of Middle Earth from different directors of films that are meant to be linked, would have been very jarring. I do think GDT version of Middle Earth would have been dramatically different. It would have been good to see his vision, but not as a prequel to a world we already know and love. Save the ''New Vision'' for a re-boot or whatever, not for a prequel to a different directors vision of Middle Earth

So when i heard GDT had stepped down, there was a certain amount of relief, and upon hearing that PJ was back at the helm i was pleased we would be heading back into the world i know and love. Im very happy it turned out being PJ and the team working on The Hobbit, and i cant wait to see it.

P.S I like others, would still love to see GDT's designs though.

“I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.” - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring


Hamfast Gamgee
Grey Havens

Aug 24 2012, 11:42pm

Post #12 of 216 (4777 views)
Shortcut
I would quite like [In reply to] Can't Post

To see someone else's take on Tolkien. Someone could do a different version of Lotr and it might be very different from PJs. Though I am sure that any studio would say 'Why do this again we've seen it,' despite there been about five remakes of Spider/batman in that time I've seen several version of the same Shakespeare plays, and multipl Jane Austin adaptation on TV. But I guess well just have to wait. In fact plays might bethe way forward. On could show 3 or 4 plays in. Series to cover the Lotr tale. Though musicals seem more popular. Quite how musicals get around the rights issue and plays don't I'm not sure.


lyndomiel
Rivendell

Aug 24 2012, 11:57pm

Post #13 of 216 (4826 views)
Shortcut
I am with you. [In reply to] Can't Post

I am glad to see Middle Earth back in PJ's hands. Another director might have satisfied, but I am not a big fan of GDT. Hated Pan's Labyrinth! Not overly fond of Hellboy - and I enjoy many comic book, sci fi, and fantasy films. Can't say I've seen anything else he created. He's not to my taste. I was relieved when he quit.


Escapist
Gondor

Aug 25 2012, 12:02am

Post #14 of 216 (4832 views)
Shortcut
Comparing PJ and GDT [In reply to] Can't Post

without considering LOTR, I do like PJ better. I appreciate the realism in PJ's work and find the darker twist of GDT's work unappealing, being not so interested in the darker side of life in general.

I do like a little bit of a horror element sometimes - but my taste is more along the lines of Gremlins or The People Under the Stairs where it is a little bit unclear the line between comedy and true scariness. But this I kind of relish.

Show or do not show, there is no tell.


lyndomiel
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 12:02am

Post #15 of 216 (4773 views)
Shortcut
Comfort food vs. variety [In reply to] Can't Post

Comfort food is always good. I like adventure as much as anyone, and I don't want mac and cheese every night, but if a restaurant has a good chef - I'll go back over and over to taste his vision. Not tired of PJ yet - for all his flaws.


TomthePilgrim
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 12:09am

Post #16 of 216 (4749 views)
Shortcut
good analogy [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes chef PJ is a good one, but the menu has changed, and I would like to have see someone with more finesse and subtlety make this meal. Sly


The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,

"Thorin sat up with a start. 'Something is not right,' he muttered to himself as he stood up and
looked towards the mirror . . . . . . . . . 'Durin's bones', he gasped, 'what's happened to my beard?'"


lyndomiel
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 12:12am

Post #17 of 216 (4710 views)
Shortcut
Perhaps he's grown by now. [In reply to] Can't Post

12 years later...I hope he's learned from his mistakes.


Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 12:15am

Post #18 of 216 (5043 views)
Shortcut
If GDT had.... [In reply to] Can't Post

... brought some of the genius of Pan's Labyrinth with him then his version of The Hobbit could've been something amazing. However I had a little trepidation at some of his character designs (like Thorin having antlers) which may or may not have been terrible. And remember GDT stated several times that his version would fit into the canon so I don't think it would've been so drastically different as some have suggested.

However it should be pointed out that GDT has so far struggled to make an English language film that comes even close to his Spanish language efforts. Hellboy II is the closest he's ever managed to get to Devils Backbone or Pan's Labyrinth.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."

(This post was edited by Spaldron on Aug 25 2012, 12:16am)


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 12:49am

Post #19 of 216 (4770 views)
Shortcut
But it was the time to test run a radically new film format? [In reply to] Can't Post

Ya know, it's okay if prequels and sequels don't look or feel exactly like what came before... heck sometimes the story lines can be completely alien to one another... there are no hard rules for these things.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 1:05am

Post #20 of 216 (4812 views)
Shortcut
PJ and co. have monopolized Tolkien and Del Toro's filmic interpretation..... [In reply to] Can't Post

there wouldn't be three Hobbit films if it wasn't for PJ and his successful film trilogy, and all due respect to Del Toro, he was filling in for PJ and co. As far as PJ monopolizing Tolkien...so you would rather be living right now without the LOTR's films or these new Hobbit films?


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


RosieLass
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 1:16am

Post #21 of 216 (4691 views)
Shortcut
You sound like a broken record. [In reply to] Can't Post

Not liking what PJ did to LOTR does not mean that nobody else could have done a good job, and nobody is claiming to prefer no films at all.

"BOTH [political] extremes are dangerous. But more dangerous are team fanboys who think all the extremists are on the OTHER side." (CNN reader comment)

It is always those with the fewest sensible things to say who make the loudest noise in saying them. --Precious Ramotswe (Alexander McCall Smith)


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 1:21am

Post #22 of 216 (4775 views)
Shortcut
Media Literacy 101 [In reply to] Can't Post

Back in July Voronwe posted an interview made at SDCC2012 in which PJ was asked the same question. (See here if you don't remember: http://newboards.theonering.net/...?post=470273;#470273)

This offers us an excellent opportunity to compare what he said about the same topic in two entirely different milieux.

The first time was in a frantic con setting, and he seemed a bit off the cuff. The second one (today's) was much more laid back (both setting and stance) -- regardless the content is pretty much the same, in some parts almost word for word.

Given the two very different settings, wouldn't you expect quanitatively different answers? Not to the point where the content contradicts itself, but at least to the point where the answer does not come across as scripted.

Am I being cynical here? I mean obviously someone was going to ask eventually; and as it is a sensitive issue, it makes sense that a public figure would have given some thought to what he would say when he was asked... after all, being diplomatic is not something that comes naturally to everyone.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 25 2012, 1:30am)


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 1:24am

Post #23 of 216 (4625 views)
Shortcut
Sir PJ has a lot of experience with diplomacy [In reply to] Can't Post

But I think he is basically telling the truth.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 1:27am

Post #24 of 216 (4664 views)
Shortcut
seems like you like the glass half empty [In reply to] Can't Post

why can't you give credit to PJ and co. for pulling off what most people said was the impossible? he won best director for a FANTASY movie for pete's sake, do you know how rare that is in hollywood? Do you even know how much effort and time was spent by PJ and co. and the actors to pull off filming three films back-to-back? But yeah...let's just say "another director" could have done better...


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 1:32am

Post #25 of 216 (4642 views)
Shortcut
Yes I think so too... [In reply to] Can't Post

Still it is a good exercise for those who don't want to see Sir Peter as someone who, like almost every other media figure on the planet, would choose to rely on scripted answers.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 25 2012, 1:37am)


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 1:38am

Post #26 of 216 (4175 views)
Shortcut
And, and didn't he give us the phrase, "for pete's sake?" // [In reply to] Can't Post

 

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


GoodGuyA
Lorien

Aug 25 2012, 1:42am

Post #27 of 216 (4192 views)
Shortcut
Monopolized? [In reply to] Can't Post

That's just a terribly misleading word, you know. Not only have there been other interpretations of Tolkien, both in film and other media, but what would you epect from the most recent adaptation? Of course it's going to be more in the public consciousness than others. Before that, the 'monopoly' was from Ted Nadsmith, or the Rakin & Bass Hobbit. I guess that doesn't count, since you feel betrayyyedd! by the Jackson films. Well don't you fret. In a few decades we'll get a new, terribly overwrought version for you to grumble over!


HiddenSpring
Lorien

Aug 25 2012, 1:42am

Post #28 of 216 (4211 views)
Shortcut
What might have been [In reply to] Can't Post

A Guillermo del Toro version would have been immensely interesting not just for the beauty of the monsters but for the sensations he'd be able to evoke. There is a very simple scene in Pan's Labyrinth, with a dying mother and her daughter lying in bed in the darkness, listening intently to the rustling of the wind in the old country house. It's bewitching because it's in that uncomfortable area between magic, nature and reality. Now, I'm aware that kind of high Spanish romanticism wouldn't always gel with the mythic Britishness of The Hobbit, but just imagine being engulfed by the shadows and sounds of Mirkwood in quite the same way, wondering about the trees, the forest, the eyes in the dark, the singing. It's that perfect state of wonder and fear.

That said, I trust Peter Jackson more in other aspects. I don't think you could improve on his lived-in and humorous take on The Shire, for instance. In a world where egos weren't so important a co-direction between the two would have been a sight to behold.


(This post was edited by HiddenSpring on Aug 25 2012, 1:50am)


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 1:44am

Post #29 of 216 (4198 views)
Shortcut
LOL [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To


Wink


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 2:34am

Post #30 of 216 (4144 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

Shelob'sAppetite wrote: what I am most interested in is how much of Del Toro's influence is still in the scripts, as he was an equal partner on those.

Answer: Maybe 0.1% GDT's script credit is contractual. His vision and his influence are long gone--as PJ politely, but emphatically, emphasized. These movies are now 99.9% Jackson.


(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Aug 25 2012, 2:36am)


dalecooper
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 2:44am

Post #31 of 216 (4153 views)
Shortcut
I feel quite oppositely... [In reply to] Can't Post

...and not just because I'm a bigger fan of the LOTR movies than you.

For one thing, when you say PJ & company have monopolized the vision of the movies, I think that's misleading, because it sounds like it's PJ above all else, with a company just executing his orders. I don't think that's true. He may be at the main switch, but plenty of artists contributed otherwise; surely many of the designs came directly or indirectly from Howe and Lee, and of course the music is entirely Shore's. Even in an arena that PJ and his closest inner circle worked on directly - the script - there was certainly input from other people who are writers or scholars, and are fans of the books. That's all to say that I feel you put undue emphasis on the PJ part, and I'd prefer to emphasize and expand the notion of the "company." :) This is why I've never quite understood my friend who got so mad at the movies because of things like the change to Faramir - it seems to me that even if you hate those kinds of changes, there's so much other stuff that the movies got right, and it's equally as important to me to see those things. Anyway, that's a side tunnel I'd like to not get lost going down.

For another, unless I had hated the LOTR movies, I probably would have always wanted a "Hobbit" which is similar in tone and style. I like the feeling of watching a complete, mammoth undertaking. I liked plowing through 5 seasons of "The Wire"; I wouldn't have wanted one of those seasons to be helmed by someone other than David Simon. So given that I like the LOTR trilogy, I have always felt like PJ directing "The Hobbit" was the best choice. But it's understandable that we would differ on that front. If it comforts you, I would argue even to LOTR detractors that the best parts of those movies were the early parts revolving around the hobbits and The Shire, and I feel (or at least hope) like these movies will be much closer to those sequences in spirit. So chin up - these could be quite good!

And finally, I have to admit that I never thought Del Toro was the right choice for this material in the first place. His personal sense of style is too strong and too contrary to how I picture "The Hobbit" in my head. I like his designs for Hellboy and Pan's Labyrinth, but NONE of them resemble Tolkien creatures to me, not even slightly. Besides, if memory serves, he was no great Tolkien or fantasy fan before being recruited for this project - that doesn't really scream to me that he was likely to have great respect for the source material. He's a guy with strong personal ideas that worm their way into many of his movies, and I could easily see big chunks of the Hobbit's plot subtly transforming to be more in line with GDT's personal vision. I know a lot of his writing is still in the movies we will see, but I also feel certain that Jackson and collaborators rewrote to their heart's content after he left (along with re-designing all his creatures), and that actually comforts me a bit. For all his little adjustments and flights of fancy, Jackson is basically just telling the same tale as Tolkien but blockbusterizing it. I sort of suspect that Del Toro might have made something more personal, less Hollywood-epic in feel - but also something that actually feels LESS like "The Hobbit" to me. All of his movies that I've seen feel very much like Guillermo Del Toro Movies, and none of them have a tone that (in my mind) resembles the sprightly, Old World-infused, twinkly-eyed Englishness of Tolkien.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 3:21am

Post #32 of 216 (4281 views)
Shortcut
Thorin was NOT described with antlers [In reply to] Can't Post

For the millionth time, Del Toro described a Thorin with a helmet that had "thorns" on it, which the reporter described as antlers. If you're going to criticize, at least get the story straight. Smile


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 3:23am

Post #33 of 216 (4059 views)
Shortcut
its kinda like saying [In reply to] Can't Post

the director of the last chronicles of narnia monopolized C.S. Lewis's series...actually he probably did C.S. Lewis a service by giving people who would have otherwise paid no attention or interest in his work/writing.


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...

(This post was edited by MouthofSauron on Aug 25 2012, 3:24am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 3:26am

Post #34 of 216 (4168 views)
Shortcut
Once again, putting words in my mouth. Helps with creating straw men... [In reply to] Can't Post

I said filmic interpretation, by which I meant a live-action film.

I said nothing about static artwork, or animation.

I also said nothing about feeling "betrayyyedd" by the films. I simply did not find them to be very good, and wish another director had decided to make them.

My opinion in no way threatens yours. So why fly off the handle? Like the films, say so, and be done with it.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 3:31am

Post #35 of 216 (4151 views)
Shortcut
All good points [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks for responding with reason, and not with knee-jerk defensiveness. Also, you may know that I have much higher hopes for the Hobbit, than I did for LOTR, largely because I think the tone will be closer to the best parts of the LOTR films, which were in the Shire. The reason I like the idea of three films is that I think it will give PJ more time to flesh out the world and story, as he did with Bilbo, Gandalf and Frodo at the beginning of FOTR. I always felt that the films went downhill when PJ and company tried to jam too many character arcs into too little time, so for PJ, the more time the better. As such, the below comforts me very much.


Quote
If it comforts you, I would argue even to LOTR detractors that the best parts of those movies were the early parts revolving around the hobbits and The Shire, and I feel (or at least hope) like these movies will be much closer to those sequences in spirit. So chin up - these could be quite good!



Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 3:32am

Post #36 of 216 (4175 views)
Shortcut
I'm not criticising though. [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
If you're going to criticize, at least get the story straight.


You get your story straight.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 3:36am

Post #37 of 216 (4172 views)
Shortcut
You stated [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
However I had a little trepidation at some of his character designs (like Thorin having antlers)...


That is worry, if not criticism, and you based it on an inaccurate description. Thorin was never described as "having antlers" under GDT's design.



Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 3:38am

Post #38 of 216 (4087 views)
Shortcut
GDT is obviously a fantasy fan [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
Besides, if memory serves, he was no great Tolkien or fantasy fan before being recruited for this project


That's where you're wrong. He may not have been a Tolkien'ite but considering nearly every film to his name so far has been a fantasy film or fantastical in nature is indicative of GDT being a huge fan of fantasy cinema.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 3:40am

Post #39 of 216 (4037 views)
Shortcut
Agreed. [In reply to] Can't Post

Where oh where could one possibly get the impression that GDT is not a fantasy fan?

In any event, I don't really care if a director is a fantasy fan or not. I simply want them to treat the material seriously, and make an excellent film out of it. In general, I actually would prefer a director who is not locked into a specific genre.


Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 3:42am

Post #40 of 216 (4198 views)
Shortcut
He was described as having antlers.... [In reply to] Can't Post

...by virtually every movie publication available at the time so I'm not going to take the blame if (presumably) trusted media sources were, in the end incorrect. This is the first I've heard of the antler thing being untrue.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 3:43am

Post #41 of 216 (4068 views)
Shortcut
one point... [In reply to] Can't Post

Howe and Lee both great Tolkien artists BUT they are being paid by Peter Jackson to give him HIS vision of Middle Earth not Tolkien's. So it really doesn't matter how great of Tolkien artist's they are, PJ is paying them to give his interpretation of Tolkien nothing more. An artist has to please the boss or they wont keep working, they are after all Peter Jackson's films not Lee's or Howe's. Wink


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 3:45am

Post #42 of 216 (4134 views)
Shortcut
If it was up to me... [In reply to] Can't Post

the answer to that question would be NO. If only PJ had asked me Wink, I would have told him to shoot in traditional 35mm. Unsure



"All men dream; but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds awake to find that it was vanity; But the dreamers of day are dangerous men. That they may act their dreams with open eyes to make it possible."
- T.E. Lawrence


(This post was edited by Aragorn the Elfstone on Aug 25 2012, 3:46am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 3:50am

Post #43 of 216 (4090 views)
Shortcut
No they didn't [In reply to] Can't Post

Here is exactly what was reported in the New Yorker, where the story originated:


Quote
Even the major characters of “The Hobbit” bore del Toro’s watermark. In one sketch, the dwarf Thorin, depicted in battle, wore a surreal helmet that appeared to be sprouting antlers. “They’re thorns—his name is Thorin, after all,” he said.


And while we're at it, let's dispel the idea that Smaug was made to look just like an axe, and highlight that this was only evident as a silhouette, if you were looking down on his flying form:


Quote

I paused at what looked like an image of a double-bitted medieval hatchet. “That’s Smaug,” del Toro said. It was an overhead view: “See, he’s like a flying axe.” Del Toro thinks that monsters should appear transformed when viewed from a fresh angle, lest the audience lose a sense of awe. Defining silhouettes is the first step in good monster design, he said. “Then you start playing with movement. The next element of design is color. And then finally—finally—comes detail. A lot of people go the other way, and just pile up a lot of detail.”


This is where all the rumors came from regarding Del Toro's "inappropriate designs" and the actual descriptions were far less alarming than the rumors (naturally).

Look, GDT was not my first choice either. He can be okay, but I find his vision a little "small" and "claustrophobic" if you know what I mean. But I do not think it good practice to propagate rumors about his designs that are not based in reality.


(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Aug 25 2012, 3:50am)


Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 4:13am

Post #44 of 216 (4095 views)
Shortcut
I don't read the New Yorker [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
Look, GDT was not my first choice either. He can be okay, but I find his vision a little "small" and "claustrophobic" if you know what I mean. But I do not think it good practice to propagate rumors about his designs that are not based in reality.


I'm not propagating anything, I'm merely recounting what I read in several movie magazines at the time including Empire. I don't read the New Yorker so am not aware of the thorn quote. All I know is from what I've read from reputable sources (and not some internet rumour) so I can't be blamed if said publications are incorrect.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 4:23am

Post #45 of 216 (4105 views)
Shortcut
There might have been some confusion because of [In reply to] Can't Post

GDT's King Balor from Hellboy 2 released shortly after he was named Hobbit director (and started posting here).

Really, is this not an interesting design for a king?



In any event Thorin didn't have antlers, it was suggested that his helmet might have thorn-like antler adornment. Which again is not all that out there -- one of my favourite Bretonnia Knights (Warhammer) has stag horns on his helmet (at far right):



I think I've seen antlers on Samurai helmets as well...

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 25 2012, 4:24am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 4:29am

Post #46 of 216 (4161 views)
Shortcut
The King Balor design is excellent [In reply to] Can't Post

If Thorin with his BoFA armor looks anything like that (including the antlered helm), I would be happy.

Ancient royalty wore all kinds of outlandish headgear. I don't see why Middle Earth needs to be all drab leather and washed-out earth tones.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 4:31am

Post #47 of 216 (4081 views)
Shortcut
They did post links to the article right here on TheOneRing.net [In reply to] Can't Post

so even if you don't read the NewYorker you could have seen that article. But, all right, you missed it. It happens. Now all has been clarified.

In Reply To

Quote
Look, GDT was not my first choice either. He can be okay, but I find his vision a little "small" and "claustrophobic" if you know what I mean. But I do not think it good practice to propagate rumors about his designs that are not based in reality.


I'm not propagating anything, I'm merely recounting what I read in several movie magazines at the time including Empire. I don't read the New Yorker so am not aware of the thorn quote. All I know is from what I've read from reputable sources (and not some internet rumour) so I can't be blamed if said publications are incorrect.


"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."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 4:34am

Post #48 of 216 (4084 views)
Shortcut
Understood [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't mind that you missed it. I miss things all the time (though I try to find those things if I need to reference them while making a case...).

However, you then responded with "you get your story straight," as if you refused to admit that your description was inaccurate. hat is what bothered me about it.

In any event, you missed it, and that's that. In any case, GDT's designs were likely to upset some people. He wasn't my first choice, but I still yearn to escape PJ's vision...


Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 4:35am

Post #49 of 216 (4121 views)
Shortcut
It missing one article a crime? [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
They did post links to the article right here on TheOneRing.net so even if you don't read the NewYorker you could have seen that article. But, all right, you missed it. It happens.


Bit patronising no? I only joined TORn last year so I probably did miss it.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 4:43am

Post #50 of 216 (4060 views)
Shortcut
But that's not the point [In reply to] Can't Post

The point is that you said, definitively and without a qualifier, that GDT designed Thorin "with antlers."

If you weren't 99.9% sure of that, it would have been best to preface your statement with "I think I heard..." or something to that effect.

In any event, water under the bridge. No big deal.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 4:50am

Post #51 of 216 (3982 views)
Shortcut
Aside: It was upon seeing HB II [In reply to] Can't Post

That I became convinced that the Hobbit was going to look spectacular. The elves especially, their look, their weapons, their fighting style... sigh. Actually Prince Nuada's sword reminded me very much of what Peter Lyon came up with for the Prologue Elven Warrior's, which remain my favourite designs in LOTR.



(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 4:53am

Post #52 of 216 (3991 views)
Shortcut
oh i agree [In reply to] Can't Post

makes my mouth water for what is in-store for us!


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


imin
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 8:36am

Post #53 of 216 (3929 views)
Shortcut
You say the same thing in every thread, lol [In reply to] Can't Post

If PJ cant do it then no one can! lol.

Other directors could i am sure come in and try their hand at making a film adaptation of Tolkien's works. I am sure some would fail, others i think would succeed.

This does not mean people who have this opinion wish that PJ had never made the films - how you are coming to this conclusion is strange as no one is saying this in any thread yet its all you say...........


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 9:24am

Post #54 of 216 (3932 views)
Shortcut
Had PJ not made the trilogy [In reply to] Can't Post

I reckon someone would have made an adaptation with the same feel as The Neverending Story. While I like the book and enjoy the film, I certainly wouldn't want it to have ended it up like that ...


imin
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 9:46am

Post #55 of 216 (3938 views)
Shortcut
Well we cant know now obviously [In reply to] Can't Post

as it has been done. Though i am sure if someone else did it and then other people mentioned PJ - he would get a poor reception from people here due to his other works.

I think it would totally depend on the director, for example if Nolan adapted the lord of the rings it wouldnt be anything like the neverending story and would also be different to PJ's version.

Its besides the point though, that from certain posters its either PJ or you want nothing, it just doesnt make sense. no one ever says these things.


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 9:59am

Post #56 of 216 (3947 views)
Shortcut
It's a lovely design for a king... [In reply to] Can't Post

... majestic, mysterious - just stunning. that said, it's a design that has already been used so I wouldn't have wanted to see Thorin looking like that.

I would be fascinated to see other film directors take on Tolkien's work in future. But I'm glad, so glad, that Peter Jackson and co are making The Hobbit now because I love the vision of Tolkien's world they created and want to see more of it. It's as simple as that, really.


imin
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 10:05am

Post #57 of 216 (3914 views)
Shortcut
Yeah this is how i feel, would be nice in the future to see other adaptations but for now im pleased its PJ as i like his LOTR :) [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

I would be fascinated to see other film directors take on Tolkien's work in future. But I'm glad, so glad, that Peter Jackson and co are making The Hobbit now because I love the vision of Tolkien's world they created and want to see more of it. It's as simple as that, really.



DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 10:18am

Post #58 of 216 (3889 views)
Shortcut
I'm not *that* familiar with Nolan [In reply to] Can't Post

Did he make any films around the same time of the filming of LOTR (~2000), and what were they like?

In my opinion, all fantasy films up to LOTR had the very same feel to The Neverending Story (and some still do).


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 10:19am

Post #59 of 216 (3861 views)
Shortcut
Agreed as well / [In reply to] Can't Post

 


imin
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 10:26am

Post #60 of 216 (3892 views)
Shortcut
He had made a few at that point [In reply to] Can't Post

From the ones i have watched they were insomnia and memento. I really like memento think it was very original. insomnia was good but for me there are other woks he has done which are better. Overall i think he has a great track record - though he isn't the only one who could adapt the books into film, it was just an example. I dont know what you would think of them obviously but seeing as i like them i think you would, lol.

PJ was the first to do a big blockbuster fantasy in a realistic way - i doubt people would have expected him to do so before the films came out from looking at his previous material so its hard to say every other director in the world would have gone down the never ending story route. Like i have said if Nolan did it, it certainly would not have but he is just one example. And at the end of the day he didn't and PJ did.

My point i was making though is that certain people are so pro PJ they cant take any criticism of him - all they hear is PJ sucks! I wish there were no movies. When that just is not what has been said.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 12:01pm

Post #61 of 216 (3916 views)
Shortcut
Remember that GDT hired John Howe and Alan Lee to work on the films [In reply to] Can't Post

They were never intended to look radically different from Lord of the Rings.


dalecooper
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 12:22pm

Post #62 of 216 (3838 views)
Shortcut
Well, I meant the Tolkien-ish brand of fantasy... [In reply to] Can't Post

...swords, wizards, warriors. Certainly GDT's movies are "fantastical in nature" but they draw from fairy tales and horror, not from anything especially Tolkien-like. The two do share a common love of monsters, though.

Unfortunately my Googlin' skills are letting me down on this front, because I can't find the quote from him (years ago - it pre-dates him being involved with the movies at all).


dalecooper
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 12:24pm

Post #63 of 216 (3805 views)
Shortcut
Yes, they work for PJ. But: [In reply to] Can't Post

I believe he hired those guys because they have a history of interpreting Tolkien visually. Otherwise, any skilled sketch artist with a little imagination would do. Those guys were used for a reason, and that is to give creative input.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 12:25pm

Post #64 of 216 (3861 views)
Shortcut
As much as I like Nolan, he would be a poor fit for Tolkien [In reply to] Can't Post

As evidenced by his Dark Knight films, Christopher Nolan does not particularly like fantasy universes. Almost every comic-like or fantastical element of the Batman mythos was stripped away. The result – while very good in its own right – did not satisfy all fans of the material, many of whom are eagerly awaiting the upcoming reboot. Considering that even Peter Jackson's handling of Tolkien's fantasy – such as Gandalf's magic – managed to elicit complaints from some corners, I can scarcely imagine how Nolan's ultra-realistic, fantasy-free Lord of the Rings would have been received.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 12:31pm

Post #65 of 216 (3804 views)
Shortcut
Fairy tales like 'The Hobbit'? // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


dalecooper
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 12:35pm

Post #66 of 216 (3845 views)
Shortcut
Found the quote. [In reply to] Can't Post

From a Spanish interview, here translated to English:

To what extent has the work of Tolkien influenced you ? Thank you and much success with the film!

Not at all. I could barely finish "The Hobbit". Curiously, that kind of fantasy, never called out to me. I think that fairy tales are in themselves a different genre. Heroic fantasy, in general, leaves me cold. I am more interested in Robert E. Howard's work of terror - his novels about the muscular Conan. Although there are two writers of fantasy that I think are sublime: Clark Ashton Smith and Lord Dunsany.

So it's clear enough: GDT doesn't view "The Hobbit" as a fairy tale, he views it as a tale of swords and sorcerers, and it clearly wasn't up his alley at all.


imin
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 12:37pm

Post #67 of 216 (3856 views)
Shortcut
Yeah i dont think he would be a great fit for Tolkien [In reply to] Can't Post

He would not be as good as PJ at any rate in my mind as like you say he is good but just wouldnt fit in middle earth.

It was more an example of how it wouldnt be in the never ending story mold if he were the director. Tongue


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 12:45pm

Post #68 of 216 (3891 views)
Shortcut
I'll let GDT speak for himself [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
wetahost: My question is, when Del Toro has acknowledged his disdain for Hobbits and "sword and sandals" fantasy, how can he do justice to the movie? Why can't Peter direct it himself after The Lovely Bones? He can direct these 2 movies and then direct the 3rd Tintin movie.



Quote
Guillermo_del_Toro: Okay- If by “Sword and Sandal” you mean “Sword and Sorcery” I stand by the general lines of my statement in 2006. But allow me to reproduce the following paragraph from ONERING.net and expand it-

Since the age of 4 I became an avid reader and collector of books; manuscripts, pamphlets, first editions, small press or worn-down paperbacks... they all find a home at my library which has grown so cumbersome and obtrusive that I had to move to a separate home from the family one...

For many decades my main area of interest has been horror fiction: Algernon Blackwood, Arthur Machen, MR James, LeFanu, etc and classic Fairy tales and literature about the engines of Myth: unabridged Grimm, Andersen, Wilde, Bettelheim, Tatar, etc

Now and then I indulge in Science Fiction (not hardware oriented but more humanistic things) and thus I count Bradbury, Ellison, Sturgeon and Matheson amongst my favorites.

My area of interest gets much narrower when we deal with another genre... the genre that is shelved under Fantasy.

As a youngster I read Moorcock, Clark Ashton Smith, Lord Dunsany, Lloyd Alexander, Fritz Leiber, Marcel Schwob, RE Howard and a few others.

Nevertheless I was never propelled into an aleatory addiction to sub-genres like Sword & Sorcery or indiscriminate fantasies about magical this or that- Like any other genre or subgenre there's a great abundance that makes it hard to discern when a new "trilogy" or "chronicle" comes from as genuine a place as Tolkien's or derives from genuine fervor -religious or otherwise- like C.S. Lewis' did. But here I am now: reading like a madman to catch up with a whole new land, a continent of sorts- a Cosmology created by brilliant philologist turned Shaman.

As if he grasped an existing universe outside our Platonic cave, Tolkien channels an entire world, weaving expertly from myth and lore. The oustanding virtue is that all this scholarly erudition doesn't reduce his tales to mere Taxidermy. He achieves an Alchemy all of his own: he writes new life in the freshly sculpted clay of his creatures.

I have, through the years become familiar with the very roots of Tolkien's myths and the roots of Fafhrd or Elric or Hyperborea and many a time I have relished the intricate ways in which demonic wolves, shape-shifter and spindly-limbed pale warriors can be woven into those many tales that become, at the end, the single tale, the single saga- that of what is immortal in us all.

In creating Pan's Labyrinth I drank deep of the most rigid form of Fairy Lore and tried to contextualize the main recurrent motifs in an instinctive rhyme between the world of fantasy and the delusions of War and Politics (the grown man's way of playing make-believe) and in re-reading THE HOBBIT just recently I was quite moved by discovering, through Bilbo's eyes the illusory nature of possession, the sins of hoarding and the banality of war- whether in the Western Front or at a Valley in Middle Earth. Lonely is the mountain indeed.

When that statement was made- at different times during PANS LABYRINTH’s promotion, many a time I made the distinctive call to say that althought I had not read Tolkien outside THE HOBBIT I had been fascinated by the Trilogy films. A statement that I already had the chance to make in 2005 when PJ, Fran and I met about HALO.

So, no, generally I am NOT a “Sword and Sorcery” guy or a “Fantasy” guy- By the same token, I'm not a sci-fi guy but I would make a film based on Ellison in a second- or on Sturgeon or Bradbury or Matheson. I'm not into Barbarians with swords but i would kill to tackle Fafhrd and Grey Mouse... and so on and so forth... I'm a believer but not a Dogmatic.

Allow me to put a final, finer point to our discussion. The aesthetics of HELLBOY II are completely Pop and color-saturated, much more comic book / modern than I would ever use in THE HOBBIT but- I spend two years creating a world of Fairies, Elves, Trolls, etc

Two Years. A career / creative decision that precedes any inkling of THE HOBBIT. I wrote the script years before I met with PJ or Fran. In other words I dedicated the last 6 years of my career (between PL and HBII) to create Fantastical world inhabited by Fairies, Fauns, Ogres, Trolls, Elves, etc

In that respect- I guess I am a Fantasy guy when the particular world appeals to me. Back in the Jurassic Period (1992 / 1993) when CRONOS won the Critic’s Week at Cannes I was referred to as an “art house guy”- I followed that with a giant cockroach movie that proved successful enough to spawn two sequels and allow me to co-finance THE DEVILS BACKBONE which send me back to being an “art house guy”. Then I did BLADE II and people thought of me as an “Action guy”- PJ went through a similar mercurial career with HEAVENLY CREATURES, BAD TASTE, DEAD ALIVE, etc I squirm away from a tag and I hope I can avoid being just a “Fantasy guy” after PL, HBII and H…

I do the tales I love (regardless of what shelf Barnes & Noble classifies the book under) and I love the HOBBIT.

I love it enough to give it half a decade of my life and move half a world away to do it.


http://www.comingsoon.net/...bitnews.php?id=45413


GoodGuyA
Lorien

Aug 25 2012, 12:49pm

Post #69 of 216 (3911 views)
Shortcut
You said monopolized. [In reply to] Can't Post

That means all encompassing. You did not specify live action in that statement. Even if you did, it's absurd to be saying that someone has 'monopolized' something there's only been one attempt at... Maybe if there were more than two Tolkien stories which were properly adaptable (since I'm sure few here want to see shots in the dark at stuff like the War in the North in detail) then you might have a point on how much influence PJ's team has over the vision of Tolkien. However, there are only two stories. That's where it will likely end. I don't think that's 'monopolizing'.


dalecooper
Rivendell

Aug 25 2012, 12:53pm

Post #70 of 216 (3911 views)
Shortcut
That's a strong about-face from him EXPLICITLY saying: [In reply to] Can't Post

"I could barely get through 'The Hobbit'."

Pardon my cynicism, but I think his current employment at the time of that second quote informed it greatly. I think his earlier comment was a lot more candid. He just wasn't big into Tolkien, or medievalist fantasy in general.

That doesn't mean his "Hobbit" movies would have been bad, but it doesn't fill my heart with hope that they would have been great, either. As I said above, GDT is a guy with a strong personal vision and a common feel to all his movies (even his "superhero blockbusters" - Hellboy). That feel, to me, doesn't resemble Tolkien and would have dovetailed rather strangely with PJ's LOTR approach.

I also think it's probable that he would have taken more bothersome liberties with the material than PJ is prone to. But that's just my feeling, and it's possibly quite inaccurate.


(This post was edited by dalecooper on Aug 25 2012, 12:55pm)


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 2:00pm

Post #71 of 216 (3842 views)
Shortcut
You know something is wrong... [In reply to] Can't Post

...when a translation of an off-the-cuff statement made more than half a decade ago holds more water than a life-changing career commitment. If GDT legitimately does not like Tolkien, why on earth did he spend two years in New Zealand developing The Hobbit as a directorial project? Before you suggest that he accepted a film he did not want to make in an attempt to further his career, remember that this is the man who turned down Harry Potter to make a comic-book vampire movie, and declined The Chronicles of Narnia in favour of a little Spanish horror film.

I find it easy to relate to the 'about-face', perhaps because I had a similar experience. I first read The Fellowship of the Ring when I was eight or nine years old, and for the most part, Tolkien's world flew right over my head. I was not yet mature enough to appreciate the complexity and stately beauty of what he had created. Since then my relationship to the story has reversed entirely.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 2:08pm

Post #72 of 216 (3866 views)
Shortcut
Of the same mind [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
I love the vision of Tolkien's world they created and want to see more of it.


However when G was directing I was confident he would make a film that would delight even though it would have been completely different than what PJ had done before.

As for the King Balor pic, that wasn't a vote for the look of Thorin, I was just saying G has a great design sense and the antler idea can be aesthetically pleasing... just a little tired of people saying "OMG he was gonna put antlers on his head," like it's universally understood as a bad thing.



(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 2:36pm

Post #73 of 216 (3802 views)
Shortcut
That is true [In reply to] Can't Post

But with GDT in the driving seat, Howe and Lee would have to work to his requirements, and his vision of Middle-earth; rather than PJ's, which had already been created.


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 25 2012, 3:05pm

Post #74 of 216 (3811 views)
Shortcut
I have to agree with you... [In reply to] Can't Post

Knowing his first statement did not make me excited for him filming. In fact I personaly don't think his second statment was anything but saving face.

Has anyone ever seen an actor or director praise there current project. But after admit they reolized it was. Crap all along. As far as I am concerned GDT was an employee of WB at the time and it was his responsibility to put his best foot forward.

For me PJ and team have such a deep love for this work that I can much easier forgive their mistakes. Had GDT directed and made a mess of the film/films I would not be so easy to forgive because I know he had no real love for it.

I feel it shows when a director does not love the source material. Christopher Nolan is a prime example. His achivment with his batman trilogy rests with his incredible talent as a film maker. He made three incredibly well made movies. But he also made three kinda crappy "batman" movies. He is and was not ever a comic book fan and it shows.

I will also say that I am generally happy with the LOTR trilogy. Could have another director done a better job. Sure. But there is just as much chance another director would have done worse.


Marionette
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 3:16pm

Post #75 of 216 (3772 views)
Shortcut
I second that [In reply to] Can't Post

I admire what Peter Jackson is doing, for sure, but in the other hand I was very much interested in watching Del Toro´s (Something different) vision as well.

Yeah, New Zealand and Jackson´s company has the hands over all Tolkien, but I still think it was good after all to have them back to make both trilogies the same.

Good to hear Jackson mentioning Del Toro, interested in seeing what he (Del Toro) did.Smile


"Dear friend good bye, no tears in my eyes. So sad it ends, as it began"
Queen



geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 25 2012, 3:20pm

Post #76 of 216 (3897 views)
Shortcut
I don't know HBII [In reply to] Can't Post

- what's this about Prince Nuada?
.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 3:36pm

Post #77 of 216 (3944 views)
Shortcut
He is the film's villain [In reply to] Can't Post


Played by Luke Goss.


geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 25 2012, 3:53pm

Post #78 of 216 (3892 views)
Shortcut
Ah, thanks for that - [In reply to] Can't Post

- I hadn't twigged that HBII is 'Hell Boy 2' - I haven't seen any of those movies.

It's intriguing that the villain is called 'Nuada' - now there's a name with a Tolkien connection - (though not exclusively of course). Back in '32, Wheeler published his report on an archaeological dig at Lydney Park in Gloucestershire. He asked JRR to write a piece on the name 'Nodens' which appeared in a couple of Roman inscriptions on the site. Tolkien opined that 'Nodens' is the same as Nuada argat-lam; Nuada of the Silver Hand, king of the Tuatha de Danaan, 'who had possession of Ireland before the Milesians'. Nuada lost a hand in battle with the firbolg, and the Tuatha had made him one of silver, 'with full movement'.

Sounds very Tolkienian to me.

Smile


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 4:22pm

Post #79 of 216 (3842 views)
Shortcut
That's not all [In reply to] Can't Post

The Hellboy films don't shy away from their comic-book roots, hence the saturated colours and over-the-top designs, but they're still firmly entrenched in their own literary heritage. Hellboy I draws mainly from the works of HP Lovecraft, while Hellboy II is based more in Celtic mythology.

For example, there's a trace of the original 'Silver Hand' meaning in the silver lance Sir Dennis mentioned above. If you saw the picture of King Balor that was posted earlier, you may have noticed the ring in the centre of his forehead – a reference to the third eye of the mythological figure of the same name. He also happens to have a literal silver hand, but it's so understated that I only just noticed it now – YouTube clip for anyone interested:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4liPmQEPEU


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 4:24pm

Post #80 of 216 (3900 views)
Shortcut
Jackson's vision [In reply to] Can't Post

I am thrilled to have three more films that feature Jackson's vision of Middle Earth. Those who are frustrated by PJ's "monopoly" on the Tolkien franchise needn't worry. I have no doubt that there will be future film versions of The Hobbit and LOTR down the road.

I would like to point out that while the vision of Middle Earth is Peter Jackson's, his vision was originally influenced by the work of Alan Lee and John Howe. So while they work for him and no doubt give him exactly what he wants, their previous work laid the foundation for the LOTR's designs. For example, I recall Peter saying in the "making of" videos that he asked Alan to give him the rest of Orthanc and John to give him the rest of Bag End.

Regarding GDT, I suspect that there were increasing concerns with his vision for The Hobbit than ran throughout the New Zealand production. Take a production incredibly loyal to PJ and bring in an 'outsider' who has a reputation for bringing his own unique vision to a project and you have a recipe for friction. I strongly suspect the failure for the production to get a "green light" had more to do with signals to the studios from the Jackson camp of their growing reservations about GDT than it did with MGM's problems. The delay became a convenient, face-saving way for a change of Director to be made.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 6:05pm

Post #81 of 216 (3854 views)
Shortcut
I wouldn't consider this a monopoly by PJ and Co [In reply to] Can't Post

GDT left, not kicked out, and it was a while until PJ announced that he was gonna take over. He didn't announced it the following day of Del Toro's departure. So to me, it wasn't a piece of cake decision for PJ to make. There were other directors' names mentioned as contenders until PJ finally said he would take over. So, i can't consider this "monopolized" by PJ. So much art has been made by other artists based on Tolkien's books as well.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 6:08pm

Post #82 of 216 (3869 views)
Shortcut
Coulda shoulda woulda [In reply to] Can't Post

this thread is just beating a dead horse. We've had so much of this comments and conversations before. I was one of the devastated fans when GDT left, but i moved on and this will not be GDT movie.


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 6:23pm

Post #83 of 216 (3775 views)
Shortcut
Exactly, GDT's departure was his own decision. [In reply to] Can't Post

Thus, the "monopoly" conspiracy theory can be placed in the trash can.



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 6:59pm

Post #84 of 216 (3755 views)
Shortcut
It's not a conspiracy theory so much as an observation [In reply to] Can't Post

Two years from now, we'll have a grant total of six live-action Tolkien adaptations, all written by Peter Jackson, produced by Peter Jackson and directed by Peter Jackson. He has acknowledged that the films are in no way definitive, being simply his own personal take on the source material. I have nothing to say regarding the studio politics that led to this situation, but artistically speaking, I would find it much more interesting if we were able to see Tolkien's world filtered through the sensibilities of more than one man. Middle-earth is bigger than that.


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 7:00pm

Post #85 of 216 (3808 views)
Shortcut
Some of GdT's 'Hobbit' designs surfaced in an earlier interview [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I would have enjoyed seeing the different take GDT had . . . especially as the Hobbit is written in such a different style.



Shortly after leaving The Hobbit, del Toro did an extensive interview for the New Yorker (I think). Some of his Hobbit designs appeared in the interview; he also described his concept for Smaug (specifically, his hatchet-like flight profile).

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house." - Aragorn


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 7:02pm

Post #86 of 216 (3796 views)
Shortcut
I think he had simply not read the Hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post

Clearly, by describing "the Hobbit" as sword and sorcery, he had simply not read the book, as it is nothing like that. It is about humility and pride, and other very deep and human themes. My sense is that when GDT visited the book again (or for the first time), and plumbed it for meaning, he became entranced and fully aware of its worth.

It's not quite fair to describe an evolution in opinion as an "about face." I didn't like certain things when I was younger, that I now love. Like peas.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 7:06pm

Post #87 of 216 (3765 views)
Shortcut
Those were all preliminary [In reply to] Can't Post

and just sketches. None of the completed designs were shown or discussed.

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



geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 25 2012, 7:08pm

Post #88 of 216 (3764 views)
Shortcut
I eat my peas with honey - [In reply to] Can't Post

- I've done it all my life.
It makes the peas taste funny, but -
It keeps them on the knife!

Tongue


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 7:10pm

Post #89 of 216 (3789 views)
Shortcut
GdT's preliminary designs [In reply to] Can't Post

Nonetheless, the designs (such as the Troll 'ball-armor") provided an interesting insight into del Toro's approach to the project.

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house." - Aragorn


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 7:12pm

Post #90 of 216 (3744 views)
Shortcut
I suggested this possible scenario a while back [In reply to] Can't Post

And for some reason or another, was lambasted for it...

Seems like a very reasonable possibility. GDT even hinted at such discomfort from the production team in the New Yorker interview, though his comment was very vague.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 7:14pm

Post #91 of 216 (3719 views)
Shortcut
Nooneever suggested a conspiracy [In reply to] Can't Post

The rapidity with which comments get twisted here is breathtaking. Someone should do a sociological study of this phenomenon.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 7:16pm

Post #92 of 216 (3723 views)
Shortcut
But how [In reply to] Can't Post

Were the troll balls much different than Uruk pods or spider-goblins in Moria?


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 7:20pm

Post #93 of 216 (3745 views)
Shortcut
They weren't that different, I suppose.... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Were the troll balls much different than Uruk pods or spider-goblins in Moria?



It's not like I was being particularly critical of the 'Troll-balls" (although I think I did post negatively about them when the original interview was being discussed). If I remember right, the general consensus was that those Trolls were probably intended to be part of the Necromancer's forces, not William, Bert or Tom.

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house." - Aragorn


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 7:28pm

Post #94 of 216 (3727 views)
Shortcut
Well... [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, all 6 movies are being made, produced and written by Peter Jackson. Correct. But it could have just been 3 - Guillermo del Toro chose not to stay as director, it was his decision, and his only - so he said. I just don't see how it's a monopoly. Peter Jackson jumped in and saved a sinking ship (sinking as in - no captain steering the ship. The project was director-less for many months during 2010) And for that, he deserves credit.



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.

(This post was edited by macfalk on Aug 25 2012, 7:28pm)


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 7:32pm

Post #95 of 216 (3701 views)
Shortcut
When it comes to design, the guy can be counted on to go deep. [In reply to] Can't Post

It is much, much more than simply having an eye for what looks "cool."

And I hope people understand that I am not suggesting that Sir Peter and his design team don't build symbolism into their designs... when this topic makes its appearance, for me, it is never a case of "if you're not with us you're against us." I was just looking forward to something that we will not get now. But based on the strength of LOTR, I am also looking forward to what we will get.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 7:36pm

Post #96 of 216 (3738 views)
Shortcut
You are assuming that "monopoly" [In reply to] Can't Post

Implies a "forced monopoly."

That's not what I said. I used the term with its simplest definition in mind - that of exclusivity. All I meant is that with Peter Jackson helming the live-action films of the Lord of the Rings, and the Hobbit, the only material studios hold rights to, Peter Jackson's vision has effectively been exclusive in the live-action filmic interpretation of Tolkien.

Other directors can be brought on board for a reboot, etc, and I hope that happens. But I would have liked to see a new vision sooner rather than later.

After all, I'm not getting any younger, and I still haven't seen the Middle Earth I know on screen! Smile


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 7:37pm

Post #97 of 216 (3688 views)
Shortcut
I am not assuming anything - I was responding to Flagg // [In reply to] Can't Post

 



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 7:42pm

Post #98 of 216 (3675 views)
Shortcut
But... [In reply to] Can't Post

isn't it a good thing though, in the end, that we have the same director for LOTR and The Hobbit? If not, there would arguably have been continuity errors. Not some small ones, but big continuity errors. For me at least, that would ruin the experience. I want to see a whole, complete Hobbit & LOTR film-series with the same people behind the camera. Just look at Harry Potter - 4 different directors for eight movies, and 4 different composers. And look what happened - while the films can hold their own as movies, they just don't work at all when viewed in order. They are just so vastly different from each other (which is not necessarily bad, but when sets, locations and even actors are changed each movie, frankly, its distracting beyond words).



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 7:49pm

Post #99 of 216 (3706 views)
Shortcut
good points [In reply to] Can't Post

although i have heard that PJ has said that he intends these new films to be viewed after LOTR's, and if the opening of the last trailer is any indication...with older Bilbo asking Frodo (established character viewers have seen) to listen to his adventures.


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 7:52pm

Post #100 of 216 (3698 views)
Shortcut
I don't care about continuity [In reply to] Can't Post

...between the films, so no, I don't see it as a good thing.

I wanted to see another director adapt the Hobbit book, not the same director adapt the book to fit his previous films.

But this is all very simple. If you absolutely adored PJ's LOTR, than you are likely to be happy about him directing again. If you thought they were general subpar films, then you might not be happy about him directing again.

Simple, really. Smile

However, I am optimistic that three films will allow Jackson to do a better job of creating a believable and immersive story.


(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Aug 25 2012, 7:53pm)


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 7:53pm

Post #101 of 216 (3848 views)
Shortcut
Just a niggle: that interview was done quite some time before he left [In reply to] Can't Post

in fact the design talk was all preliminary stuff -- sort of like G's homework lest he show up at Wellington empty handed -- not designs that were set in stone.

I think what happened is The New Yorker was planning an in-depth piece that was to appear around (what was thought to be back in 2008) the time of The Hobbit release... the structure and timing has a planned before and after feel, though when Guillermo left, there was no "after" to speak of. Yet the existing work that had been done on the article wasn't scraped but rather was released in albeit a different form than expected, when it was originally scheduled to.

Just to reiterate -- in case that was hard to follow -- the New Yorker/GDT interview was done around the time G accepted the job, but was released after he had left (a lapse of about 2 years time). We really have no idea what designs for The Hobbit Guillermo ultimately would have settled on.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 25 2012, 7:55pm)


Otaku-sempai
Immortal


Aug 25 2012, 8:07pm

Post #102 of 216 (3805 views)
Shortcut
Thanx - I was working from memory... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
in fact the design talk was all preliminary stuff -- sort of like G's homework lest he show up at Wellington empty handed -- not designs that were set in stone.



I wasn't even certain about where the interview appeared. At least I got that much right!

"Good and ill have not changed since yesteryear; nor are they one thing among Elves and Dwarves and another among Men. It is a man's part to discern them, as much in the Golden Wood as in his own house." - Aragorn


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 8:10pm

Post #103 of 216 (3875 views)
Shortcut
PJ said he did not read The Lord of the Rings [In reply to] Can't Post

in its entirety, at his first attempt. IIRC on the Extras he went so far as to say that he decided he wanted to make it into a movie only having read Fellowship and part way into Towers. Once he decided to try to make the films, he either got around to reading the books all the way through, or teamed up with someone who had (Boyens?)

On the other hand, G said he read The Hobbit when he was youngish (around 11?) but had not read Lord of the Rings until after he got the job of directing The Hobbit.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 8:12pm

Post #104 of 216 (3901 views)
Shortcut
As I said above, I am not commenting on the politics that led to six PJ-directed films [In reply to] Can't Post

My point is that it would be more creatively satisfying to see different directors take on the material, rather than the same director take on the material six times.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 8:33pm

Post #105 of 216 (3857 views)
Shortcut
PJ does often state [In reply to] Can't Post

That he forgets what is in the books vs. what is in the films. Its all a jumble to him, which is understandable.


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 25 2012, 8:35pm

Post #106 of 216 (3883 views)
Shortcut
Forum Policy [In reply to] Can't Post

But it is the policy by structure of these forums, and explicitly encouraged, that ideas drop off and be restarted as often as possible.


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Aug 25 2012, 8:36pm)


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 8:40pm

Post #107 of 216 (3860 views)
Shortcut
Totally disagree. [In reply to] Can't Post

Flagg wrote: My point is that it would be more creatively satisfying to see different directors take on the material...

One of the most endearing qualities of the books is the "realism" and "sense of history' that the story evokes. Six films with different directors might have been 'creatively satisfying' for you, but the contrasting visual styles, production decisions, and script choices of the particular director in charge would have weakened the very quality that made the story work so well for Tolkien--and for Jackson.


(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Aug 25 2012, 8:41pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 8:43pm

Post #108 of 216 (3819 views)
Shortcut
You've gone and done it now [In reply to] Can't Post

Despite all my pleas
I had to eat those peas
Now I'm in my forty-threes
And can't get enough of these!


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 8:51pm

Post #109 of 216 (3832 views)
Shortcut
You don't care about continuity? [In reply to] Can't Post

Hmm. That's maybe a reason why you adore Cuaron and I don't, and the opposite with PJ Smile

(another reason to why I don't like Cuaron as a director is that he totally messed up the continuity between the HP films by replacing already iconic sets and recasting actors - even admitted he had not even seen the first two films! That is exactly the kind of stuff I don't want - as I consider continuity between films in the same "world"very, very important - but, as you said, you don't care about continuity, so I can see why it's not a problem for you. I guess we have to agree to disagree, right?



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.

(This post was edited by macfalk on Aug 25 2012, 8:52pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 8:54pm

Post #110 of 216 (3853 views)
Shortcut
As Ralph Waldo Emerson stated [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines


I just don't see how, or why, consistency would be valued over artistry.


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 9:21pm

Post #111 of 216 (3918 views)
Shortcut
Let's have MORE 'artistry'!!!! [In reply to] Can't Post

Shelob'sAppetite wrote: just don't see how, or why, consistency would be valued over artistry.

Smile Why stop with different directors for these films? How cool would it have been if we had different actors portray the characters of Bilbo, Gandalf, and Thorin in the three films. Imagine how creatively satisfying it would be to have had the opportunity to appreciate the different qualities that these actors would bring to their iconic roles.

Since variety = "artistry," let's also have different musical scores...screenwriters...and set designers.


(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Aug 25 2012, 9:23pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 25 2012, 9:44pm

Post #112 of 216 (3786 views)
Shortcut
Well, there are obvious limits [In reply to] Can't Post

Your "slippery slope" example is utterly absurd (and a fallacy).

The Hobbit story is a self-contained one, as is the Lord of the Rings.

It would therefore be a bit silly to cast different actors, designers, etc, while telling one story.

But it is not so silly to cast different actors to play characters in the different stories that are the Hobbit and LOTR.


Quote
Since variety = "artistry," let's also have different musical scores...screenwriters...and set designers.


Um, yeah. That was partially the idea with GDT directing...

Secondly, I never said "variety=artistry." Stop putting words in my mouth. I said a fresh vision is preferable to consistency. Those are two very different things.


(This post was edited by Shelob'sAppetite on Aug 25 2012, 9:47pm)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 9:51pm

Post #113 of 216 (3803 views)
Shortcut
In regards to which work? [In reply to] Can't Post

A Neverending Story feel would certainly not have suited an adaptation of LOTR, though it might have worked very well for a certain type of adaptation of The Hobbit.

In Reply To
I reckon someone would have made an adaptation with the same feel as The Neverending Story. While I like the book and enjoy the film, I certainly wouldn't want it to have ended it up like that ...


"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."


Ruinwen
Rivendell


Aug 25 2012, 9:53pm

Post #114 of 216 (3785 views)
Shortcut
I understand that you're being sarcastic [In reply to] Can't Post

but actually, why not? The Hobbit takes place in a wealth of locations never seen in LOTR. Therefore, 'consistency with LOTR' is a moot point for everything except locations, characters and items seen LOTR, which are relatively few - the Shire, Rivendell, Gandalf, Gollum, Sting, the Mithril coat, the Ring etc. (Unless, of course, like PJ, you're deliberately shoehorning in as many LOTR - based things as possible.)

For my personal comfort, I would have enjoyed seeing the same sets for Hobbiton, Rivendell, etc, and the same actors playing Gandalf, Elrond and Gollum.
However, outside of that, GDT could have realised his own vision of ME without actually contradicting anything from the LOTR movies. I would have been quite happy with that, and interested to see his stylistic choices. I loved Pan's Labyrinth and Hellboy 2 (especially his elves!) and I think he could have brought something really interesting - yes, artistically - to the screen.

To me, the book will always be more important than the LOTR movies. I would rather that a film of The Hobbit was faithful to the book of The Hobbit than to the earlier LOTR films. And as the tone of Tolkien's TH is different to the tone of Tolkien's LOTR, I think that the film should follow suit. It is not a 'Prequel.' It is an original and beautiful work of its own, and I'd like a film that reflects that, rather than tries to force it into a mould it does not fit.

However, I'm also glad PJ is back in charge, because of the great affection I have for him and his methods, and of course we will never know how it would have worked out otherwise.

All we have to decide, is how to enjoy the film that is given to us.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 10:00pm

Post #115 of 216 (3864 views)
Shortcut
Well as long as we are casting caution to the wind [In reply to] Can't Post

I have my suspicions that Jackson decided he wanted to take over when The Lovely Bones didn't do the business he hoped it would.

Or maybe it was the 3D thing that pushed him to leave (actually this one is highly plausible given various comments made along the way).

Or maybe plans to use The Hobbit to market NZ tourism didn't sit right with him? (Personally I find it not very classy at all, Sir Ian Holm V/O notwithstanding.)

Or being even less charitable, and along the lines of the hint of discomfort you mention, perhaps G picked up on a xenophobic vibe around the place? A casual racism has been noted in NZ (just saw this today: Nice country, shame about the racism.)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 25 2012, 10:07pm)


Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 10:19pm

Post #116 of 216 (3826 views)
Shortcut
Wow. [In reply to] Can't Post

I didn't know there were such issues in NZ. That surprises me for some reason.

As for Guillermo's exit, it's a shame we're unlikely to ever hear the real story behind it. I presume any covering of the topic on future Hobbit Blu-rays/DVDs will likely paint the whole affair in the most peaceful light, if they mention it at all. Still, if it has to do with GDT not meshing with PJ's team - I wouldn't be that surprised. It's the reason I was hesitant of someone else directing from the start. It would be one thing if it was going to be a 100% GDT project, with his own crew and such. But to bring him in to work with PJ's team, with PJ lurking in the background, was never going to work. I breathed a huge sigh of relief when PJ decided to direct, in spite of my love for Guillermo.



"All men dream; but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds awake to find that it was vanity; But the dreamers of day are dangerous men. That they may act their dreams with open eyes to make it possible."
- T.E. Lawrence


(This post was edited by Aragorn the Elfstone on Aug 25 2012, 10:20pm)


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 10:21pm

Post #117 of 216 (3786 views)
Shortcut
yes [In reply to] Can't Post

Interesting article Sir ...but Guillermo is white, right? That racism, or disconfort with large percentages of foreigners, seems to be directed at non white people...

Look, wake me when its over..this racism problem is never going to end...particularly when significant immigration changes occur...that can create quite a resentment...


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 10:32pm

Post #118 of 216 (3811 views)
Shortcut
Yeah you know [In reply to] Can't Post

I feel a bit of stink having mentioned it at all... there are few countries, if any, that are immune from such criticisms.

And I agree with you to a certain extent. There was a part of me that felt it was going to be difficult for anyone (from inside or outside NZ) to mesh with the original crew that produced LOTR -- especially when Guillermo brought many of his own key people in with him.

Liken it to bringing in ringers for the World Series only after the home team won the right to be there on their own. (Holy crap, did I just use a sports analogy? the world must be coming to an end after all.)

ETA: just saw Lustano's post... yeah sorry to almost derail the thread with that one. Just a note though, in NZ Guillermo would have been considered an ethnic minority more so than a visible minority. Not that it matters a lick to anyone here I'm sure.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 25 2012, 10:38pm)


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 25 2012, 10:44pm

Post #119 of 216 (3753 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

Shelob'sAppetite wrote: I never said "variety=artistry."

No, you said:

Shelob'sAppetite wrote: I just don't see how, or why, consistency would be valued over artistry.

I never realized these two qualities were mutually exclusive. How were we supposed to take your comment?


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 25 2012, 10:46pm

Post #120 of 216 (3718 views)
Shortcut
Well said. // [In reply to] Can't Post

 

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Aug 25 2012, 10:48pm

Post #121 of 216 (3756 views)
Shortcut
Some NZers [In reply to] Can't Post

don't like the country's multi-culturalism; others embrace it. Like any country, we're a mix of opinions.

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 10:49pm

Post #122 of 216 (3767 views)
Shortcut
When did I say this? [In reply to] Can't Post

I just don't see how, or why, consistency would be valued over artistry.

I said that I care very much about consistency, because I feel it's needed for movies that are supposed to feel like a part of something great. I did not, however say this: "consistency would be valued over artistry"

I never said that I value constiency over artistry. What I said was that the artistic vision offered by Cuaron wasn't to my liking - that does not mean that it's the case for anything else.




The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Aug 25 2012, 10:56pm

Post #123 of 216 (3854 views)
Shortcut
i think artistry should be taken in context [In reply to] Can't Post

Tolkien meant both LOTR and the Hobbit to have their own feel. I think a director should realize what the tone of the source material is and respect the authors intentional difference in them. Consistancy should come after that if possible Smile


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 25 2012, 11:04pm

Post #124 of 216 (3692 views)
Shortcut
He did indeed [In reply to] Can't Post

He did also make a lot of efforts to connect The Hobbit with LOTR, as in re-writing chapters such as Riddles in the Dark. The Hobbit and LOTR are both set in Middle-earth. No, the tone shouldn't be the same, but it should not be totally different either. The places in LOTR we've seen should look more ancient... but not completely re-made just because The Hobbit has a slightly joyous feel (and even that changes after they get to Beorn's)



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 12:01am

Post #125 of 216 (3733 views)
Shortcut
guillermo [In reply to] Can't Post

SirDennis, no need to say sorry, i was interested in reading that article and the possibility that guillermo faced some xenophobic sentiments...i mean, it boggles me a bit... its not like the man came from Somalia...hes mexican...but these things are never rational...

No im sure it doenst matter to a single soul here...

But i think that a rifft between him and pj's crew could have risen....a rift or just uncomfortable disagreements ...


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 26 2012, 12:07am

Post #126 of 216 (3806 views)
Shortcut
nope [In reply to] Can't Post

sinister71 wrote: Tolkien meant both LOTR and the Hobbit to have their own feel.

If that were truly the case and not your imagination, there wouldn't have been continuous efforts by the author to bring The Hobbit more in line with his later work.


Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 12:19am

Post #127 of 216 (3824 views)
Shortcut
and Tolkien himself [In reply to] Can't Post

ABANDONED such a drastic rewrite claiming himself it took away the tone and charm of the Hobbit. the only added part of the rewwrite ever published in the Hobbit was Riddles in the dark.

hate to burst your bubble on that one. but its a well known fact. go ahead and look it up. almost every Tolkien scholar out there will tell you the same thing


elostirion74
Rohan

Aug 26 2012, 12:52am

Post #128 of 216 (3834 views)
Shortcut
what aspects of continuity are you particularly concerned about between The Hobbit and LoTR? [In reply to] Can't Post

I´m curious because there are so many differences between the two works. As regards the books tne great majority of the characters that feature in The Hobbit don´t make an appearance in LoTR and vice versa. The majority of the places and settings they travel through or visit are not the same. The nature of the respective quests of the two stories are very different - Bilbo goes to find a treasure, while Frodo must get rid of one. The tone of the Hobbit is quite different, with considerably larger doses of humour and comedy, even if you remove the "talking down to children" elements and the more seemingly silly elements (tra-la-lally elves for instance).

I understand the need for some continuity to be observed, for instance the general look of Hobbiton and the landscape of the Shire as seen in LoTR, to have the same actor play Gandalf and Elrond and Gollum, but apart from that there are from my perspective not many continuity aspects to worry about in the first place.


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 26 2012, 1:49am

Post #129 of 216 (3852 views)
Shortcut
the facts [In reply to] Can't Post

Sinister71 wrote: hate to burst your bubble on that one. but its a well known fact. go ahead and look it up. almost every Tolkien scholar out there will tell you the same thing

I am quite familiar with the facts. Are you? This notion that Tolkien was against rewriting his children's tale to reflect his tone in the LOTR ignores mountains of evidence to the contrary. Tolkien revised The Hobbit a number of times and attempted, late in life, to even retell the entire story in the tone of the LOTR. He abandoned the project only after a person he trusted with reviewing his work discouraged him by saying the effort was taking away the charm of his original story. Being talked out of a project is very different than being adamantly opposed to it from the start.


(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Aug 26 2012, 1:51am)


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 1:56am

Post #130 of 216 (3837 views)
Shortcut
Del toro's exit was clearly stated by Del toro himself [In reply to] Can't Post

GDT could no longer stand the studio delaying the project because of financial reasons, it was delay after delay...Finally GDT moved on than it almost seemed intentional by the (powers that be) because just weeks after GDT left the hobbit PJ stepped up to direct.


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 2:21am

Post #131 of 216 (3813 views)
Shortcut
This makes a great deal of sense [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
although i have heard that PJ has said that he intends these new films to be viewed after LOTR's


I don't remember him having said that, but yeah, watching the two films out of order -- as sets, chronologically I mean -- would make the most sense I should think. Don't ask me why... call it a trick of the mind to overcome the change in technology between the two titles.

Story telling is like that sometimes. Think of the story of Jules and Vincent in Pulp Fiction. You may recall that the movie ends with the pair exiting a restaurant, very much alive in all their baddie glory. But we know, because we were shown what happens to Vincent at Butch's house earlier in the film, that the total story of Vincent ends on not so high a note.

But yeah as you imply, The Hobbit is being presented as told by Bilbo sometime during the time frame of LOTR. And now that I think about it, this might be a way, a device if you will, of accounting for the difference in tone between PJ's movie and Tolkien's book.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 26 2012, 2:22am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 2:40am

Post #132 of 216 (3823 views)
Shortcut
At least in the United States [In reply to] Can't Post

Guillermo would be described as "Latin American," which is separated from "White" or "Caucasian." A "minority ethnic group," in official terms.

Make of that what you will, but I think Dennis was referring to the fact that his first language is not English.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 2:42am

Post #133 of 216 (3857 views)
Shortcut
Well that is interesting. . . especially on an island chain where the natives are dark indeed [In reply to] Can't Post

Aboriginally so. I wonder if they are as unwelcoming to the lighter hued immigrants to their native land.

That said, the issues over diversity in the films rises to mind again, with the old curiosities concerning varying degrees of attention to matters of gender vs. ethnicity. No need to get into it further here, as it would only spirial into a vicious cycle of shifting umbrage and oblivious defense, but it is an interesting observation.

In Reply To
I have my suspicions that Jackson decided he wanted to take over when The Lovely Bones didn't do the business he hoped it would.

Or maybe it was the 3D thing that pushed him to leave (actually this one is highly plausible given various comments made along the way).

Or maybe plans to use The Hobbit to market NZ tourism didn't sit right with him? (Personally I find it not very classy at all, Sir Ian Holm V/O notwithstanding.)

Or being even less charitable, and along the lines of the hint of discomfort you mention, perhaps G picked up on a xenophobic vibe around the place? A casual racism has been noted in NZ (just saw this today: Nice country, shame about the racism.)


"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."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Aug 26 2012, 2:49am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 2:44am

Post #134 of 216 (3837 views)
Shortcut
Exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

Though in that case, one of those opinions is simply better than the other, because one of those opinions is racist! Smile


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 2:48am

Post #135 of 216 (3809 views)
Shortcut
Sirdennisc [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes he probably was. Thanks for the clarification.


GoodGuyA
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 3:03am

Post #136 of 216 (3832 views)
Shortcut
Do we have to view everything from the original perspective? [In reply to] Can't Post

The Hobbit changed in and of itself when LotR was released. The entire idea of it changed. The overall view of Tolkien changed, and his life became absorbed in the concept of Middle-Earth. After his death, the story continued to change. Now here we are, in 2012, and even without PJ's help the entire literary persona of Tolkien has completely altered itself. Why must we view this as it was? Why must we take these stories as entirely separated? Why must we think that there is no substitute for when it was written? Even Beowulf changed, my friends.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 3:13am

Post #137 of 216 (3932 views)
Shortcut
Just to halt this here [In reply to] Can't Post

really the four theories I posited were just a bit of conjuring, in order to show the futility of second guessing the official story. I've as much as apologized already and would like to leave it at that... in fact it may surprise many to learn that even here in culturally diverse Canada, a casual (and sometimes overt) racism is in evidence in various pockets across the land. (Though Guillermo has been getting along quite well in one of our fair capitals, Toronto, for some time now.)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Aug 26 2012, 3:16am

Post #138 of 216 (3859 views)
Shortcut
My point [In reply to] Can't Post

was that New Zealand as a whole shouldn't be judged by the comments of some of its population. I didn't touch on right or wrong because that point is obvious.

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 3:17am

Post #139 of 216 (3853 views)
Shortcut
Ah, dear Sibling to The North [In reply to] Can't Post

I so loved watching Oh Canada animations on PBS and cartoon network. True story.

"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."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 3:28am

Post #140 of 216 (3796 views)
Shortcut
Agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

Numerous nations, even those that are deemed very liberal (Scandinavian nations, Canada, New Zealand, etc.), have various forms of both subtle and overt racism. I find it odd, and a little alarming, that anyone would not be prepared for such a thing. I wonder if the author of that article has been living in some dreamland utopia until now!


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 3:32am

Post #141 of 216 (3845 views)
Shortcut
Yes, [In reply to] Can't Post

and I in no way intended for the entire country to be judged on the opinion of one of its bloggers, and a couple blogging visitors.

Again, sorry about that Ataahua.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 8:30am

Post #142 of 216 (3818 views)
Shortcut
Too far, SirDennis... [In reply to] Can't Post

... much, much too far. Racism exists in all countries and there is absolutely no suggestion, at all, that it had anything to do with Guillermo's decision to leave The Hobbit. But now you've raised it, just as a suggestion, one poster after another is taking up the idea. You see where conspiracy theories and cynicism take you? The damage they can do?

We do know why Guillermo left. The green light was delayed and delayed, his stay in New Zealand ran on long beyond anything he had planned or anticipated, he had other projects in hand, a family to think of, and when he reached the point of realising that if the green light did come he would then be committed to another two years in New Zealand making the film he decided to leave. The Hobbit was never 'his' project in the sense of being something he had always loved and wanted to do - the dream project for him is 'Mountains of Madness'. He accepted The Hobbit, threw himself into it for a limited time and would have made an excellent job of it if things had gone as planned. But they didn't. The limit passed and he decided it was time to move on. He said it, Peter Jackson confirmed it, it makes perfect sense, why on earth do you - and so many other people here, refuse to believe it? Why do there have to be dark secrets 'they' are hiding from us? Why is it so enticing to believe that there was a falling-out, that someone was nasty to someone, that poor Guillermo was tricked by devious doings at Wellington? There is no evidence for it, none at all.

Sometimes I hate the internet, I really do.

ETA - sorry, SirD - I've just seen that you've drawn back from that one yourself. But I'm leaving this post up anyway because it seems a point worth making and re-making


(This post was edited by dormouse on Aug 26 2012, 8:34am)


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 26 2012, 9:02am

Post #143 of 216 (3760 views)
Shortcut
Please... [In reply to] Can't Post

Aboriginally so. I wonder if they are as unwelcoming to the lighter hued immigrants to their native land.

That said, the issues over diversity in the films rises to mind again, with the old curiosities concerning varying degrees of attention to matters of gender vs. ethnicity. No need to get into it further here, as it would only spirial into a vicious cycle of shifting umbrage and oblivious defense, but it is an interesting observation.

This type of discussions are just meant to go out of hand... let's not go that route, please Unsure




The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 26 2012, 9:02am

Post #144 of 216 (3750 views)
Shortcut
Like Sweden? // [In reply to] Can't Post

 



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 26 2012, 9:03am

Post #145 of 216 (3795 views)
Shortcut
Well said, dormouse. [In reply to] Can't Post

One conspiracy theory too many about GDT's departure in this thread, if you ask me...



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 26 2012, 9:39am

Post #146 of 216 (3793 views)
Shortcut
The "naffness" of it [In reply to] Can't Post

Rubbish sets, cheesy acting, poor CGI.

I still love it though!


lyndomiel
Rivendell

Aug 26 2012, 1:09pm

Post #147 of 216 (3788 views)
Shortcut
Maori, actually [In reply to] Can't Post

of Polynesian origin. Aborigines are indigenous to Australia.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 1:31pm

Post #148 of 216 (3748 views)
Shortcut
No need to draw such extreme implications from my statement [In reply to] Can't Post

Of course switching directors for each instalment of the Lord of the Rings trilogy would have been daft – it's a singular story in three volumes, and requires a steady hand to be coherent. But The Hobbit is a distinct and self-contained tale with its own themes, a very different tone and (for the most part) a different setting. It would have been the perfect opportunity to show us another aspect of Middle-earth – it'll be a pity if every live-action adaptation of Tolkien's vast universe we get to see has been filtered through the narrow confines of a single director's interpretation and blessed/cursed by the same strengths and weaknesses.

I don't think that Peter Jackson is all that great at capturing the 'realism' and 'sense of history' of the books. For example, the CGI tracking shots that swoop around the landscape at rapid speeds play havoc with the audience's grounding in reality, while the heroes' seeming invulnerability in the heat of battle prevents any real tension from accruing. I think the Game of Thrones directors do a much better job in this respect.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 2:05pm

Post #149 of 216 (3750 views)
Shortcut
"Casting caution to the wind" is like that [In reply to] Can't Post

If you are able to follow the line of discussion, my four theories post (with the last being the wildest) was a reaction to BB's post:


Quote
Regarding GDT, I suspect that there were increasing concerns with his vision for The Hobbit than ran throughout the New Zealand production. Take a production incredibly loyal to PJ and bring in an 'outsider' who has a reputation for bringing his own unique vision to a project and you have a recipe for friction. I strongly suspect the failure for the production to get a "green light" had more to do with signals to the studios from the Jackson camp of their growing reservations about GDT than it did with MGM's problems. The delay became a convenient, face-saving way for a change of Director to be made.


I've seen the above theory one too many times, baseless and unkind though it is. So I pushed the absurdity of such speculation a bit further. The post title "as long as we're throwing caution to the wind" was meant to indicate that the post was not careful nor even rational, and at that, deliberately so. I guess I need to be more explicit when my intentions run devious.

On the other hand, I should know better than to repay evil with evil...

It is fascinating however how certain ideas can really take hold, or are easier to run with than others. It's like your post to Geordie about how when film makers consult experts, often they are only looking for broad strokes. Complexity can get in the way of the story, but sometimes it's the only way to understand a story...

Anyway, the tendency to gravitate to ideas that are portable, that have built in wheels, that are easy to grasp or understand (but are they truly understood?) is there in all media. The Internet is no different, but at least we can take the time to try to clarify our positions, if people are willing to read a little further... I appreciate you doing so.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 26 2012, 2:11pm)


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 26 2012, 2:59pm

Post #150 of 216 (3713 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

SirDennisC wrote: If you are able to follow the line of discussion, my four theories post (with the last being the wildest) was a reaction to BB's post:


Quote
Regarding GDT, I suspect that there were increasing concerns with his vision for The Hobbit than ran throughout the New Zealand production. Take a production incredibly loyal to PJ and bring in an 'outsider' who has a reputation for bringing his own unique vision to a project and you have a recipe for friction. I strongly suspect the failure for the production to get a "green light" had more to do with signals to the studios from the Jackson camp of their growing reservations about GDT than it did with MGM's problems. The delay became a convenient, face-saving way for a change of Director to be made.

I've seen the above theory one too many times, baseless and unkind though it is. So I pushed the absurdity of such speculation a bit further.


Baseless and unkind? Absurd? Repay evil with evil? Wow, you are really on a roll.



grammaboodawg
Immortal


Aug 26 2012, 6:19pm

Post #151 of 216 (3947 views)
Shortcut
Just as Peter turned GDT loose [In reply to] Can't Post

to make these films his own, it makes perfect sense that he'd follow the same logic for himself... for which I'm deeply grateful. When Peter chose GdT to spearhead The Hobbit, I embraced Jackson's choice and judgement... but I will honestly say I'm so delighted that Peter's here and making them his own.


sample

I really need these new films to take me back to, and not re-introduce me to, that magical world.




TORn's Observations Lists
Unused Scenes



Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 6:23pm

Post #152 of 216 (3898 views)
Shortcut
bottom line is [In reply to] Can't Post

he still abandoned it. I knew why he did and he must have agreed with this person since he did abandon a total rewrite.


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 6:58pm

Post #153 of 216 (3917 views)
Shortcut
I am sad that he did abandon it [In reply to] Can't Post

And I am sad that said "friend" discouraged Tolkien. With any mythology you can have different interpretations. And I would have loved to read a Lotr style version of the hobbit. Not as a replacement but as a story that can coexist.

This is sometimes why I don't understand how people can get so angry with Pj version. It's his retelling of a mythology. It's the same reason I don't understand Christopher Tolkiens hatred. If Tolkien was truly seeking a mythology for the English to call their own and if he achieved this goal then he aspired to something much greater then being just the author of a classic set of novels. And in some ways the success and love for these stories by its reader and followers has transcended Tolkiens ownership. This mythology belongs to everyone. And anyone that wants to retell it no matter how accurate has the freedom.
Just my two cents.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 7:56pm

Post #154 of 216 (3892 views)
Shortcut
People are free to retell it [In reply to] Can't Post

And other people, like CT, are free to criticize the nature of the retelling!

I just cannot understand why people believe criticism of the films, from either CT or anyone else, somehow restricts the freedom of those doing the adaptation, whether it is PJ, or someone else in the future.


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 8:00pm

Post #155 of 216 (3874 views)
Shortcut
It's not the... [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't like what he did attitude. It's the "how dare you" attitude that I think is unfair. :)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 8:04pm

Post #156 of 216 (3877 views)
Shortcut
He never displayed that attitude [In reply to] Can't Post

In one of his only public comments on the film, he simply stated that the story was turned into an action film for young adults. Doesn't sound like "how dare you!" to me.


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 8:07pm

Post #157 of 216 (3862 views)
Shortcut
Ok [In reply to] Can't Post

There are many Tolkien fans on this site as well as other that very much exhibit this kind attitude.


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 26 2012, 8:19pm

Post #158 of 216 (3877 views)
Shortcut
Clarification [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
...Christopher Tolkiens hatred


Keep in mind a couple of things. First it's the Estate. Though Christopher would naturally have a heavy influence, there's a difference when more than one person and attorneys are involved with other complex interests within the Estate, such as charities, trusts, funds and so forth. Second, and most important, I think it's likely that you are using the word "hate" from the title of the other thread saying "Tolkien Estate HATES these movies?" Please don't attribute our words to Christopher himself because it lessens the credibility of our point of view. If you are going to attribute such a strong word to Christopher, you should feel compelled to source the quote.

That said, I too wish the Estate would relax and allow productions of such things as the Silmarillion and more. I don't have a very good attitude toward the Estate either simply because of that. But I would try to not misrepresent them.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 8:28pm

Post #159 of 216 (3841 views)
Shortcut
Oh, sure [In reply to] Can't Post

But we should be very wary not to conflate self-styled "guardians of Tolkien" with Christopher Tolkien himself. He, for one, would not approve!

Just for the record, my own attitude is simply; I don't quite like PJ's interpretation, in terms of its merit as a film.

The "how dare they" attitude is not one I subscribe to, though of course, people have every right to feel that way.


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 8:29pm

Post #160 of 216 (3852 views)
Shortcut
I don't [In reply to] Can't Post

Claim to attribute anything! My opinion of Christopher is my own thank you very much.


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 26 2012, 8:39pm

Post #161 of 216 (3864 views)
Shortcut
Attribution [In reply to] Can't Post

"Christopher Tolkiens hatred" does not attribute to Christopher that he has said he "hates" PJ's versions?

And if you may have your own opinion of him, he may not of PJ's versions without complaint from any of us?

Well, okay then.


Owain
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 8:41pm

Post #162 of 216 (3855 views)
Shortcut
Agreed.// [In reply to] Can't Post

 

Middle Earth is New Zealand!

"Question everything, embrace the bad, and hold on to the good."


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 8:44pm

Post #163 of 216 (3808 views)
Shortcut
although [In reply to] Can't Post

CT has made lots of $$$$$ due to PJ's LOTR's films and will no doubt make lots more $$$$ with these new Hobbit films...


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 8:44pm

Post #164 of 216 (3798 views)
Shortcut
Is this directed at me? [In reply to] Can't Post

Because I don't follow what you are saying?


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 26 2012, 8:47pm

Post #165 of 216 (3816 views)
Shortcut
You don't have to be a trained detective... [In reply to] Can't Post

...to figure out what Christopher Tolkien thinks of Peter Jackson's LOTR films.


droidsocket
Lorien

Aug 26 2012, 8:49pm

Post #166 of 216 (3833 views)
Shortcut
I agree [In reply to] Can't Post

And I am no detective.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 26 2012, 9:36pm

Post #167 of 216 (3805 views)
Shortcut
How long have those people been there? [In reply to] Can't Post

That really is the relevant question, if things like "immigration" and indigenous population are to be discussed. They are the indigenous population, and are rather darker than the wave of immigrants who began poplating their land after the 17th century.

That said, clarification noted. I won't discuss the matter any further, as it is too delicate a topic for the thread, and veers off from the main topic besides.

In Reply To
of Polynesian origin. Aborigines are indigenous to Australia.


"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."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Aug 26 2012, 9:42pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 9:56pm

Post #168 of 216 (3785 views)
Shortcut
Right [In reply to] Can't Post

If you look at the evidence, he says that the films turned the story into an action movie for young adults. He doesn't like that, I suspect.

But that is different than 'hate' and 'how dare you, PJ!'


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 10:00pm

Post #169 of 216 (3750 views)
Shortcut
Right [In reply to] Can't Post

And PJ has made a whole lot of money because of Tolkien's books!

What's your point? CT is not primarily concerned about money. He is primarily concerned with his father's legacy, and he seems to feel that PJ's films do not do that legacy justice.

Is it okay for him to hold that opinion?


lyndomiel
Rivendell

Aug 26 2012, 10:04pm

Post #170 of 216 (3785 views)
Shortcut
Just FYI - Googled it [In reply to] Can't Post

1280 - archaelogical evidence seems to indicate that they were the first peoples to populate New Zealand and were alone until the European settlers arrived in the 1700s.


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 26 2012, 10:13pm

Post #171 of 216 (3785 views)
Shortcut
absolutely [In reply to] Can't Post

 


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 26 2012, 10:16pm

Post #172 of 216 (3788 views)
Shortcut
Great! [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 27 2012, 1:38am

Post #173 of 216 (3831 views)
Shortcut
I often wonder where people find unidirectional magnifying glasses [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems it's fine to invent scenarios that reflect poorly on GDT, but drop oneor two that feature Sir Peter in a bad light and all hell breaks loose.

Wink

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 27 2012, 1:39am)


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 2:38am

Post #174 of 216 (3842 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

SirDennisC wrote: It seems it's fine to invent scenarios that reflect poorly on GDT, but drop one or two that feature Sir Peter in a bad light and all hell breaks loose.

First off, take responsibility for your own posts without hiding behind others. Simply apologize for your xenophobic New Zealand comment and be done with it. Saying it was an 'overreaction' to my post is downright silly.

Unlike your own speculative post, mine was a simple observation. I'd like to know know what was so 'evil' 'absurd' and 'unkind', and 'baseless' about THIS post of mine.
Quote
Regarding GDT, I suspect that there were increasing concerns with his vision for The Hobbit than ran throughout the New Zealand production. Take a production incredibly loyal to PJ and bring in an 'outsider' who has a reputation for bringing his own unique vision to a project and you have a recipe for friction. I strongly suspect the failure for the production to get a "green light" had more to do with signals to the studios from the Jackson camp of their growing reservations about GDT than it did with MGM's problems. The delay became a convenient, face-saving way for a change of Director to be made.

I said nothing that 'reflected poorly' on GDT. Any director of GDT's pedigree and status is going to have a strong vision. How in the world did that observation reflect poorly on GDT?

I noted that GDT was working with a large, New Zealand-based production team that was loyal to Peter Jackson.
If what I said reflected poorly on anybody, it was on Jackson and his production team.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 4:51am

Post #175 of 216 (3748 views)
Shortcut
Not helping in making a point here [In reply to] Can't Post

but maybe it's because CT should show a little bit of gratitude instead of just complaining of how the movies don't do a legacy justice. It's his opinion and yes, he's entitled to it, just like anyone. There are people who love the movies, and others who don't.

And what i mean by gratitude i don't mean the money, but there are so many people who actually got to know Tolkien with these movies. More and more people started reading Tolkien after the trilogy came out. The movies may not do justice to JRR Tolkien's legacy, but it surely got more and more people to read the books.

Should he send a thank you note to PJ? No. But he shouldn't be so negative about the fact that these movies came out in the first place.


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 27 2012, 4:57am

Post #176 of 216 (3830 views)
Shortcut
its not a circle of negativity as you have articulated [In reply to] Can't Post

i understand PJ has made money off LOTR's/TH films, as he should, but that's not the point. Peter hasn't come out and said negative remarks about CT, however, CT has come out and made negative remarks on PJ's LOTR's films even though PJ no doubt has increased the number of readers thus increased the number of books sold. Although, like i've told you, CT has every right to say what he wants about his father's work in the hands of another artist.


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...


rings7
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 5:12am

Post #177 of 216 (3795 views)
Shortcut
I never said the point was PJ making money out of the movies. [In reply to] Can't Post

And i thought i made clear in my post that CT has the right to express his opinion, so i don't understand your comment. My only point was that he shouldn't be so negative. I repeat, he has the right to not like the movies and express it publicly. I'm just saying he shouldn't focus only on that. Yes, i repeat again, he can say he doesn't like them, but i think it would also be good for him to show a tiny itty bitty appreciation to the fact that his father's and his own books are now more popular because of these movies. That's all.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 6:24am

Post #178 of 216 (3792 views)
Shortcut
He has never been negative about the films "coming out" [In reply to] Can't Post

He has only been negative about the quality of the films. There is a huge difference between being against films of LOTR in general, and being critical of the films that Peter Jackson made.

He is likely not expressing gratitude because he feels the films misrepresent his father's vision, and is worried about the legacy of his father's work.

There is absolutely no reason for him to be grateful if he feels this way.

And this whole "the films got more people to buy and read the books" is a little overcooked. The Lord of the Rings is the secod-highest grossing book of all time. It didn't exactly need PJ's "help" in order to reach the masses...


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 6:29am

Post #179 of 216 (3798 views)
Shortcut
There's no reason for PJ to make negative comments about CT [In reply to] Can't Post

Because CT never took a work of PJ's, or PJ's family, and adapted it into something!

Plus, CT has never, ever said anything negative about Peter Jackson. He simply criticized the films, which he felt were mere action adventures for young adults.

And that is not very harsh criticism, as PJ stated from the start that an action adventure of that kind was all he intended to make!

CT has been remarkably reserved about all this. But there has grown a mythology about his hatred for the films and PJ, and his lack of "gratitude," just because PJ remarked at ComicCon that the Tolkien Estate didn't like the films very much!


MouthofSauron
Tol Eressea


Aug 27 2012, 7:06am

Post #180 of 216 (3813 views)
Shortcut
no, i understand [In reply to] Can't Post

i'm just saying PJ has never said anything negative about CT is all, and like i've said yes, CT has every right to his criticism but come on, if CT is making negative remarks on PJ's LOTR's films lets at least be honest and acknowledge that is a criticism of PJ. For example, if i make a product, you buy it and post a criticism, whose at fault? the product or the manufacturer?


From the bottom of the Long-Lake a dragon shall be possessed...green lights glowing out of the deep waters shall be seen where the dragon fell...reanimated shall be Smaug that was killed...and the Dark Lord will fly over Middle-Earth unopposed...raining fire down upon his enemies...

(This post was edited by MouthofSauron on Aug 27 2012, 7:07am)


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 27 2012, 8:03am

Post #181 of 216 (3828 views)
Shortcut
Well... [In reply to] Can't Post

For me at least, as you know, I've been criticizing CT. Not because he's not "grateful" of all the money he got off PJ's project. Not that. But because of his ignorant comments about the movies. Movies that I doubt he even has seen. If he really does think that the movies are only people for ages 15-25, I advice him to first get a reality check and then take a look at this message board. There majority of the people here at this board are older than 25 years old. Granted, not everyone who's here like the movies, but the majority does. I feel insulted by CT's sly remarks. Insulted and minimized.


I would like to add that I fully respect Christopher Tolkien's stance on protecting his fathers work. I really do. It's his comments about the films that bothers me (as far as I've heard, he has not even seen the movies)



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.

(This post was edited by macfalk on Aug 27 2012, 8:08am)


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 27 2012, 8:11am

Post #182 of 216 (3813 views)
Shortcut
Poor Sample [In reply to] Can't Post

This site and forum contain a beyond-vast minority of those who have seen the movies. It is self-selecting and cannot possibly be counted as demographically representative.


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Aug 27 2012, 8:14am)


Noria
Gondor

Aug 27 2012, 1:23pm

Post #183 of 216 (3795 views)
Shortcut
Conspiracy theories [In reply to] Can't Post

I was very disappointed when Peter Jackson said he wouldn’t be directing The Hobbit, glad when Guillermo del Toro was hired, sorry when he left and overjoyed when PJ took the reins again.

I get that people who are huge GdT fans and/or dislike Pj’s LotR were very disappointed when GdT left the production and I’m sorry. Having seen a number of GdT’s movies, I’ve come to the conclusion that his artistic sense is too fairy-tale like and grotesque for The Hobbit that I want to see. The GdT movies that I’ve seen were great and his artistic vision is wonderful, but not for TH, in my opinion. Many of you feel differently and this is truly a matter of personal taste.

But the point I wanted to make is this: maybe Dormouse is right and we got the whole story about GdT leaving the production, or maybe there were other factors such as conflicting artistic visions, 3D, workplace hostility etc. There appears to be no actual evidence to support a conspiracy theory but it doesn’t matter anyway. The parties involved in TH made a statement that allowed everyone to come out of the situation with their dignity and reputations intact, in what appears to have been an amicable parting of the ways. It was well done. Anything else is truly none of our business and the speculation is really just gossip. We don't have any right to know everything about the film makers' business relationships and decisons, any more than we do about their personal lives.


elostirion74
Rohan

Aug 27 2012, 1:25pm

Post #184 of 216 (3788 views)
Shortcut
As far as I can see there still seems to be quite a bit of Del Toro left [In reply to] Can't Post

This excerpt focuses mainly on the designs, which I expected would be changed after Del Toro left the production and the direction passed over to PJ. After all, how could it be otherwise? But Del Toro still co-wrote the script, I believe, so I take it that parts of his vision and ideas for the content of the films are still left. I haven't got the impression, either, that the intended colour palette of the films have changed with the change back to PJ either, which means that the colour palette will be fresher and brighter than it was for LoTR.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 2:50pm

Post #185 of 216 (3768 views)
Shortcut
There is a difference between a conspiracy theory [In reply to] Can't Post

And a suggestion that perhaps events were a bit more complex than publicly announced (which is almost always the case with any large enterprise, whether it be artistic, financial or governmental).

I think it is safe to say, however, that we really do not (and cannot) know the full story of what happened re: GDT.

My suspicion is that GDT just didn't have the time to wait around and see if there would be a green light or not. It was too risky, in terms of his career, to wait.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 3:34pm

Post #186 of 216 (3744 views)
Shortcut
I know he's only been negative about the quality of the films [In reply to] Can't Post

I won't argue that. But i still think the films contributed to more people reading and getting into Tolkien. Even now, people i know who never read Tolkien, are starting to read the Hobbit because it's coming out. And i don't think the ones i know are the only ones in the planet. I don't know why you guys are so negative towards PJ. I know you'll say you're not, but you are. Nothing personal i know. But there are people who didn't even know Tolkien existed till these films came out. I know you're not happy with the films but give him a little freaking credit to what he's done to Tolkien. Don't tell me he hasn't made an impact because he has. Did Tolkien need it? Maybe not, but the impact is there whether you like the films or not, and whether he needed it or not.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 3:48pm

Post #187 of 216 (3721 views)
Shortcut
I think PJ's films [In reply to] Can't Post

Have primarily had a negative impact on the perception of the books. Non-Tolkien readers tend to conflate book and film, whether we like it or not, and in my experience, this has led to a perception that the books are of lesser quality than they actually are.

Yes, some more people have read them since. But probably a greater number of people saw the films, won't bother to read the books, and will primarily think of PJ's films when thinking and talking about the Lord of the Rings, and Tolkien.

That is the legacy problem that I am sure Christopher has. This new fan base, driven by derivative films, who get further and further away from the spirit and intent of the original.

I like Peter Jackson a lot, but I am certainly not grateful for him making these films. I wish he had let someone with a better sense of both film and Tolkien take them on.

If I liked the films, I would feel differently, of course. But I don't, so there we are!


rings7
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 4:13pm

Post #188 of 216 (3733 views)
Shortcut
He tried and he walked out. [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't know if he tried offering this to someone else after GDT walked out. We don't know that, we don't know what happened in between, we can only speculate. I'm fairly happy with the trilogy and i hope that doens't make me a non Tolkien fan. You can be both Tolkien and PJ fan AND like the movies along with the books. To me it's not a tragedy. I majored in English ages ago and my favorite discussions were always comparing books to movies. I'm not that 100% happy with what i see in the Hobbit, but if i liked the trilogy, i'm sure i won't have that much of a problem with the Hobbit. I hope.

Sorry wanted to add one more thing. To say it's a negative impact is a matter of personal opinion. To me it's not that negative. I like both movies and books. Neither made me like less the other. I don't know if that made sense.


In Reply To

I like Peter Jackson a lot, but I am certainly not grateful for him making these films. I wish he had let someone with a better sense of both film and Tolkien take them on.



(This post was edited by rings7 on Aug 27 2012, 4:21pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 5:15pm

Post #189 of 216 (3661 views)
Shortcut
Nearly everything I say here [In reply to] Can't Post

Is a matter of personal opinion!

You can have yours, and I can have mine, and it's all good. Smile


geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 27 2012, 5:25pm

Post #190 of 216 (3720 views)
Shortcut
I know I keep saying this - [In reply to] Can't Post

- but I agree. This is exactly how I feel.
.


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 27 2012, 5:47pm

Post #191 of 216 (3683 views)
Shortcut
It's Not B&W [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I don't know why you guys are so negative towards PJ.


Someone (please speak up if it was you - good post) recently lamented the "linear," or black and white, thinking that goes on these days where there is no degree of freedom on thought. What it means is that if we complain about one aspect of something, we must hate all aspects of it. Such unhealthy generalizations and false assumptions are just not true or valid thought. We can despise the corporate behavior of such things as The Green Tint, or what was done to selected aspects of the screenplay as an adaptation of The Lord of the Rings without despising the other 99.999% of the person involved. In fact, I think you would find almost everyone on this forum actually does like Peter Jackson as an atypically sincere Hollywood personality who stays true to himself.


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Aug 27 2012, 5:50pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 6:25pm

Post #192 of 216 (3657 views)
Shortcut
Exactly [In reply to] Can't Post

I find Peter Jackson himself to be a breath of fresh air.

But if you listened to some other people's opinions about my opinion, you would think I wanted him sent to the Tower!


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 27 2012, 6:40pm

Post #193 of 216 (3746 views)
Shortcut
Points for being forthright [In reply to] Can't Post

but points deducted for missing the point. Wink

I have apologized a few times already. Further to that, when I said "I should know better than to return evil for evil" it was the same as saying "BB's comments do not excuse my own behaviour." Incidentally "do not repay evil for evil" is a figure of speech (google it) which is essentially the same as saying "turn the other cheek." In other words, sorry if the word "evil" threw you a bit.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that MGM and WB were stalling because they thought GDT wasn't a good fit for The Hobbit. Therefore as theories go, it is baseless. Given that WB gave him around $200 million to make his current movie, and have not interfered with him in the least, the idea that they may have thought he would ruin The Hobbit and would only green-light the thing if he left is absurd.

Finally, If it was in fact a simple observation, please tell me about (or point to) the things that you observed that lead to making your statement. Since I know there are none, your "observation" is also unkind.

Unimpressed

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 6:54pm

Post #194 of 216 (3730 views)
Shortcut
Antler headgear - perhaps transferred to Thranduil? [In reply to] Can't Post

I think a great way to preserve some of GDT's ideas, while keeping close to canon, would be to give Thranduil, the Woodland King, a headdress that includes an antler motif. This would also draw a good connection to the white stag, which I hope is in the films.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 7:22pm

Post #195 of 216 (3655 views)
Shortcut
I didn't think i was being B&W [In reply to] Can't Post

I said CT is free to express his opinions, just not to focus only on not being fateful to the legacy.

I also said to give PJ a break, and maybe i did misinterpreted others' comments here.


imin
Valinor


Aug 27 2012, 7:42pm

Post #196 of 216 (3433 views)
Shortcut
reply [In reply to] Can't Post

I think the films were targeted at the 15-25 age range, though that doesn't mean only people of that age range will like it. but they certainly were more mass market, blockbuster appeal to them than the books which makes them more accessible to young adults who were their target audience (imo), this is not a slight on the films, just that is who they were aimed at.

CT i think feels people have come to his fathers works from PJ's film with a wrong impression of what ME is etc. For CT it seems its more important that people 'get' his father's work than how many read it. It is a shame though that he cant say - i didnt like the films, but im not against adaptations. For me it is nice to see more people reading my father's work.

I guess he is too close to the material to have any opinion other than - my father's work is the best, better than any adaptation could be. I think after a life spent being immersed in ME that is understandable.

Still i can see how to you, who prefers the films it is annoying that he doesnt like them.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 27 2012, 8:32pm

Post #197 of 216 (3662 views)
Shortcut
You have to be kidding me [In reply to] Can't Post

I didnt know he hasn't even seen them. But regardless, not many people his age would like them. I hope i don't sound rude because it's not my intention.


In Reply To
For me at least, as you know, I've been criticizing CT. Not because he's not "grateful" of all the money he got off PJ's project. Not that. But because of his ignorant comments about the movies. Movies that I doubt he even has seen. If he really does think that the movies are only people for ages 15-25, I advice him to first get a reality check and then take a look at this message board. There majority of the people here at this board are older than 25 years old. Granted, not everyone who's here like the movies, but the majority does. I feel insulted by CT's sly remarks. Insulted and minimized.


I would like to add that I fully respect Christopher Tolkien's stance on protecting his fathers work. I really do. It's his comments about the films that bothers me (as far as I've heard, he has not even seen the movies)



Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 27 2012, 11:44pm

Post #198 of 216 (3649 views)
Shortcut
CT has never said he hasn't seen the films, as far as I know [In reply to] Can't Post

Not sure where that idea came from.

Based on his recent comments about the films being action fare aimed at a particular age demographic (which I believe he is generally right about - and just because one aims to please a particular age bracket, doesn't mean people outside that range may not like them...) I have to assume that he has watched the films and made a judgment.


rings7
Rohan


Aug 28 2012, 2:56am

Post #199 of 216 (3621 views)
Shortcut
Well yeah that's what i thought [In reply to] Can't Post

i wouldn't believe he would make a judgment of the films without seeing them.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 28 2012, 4:05am

Post #200 of 216 (3637 views)
Shortcut
Just one example [In reply to] Can't Post

Someone recently asked the following question in regard to the LOTR books:


Quote
Does anyone know how Sauron became an eye? When he lost the ring he was still in the shape of a human being. It is probably somewhere in the Silmarillion.


Does this represent an improvement of Tolkien's legacy? Not so sure... Crazy


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Aug 28 2012, 11:51am

Post #201 of 216 (3780 views)
Shortcut
I don't know about "improvement" [In reply to] Can't Post

As I don't really understand the use here in a compartive sense but from my own perspective I think it's super that large numbers of people, who would not otherwise have encountered Tolkien*, are talking and thinking about his stories.

I feel much the same way about this as I do about people reading or watching Shakespeare. On a first encounter many will not understand and appreciate every word, phrase or idea (myself included) but I think it is much better for people to engage than not.

LR

*Some who watched the films would certainly have encountered the texts anyway but it seems clear from the numbers that many would have been unlikely to.


Noria
Gondor

Aug 28 2012, 11:52am

Post #202 of 216 (3797 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

SmileSir Dennis, if your post was in response to mine, I don’t understand what you’re talking about.

Maybe that’s because my post was not intended as a direct response to yours and was meant as a comment on the whole conspiracy theory thing. Obviously I didn’t make that clear.

I don’t think it’s wrong to speculate about anything, including GdT’s departure from The Hobbit, and I think it's questionable whether or not you really needed to apologize for your initial comments. My point was that PJ and GdT have made their statements and they don’t owe the public anything more. So the notion that we will get some additional explanation of what went down is both unlikely and unnecessary, IMO.

Conspiracy theory is a strong term to use for what happened with the Hobbit production but it is cut from the same cloth as suspecting that the whole truth was not told. But I stand corrected because I was one of the ones who objected to the use of the term fan fiction for additional scenes created by screenplay writers during the adaptation process.Wink

I am also Canadian and the notion of two Canadians quarrelling on the internet is kind of mindboggling. Aren’t we supposed to be mild and polite or something?Smile


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 28 2012, 3:11pm

Post #203 of 216 (3772 views)
Shortcut
I knew there was something about you that I liked [In reply to] Can't Post

Wink

No, actually I thought your earlier post was quite good and sensible -- sorry I didn't respond to it directly. Anyway, I was replying to Black Breathalizer's post here: http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=486657#486657

By the way, if you're reading in "flat mode" and aren't entirely sure whose post another post is in response to, click on "In reply to" which appears to the right of the subject line in the post your are reading. Actually this can be useful in "threaded mode" as well.

For a quick run down on the difference between thread and flat modes check out this post by our resident tutor and collector of minutia: http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=144421#144421

Incidentally, I've noticed you around the place, diving right into some of the more intense debates we've had this season... I figured you were either a Canadian or a very brave newbie (just kidding!!!). In case no one has said so already, welcome to TORn Noria!

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 28 2012, 3:11pm)


kzer_za
Lorien

Aug 28 2012, 8:26pm

Post #204 of 216 (3751 views)
Shortcut
The films are generally held in high regard [In reply to] Can't Post

I know not everyone enjoys them, but they are liked across a lot of demographics. I know plenty of non-geeky women who like them, for example. While it's too early to say it definitively, I think their impact on popular culture is likely comparable to Star Wars or The Godfather (not to say they're the same quality as The Godfather I/II, though I would put them ahead of Star Wars except maybe ESB). You can still do a Gollum impression or whistle the fellowship theme or say something about "the ring" and most people will instantly recognize it, which isn't true of very many ten-year old films.

So I would say that while the movies may give people a wrong impression of some elements of the books, I think most people who haven't read the books will assume they are high-quality. And I would say they get more right than wrong, but I don't think I'll convince you there.

Plus, sometimes people dislike the movies for reasons like "too much walking"! They would dislike the books even more and probably give up after a couple of travel songs. ;)

That said, Christopher has every right to dislike the movies. He's dedicated his life to preserving and chronicling his father's work, so I'm sure he has much more attachment to it than us.


(This post was edited by kzer_za on Aug 28 2012, 8:27pm)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 29 2012, 4:54am

Post #205 of 216 (3723 views)
Shortcut
Ha, It was me!!! [In reply to] Can't Post

I say it often, as it is true about so many things, many of them more immediately consequential to society than LOTR, strange as that may seem to an LOTR fanatic like me. Thrilled that someone took notice! Wink

In Reply To

In Reply To
I don't know why you guys are so negative towards PJ.


Someone (please speak up if it was you - good post) recently lamented the "linear," or black and white, thinking that goes on these days where there is no degree of freedom on thought. What it means is that if we complain about one aspect of something, we must hate all aspects of it. Such unhealthy generalizations and false assumptions are just not true or valid thought. We can despise the corporate behavior of such things as The Green Tint, or what was done to selected aspects of the screenplay as an adaptation of The Lord of the Rings without despising the other 99.999% of the person involved. In fact, I think you would find almost everyone on this forum actually does like Peter Jackson as an atypically sincere Hollywood personality who stays true to himself.


"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."


geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 29 2012, 12:25pm

Post #206 of 216 (3730 views)
Shortcut
Christopher has seen them - [In reply to] Can't Post

- or at least, we're told he's seen Fellowship. This question came up recently on another site, and one of the posters there referred to a post by Carl Hofstetter in 2002 (ie before the other two movies came out). Carl is in regular correspondence with CT, and in this post he said that Christopher had seen Fellowship - he hated it, says Carl, and gave a long list of reasons which, CH says, he won't give here.

I don't know whether CT has seen TT and RotK, but I don't see any reason to assume that he hasn't.

And of course, CT is not the only one to view the films in this way. Verlyn Flieger says much the same things as Christopher said in his interview with Le Monde; only Prof. Flieger goes further. In a Q&A session published in ToRn's book 'More people's Guide to JRR Tolkien', Prof. Flieger says

"I didn't like the first film when I saw it, and I don't like the whole thing now that all three films are out. But then, it isn't aimed at me. It's aimed at the generations who've grown up on Star Wars and hunger for more and more action and special effects. Jackson has turned an extremely sophisticated, complex and subtle - and very long - story into an action movie that I think satisfies the audience for whom he made it. "

Flieger goes on in this way at some length. I agree with her, too.


(This post was edited by geordie on Aug 29 2012, 12:26pm)


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 29 2012, 1:34pm

Post #207 of 216 (3708 views)
Shortcut
Then again, [In reply to] Can't Post

Then again, many Tolkien scholars/experts do like/love the movies. Not every Tolkien scholar has a negative view on the films. Tom Shippey, Brian Sibley, Patrick Curry, etc



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 29 2012, 3:02pm

Post #208 of 216 (3700 views)
Shortcut
Interestingly [In reply to] Can't Post

Flieger's comments are not very harsh! She disliked the films, as I did, but dislikes them for the same reasons many other people like them!

If CT feels similarly, as his one quote on the matter suggests, it's not the kind of "hateful" opinion some have characterized it as.


macfalk
Valinor


Aug 29 2012, 4:26pm

Post #209 of 216 (3680 views)
Shortcut
This is a rare thread indeed... [In reply to] Can't Post

Where there's still discussion going on despite the fact that the thread has been pushed to page 3 Cool



The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 29 2012, 5:16pm

Post #210 of 216 (3668 views)
Shortcut
I depends how you have the page set [In reply to] Can't Post

For me it is still page one.

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



geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 29 2012, 5:25pm

Post #211 of 216 (3670 views)
Shortcut
This is true - [In reply to] Can't Post

- and I've got a lot of time for all three gentlemen; though I don't have to agree with them about everything. Smile

For example, I don't agree with Shippey when he says that, in spite of Tolkien's denials, the Rohirrim are 'Anglo-Saxons on horseback'. I've never thought that; (despite the fact that ol' Tom knows more about Old English than anybody else I know) - and since he said that, some new writings of Tolkien's have come to light which further emphasize JRR's further thoughts on the matter.

I don't remember Patrick Curry's remarks on the movies; IIRC his slots on the dvd extras were spent discussing Tolkien and the environment, which is his speciality. I recall going to the launch of his book, 'Defending Middle-earth', and I still see him now and then, at T.S. events.

Brian Sibley is a lovely bloke; but I wonder whether he'd describe himself as a scholar? He's certainly a 100% Tolkien enthusiast; same as the other two gents (same as me, come to that). Brian got his big break by adapting LotR for radio, and made a v.good job of it. The first time I met him was back in 1981 (gosh!) at Oxonmoot. I think the radio series was still being broadcast then; we all had a laugh about one or two things which went a bit wrong here and there. And Brian has written a couple of books on the movies since then; and written a guide to the Middle-earth maps too, IIRC. But I wouldn't call those scholarly works. Some years ago, Brian made a classic blooper in a taped 'book' called 'JRR Tolkien: An Audio Portrait'. He reckoned a framed 'note' on the wall in the Eagle & Child is a letter from the Inklings to the pub landlord. It isn't; first, it's not a letter, but a photocopy of a note - and second, it ain't to the landlord. It's to an American admirer of CS Lewis, and the original is in the Bodleian Library. As even I know; and I'm not a scholar.
Smile

But going back to Christopher for a bit; and Carl Hostetter and Prof. Flieger. I just remembered that they edited a festschrift for Christopher, back in 2000. My copy is signed by both the editors; and later I added the signatures of some of the other contributors. I wish I'd been able to ask Rayner Unwin to sign it, too. Rayner was Tolkien's publisher for many years, and a good friend of the Professor. And the Tolkien Society too, as it happens - here's what Rayner says, in his introduction to the book - "No other author has ever had the advantage of a literary executor with the smpathy, the scholarship, and the humility to devote half a lifetime to the task of unobtrusively giving shape to his own father's creativity. In effect one man's imaginative genius has had the benefit of two lifetimes' work."
(Rayner Unwin, in 'Tolkien's Legendarium - Essays on the History of Middle-earth', ed. Verlyn Flieger and Carl F. Hostetter).

Now, that's the truth!
Smile


geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 29 2012, 5:41pm

Post #212 of 216 (3677 views)
Shortcut
Actually, [In reply to] Can't Post

the quotes I gave were only the beginning - Flieger really gets her teeth into the subject;

"...As for un-Tolkienian lines like Gimli's 'Nobody tosses a dwarf', and Strider's 'Let's hunt some orc', they are beyond comment."

"I found Jackson's increased messing with the plot and character unnecessary and destructive to the story..."

"And the silly idea of having Gollum successfully turn Frodo against Sam... should have been stifled at birth..."

"...I thought it was gratuitous violence to Tolkien's concept to take out the phrases in his Elven languages that _he_ chose to include in his text... and then add unnecessary, made-up dialogue by someone else in which characters like Aragorn and Arwen who have been speaking English (what JRRT called the Common Speech) suddenly slip into Sindarin so Jackson can do subtitles."

There's more... and as it happens, I agree with these sentiments, too - 'gratuitous violence to Tolkien's concept', indeed!


Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Aug 29 2012, 11:16pm

Post #213 of 216 (3669 views)
Shortcut
indeed [In reply to] Can't Post

i agreeWink


kzer_za
Lorien

Aug 29 2012, 11:59pm

Post #214 of 216 (3715 views)
Shortcut
I believe John Rateliff (author of History of The Hobbit) likes them too // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 30 2012, 2:00am

Post #215 of 216 (3680 views)
Shortcut
An unfair assumption [In reply to] Can't Post

"...in which characters like Aragorn and Arwen who have been speaking English (what JRRT called the Common Speech) suddenly slip into Sindarin so Jackson can do subtitles."

They might have chosen to use Sindarin during some scenes (between Aragorn and Arwen especially, but also between Legolas and Aragorn) simply because it sounded so much more romantic than Common Speech.

(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)


geordie
Tol Eressea

Aug 30 2012, 12:03pm

Post #216 of 216 (3702 views)
Shortcut
Thanks - [In reply to] Can't Post

- I hadn't heard this, though it doesn't surprise me. Can you tell us where John says this?

.

 
 

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.