|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MTRougeau
Nevrast
Oct 2 2012, 1:26am
Post #26 of 30
(311 views)
Shortcut
|
"That is an encouraging thought." Thank you!
|
|
|
dormouse
Gondolin
Oct 2 2012, 8:50am
Post #28 of 30
(277 views)
Shortcut
|
Sorry, but unless I've missed an announcement somewhere, 'we' are not sure that the decision to split into three films came from the studio. As of this moment, and until anyone can prove to me that it's not so, I'm 100% sure that the idea came from Peter Jackson and was essentially an editing decision - the two-film split involved too much loss of material and there were still things he wanted to add.
That's what he said and I haven't seen anything so far to contradict it.
|
|
|
Fardragon
Nargothrond
Oct 2 2012, 9:37am
Post #29 of 30
(307 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I suspect it was a bit of both.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Maybe something like this:
WB: "These films will be less than three hours long..?"
PJ: "errr... I don't suppose we can make it three films?"
WB think bubble: 'more films = more money'
WB: "Sure, good idea, go ahead!"
A Far Dragon is the best kind...
|
|
|
Sunflower
Doriath
Oct 3 2012, 3:31pm
Post #30 of 30
(256 views)
Shortcut
|
if that report about the running time of AUJ being 123 min is accurate. Then we'll know whose decision it was for sure. Even though Jackson will never say. B/c if each film is only 2 hrs long, it'll likely be the same total length 2 films would have been. What, artistically, would have been better for Jackson--2 3-hr films with some roon for an EE of each, or 3 2-hr films with no extra material for EE's, maybe a couple mins for each? That'll reveal how much "extra filming" is really needed.
Poor Peter though-if this turns out to be the case, he won't be able to publicly "bite the hand that feeds him", not if he wants a good future working relationship with any studio. he'll have to take the fan and critical reaction of being "Peter Lucas" alone.
|
|
|
|
|
