|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lionoferebor
Rohan
Aug 30 2015, 4:39am
Post #26 of 48
(2132 views)
Shortcut
|
 
As I said I believe PJ is responsible for his part, however I cannot wrap my head around the idea that WB had no say in these films. Film making is a form of art and as much as I would like to believe the entire process - from start to finish - is solely left to the director's creative mind...it's also a business. The director and studio in a way business partners, and as with any relationship each party has to to give a little and take a little.
|
|
|
LordGawain
Rivendell
Aug 30 2015, 10:04am
Post #28 of 48
(2038 views)
Shortcut
|
In Hollywood, studios have a lot of power over the film, because they fund it. The Director is on their pay roll, adn in extreme cases they can fire him. In the end, studios have the final say, theoretically. Of course, every studio deals with this power in their own way. Some studios tend to trust the director more, while others have a reputation for interfering.
A good example is Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven. 20th Century Fox gave Scott a lot of control during Production, but decided to interfere with the editing so that the film would be shorter and therefore, the individual movie tickets would be cheaper, since theaters have the tradition to ask more money if a film is over three hours long. In doing so, Fox forced Scott to cut almost an hour of material out of his movie. Years later, Fox allowed him to release a director's cut, restoring the edit. While the theatrical edition received mixed reviews, this version made much more sense story wise, has a greater focus on character, and is in my opinion by far the best historical movie Scott has made as of yet. While Fox did release this Director's Cut and used this version for the blu-ray release, they refused to advertise or promote it, so sadly, not many people know it exists.
Half a league, half a league, half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death, rode the six hundred.
'Forward, the Light Brigade! Charge for the guns' he said:
Into the valley of Death rode the six hundred.
Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death rode the six hundred.
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Aug 30 2015, 1:36pm
Post #29 of 48
(1942 views)
Shortcut
|
We know for a fact (don't we?) that it was Warner Bros. that set the limits for the run-time for TH:BotFA theatrical cut.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Susan
Bree
Aug 30 2015, 2:05pm
Post #30 of 48
(1914 views)
Shortcut
|
Interestingly enough, 20th Century Fox was also the studio behind Fantastic Four (which has been receiving extremely negative reviews). So I'm guessing they tend to really go to town with their power. In any case, I enjoyed Kingdom of Heaven and will have to check out the Director's Cut; thank you for bringing that up.
With PJ and WB, I feel as though PJ was given less autonomy as the series progressed. He was probably able to control most of AUJ, since the studio had a few more tries to get it right, so to speak, and they could rely on the director's name and the movie's title to sell a good number of tickets. But it seems as though WB had more of a say in DOS and BOTFA, "suggesting" or changing things based on what critics seemed to like/not like about AUJ (ex. the later two movies had a much more brisk pace with progressively shorter runtimes). So perhaps influence shifted from 80/20 or 70/30 at the beginning of the trilogy, to 50/50 or maybe even 40/60 at the end.
|
|
|
LordGawain
Rivendell
Aug 30 2015, 2:17pm
Post #31 of 48
(1910 views)
Shortcut
|
You really should, I've never seen a director's cut improve a film so much. While Kingdom of Heaven was indeed an enjoyable film in its theatrical form, I found the extended edition to be one of the best historical films I've ever seen. It has much better character progression, which allows the terrific cast to truly shine, the script gets much more breathing time, and important plot points are put back into the film, making it much more personal and touching.
Half a league, half a league, half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death, rode the six hundred.
'Forward, the Light Brigade! Charge for the guns' he said:
Into the valley of Death rode the six hundred.
Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death rode the six hundred.
|
|
|
NManfredi
Rivendell
Aug 30 2015, 3:05pm
Post #32 of 48
(1888 views)
Shortcut
|
|
If there isn't any facts, we will never know who made the changes
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But I would argue that it doesn't matter, and that both PJ and WB seem to have wanted to make the changes and expanding the work into a trilogy. My guess, is that their desires for that to happen were pretty different. WB liked the idea because it would give them more profit, and PJ liked it because it could let him flesh out the characters more and give the story more breathing space.
I don't mean to say that I like everything he did, but what I will argue is that I don't really care that the movies were made into 3 movies, even if we have some scenes that could have been executed better, as the Kili and Tauriel ones. Even so, the character of Tauriel was a very welcome one, imo, and I don't thing it "destroyed" the story or anything like that.
On the other topic, and as some have said, I think that WB may have been behind the edit of BOFTA. But I don't know for sure. Anyway, the EE's for both AUJ and DOS have made the movies much better, imo, and I feel that it will be the same for BOFTA.
"Is it not a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt for so small a thing? So small a thing! And I have seen it only for an instant in the house of Elrond! Could I not have a sight of it again?"
|
|
|
lionoferebor
Rohan
Aug 30 2015, 5:27pm
Post #33 of 48
(1824 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I too hope the EE will once again be an improvement...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I don't mean to say that I like everything he did, but what I will argue is that I don't really care that the movies were made into 3 movies, even if we have some scenes that could have been executed better, as the Kili and Tauriel ones. Even so, the character of Tauriel was a very welcome one, imo, and I don't thing it "destroyed" the story or anything like that.
It wasn't Tauriel that "destroyed" the story, but rather the Kili/Tauriel subplot. IMHO had Tauriel remained a "strong female" character with no romantics ties I think more fans would have been okay with her. I also feel had the Kili/Tauriel subplot been executed differently - not hindering other character relationships *cough* Fili and Kili - more fans may have been okay with it as well.
Moving on...
On the other topic, and as some have said, I think that WB may have been behind the edit of BOFTA. But I don't know for sure. Anyway, the EE's for both AUJ and DOS have made the movies much better, imo, and I feel that it will be the same for BOFTA.
I too hope the EE will once again be an improvement, however with all the plot holes that need to be filled and storylines that need to be tied, with only 20 minutes how much of an improvement will it be? Unlike AUJ and DOS where plots and storylines could carry over to the next film or two, that is not the case with BOTFA...though some material will carry over to the LOTR. There is a lot that needs to be added to and concluded in this final film and I'm not sure 20 minutes is enough.
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Aug 30 2015, 5:40pm
Post #34 of 48
(1821 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I would disagree the editing.....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
On the other topic, and as some have said, I think that WB may have been behind the edit of BOFTA.
In the sense that while yes, I am sure the studio made comments and wanted this or that, based on PJ's and Philipa's own comments, I think their decisions were their own, and also some past histories.
Eg:
- Folks more knowledgeable about the LOTR films can comment about this one, but "elevation" of Arwen as a character from the IMO book depiction; years later we have a female elf where there was none, also elevated as a major character and also with a romantic arc. Also a comment about how PJ "loves the idea of a female elf" - I think that went all the way back to LOTR - and Philipa and her talk of "these movies need feminine energy". I just think PJ & co. are in love with the idea of romance arcs in these films.
- PJ (in an Empire article, I think it was) stating that BOFA would have a "short and snappy" pace - also later there would be the comments on having to cut stuff to maintain the rating, but IMO that is not WB interfering per se. Early on there were comments re how short BOFA would be *sigh*.
- PJ openly saying he was going to make these films his way - comments in the Appendices about "not competing with himself" which I think also may have led to him having a rapid pace for DOS and BOFA?; that BOFA especially would have a "thriller pace"; and a comment alluding to the fact that the journey was essentially over - e.g. that the players are all lined up and ready to go.
(True enough, but I wonder if that thinking also contributed to editing BOFA rapid-fire in many places, and being less inclined to focus on some character moments such as, say, Bofur and Bilbo having a conversation.
E.g the character moments that were preserved probably could be considered "critical" in either telling an audience the story or PJ felt they were important comic moments. Other moments like dwarf interaction, some explanation perhaps of the white gems, and so on - even the dwarves with Thorin at the end, and coming for Fili (if that was even filmed) were stripped to the minimum as far as I can tell.)
For me it just seems that is the way PJ directs at times, e.g. re the missing Thranduil/dwarf scene in DOS, re PJ's own comments that "everyone was great and we spent quite a lot of time on it, but the dwarves are there and you just want to get them in the cells..." - that PJ directs at times in terms of "action" in the sense of moving characters from place to place. Not in terms of color of that action, e.g., in that case adding the richness of detail and interest of the contrast of the scruffy, defiant dwarves vs. the elegant and powerful Elven King.
- I don't think WB would have said "let's not give Fili any lines and keep him to the background"...I do think WB and also PJ's camp have some sense of social media, and the concept by the end of DOS "I belong with my brother" as far as I can tell in the art, Tumblr, and Pinterest communities certainly resonated within the graphic communities - not that I am a media expert, but I see lots of 'shopping and drawings or comics of the concept, or the concept of family:
Fili is one of the "hot dwarves" after all. 
- IMO it was PJ's choice, not WB's, to expand Legolas' role - re Legolas too, I imagine a lot of his stuff is expensive to finalize, frame by frame.
So you're heavily investing in a character at that point - and also OB mentions "talking with PJ" over the part - but no mention of discussing with studio heads is ever made by OB that I know of. (Which can and does happen, when a studio executive is interested - nothing wrong with that, I guess sometimes it's reassuring for an uneasy actor.)
Anyway for me - I just haven't gotten the sense that WB interfered a lot with the Hobbit films - I know about the KOH situation (and completely agree that the Director's Cut of Kingdom of Heaven is THE version to watch - just gorgeous and amazing!!!!! with some great performances) - but I suspect, outside of watching the daily budget, that WB gave PJ a fair amount of freedom.
Maybe a little interference would have been a good thing LOL, tho. Like some studio excecutive pointing out that you've got this amazing, kick-ass bear-creature and you're not using more of that????
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Aug 30 2015, 5:55pm
Post #35 of 48
(1807 views)
Shortcut
|
It wasn't Tauriel that "destroyed" the story, but rather the Kili/Tauriel subplot. IMHO had Tauriel remained a "strong female" character with no romantics ties I think more fans would have been okay with her. I also feel had the Kili/Tauriel subplot been executed differently - not hindering other character relationships *cough* Fili and Kili - more fans may have been okay with it as well.
For me - I'm not in love with the idea of Tauriel as a "strong female character" per se as my concept of that - for me - is quite different. That said, even with the *notorious* healing scene, if Tauriel and Kili had separated at the lake for the rest of BOFA (a scene IMO which is quite beautifully done, and well acted) and Tauriel had gone on to fight more - IMO waste of EL's potential there.
I could picture her, even banished, staying around, doing the "disgraced warrior who steps into battle" thing. I'd rather watch Tauriel fighting orcs than EL having to force out cheesy lines.
And I would have like to have seen more of Fili fighting, too.
You know, like where this banner kind of implies to me that Fili would be doing some kick-ass battle stuff as a pretty important character, and for more than a few seconds.
|
|
|
NManfredi
Rivendell
Aug 30 2015, 6:05pm
Post #36 of 48
(1803 views)
Shortcut
|
It seems that you made some quite good points right there. I would like to confirm some of them, though. One of the reasons I'll definitely buy the EE is those promised 9 hours of footage of how BOFTA was filmed. In the end, I think it might have been a little of both –WB and PJ– but what's clear is that PJ wanted a lot of Legolas in the movies (which I do not disagree with, except in the over the top scene of Legola's jumping on the rocks and some others, that was too much and unneeded.)
And yes, the Director's cut for Kingdom of Heaven is definitely the best cut of the movie.
"Is it not a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt for so small a thing? So small a thing! And I have seen it only for an instant in the house of Elrond! Could I not have a sight of it again?"
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Aug 30 2015, 6:43pm
Post #37 of 48
(1774 views)
Shortcut
|
Well, OK, here are a few sources - there are more along this line, especially the furor over Tauriel - anyway I just don't get the impression that PJ & co. weren't doing things pretty much, as they wanted to - within keeping to the budget and so on.
Ms. Walsh and Ms. Boyens, a former teacher and hard-core Tolkien fan, said part of the solution came from Tolkien’s appendices to “The Lord of the Rings.” Those materials helped the writers create a bigger part for Gollum, a fan favorite, and explain the relationship between Gandalf and Thorin, an exiled king played by the British actor Richard Armitage. But that only got them so far. In Tolkien’s largely female-free “Hobbit,” Ms. Boyens said, “The lack of feminine energy becomes very evident.” “And oppressive,” Ms. Walsh added. To work toward a solution they added a “Lord of the Rings” character — the ethereal elf Galadriel, played by Cate Blanchett — to the “Hobbit” story. The move prompted a dust-up among some Tolkien fans, but Ms. Walsh and Ms. Boyens said it was important to them, both as storytellers and as women, to add a female character who could bring more emotional depth to the spectacle. “That’s really important if you are going to touch the audience in a meaningful way,” Ms. Boyens said. Length, Ms. Walsh added, is generally not a problem because they err on the side of overwriting. “We tend to write our way into a scene and write our way out,” she said. Mr. Jackson “will then revise us,” she added. “And he always makes it shorter.”
http://www.nytimes.com/...nt-partner.html?_r=0
http://thorinoakenshield.net/...-middle-earth-issue/
Knowing how successful The Lord Of The Rings trilogy was, and also the fact that Legolas isn’t actually in The Hobbit, and you mentioned the excitement, but was there ever any hesitation on your part about taking a role in this film?
BLOOM: Not after I had spoken to Peter. Their ideas, which I have explained, were made to clear to me about how it could be made seamless and effective. Not after I’d had that conversation. It was definitely something that anyone would think. There’s a big love for these books and these films and these stories. I think in the hands of Peter, the fans, I would hope, would feel rest assured that he will deliver a movie that will both entertain and enjoy and will be in keeping with Tolkien’s vision of the stories. They never stray at all from Tolkien’s vision of what the world is, and for me it was exciting to think of returning to Middle Earth and to be a part of something. This is Pete in his element, doing what he does best. So it was just very exciting.
http://collider.com/...-of-smaug-interview/
Philippa Boyens: The gems! It started with the gems. It will be fleshed out in the extended cut. Legolas’ Mother was never mentioned but we like that idea and it’s a bit more than “ I want my gems back”[laughs]…in the end it never gets told necessarily but informs the actor when you deliver that line [referring to Pace} “Your Mother loved you”, it has a power that I thought would have the backstory that she died and the only thing he has remaining of her that Thranduil has are these gems.
(*cough, cough*)
Peter Jackson: The only thing we’ll be doing is in the new year is the extended cuts. The extended cut is interesting because, it’s not the dumping ground for outtakes and a way to make more money as a lot of people may think. To me, it’s essentially the same story from two different experiences of viewing.
You know, I’m a guy who wants to make other things and it would be a sad thing to spend the rest of my life going back over these films to try and make them better.
Um.
http://www.legendariummedia.com/...ace-philippa-boyens/
“It’s very snappy, it’s got very short scenes, it whizzes along,” said Jackson, who already has begun writing scripts with Walsh for projects that have nothing to do with hobbits, orcs or goblins. “The other five Tolkien movies have all had journeys…This movie, there ain’t no traveling. Everybody’s exactly where they need to be.
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/...with-five-armies/#/0
|
|
|
lionoferebor
Rohan
Aug 30 2015, 6:50pm
Post #38 of 48
(1763 views)
Shortcut
|
with you on Legolas. I believe he was PJ's idea, and - IMO - a good one from the start that essentially was carried away...by a bat. 
When it comes to Legolas and action...Iess is more. For myself one of his best moments in this triology is at Ravenhill when he starts firing at the orcs coming toward Thorin. It's simple - not ott - and it's a great moment that makes me want to cheer.
|
|
|
Hanzkaz
Rohan
Aug 30 2015, 7:06pm
Post #39 of 48
(1742 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I actually liked the character of Tauriel -
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It wasn't Tauriel that "destroyed" the story, but rather the Kili/Tauriel subplot.
but the Tauriel/Kili business reminded of the Anakin/Padme 'romance' (That was what it was, right?) in the Star Wars prequels. Well, not that bad. I think.
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'.
|
|
|
Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea
Aug 30 2015, 7:14pm
Post #40 of 48
(1737 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Scott shares responsibility there...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It's a common misconception that Fox "forced" Ridley Scott to cut down Kingdom of Heaven, but in actuality, Ridley had final cut. If you listen to Ridley's interviews, he goes on about wanting to have good working relationships with the studios and respecting the fact that they've put money into his projects, and he tries not to make his films any longer than he feels they have to be.
In the case of Kingdom of Heaven, he acknowledged that he made a mistake and that the longer cut was the way to go.
Here's one such interview where he talks about it (start at around 1:50): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqeyI1RPz6o
Also, the Director's Cut actually came out the same year as the Theatrical Version. It had an under-promoted theatrical release in L.A. in December 2005, and was subsequently released on DVD in May of 2006.
"The danger with any movie that does as well as this one does is that the amount of money it's making and the number of awards that it's got becomes almost more important than the movie itself in people's minds. I look at that as, in a sense, being very much like the Ring, and its effect on people. You know, you can kind of forget what we were doing, if you get too wrapped up in that."
- Viggo Mortensen
(This post was edited by Aragorn the Elfstone on Aug 30 2015, 7:15pm)
|
|
|
Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea
Aug 30 2015, 7:17pm
Post #41 of 48
(1741 views)
Shortcut
|
Is that actually a fact, or something just tossed around as fact on the forums?
"The danger with any movie that does as well as this one does is that the amount of money it's making and the number of awards that it's got becomes almost more important than the movie itself in people's minds. I look at that as, in a sense, being very much like the Ring, and its effect on people. You know, you can kind of forget what we were doing, if you get too wrapped up in that."
- Viggo Mortensen
|
|
|
NManfredi
Rivendell
Aug 30 2015, 7:38pm
Post #42 of 48
(1713 views)
Shortcut
|
It seems as if he had a lot of freedom to work with, then. It remains to be seen how the whole production process went to confirm the theory of PJ delivering the movies he wanted, but I would say it's quite a likely one.
"Is it not a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt for so small a thing? So small a thing! And I have seen it only for an instant in the house of Elrond! Could I not have a sight of it again?"
|
|
|
NManfredi
Rivendell
Aug 30 2015, 7:51pm
Post #43 of 48
(1702 views)
Shortcut
|
I agree with you completely, Legolas' involvement was one of the things I liked most of all the additions that the trilogy had. I think he had a very nice backstory, and the execution of how he never intended to help Dwarves in the first place –but finally understood the scale of the war they were facing and decided to help them– was a nice plot, imo. It would have rounded up so much better if he hadn't had some of the ott scenes he got in the trilogy.
"Is it not a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt for so small a thing? So small a thing! And I have seen it only for an instant in the house of Elrond! Could I not have a sight of it again?"
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Aug 30 2015, 8:30pm
Post #45 of 48
(1688 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm pretty sure that I remember reading (in Empire? Maybe not) that Warners imposed a runtime of under 2 hrs. 30 minutes on the movie. I do know that Peter Jackson had somewhere discussed the necessity for keeping this film tighter than the previous entries. I'm sorry that I can't be more specific.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Elanor of Rohan
Lorien
Aug 30 2015, 9:13pm
Post #46 of 48
(1655 views)
Shortcut
|
but unfortunately I can't be more specific, too.
|
|
|
DjU
Lorien
Aug 31 2015, 12:30am
Post #47 of 48
(1599 views)
Shortcut
|
Is that actually a fact, or something just tossed around as fact on the forums?
No we don't know that, the fact it can't be accurately sourced says volumes.
File under 'Internet Tales'
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Aug 31 2015, 1:33am
Post #48 of 48
(1583 views)
Shortcut
|
that you read it (that WB would like the movies to keep to a certain time limit)...sometimes I wish I kept links of all the articles, but I don't...
The ones that stick in my head the most - or that I know I read - either were great reads because the actors were really allowed to express themselves - I remember a wonderful article w. Richard Armitage and Lee Pace, where LP talks about preparing and walking in the woods, and RA had some great thoughtful comments.... (think that was F---magazine)
and the flurry of really fun, interesting articles as the dwarves were revealed.....
or,
the articles that just get me upset - and that would include the first hints that BOFA was in no way going to be the epic, grand, bleeding, gutwrenching, Helm's Deep-type film I had envisioned (not that PJ asked MY opinion) and worse it was going to be SHORT - what the????? (although IMO in some ways it had what I envisioned, but not those long lingering shots of taut dwarf faces and the grim sound of Dwalin sharpening his axe in the silence as the battle is heard outside the walls, and so on...)
and also the commentaries mostly from Ms. Boyens and occasionally EL, e.g.,
To work toward a solution they added a “Lord of the Rings” character — the ethereal elf Galadriel, played by Cate Blanchett — to the “Hobbit” story. The move prompted a dust-up among some Tolkien fans, but Ms. Walsh and Ms. Boyens said it was important to them, both as storytellers and as women, to add a female character who could bring more emotional depth to the spectacle.
“That’s really important if you are going to touch the audience in a meaningful way,” Ms. Boyens said.
I suppose this pre-dates Tauriel, but of course there's many comments like:
She [Philipa Boyens] also spoke of the creation of Tauriel, a controversial addition to the second and third Hobbit films:
The female energy is great, and she’s become one of the most popular characters in the film so I feel like we made the right choice there. It allowed younger women a way into the story, and it also leavened it because you can feel the blokiness of 13 dwarfs after a while. http://www.tolkiensociety.org/...angst-of-adaptation/
(*meh* not to derail the thread, but for me these kind of comments will always be pretty outrageous - and upsetting. But what's done is done.)
Anyway, as far as I can remember it just seems as tho PJ & co. were comfortably handling the narrative, and there didn't seem to be any hint of WB being a pain to deal with, especially.
(This post was edited by Avandel on Aug 31 2015, 1:34am)
|
|
|
|
|
