|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kimtc
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 2:24am
Post #1 of 69
(2912 views)
Shortcut
|
|
GDT still hasn't seen AUJ
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm in full fangirl mode for Pacific Rim and Idris Elba canceling the apocalypse. But in an interview with GDT in the Vulture page of NY Magazine, he is asked if he thinks Smaug in DoS is like his vision of the character. He laughs and says he hasn't seen the second movie, and in fact hasn't seen the first one, either. He also has some pointed comments earlier in the piece where he complains about long movies.
This made me a little sad. I always liked to think that there was a little bit of GDT DNA in AUJ (so sorry for all the acronyms), but based on this I have the feeling that there isn't even a dollop in the stone giants.
Hope the link works--if not it's at nymag.com. It's a good interview.
http://www.vulture.com/2013/07/pacific-rim-guillermo-del-toro-interview.html
|
|
|
MorgolKing
Rivendell
Jul 11 2013, 2:36am
Post #2 of 69
(1806 views)
Shortcut
|
I've been in the minority, but I really think the split was not amicable.
Several months before GDT left, PJ was quoted as saying he kind of wished he was directing after he started working on the film. Earlier it was reported that there was a dispute as to how the orcs should look and that PJ wanted them to look more connected with the orcs in the original trilogy and GDT had decided on something completely different.
Just speculation from these pieces of the puzzle, but this news adds to the fire.
I'm in full fangirl mode for Pacific Rim and Idris Elba canceling the apocalypse. But in an interview with GDT in the Vulture page of NY Magazine, he is asked if he thinks Smaug in DoS is like his vision of the character. He laughs and says he hasn't seen the second movie, and in fact hasn't seen the first one, either. He also has some pointed comments earlier in the piece where he complains about long movies.
This made me a little sad. I always liked to think that there was a little bit of GDT DNA in AUJ (so sorry for all the acronyms), but based on this I have the feeling that there isn't even a dollop in the stone giants.
Hope the link works--if not it's at nymag.com. It's a good interview.
http://www.vulture.com/2013/07/pacific-rim-guillermo-del-toro-interview.html
|
|
|
lurtz2010
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 3:14am
Post #3 of 69
(1763 views)
Shortcut
|
You'd think that after spending all that time working on the movie and with PJ he'd be interested in watching it. It seems like he had a falling out with PJ and is being stubborn by refusing to see it lol
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Jul 11 2013, 3:31am
Post #4 of 69
(1836 views)
Shortcut
|
If I were him and knew that I could have made a better Hobbit film and got cheated the way he did, I wouldn't see it either.
I bet its not as rosey as Jackson and co are making it out to be. Why would DelToro walk away from what would surely have been the biggest films of his career? to go to a project that ends up getting shelved... Makes sense to me  I think Jackson got the jones to be in charge again and that was it DelToro was out and then the PR machine took over to make it all rosey again... Public relations and Hollywood i believe about 1/100th of what I hear the rest is all BS IMO
|
|
|
Mauricio
Bree
Jul 11 2013, 3:43am
Post #5 of 69
(1681 views)
Shortcut
|
I went to the premiere and had a chance to have a word with del Toro.
I asked him if he was going to be credited at all in any of the upcoming Hobbit films, and he coldly responded:
"That remains to be seen. We'll have to see the movies first."
I'm not sure how to read into that or if there's anything to read into at all.
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Jul 11 2013, 6:03am
Post #7 of 69
(1671 views)
Shortcut
|
|
This has long been my suspiscion. I don't know it to be true, and I hope it isn't. . . but my heart tells me. . .
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
things just fell together WAY too quickly almost as soon as Del Toro was officially off. Could be that it was coincidence. Yet, I am not so sure. Especially with NO credit seeming to be there for Del Toro on Desolation. Certainly if the split was unfriendly, WB would want to keep rumour of that down if possible, and it would be possible unless it was an all out combative situation rather than a displeased and mildly resentful one. If I were him and knew that I could have made a better Hobbit film and got cheated the way he did, I wouldn't see it either. I bet its not as rosey as Jackson and co are making it out to be. Why would DelToro walk away from what would surely have been the biggest films of his career? to go to a project that ends up getting shelved... Makes sense to me I think Jackson got the jones to be in charge again and that was it DelToro was out and then the PR machine took over to make it all rosey again... Public relations and Hollywood i believe about 1/100th of what I hear the rest is all BS IMO
"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."
|
|
|
Elessar
Valinor
Jul 11 2013, 6:48am
Post #8 of 69
(1566 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't believe they would have been better
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I was never all behind Del Toro doing The Hobbit. He's perfect for Hellboy and Pacific Rim but IMO is not the right man for Middle-earth. Thankfully it worked out that the right man got it and is making pretty darn fantastic films.
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 7:01am
Post #9 of 69
(1576 views)
Shortcut
|
|
GDT May 2010 "...and I will be first in line to see the finished product."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"I wlsh the production nothing but the very best of luck and I will be first in line to see the finished product. I remain an ally to it and its makers, present and future, and fully support a smooth transition to a new director”.
http://www.theonering.net/...-departs-the-hobbit/
|
|
|
Shagrat
Gondor
Jul 11 2013, 8:16am
Post #10 of 69
(1521 views)
Shortcut
|
|
He had nothing to do with The Orphanage
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Except lend his name to it.
While I'm a big fan of Chronos, The Devil's Backbone and Pan's Labyrinth I really don't get the claims that GDT is a better director than Jackson and the assumptions that he would have made a better film. Blade II and the Hellboy films are good entertainment and imaginative but hardly masterpieces. Furthermore, it sounds like GDT had a lot of interesting new ideas for designs which would have created a fair amount of inconsistency with Jackson's LOTR films. No doubt his designs for creatures would have been wonderful but just how different are we talking?
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 8:44am
Post #11 of 69
(1558 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"Peter sent me an email and offered to screen it any time I wanted..."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
One lesson of The Hobbit, however, is that plans sometimes go awry, and all that energy and enthusiasm which del Toro has can come to naught. Have his feelings changed about The Hobbit now that the film is out?
“I haven’t seen it!” he says. “I didn’t want to see it on a BluRay and I’ve been so busy I’ve only been to the theatre three or four times in the last year. And my daughters dominate that decision. So we go to see Les Mis, which I would never see!”
But surely…
“No, of course. Peter sent me an email and offered to screen it any time I wanted. So when I have time, I’m going to take him up on the offer and do it properly.”
Would it be painful?
He thinks a minute. “I’m not sure. But in the road of my life, I’ve been blessed with a very tiny rear-view mirror. Without it I wouldn’t have survived the kidnapping of my father, the impossibility of making genre movies in Mexico in the Seventies and Eighties… I have a geological perspective on life – we concentrate so much on the small things but when we are a strata of chalk between two layers of granite a million years from now, your supermarket to-do list and the entire canon of Shakespeare are going to have the exact same importance.”
He smiles broadly. “So enjoy your life as it is now and stay in the process. Don’t think of the outcome. Just do something.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...harlie-Kaufman-.html
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 11 2013, 9:51am
Post #12 of 69
(1502 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Why is it so satisfying to believe the worst of people and situations?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Why?
There's nothing negative in what GdT actually says there. He hasn't seen the film because he's been busy with work of his own. Is that really so unlikely?
I'm sorry, I'm not getting at you, but your comment has called out the predictable stream of posts from those who wisely shake their heads and tell us they always knew that the situation wasn't amicable, no matter what was said, they know there were dark dealings behind it, he was robbed....
Sometimes things just happen because they happen. Sometimes what you are told is actually the truth.
I don't think you have any reason to feel sad. Truly I don't. Guillermo put a lot of time and work into the design and I'm sure something of his 'DNA' remains - Peter Jackson says it does, and he should know. But in the end Guillermo decided to step down. He decided. And now he's got on with other things and put it behind him - would people rather he was tormenting himself about something that didn't happen? Maybe he will see The Hobbit when he has time. Maybe he won't. It doesn't diminish him or the film, or point to anything dark and suspicious lurking in the shadows, truly it doesn't. It just means he hasn't seen the film. I've seen John Howe quoted as saying that he hasn't seen the EEs of Lord of the Rings, but I'm sure it isn't personal.
|
|
|
MorgolKing
Rivendell
Jul 11 2013, 12:05pm
Post #13 of 69
(1385 views)
Shortcut
|
Nothing satisfying about it, it's simply elementary my dear Watson. It's not hard to piece together the puzzle from all the interviews.
Could this theory be incorrect? Absolutely, but I give I'd say more likely than not that things did not end well generally speaking.
Why?
There's nothing negative in what GdT actually says there. He hasn't seen the film because he's been busy with work of his own. Is that really so unlikely?
I'm sorry, I'm not getting at you, but your comment has called out the predictable stream of posts from those who wisely shake their heads and tell us they always knew that the situation wasn't amicable, no matter what was said, they know there were dark dealings behind it, he was robbed....
Sometimes things just happen because they happen. Sometimes what you are told is actually the truth.
I don't think you have any reason to feel sad. Truly I don't. Guillermo put a lot of time and work into the design and I'm sure something of his 'DNA' remains - Peter Jackson says it does, and he should know. But in the end Guillermo decided to step down. He decided. And now he's got on with other things and put it behind him - would people rather he was tormenting himself about something that didn't happen? Maybe he will see The Hobbit when he has time. Maybe he won't. It doesn't diminish him or the film, or point to anything dark and suspicious lurking in the shadows, truly it doesn't. It just means he hasn't seen the film. I've seen John Howe quoted as saying that he hasn't seen the EEs of Lord of the Rings, but I'm sure it isn't personal.
|
|
|
deskp
Lorien
Jul 11 2013, 12:20pm
Post #14 of 69
(1364 views)
Shortcut
|
It should be noted that GDT talking about doing tonnes and tonnes of things, and gets attached to a truckload of stuff that never gets made at all.
tv shows, movies, video games.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 11 2013, 1:18pm
Post #15 of 69
(1321 views)
Shortcut
|
It isn't even there unless you want it to be. There is no actual evidence at all, whatsoever, that there is or ever was any bad feeling between Guillermo del Toro and Peter Jackson. If you see it there it's because you want to see it. I just can't understand why anyone would.
Guillermo left because the production had been delayed for so long. He had reached the point at which if it did get the greenlight he and his family would then face another two years of living in New Zealand. Which they hadn't intended and didn't want to do. And he had other projects. End of story.
What his version of The Hobbit would have been like; whether you or I or the man down the street or Mrs Jenkin's cat would have liked it better than Peter Jackson's is something none of us will ever know. Because it never happened.
|
|
|
MorgolKing
Rivendell
Jul 11 2013, 1:43pm
Post #16 of 69
(1289 views)
Shortcut
|
Lets be clear here. You're alleging that we're drawing baseless conclusions off of nothing. Your real problem is that we're drawing conclusions based on circumstantial evidence not direct evidence; you've opined that we are simply seeing what we WANT to see based on no evidence, but circumstantial evidence is evidence whether you want to believe it or not.
People do this all the time, just look at your posts -- what you are relying on to form your opinion and unilaterally declare "end of story", may be direct evidence in form but has very little weight given the implications and motivations of WB.
However I wouldn't be so bold as to say you are simply seeing what you want to see based on no evidence. That's just an emotional and irrational argument/response because you find our theories offensive.
It isn't even there unless you want it to be. There is no actual evidence at all, whatsoever, that there is or ever was any bad feeling between Guillermo del Toro and Peter Jackson. If you see it there it's because you want to see it. I just can't understand why anyone would.
Guillermo left because the production had been delayed for so long. He had reached the point at which if it did get the greenlight he and his family would then face another two years of living in New Zealand. Which they hadn't intended and didn't want to do. And he had other projects. End of story.
What his version of The Hobbit would have been like; whether you or I or the man down the street or Mrs Jenkin's cat would have liked it better than Peter Jackson's is something none of us will ever know. Because it never happened.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 11 2013, 1:50pm
Post #17 of 69
(1290 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No, I'm actually accepting what Guillermo del Toro said...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
.. himself, in his own words, and posted here on TORn at the time he stepped down from The Hobbit. I'm taking his word for it.
What are you basing your conclusions on? Which particular 'implications and motivations of WB' were you thinking of?
|
|
|
AncalagontheBlack
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 1:58pm
Post #18 of 69
(1280 views)
Shortcut
|
Production of AUJ was supposed to begin initially in 2008 and was delayed 3 years until 2011. This is all well documented. Initially the delays were the CH 11 bankruptcy and continuing financial problems of MGM and then later the labor issues surrounding the movie. GDT lives in Los Angeles and had transplanted his life to Wellington to a project that seemed like it was never going to receive a green light. I think he was fairly upfront about the mounting pressure of the delays, keeping his life on hold and passing up projects. When he exited, PJ did not initially step up and only did so when WB was about ready to pull the plug.
I can't see how was cheated out of anything, since he elected that to bail out because of frustrations from the multi year delay. If he had toughed it out another 9 months, he would have still been on the project when MGM finally cleared its CH 11 hurdles and received court approval for the financial outlay of AUJ and Skyfall. It's pure conjecture as to whether his movie would have been better or worse. I for one would have liked to have seen it but we won't and not because he was cheated out of anything.
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 2:47pm
Post #19 of 69
(1267 views)
Shortcut
|
|
yes, i think it's simply not that important to GDT anymore...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
after his decision to step back he closed that chapter and concentrate on other projects. it would be interesting to join when PJ and GDT watch the movies together...i don't think that there was any big trouble between them.
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Jul 11 2013, 2:56pm
Post #20 of 69
(1266 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Once again Bomby agrees with Dormouse...GDT
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
could have been on Location somewhere Remote and No theater in sight?
He has his Schedule, and just can't leave the "PR" production ...
Remember they are still friends.
Personally, Bomby is Truly Bummed...
that his long awaited production of
"At the Mountains of Madness" got shelved.
(Bomby's absolute favorite H.P. Lovecraft Novella.)
You can read that on-line Free!
http://www.dagonbytes.com/thelibrary/lovecraft/
this would only take about 2 hours for anyone
to read and will SCARE the ORC OUT
of you?
Together let's hope GDT makes a TON of $$$
on Pacific Rim, and just like PJ,
he could get THAT Movie made.
"At the Mountains of Madness"
is at the TOP of Bomby's Bucket List...
|
|
|
unexpectedvisitor
Rohan
Jul 11 2013, 3:30pm
Post #21 of 69
(1244 views)
Shortcut
|
first off, i wish people would stop trying to manufacture this GdT vs. PJ paradigm. while having some things in common, they are two very different filmmakers with individual merits and weaknesses. there is absolutely no concrete evidence that GdT's split from The Hobbit was some horrible divorce where PJ bullied him out of the project. maybe each party is sore about a couple things here and there, but the general gist seems amicable and it's pretty clear why GdT wanted to move on to other projects while The Hobbit was in pre-production limbo. saying things like "GdT is more of an artist while PJ is just a movie-maker," i'm sorry, that's just baloney, starting off with the very attempt to draw a line in the sand between artists and movie-makers and then categorize who's who. and, this is just my opinion, but to this date both GdT and PJ have two extremely artful movies to their credit, Pan's Labyrinth for GdT and Heavenly Creatures for PJ. GdT also had Cronos, which i'd put roughly equivalent with Braindead in terms of overall quality, though i personally prefer Braindead (much more a zombies than vampire guy) and while PJ doesn't really have a release to compare to The Devil's Backbone, the LotR trilogy was a dazzling melding of PJ's artistic abilities as a storyteller and visually intense director along with his more populist and genre-based sensibilities on an epic scale, with a great story and characters as the bones for it. GdT doesn't have that yet, though i suppose the Hellboy movies are the closest thing. Pacific Rim certainly ain't it, sorry to say. maybe if GdT gets to make At the Mountains of Madness in the near future he will have that calling card.
but i find it funny that lot of people on here who disliked The Hobbit were in the same breath saying things like, "if only GdT had made it, it would be so much better." and these same people criticized PJ's The Hobbit for some cheesy dialogue and too much CG and the 3D and on and on and when you look at GdT's first attempt at making something on a really massive scale, Pacific Rim, it has all the same supposed "problems" (by the way, i loved AUJ and Pacific Rim isn't really fit to kiss its boots, because PJ still really understands how to create an emotional connection with the characters and how to bring beauty to the quiet moments, and this is something i've only seen GdT do in Pan's Labyrinth and The Devil's Backbone). i mean, i remember several people on here who were all aboard the GdT-Hobbit-train while complaining about AUJ's stone giants scene and it going on too long; well, Pacific Rim's action = that, basically. so imagine about 45 minutes of the stone giants scene--better, to be sure, as it's the focus of Pacific Rim--but, then again, it's the focus of Pacific Rim. the whole movie is built around big CG robots fighting big CG monsters in CG environments with CG rain and CG water at CG night and you can watch it in 3D. and i find it funny that GdT would take a jab at long movies when several of his are pretty long and Pacific Rim is a glorified Power Rangers episode with half the narrative ambition of AUJ and yet it's 130 minutes long. all that is to say, maybe GdT's Hobbit wouldn't have been what some of you wanted, either. so i say, try to enjoy what you got, because it was made with a lot of care and love by a team trying to create this massive work of continuity with the other great trilogy they delivered that, i think, earned them the right to make The Hobbit, too.
|
|
|
MorgolKing
Rivendell
Jul 11 2013, 3:46pm
Post #22 of 69
(1193 views)
Shortcut
|
Exactly. You're willing take what he said at face value and refuse to believe that he may have not fully disclosed the entire situation in the interest of keeping things in-house and to save face for everyone.
If that's how you interpret it,fine. There's nothing wrong with that; however, it is wrong to suggest that others can't draw their own conclusions based one what else has been published before and since. I don't believe you're naive enough to suggest that published statements are not subject to polishing or half-truths for reasons undisclosed.
.. himself, in his own words, and posted here on TORn at the time he stepped down from The Hobbit. I'm taking his word for it.
What are you basing your conclusions on? Which particular 'implications and motivations of WB' were you thinking of?
|
|
|
Shagrat
Gondor
Jul 11 2013, 4:15pm
Post #23 of 69
(1179 views)
Shortcut
|
That GDT left The Hobbit in May 2010 and a month or so later At the Mountains of Madness, his dream project, was announced. Is it not plausible to think that he chose to leave a long-gestating uncertain project in order to direct something he'd long been itching to make, a chance he might not get again? Of course it fell through in the end, but GDT wasn't to know that at the time.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jul 11 2013, 4:16pm
Post #24 of 69
(1170 views)
Shortcut
|
I pay the man the compliment of believing what he says - do you find that so bizarre? I have to say, I'd do the same for you too, or anyone here. time was when Guillermo del Toro posted here a lot and he always came across to me as a genuine, decent person.
You see, I can't help noticing that although I've asked you twice now you haven't produced one single shred of evidence that would lead anyone to suspect that there was something dark and sinister going on. You mention 'what has been published before and since' well, OK, what has been published on this? Specifics, please: quotations from anyone who was actually involved in what happened and was in a position to know. If you so sure that there were dark deeds behind what happened you must have a reason, mustn't you? And know what that reason is?
Or are you telling me that trust is naive of its very nature, while cynicism is rational? If that's the case, fine, I'll live and die naive.
PS. I don't look for monsters under the bed either!
|
|
|
MorgolKing
Rivendell
Jul 11 2013, 4:22pm
Post #25 of 69
(1170 views)
Shortcut
|
Maybe you'd look for monsters under your bed if GDT told you they were there.
For the evidence I found more persuasive, look at my original post. If you can't be bothered to read what someone has wrote before engaging in conversation then I don't know what to tell you.
Another point you missed, but would have understood if you read what i wrote, was I have no problem with you believing in what GDT said. I expressly denied any wrong in believing him -- what I take offense to is your holier-than-thou "you can't interpret this any other way and you're only seeing what you want to see" attitude.
That logic can conversely applied to anyone else (e.g., "You only see what you want to see in believing GDT, PJ and WB et al. split up amicably").
So (1) Start actually reading what others say before responding, and (2) stop applying standards to others that you wouldn't want applied to you.
I pay the man the compliment of believing what he says - do you find that so bizarre? I have to say, I'd do the same for you too, or anyone here. time was when Guillermo del Toro posted here a lot and he always came across to me as a genuine, decent person.
You see, I can't help noticing that although I've asked you twice now you haven't produced one single shred of evidence that would lead anyone to suspect that there was something dark and sinister going on. You mention 'what has been published before and since' well, OK, what has been published on this? Specifics, please: quotations from anyone who was actually involved in what happened and was in a position to know. If you so sure that there were dark deeds behind what happened you must have a reason, mustn't you? And know what that reason is?
Or are you telling me that trust is naive of its very nature, while cynicism is rational? If that's the case, fine, I'll live and die naive.
PS. I don't look for monsters under the bed either!
(This post was edited by MorgolKing on Jul 11 2013, 4:23pm)
|
|
|
|
|
(and other films like The Orphanage, and Hellboy) I've always thought of del Toro as more of an artist, Jackson comes across as more of a movie-maker to me. And I can definitely see how those two would have clashed. 
1
