|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe B.
The Shire
Mar 6 2013, 7:19am
Post #1 of 240
(3328 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Has Mr. Jackson shown any signs of contrition?
|
Can't Post
|
|
I suspect that many of you will be offended by the title of this thread, but I'm not here to (re-)litigate the merits of the movie; rather, I'm curious, in light of the fact that the critical consensus (see RT scores) seems to be that AUJ was not as good a film as any of the Rings films, whether Mr. Jackson has publicly shown any sign that he regrets any of his creative choices in bringing the LOTR "prequel"(s) to the screen?
(This post was edited by Joe B. on Mar 6 2013, 7:19am)
|
|
|
Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea
Mar 6 2013, 7:38am
Post #2 of 240
(2407 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Affirmative on the first part.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In any case, no, he has not - and, no, he should not.
"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 Mar 6 2013, 7:41am)
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Mar 6 2013, 8:07am
Post #3 of 240
(2319 views)
Shortcut
|
he made the film he wanted to see, which was the reason to do it again. and it's successful.
|
|
|
macfalk
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 8:20am
Post #4 of 240
(2235 views)
Shortcut
|
The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Half-elven
Mar 6 2013, 8:50am
Post #5 of 240
(2266 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Hobbit is not Lord of the Rings.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It has neither the depth nor the scope, and therefore not the potential for being as much of a ground-breaker. Jackson has made the $1B the studio hoped for, and a lot of people have enjoyed the movie. I think he's very proud of what he's accomplished.
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Mar 6 2013, 9:04am
Post #6 of 240
(2220 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That's assuming that the production team believe AUJ was a failure ...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Which, after making $1 billion, I don't think they will. Who cares about inflation and yada yada yada. Let's wait until all 3 films are out before calling The Hobbit a failure.
|
|
|
Angharad73
Rohan
Mar 6 2013, 10:46am
Post #7 of 240
(2158 views)
Shortcut
|
There will always be criticism and plenty of people who disagree with his choices, no matter what he does. PJ made the movie he wanted to make, and he's right in doing so. Why should he have regrets about it?
And the movie *did* make $ 1 billion, there is no denying that. So why would anyone see it as a failure, really?
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 11:34am
Post #8 of 240
(2129 views)
Shortcut
|
… what the self-opinionated American critic-idiots say? They were wrong, and audiences worldwide have made up their own minds.
I trust PJ will take no notice of those critics and proceed as he wants to when it comes to the next two films. (I think he will – he seems to be his own man.)
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 12:03pm
Post #10 of 240
(2145 views)
Shortcut
|
|
And wasn't Twilight the movie fans wanted to see?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea
Mar 6 2013, 12:19pm
Post #11 of 240
(2102 views)
Shortcut
|
Who gives a toss what the self-opinionated American critic-idiots say? They were wrong, and audiences worldwide have made up their own minds. Just curious. I seem to remember at least a couple negative reviews coming out of the UK.
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 12:53pm
Post #12 of 240
(2101 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Judging by sales of things like "Twilight in Forks"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Anything with the word Twilight on it is what the fans want to see, that doesn't make them good films... If the book is popular enough, then sales figures become a meaningless indicator of how good the movie is. People were going to see The Hobbit regardless of how good critics said it is, just because they liked LotR or the books.
The only accurate indicator we have right now is what reviews are saying and almost all of them compare it to LotR saying that it's not as good... If you can't accept that then you're in denial.
For the record, I loved The Hobbit, I'm just not blind to what other people are saying
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Mar 6 2013, 1:03pm
Post #13 of 240
(2080 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A good indicator would be how many seats were actually sold
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
So we can get an idea of how many people actually saw the film. I have no idea whether this information is available?
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Mar 6 2013, 1:05pm
Post #14 of 240
(2118 views)
Shortcut
|
|
While I do consider 'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' to be a flawed film...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I expect that some (if not many) of the criticisms aimed toward it will evaporate when the film is seen in the context of the entire trilogy. A similar phenomenon happened with The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring.
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 1:17pm
Post #15 of 240
(2061 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I have wondered this myself a few times
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And openly asked if anyone knows where this info is on the net. I am not entirely sure it is public knowledge. However one could estimate the number of people to have viewed the film by going off the BO takings and dividing it by average ticket price. Things get complicated when you have to factor in 3D and then IMAX and then different currencies etc. I think it could be done for say US or UK where we know the percentage of people watching in 3D and IMAX and the total BO takings.
Basically its lots of people but not as many as when people went to see the LOTR movies.
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 1:19pm
Post #16 of 240
(2053 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That only indicates how many people saw it. Not how many liked it.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Like I said, people were going to watch The Hobbit regardless of how good it is or how good people say it is. The franchise is just too popular for ticket sales to indicate anything.
Sales for the Extended DVD, however, will indicate how many people want to see more of the film. These people must have liked the movie.
(This post was edited by QuackingTroll on Mar 6 2013, 1:20pm)
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 1:26pm
Post #17 of 240
(2033 views)
Shortcut
|
I think a lot of the qualms people have with AUJ stems from the fact that they don't know where the story is going and therefore don't see the relevance in certain scenes. Once the story is complete these scenes will make more sense.
One does wonder, though, whether it should be necessary to watch the sequel in order to appreciate a film.
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Mar 6 2013, 1:46pm
Post #18 of 240
(2022 views)
Shortcut
|
|
When the film is only part of the story?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I think a lot of the qualms people have with AUJ stems from the fact that they don't know where the story is going and therefore don't see the relevance in certain scenes. Once the story is complete these scenes will make more sense.
One does wonder, though, whether it should be necessary to watch the sequel in order to appreciate a film.
Well, in this case, the films are all part of a single, serialized story rather than three separate stories about the same character. We don't get a complete tale in any one of the three; the added sub-plots just add to the complexity of the whole (although I'm not sure that the 'Azog' story will pay off by adding any depth).
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
Lindele
Gondor
Mar 6 2013, 1:49pm
Post #19 of 240
(2042 views)
Shortcut
|
a few jaded critics who would not have liked AUJ no matter how it had turned out gave it negative reviews, you think PJ should apologize?
No thanks.
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Mar 6 2013, 1:59pm
Post #20 of 240
(2007 views)
Shortcut
|
|
If Jackson is like other artists -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
whether Mr. Jackson has publicly shown any sign that he regrets any of his creative choices in bringing the LOTR "prequel"(s) to the screen?
- he'll always have new ideas about a project, even after it is completed.
He had to make a film that served a number of different purposes and catered to very different audiences. The only other thing he could have done was make multiple versions of AUJ to please all the different kinds of viewers likely to watch it. I'll admit I'm not too thrilled about some of his decisions, but I think he gets most of it right - or better than I would have.
___________________________________________________
From the makers of 'The Lord of the Rings' comes the sequel to Peter Jackson's Hobbit Trilogy -
'The War in the North, Part I : The Sword in the Tomb'.
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 2:00pm
Post #21 of 240
(2005 views)
Shortcut
|
The LOTR films were shown in cinemas FAR longer than the Hobbit has been. I don't know for sure, but cinema attendances may also have declined in general since LOTR appeared in cinemas. Possibly some people have those huge screens and do most of their film watching at home? I think it is impossible to make comparisons with the situation then and now.
And openly asked if anyone knows where this info is on the net. I am not entirely sure it is public knowledge. However one could estimate the number of people to have viewed the film by going off the BO takings and dividing it by average ticket price. Things get complicated when you have to factor in 3D and then IMAX and then different currencies etc. I think it could be done for say US or UK where we know the percentage of people watching in 3D and IMAX and the total BO takings.
Basically its lots of people but not as many as when people went to see the LOTR movies.
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 2:01pm
Post #22 of 240
(2017 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't think PJ should apologize
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but do we have any proof critics were going to say its not that good no matter what they watched?
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 2:04pm
Post #23 of 240
(2007 views)
Shortcut
|
They are both at the same year and ticket prices should be the same when its 2d vs 2d etc. I also think it was in the cinema for the same length of time or less.
The comparison with lotr was done as its previous M-e films. Comparisons could be done but it would be hard to know for sure how accurate they are. One way could be to look at how much LOTR made in the same amount of weeks as TH and work it out that way - like i said though it would be really hard to work out!
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 2:09pm
Post #24 of 240
(1984 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The same applies to the LOTR films
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
These are also part of a single story. There are actually fewer subplots in the Hobbit than there were in TTT and ROTK – I found the switching from scene to scene extremely tiresome, especially in ROTK, where the Frodo scenes in particular really dragged on.
For me, the Hobbit felt complete enough.
I really like the sub-plots in the Hobbit, and the fact that there are mysteries still to be revealed, for instance about the goings on at Dul Gurdur and Angmar's grave, and Gandalf's absences. I'm glad we are not ending up with a cartoon-like children's story.
At the end of the day, whatever PJ did, people would still complain endlessly – they did in the case of the LOTR films, too. I thought he did brilliantly. Well, in this case, the films are all part of a single, serialized story rather than three separate stories about the same character. We don't get a complete tale in any one of the three; the added sub-plots just add to the complexity of the whole (although I'm not sure that the 'Azog' story will pay off by adding any depth).
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Mar 6 2013, 2:14pm
Post #25 of 240
(1997 views)
Shortcut
|
From reading some reviews of the film - some where critical of Tolkien's original work, others of HFR, others were about how characters just popped up then were left hanging with no resolution or further development - i think those problems will disappear when the three films can be watched together to show the whole story.
I didn't like Radagast in the film but i am interested to see where his story goes in the next two films.
|
|
|
|
|
1
