|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marionette
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 6:47pm
Post #176 of 224
(1663 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Honestly? I am glad but I prefer to wait
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
..and see The Hobbit, at least the first film, to have a least a small idea and better feeling about all this.
But so far I am OK.
But even knowing that it might be something totally different from Tolkien: I really don´t think it should be that different, there is enough material to do something decent, a great third movie (including the two Hobbits).
This idea is not new, a so called bridge movie has been around since before filming the Hobbit, so I though The Hobbit became two films so the bridge film is gone. But I see is not gone yet.
I am OK, hope it will be some wonderful work to all movie and books fans.
"Dear friend good bye, no tears in my eyes. So sad it ends, as it began"
Queen
|
|
|
hutch
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 6:51pm
Post #177 of 224
(1701 views)
Shortcut
|
...why people want a Silmarillion film but not a bridge movie. For me it's the opposite: make the bridge movie then no more Tolkien on screen. Period. Silmarillion is too intangible to be put into visuals.
Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 25 2012, 6:53pm
Post #178 of 224
(1643 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Wasn't LOTR unfilmable as well?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But I agree - the Silmarillion can't be done justice.
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 7:11pm
Post #179 of 224
(1649 views)
Shortcut
|
|
They could probably do it any number of ways -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
What would happen in between to make it a film?
We could have a prologue involving Gandalf recovering from his 'death' and discussing current events with the White Council, perhaps even voicing suspicions that things might get very ugly in the North.
We could have Bilbo in Rivendell receiving the bad news about Balin, and deciding to go to the Mountain. Perhaps even having an adventure or two along the way, and an 'official' to Thranduil's court..
We could have the bad guys finding out about Bilbo being a former Ringbearer. (He might make some sort of careless remark during a chance encounter with one of Sauron's minions.) They're sure to think he might know something about the current whereabouts of the Ring.
.
Eventually, we could have the Enemy gathering his armies and attacking everything in sight (it might be a chance to use that footage of the Uruk-Hai attacking Lorien), followed by the resulting destruction of Dol Guldur.
(This post was edited by Hanzkaz on Jul 25 2012, 7:14pm)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 25 2012, 7:18pm
Post #180 of 224
(1610 views)
Shortcut
|
But I'm not a fan of fan-fiction. This would be changing events considerbaly, rathr than keeping towards the actual timeline. 
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 7:28pm
Post #181 of 224
(1615 views)
Shortcut
|
But I'm not a fan of fan-fiction. This would be changing events considerbaly, rathr than keeping towards the actual timeline.
- is different from that of the books.
About the fan-fiction, can we call it artistic license? These movies will never be the same as the books, but if they work on screen, then why not?
(This post was edited by Hanzkaz on Jul 25 2012, 7:28pm)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 25 2012, 7:34pm
Post #182 of 224
(1607 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I knew that would be your response ;-)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yes, timelines were altered. But the majority of the time, character A ended up a place Z, just in the book.
Fan-fiction means that character A goes to place Za, which does not happen in the book.
|
|
|
Ataahua
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 25 2012, 7:35pm
Post #183 of 224
(1631 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think the common thread all through the discussions
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
is that we want good film versions of Middle-earth. The number of films is secondary.
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
|
|
|
priell3
Lorien
Jul 25 2012, 7:37pm
Post #184 of 224
(1628 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Being that I've become a Middle-earth addict...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm all for a 3rd film of material from the appendices. If done right, it should make a wonderful addition to fill in the gaps
of history.
Would stars from The Lord of The Rings be brought back to reprise their rolls? Sounds good to me.
MikeP
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 7:45pm
Post #185 of 224
(1672 views)
Shortcut
|
|
We don't really know much of what happens to Bilbo -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
- during the War in the North. We could have him spending all that time in Rivendell, writing poetry, I suppose..
Something off the Hobbit wiki page :
Martin Freeman and Sir Ian McKellen have already been contacted about signing onto this new movie.
Don't know how reliable that info is.
This third movie may not be a War in the North movie, though I'd like it to be. Oh well, they could always do one later.
|
|
|
HiddenSpring
Lorien
Jul 25 2012, 7:48pm
Post #186 of 224
(1602 views)
Shortcut
|
|
While I think a bridge film isn't happening...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
(and if it did, it would be a lousy idea), one thing I would love to see is the dwarves' partial retaking of Moria. I think that's the only truly fascinating Middle-earth event between The Hobbit and LotR.
Of course it would be a complete box-office failure... dark and claustrophobic, and with an ending to rival The Blair Witch Project =)
|
|
|
dalecooper
Rivendell
Jul 25 2012, 8:07pm
Post #187 of 224
(1615 views)
Shortcut
|
First of all, I'm new to this board. Not sure why it took me so long to register - I've been following the site since the LOTR movies were first announced, before that original tantalizing trailer. (Man, that was forever ago!)
I registered today, finally, just to weigh in on this discussion. I have to say, much as I love Tolkien and the PJ movies, I don't feel there's enough material here for a third movie. If they were doing a bridge movie that is basically separate from "The Hobbit" I would sort of understand (though it would be a very anti-climactic way to wrap up the series) - but based on the comments made so far it seems more likely that they're looking to add new stuff and divide the existing material up into three movies instead of two. And I just don't think it can support that. I can't imagine the story of "The Hobbit" spread over three films. Three long films was right for "Lord of the Rings," but there's three times as much material as there is for "The Hobbit" (and it's easily three times weightier and more epic, as well!). Even with appendices and the Necromancer, I can't picture 9 hours of "Hobbit." I can't imagine how slow the story would have to move to create a framework that would support that much movie. And I certainly can't picture myself waiting patiently until December 2014 to finally see the last of the tale. 
Please, PJ and studio: come to your senses, and do not do this thing. 5-6 hours and two movies is enough.
|
|
|
hutch
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 8:11pm
Post #188 of 224
(1636 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm of a mind that LOTR was 'unfilm-able' mainly because of logistics and perhaps technology. However much of the Silmarillion is intangible-not the stuff needed for a visual medium like film.
Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 25 2012, 8:12pm
Post #189 of 224
(1572 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's a wiki page - not reliable at all /
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
hutch
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 8:13pm
Post #190 of 224
(1553 views)
Shortcut
|
but my response is:
PJ & studio please come to your senses and make a bridge film with Viggo. 
...what I'm not in favor of, though, is adding sex appeal or demographic appeal to 'The Hobbit'. Yeesh. 
Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.
(This post was edited by hutch on Jul 25 2012, 8:15pm)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 25 2012, 8:14pm
Post #191 of 224
(1543 views)
Shortcut
|
I was expecting you to say: "PJ did prove it was unfilmable"
|
|
|
hutch
Rohan
Jul 25 2012, 8:18pm
Post #192 of 224
(1568 views)
Shortcut
|
PJ proved many, many things, but all positive...well, mostly...which is why I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt on the 48fps and 3 films issues. Personally I could go for an entire 3rd film of just watching Hobbits do their thing in Hobbition.
Davy Jones could've been Bilbo...I mean he was a Brit with a sense for adventure, singing & dancing. And think of the costs it would've save with forced perspective: he was ACTUALLY 5'3. He also hung out with a grumpy tall dude in a hat (Mike Nesmith.) While we're at it let's just have Micky Dolenz and Peter Tork as Merry & Pippin.
(This post was edited by hutch on Jul 25 2012, 8:19pm)
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Jul 25 2012, 8:19pm
Post #193 of 224
(1580 views)
Shortcut
|
Its amazing how many people have lurked here for so long. I myself have lurked on and off since just after the FOTR was released.
I agree with everything you write. I dont think a trilogy of the hobbit is a good idea. I also think making a bridge film is a tiny bit better but not much and would leave the series on an anticlimatic note.
From reading on here and other forums the vast majority of fans/general audience think either of these options are a bad idea. Obviously there are people who think its a good idea but there arent a massive amount of them.
I want it to be good but like you i dont think there is enough material etc.
PJ and studio come to your senses, and do not do this thing. 5-6 hours and two movies is enough indeed!
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Jul 25 2012, 8:43pm
Post #195 of 224
(1509 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Not entirely sure what turin would be
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but just thought i would say i am INFJ, apparently my career is especially suited to an INFJ person. Guess i am just predictable, lol.
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Jul 25 2012, 9:11pm
Post #196 of 224
(1549 views)
Shortcut
|
But to sum up this thread it appears to me that the current situation seems to be that we have no idea if there is to be a third film and if there happens to be one we have no idea what it will be about.
Could it be be possibly a little early to be making decisions about whether this is a good idea or not?
LR
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Jul 25 2012, 9:18pm
Post #197 of 224
(1472 views)
Shortcut
|
From what the ideas of this new material could go towards - EE, bridge film, third hobbit film i think at this early stage its perhaps too early to give a reasoned answer but most peoples gut reaction seems to be its not a good idea. We shall see!
Will be an interesting thread to come back to after The Hobbit is released and see what if any of our assumptions were correct and if our opinions have been changed.
|
|
|
pulpfiction16
Rivendell
Jul 25 2012, 9:19pm
Post #198 of 224
(1522 views)
Shortcut
|
It's just a fairly easy label and identifier for the average person who might be less informed.
Third bridge film wouldn't quite make sense as a label either because that would suggest that it's the third in a series of 3 bridge films. . I guess just "Bridge film rumblings" might have been more appropriate, oh well.
Everything is speculation now anyway.
|
|
|
pulpfiction16
Rivendell
Jul 25 2012, 9:25pm
Post #199 of 224
(1536 views)
Shortcut
|
The Clone Wars was a CG-animated film, even Revenge of the Sith (the film after probably the worst Star Wars film) made 600 million +. It bombed because as a live action series, a CG film didn't appeal to the audience.
The fact that this third film will now be likely "The Last Journey to Middle Earth" will get many people in seats.
It will never, ever bomb. Franchises don't work like Jaws back in the day or Star Trek (before the reboot), these companies know exactly how to market them, and about the only thing making money anymore are franchises with known properties, i.e., Transformers. Quality does not mean anything.
Meanwhile, direct-to-video is only profitable under very small circumstances (low low budget), and tv mini-series are barely (Remember George Lucas' Live Action Star Wars television show for cable that they still haven't made? That's why)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 25 2012, 9:26pm
Post #200 of 224
(1489 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The word "third" doesn't even need to be used
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings director suggests bridge film"
Says exactly what we need to know, and how much we actually know.
|
|
|
|
|
