|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Altaira
Superuser
Jul 8 2012, 2:07pm
Post #226 of 250
(2467 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I would honestly enjoy seeing it remade too
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm with you, SA. Even though I thoroughly enjoyed PJ's movies, I don't think I'd ever get tired of the excitement and anticipation of the lead up to a new adaptation, and the chance to discuss a different director's interpretation. Though, as I said earlier, there's no such thing as perfect, and I guarantee even you wouldn't like everything a Cuarone did, just like I don't like everything PJ did.
Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.
"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower
"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase
|
|
|
BeornBerserker
Lorien
Jul 8 2012, 3:15pm
Post #227 of 250
(2450 views)
Shortcut
|
Whether one likes PJ's interpretation or not, he had the perseverance to have these movies made in a way that created a multi billion dollar franchise and that received great critical reception. One only has to look at the revenues or movie scoring sites like metacritic or rotten tomatoes to see the success with the general public and critics alike. It makes any discussion about future adaptations a probable reality because the commercial success of the stories is now a given. Otherwise we might be debating Rankin-Bass vs Bakshi and not 3 and soon to be 5, 3 hour live action movie adaptations of the LotR and the Hobbit. New Zealand is now Middle Earth in a way, I doubt any other country could have become and will likely be the home of any future adaptations. I doubt you could find the numbers of incredible landscapes for location shooting, in such a compressed area and do it on the budget New Zealand provides, plus the apparent esprit de corps and comradery that shooting there provided is unquantifiable asset. All these things are owed to PJ whether you like his artistic interpretation or not. I personally was stoked for GDT because I love his story telling and visual interpretations and wish he had stayed on but I know that at least for the current generations, these movies got made and kept Tolkien's books being read at historic levels and relevant and not overshadowed by the newly written fantasy of Rowling or GRRM.
I liked the movies and there are things I would have liked done in a different fashion and would loved to have see GDT helm the hobbit.But I can also see the reason TORN exists and that people have a visual interpretation of the books and the excitement and discussion about Middle Earth and Tolkien is only expanded because a guy new these movies should be made, didn't give up on them, gave 15+ years of his life to making them and did a subjectively good job measured in either dollars(fan reception) or critical reception.
(This post was edited by BeornBerserker on Jul 8 2012, 3:18pm)
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Jul 8 2012, 3:44pm
Post #228 of 250
(2449 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I guess my real problem with Peter Jackson's version
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
lies with the fact there are about 3 hours of strictly made up material, when there was plenty of Tolkien based writings to have fueled the whole of the 3 films and been entertaining to the audience. Also I don't think PJ could write Tolkienesque dialogue if he wanted to, Too much of the dialogue was modernized instead of using the brilliant dialogue Tolkien wrote or something even close. And a blind man could see that some characters were drastically altered from the book version, such as Aragorn or Faramir. several key plot elements were changed, to suite spectacle over substance. When PJ followed the blueprint Tolkien gave him it was well filmed, and brilliant, but when he abandoned that blueprint is where it got cheesy, muddled, and IMO was not as interesting as the books we all love and know.
All that being said I have never claimed to NOT like the LOTR films or Jackson. I merely think the films could have been better and more in line with what Tolkien wrote and been just as entertaining to a general movie going audience. They are good films for what they are worth, which is pure entertainment value, but IMHO they are not a faithful adaptation of the books. Good yes faithful no... Before someone mentions the DVD extra's YES, I've seen all the commentary on the DVD's and all the praise. No one is going to say anything negative, and if they did they wouldn't be seen because it would be edited to spin a positive light on the films. Heck Viggo Mortenson even said the FOTR was the closest to Tolkien and the other 2 weren't close. (something along those lines anyways) And we wonder why Aragorn's not back? Hmmmmm? Would they really have someone say "Well you know, it actually could have been more like Tolkien", on a product they are trying to promote... I think not. Good films but they could have been better.
I personally think they will be remade withing the next 30 to 40 years (which may or may not be in my lifetime) because unlike the days when the "Wizard of Oz" was made, it's no longer about artistic films or making a film for the love of the source material. Its all about the money and how much the studio's can put in its investors pockets. A film series like LOTR made Billions of dollars,the hobbit will likely make a great deal of money also. The studio will obviously know this and do everything they can to cash in on that fact, they don't care about artistic integrity anymore, or didn't we just see that 10 years ago,(Amazing Spiderman point and case) its all about the dollar signs... If they think there is money to be made or they will lose the rights if they don't do something with it in a certain amount of time, they are gonna milk that cash cow for every drop they can get before it runs dry.
There is no guarantee when making a film it will be satisfactory to everyone, someone will always find some fault with it. There are directors out there I love who have produced awful films, and directors I think are horrible (or at least not to my taste) who have put out something that really impressed me. I just think remaking LOTR and the Hobbit (eventually but hopefully in my lifetime) could be promising with the right writer who is not the director. They should hire writers who love the source material first and once the screenplay and script is finished, then get a director who is passionate about the project. When you have a director who wants to be a writer it complicates things because they want to add their own ideas into the source material. But given the right circumstances remakes would be cool. Besides there is money to be made still which is almost a guarantee the studios will try something ... eventually
|
|
|
Altaira
Superuser
Jul 8 2012, 4:29pm
Post #229 of 250
(2470 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, I think we have a while to wait
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Plus, as you stated, and geordie intimated, even the best directors and best writers will never make a movie that everyone will like. No matter who takes it on (even Tolkien himself, as Silverlode has mused), or in what format (e.g., movie, mini-series), it will never live up 100% to our beloved book. That's a conundrum those of us who would like to see a different adaptation would have to live with. But, I think somehow we'd manage. 
Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.
"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower
"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Jul 8 2012, 4:56pm
Post #230 of 250
(2419 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm with you 100%. Why should there ever be an end to interpretations of Middle Earth?
And of course, there would be things in a Cuaron LOTR or Hobbit that I would not like. Certainly. However, his style as a film-maker is so close to my own sensibilities about what film can and should be, that I know I would appreciate them on a level that I just can't appreciate PJ's films. PJ got a few things right, but his films have a cluttered, overwrought and melodramatic sentimentality that just turns me right off.
Then of course, they might get remade by a Michael Bay or something, and then I would have to hide myself in a closet for a while...
Nonetheless, I am hopeful for PJ's the Hobbit. Why? Because it's a simpler story, and I think PJ delivers better when things are straightforward.
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Jul 8 2012, 5:05pm
Post #231 of 250
(2481 views)
Shortcut
|
I weep at that thought... that would surely be a tragedy 
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Jul 8 2012, 5:20pm
Post #232 of 250
(2470 views)
Shortcut
|
Great insight into how such things work Geordie... though your examples relates to movies, the mechanics are in play in most sectors that rely on public opinion.
Part of me wants to call such practices wily-tending-toward-deceitful. On the other hand, because few are able to see honest critique as neutral any more, and because one bad sound bite can lead to an avalanche of negativity and disaster, I can see why managing perceptions has become something of a necessity in some circles. (What lasting good can artfulness produce is another question entirely.)
I really appreciate your comments here, and I love the Garth quote (I wonder if GDT's famous remark about "slavish adaptations" came before or after this was said?) Propaganda, though so much a part of what we are engage with daily, does not get talked about very often (anywhere). Here, apart from a post Squire made almost two years ago, it hardly ever comes up. Sooo.... thank you.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Jul 8 2012, 5:22pm)
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 8 2012, 10:26pm
Post #233 of 250
(2394 views)
Shortcut
|
you're not trying to give The Wizard of Oz as an example of true-to-the-book filmmaking? It bears shockingly little resemblance to the original book, as I discovered when I read it many years after first having seen the movie. In fact, it is exactly the kind of extremely loose interpretation of a book that I most feared LOTR would be. Yeah, it's a great film if you don't know or worry about the original but it's definitely an alternate universe version. I imagine it must have made more than a few book-firsters weep. Early Hollywood under the original studio system didn't seem to bother much at all with faithfulness to source material, whether fiction or non-fiction.
If you want to point to good adaptations, try To Kill a Mockingbird. It would be a much better example.
That said, I agree with you about the modernized dialogue. I don't know whether it was because the scriptwriting team couldn't do archaic, or thought the actors couldn't sell it, or just that the audience wouldn't understand it, but certainly there are a few places it makes me cringe. It will be interesting to see whether the Hobbit script sticks closer to book dialogue. I've sometimes wondered how much the hurried re-expansion of the script from two movies to three and the nightly re-writes affected the tone of the writing in LOTR. The Hobbit script was written under different circumstances, and with the aid of Del Toro, so it will be an interesting comparison.
Silverlode
"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you." -On Fairy Stories
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Jul 9 2012, 12:38am
Post #234 of 250
(2339 views)
Shortcut
|
|
no was not referring to faithfulness to the original
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I was simply referring to back in that time the studio actually made a film for audience entertainment, artistic reasons and love of the source material even though they did make alterations. But overall it was not monetary reasons which is the case now days. Today the studio simply cares about the bottom line and the almighty dollar and satisfying its investors who expect to recoup their money plus a huge profit. In the days of the Wizard of Oz the studio did not have to satisfy investors or be forced to turn a huge profit... I've just always seen it as the principals behind making a film were different in that era, thats all  I mean I am sure they wanted a profit but it wasn't the be all end all of the films they made back then. now if a film makes millions its almost a guarantee that you will see a sequel, prequel, or remake within a reasonable amount of time.
|
|
|
Carne
Tol Eressea
Jul 9 2012, 12:54am
Post #235 of 250
(2298 views)
Shortcut
|
|
They're apparently doing several months of pick-ups next year.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
So a lot of the cast will be back to NZ
(This post was edited by Carne on Jul 9 2012, 12:55am)
|
|
|
sueb1863
Rivendell
Jul 9 2012, 10:20am
Post #236 of 250
(2322 views)
Shortcut
|
So are they done with ALL the filming for both films, or just the first one?
|
|
|
titanium_hobbit
Rohan
Jul 9 2012, 11:54am
Post #237 of 250
(2341 views)
Shortcut
|
! wow. still, lots of time for pickups, etc.
Remember they did that 3 phase shooting thing.
Hobbit firster, Book firster.
Have you explored all of TORN's forums?
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Jul 9 2012, 4:25pm
Post #238 of 250
(2332 views)
Shortcut
|
Though pick up shooting will likely continue well into next year...
|
|
|
sueb1863
Rivendell
Jul 9 2012, 11:10pm
Post #239 of 250
(2203 views)
Shortcut
|
Thanks!
So they've already filmed all of the scenes at Laketown, all of the scenes with Smaug, Smaug destroying Laketown, all of the scenes with the Arkenstone and the dwarves underground with Smaug's treasure, all of the scenes at the Gate, all of the parts of the Battle of Five Armies, all of the wrap-up stuff, and the final scenes with Bilbo returning home?
I guess I'm really surprised that they're already done with both movies. It seems like they got through a whopping lot of material in a pretty short amount of time.
|
|
|
Carne
Tol Eressea
Jul 9 2012, 11:34pm
Post #240 of 250
(2178 views)
Shortcut
|
BO5A will be filmed over the course of 3 months next year. Can't say more.
(This post was edited by Carne on Jul 9 2012, 11:35pm)
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Jul 9 2012, 11:40pm
Post #241 of 250
(2217 views)
Shortcut
|
That's interesting I wonder why? Hmmmm....
|
|
|
JWPlatt
Grey Havens
Jul 9 2012, 11:52pm
Post #242 of 250
(2306 views)
Shortcut
|
How can you call it a "Wrap Party" with a major filming block remaining?
I understand you say "over the course of 3 months," which could be as minimal as one day of filming per month for three months - but still...
Sounds like they're waiting for seasonal weather, if so.
(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Jul 9 2012, 11:52pm)
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Jul 9 2012, 11:59pm
Post #243 of 250
(2280 views)
Shortcut
|
Has absolutely none of it been shot yet?
Also, largely because you said you can't say more, I have another question.
Will it be filmed on location?
|
|
|
Finrod
Rohan
Jul 10 2012, 1:17am
Post #244 of 250
(2285 views)
Shortcut
|
Almost all of the Battle of Five Armies will be computer generated imagery. So it won’t get rendered till next year some time, and will take three months to do so.
At least, that’s one possible way for this to be the wrap but for pickups, yet the Battle still undone.
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
|
|
|
JWPlatt
Grey Havens
Jul 10 2012, 1:22am
Post #245 of 250
(2263 views)
Shortcut
|
Makes sense, particularly when thinking of Pelennor Fields in The Return of The King.
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Jul 10 2012, 1:38am
Post #246 of 250
(2231 views)
Shortcut
|
some of the scenes of close ups have been shot and the rest of the battle will be done with Massive which if memory serves was the name for their A I program.
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Jul 10 2012, 6:09am
Post #247 of 250
(2203 views)
Shortcut
|
There are armies of actual men, elves and dwarves that I very much hope to see in person, with the wind blowing through their hair and banners.
I would be very disappointed if none of the BoFA was filmed on location...
I don't want this fight to happen on a sound stage.
|
|
|
artemy
Lorien
Jul 10 2012, 2:02pm
Post #248 of 250
(2230 views)
Shortcut
|
the trilogy earned the title "epic" from sequences like Helm's Deep and the charge of the Rohirrim at Pelennor Fields involving hundreds of extras -- I highly doubt that with BO5A being the biggest battle sequence in the entire story, PJ would relegate it to being bunch of CG characters on a sound stage
~Beneath the sun, all things must wear to an end at last~
(This post was edited by artemy on Jul 10 2012, 2:03pm)
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Jul 10 2012, 2:11pm
Post #249 of 250
(2195 views)
Shortcut
|
I would be very surprised if it were done completely on a sound stage with only CGI goblins or mostly CGI goblins.
What i would want if i could ask for it, is to have them film the battle on location as the battle of the hornburg (helms deep) was done. For me seeing all the orcs in a line with the men above them was a highlight of the film. As was Theoden's speech before the charge in ROTK.
|
|
|
dave_lf
Gondor
Jul 10 2012, 2:25pm
Post #250 of 250
(2297 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Maybe we won't see that much of the battle
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Remember GdT's comments about wanting to keep Bilbo's unconsciousness in the film? Maybe they will actually do something totally unconventional like the book does--wind things up and then knock Bilbo out right when it's getting interesting and just give us flashes of the highlights after the fact. Nah; probably not. 
|
|
|
|
|
