|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intergalactic Lawman
Rohan
Jun 16 2014, 6:46am
Post #1 of 195
(4966 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Could Peter Jackson have kept everyone happy?
|
Can't Post
|
|
By simply making a childrens version of the hobbit and a more mature version? He always makes a theatrical and extended version.
Somewhere in these films there are a good movie or 2 and with a few cuts here and there of the childish humor and some added blood and grit it surely would be possible!
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Half-elven
Jun 16 2014, 7:17am
Post #2 of 195
(3855 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Wouldn't have keep the studios happy.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
They want a $1B blockbuster. That combination might make a lot of fans happy, but wouldn't bring in the $$ that it takes to keep the studios going.
Some years ago (when I lived in LA) a friend of mine who was in the marketing dept. for a major studio told me that only 15% of the movies released by the major studios make a profit. So, the urgency is to bring out blockbusters that will pay the bills for the smaller films and the failures.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jun 16 2014, 7:37am
Post #3 of 195
(3891 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No. Nothing would have made everyone happy
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And the same would be true whoever made the film. The audience is too diverse.
Take your children's version/ adult version idea for a moment. Which version would be the theatrical version? From your comment about cutting out childish humour I'm guessing it's the adult version you favour. So... say that's the version that comes out in cinemas (and will generally be considered the definitive version). It won't reflect the book at all - that will upset a lot of people. The general audience, knowing the book to be a children's book, will expect and want to go in families and find their children excluded. That won't please people either. And what about the people who want to see singing elves, sheep waiting at table and a talking purse because those things are in The Hobbit? They won't like having to wait for a second cut - presumably on DVD, if the darker version comes out first.
Reverse the process and make the children's film the theatrical version and you have the same problem in reverse.
Nothing will ever please everyone. All any film maker can do is give their best and then some, and follow their own instincts as to what will work. I reckon that's what PEter Jackson's doing, and I reckon he's doing it pretty well.
|
|
|
SafeUnderHill
Rohan
Jun 16 2014, 10:25am
Post #5 of 195
(3692 views)
Shortcut
|
I've seen him say in interviews that you can never please everyone, which is true, he just makes films he would like to see. And there are two good Hobbit films for many people, which are awful to some other people. Best PJ tries to make what he wants rather than try to second guess what others want.
|
|
|
KeenObserver
Lorien
Jun 16 2014, 10:50am
Post #6 of 195
(3708 views)
Shortcut
|
Of course, Mr. Jackson could have avoided upsetting a lot of people by excluding the indecent gags, reducing the amount of CGI, grounding the action, and delivering a more faithful adaptation.
Then you'd have a lot of neutral viewers that are indifferent in regard to this set of films.
I understand why Sir Peter unwaveringly makes movies that he would want to watch more than once and I think that kind of conviction warrants a certain degree of respect.
Luckily, I am one of those individuals that he has been able to keep happy. 
”The thirst for adventure is the vent which Destiny offers; a war, a crusade, a gold mine, a new country, speak to the imagination and offer…” - Jose Bergamin
|
|
|
Noria
Grey Havens
Jun 16 2014, 12:08pm
Post #7 of 195
(3663 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No – the audience for these movies is too diverse.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
How could anyone reconcile the fact that the studios wanted big blockbusters that would make oodles of money, many LotR trilogy fans wanted more LotR and Hobbit book fans wanted a direct adaptation of the novel (which is decidedly not LotR)?
As for two movies, if I understand correctly the OP is talking about a Hobbit trilogy that is similar in style to LotR and one that is closer to the fairy tale like book. Those would be two different movies entirely IMO. A “children’s” version would need to be shot and edited very differently than an “adult” version. Adding a little gore and cutting other stuff wouldn't do it. The extended versions of the LotR films and AUJ are not entirely different movies but were slightly reedited to incorporate some additional scenes that were originally intended for the movie anyway.
I agree that PJ is right to make the movies he wants to make and let the audiences decide.
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Jun 16 2014, 1:47pm
Post #8 of 195
(3637 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It was impossible for PJ and Co to make everyone happy -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Too many people wanted different things (including the studios who want their billions).
The movies aren't exactly as I'd wanted them, but I'm fairly happy with them so far (though I'm waiting for the remaining EEs to form a final opinion).
Also reading the posts that suggest the ways the movies could have been 'improved' (quite a few that I disagree with) by various members of this forum convinces me that PJ and Co had a very difficult task in completely pleasing all the different types of audiences.
___________________________________________________
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'.
(This post was edited by Hanzkaz on Jun 16 2014, 1:53pm)
|
|
|
Kendalf
Rohan
Jun 16 2014, 2:25pm
Post #9 of 195
(3636 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, he could have pleased more but never all
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
KeenObserver: "Of course, Mr. Jackson could have avoided upsetting a lot of people by excluding the indecent gags, reducing the amount of CGI, grounding the action, and delivering a more faithful adaptation."
I think this is a fair point and a good one. No, Jackson could never have pleased everyone with his adaptation. No-one could have...but, I think it's entirely reasonable to postulate that, had he shown a little more restraint here and there, he'd have pleased more of them.
Half the reasons people give for not feeling able to embrace these new films as fully as the original trilogy are attributable to excess of one type or another. Rarely do people say "I loathe the casting of ..." or "Dear Lord, the design of ... is appalling" or "Geez, that Thrice Welcome theme is really poor, isn't it?". Instead, the majority of complaints are grounded in a feeling that, repeatedly, in a number of ways, Jackson simply went too far whether it be with the humour, the alterations, the CG, the action, whatever...
"I have walked there sometimes, beyond the forest and up into the night. I have seen the world fall away and the white light of forever fill the air."
(This post was edited by Kendalf on Jun 16 2014, 2:26pm)
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Jun 16 2014, 2:40pm
Post #10 of 195
(3610 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"You see, you can't please everyone..."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"...so you got to please yourself."
-Eric Hilliard "Rick" Nelson
******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”
|
|
|
Elessar
Valinor
Jun 16 2014, 3:17pm
Post #11 of 195
(3596 views)
Shortcut
|
It was never gonna happen and it didn't happen with LOTR. So why wouldn't anyone be of the mind it could happen here. Tolkien himself didn't please everyone with The Hobbit either. I know more than a couple of folks that don't care for the book as much as they do the LOTR books. So
|
|
|
tsmith675
Gondor
Jun 16 2014, 3:28pm
Post #12 of 195
(3604 views)
Shortcut
|
No.
Our destiny lies above us.
|
|
|
J Pierpont Flathead
Rivendell
Jun 16 2014, 3:46pm
Post #14 of 195
(3567 views)
Shortcut
|
KeenObserver: "Of course, Mr. Jackson could have avoided upsetting a lot of people by excluding the indecent gags, reducing the amount of CGI, grounding the action, and delivering a more faithful adaptation."
I think this is a fair point and a good one. No, Jackson could never have pleased everyone with his adaptation. No-one could have...but, I think it's entirely reasonable to postulate that, had he shown a little more restraint here and there, he'd have pleased more of them.
Thank you Kendalf for this sort of what-could-be-better response instead of setting up an all-or-nothing strawman absolute to be knocked over.
Now his life is full of wonder
But his heart still knows some fear
Of a simple thing he cannot comprehend
Why they try to tear the mountains down
To bring in a couple more
More people, more scars upon the land
|
|
|
SaulComposer
Rohan
Jun 16 2014, 4:06pm
Post #15 of 195
(3554 views)
Shortcut
|
The work PJ did with The Hobbit when you compare it to LOTR, the disappointment is obvious for many, but many do like it...but I can't count myself with them...
Music!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
TnuaccayM
Bree
Jun 16 2014, 5:29pm
Post #16 of 195
(3520 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think these films are already the "mature" version
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Many people complain about the films for not being faithful adaptations but at the same time for being too childish. The films that PJ is doing, in my opinion, are already a mature version of this story, mostly just to create a connection between TH and LOTR. But at the same time with some funny and entertaining moments to appeal to a broader audience. If PJ made a movie that still remained faithful to the book then it would have ended like something like Maleficent. The fact is that he did a good job adapting the story in a more mature way (even if it's still not mature enough for some) and at the same time keeping the sense of fantasy and adventure in it. But well, there will always be people that will complain, especially after watching so serious and grim movies like LOTR. And by the way, I think that The Hobbit is more enjoyable and has a more compelling story than LOTR, and I am talking about the films, not the book.
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Jun 16 2014, 6:57pm
Post #17 of 195
(3487 views)
Shortcut
|
No.
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jun 16 2014, 7:15pm
Post #18 of 195
(3518 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm not sure anyone would like my adaptation of The Hobbit,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Which would include the fairy elements:
- The Talking Purse
- Talking eagles
- Singing elves
- Dwarf spells
- Beorn's animals
- Singing Goblins and Wargs
- All of Gollum/Bilbo's riddles
As well as other non-Tolkien canon pieces:
- Cameos from Frodo and Old Bilbo, Gimli, Aragorn and Arwen
- Tauriel (yup, I'm a NARF)
- Visits/flashbacks/flashbacks sideways to Mount Gundabad, Ered Luin
- Epilogue scene with Balin retaking Moria
- Dol Guldur, and White Council scenes (including Cirdan and Radagast, possibly Glorfindel)
- Breaks at Bree and Weathertop
Mixed in with the story we are all familiar with. Though I might be tempted to remove the Goblin King and replace him with Bolg.
My idea of a good movie ≠ a good movie to anyone else.
(This post was edited by DanielLB on Jun 16 2014, 7:23pm)
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jun 16 2014, 7:46pm
Post #20 of 195
(3457 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm keeping the golden statue and the rivers running gold from the Mountain.... Lots of Thranduil and Thorin...
I'd like the enchanted river and the elf fires, please, somewhere nice and safe, away from the spiders (in my version I might be tempted to turn them into evil squirrels)
Have we made it a six-part film yet? 
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Jun 16 2014, 8:07pm
Post #21 of 195
(3451 views)
Shortcut
|
As the Immortal Mick Jaggur SANG? "You Don't Get what you WANT...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You Get what
YOU ...Neeeee..D.."
Same w/ PJzzzz Filmzzz...
Bom, Your Local
BadASS..
(An Embear-Assment to the TORn community?)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jun 16 2014, 8:09pm
Post #22 of 195
(3435 views)
Shortcut
|
I forgot about the elf fires. They are a must.
|
|
|
cats16
Half-elven
Jun 16 2014, 10:37pm
Post #23 of 195
(3406 views)
Shortcut
|
|
|
|
Ham_Sammy
Tol Eressea
Jun 17 2014, 2:07am
Post #24 of 195
(3380 views)
Shortcut
|
No. Which as an artist, director you make the movie you want. It's an artistic deal. you make what you want because you will never end up pleasing everyone everywhere.
At the same time it has to be marketable as this is a very expensive movie to make. So there's the rub between artistic expression and the business reality.
We are along for the ride. I choose to just enjoy (or not) his vision for each film. But I absolutely think he did the right thing in making the movie he wanted because ou cannot please everyone.
Thank you for your questions, now go sod off and do something useful - Martin Freeman Twitter chat 3/1/13
|
|
|
DaughterofLaketown
Gondor
Jun 17 2014, 2:28am
Post #25 of 195
(3362 views)
Shortcut
|
No one could please everyone. Not in an imperfect world.
|
|
|
|
|
1
