Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Would you wait for PJ to Direct?
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Shargul
The Shire

Dec 20 2007, 7:57pm

Post #51 of 65 (227 views)
Shortcut
Yes! [In reply to] Can't Post

Peter! Peter! Peter!


EcossElf
The Shire

Dec 20 2007, 8:36pm

Post #52 of 65 (242 views)
Shortcut
good thinking Deej [In reply to] Can't Post

Yo Deej great thinking for Martin Freeman as Bilbo; I feel he would be a master at him!
EcossElf
Onen i-estel edain...I gave hope to men...they gave us PJ back for the Hobbit!


Juju31
The Shire

Dec 21 2007, 2:46am

Post #53 of 65 (231 views)
Shortcut
Maegwen & AnthonyP [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Are motion picture writers affected by the strike? I haven't been following that closely.


Yes, Maegwen, writers for all media are on strike.
AnthonyP, I found an email address for Kamins but am not sure if it's good as it's attached to their former street address. His company's website is still under construction, but anyway it would be hard on the guy to have to deal with a box full of thousands of messages. He be more p.o.'ed at us than ready to listen to us.


anthonylp77
Registered User

Dec 21 2007, 3:02am

Post #54 of 65 (211 views)
Shortcut
what course then? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

In Reply To
Are motion picture writers affected by the strike? I haven't been following that closely.


Yes, Maegwen, writers for all media are on strike.
AnthonyP, I found an email address for Kamins but am not sure if it's good as it's attached to their former street address. His company's website is still under construction, but anyway it would be hard on the guy to have to deal with a box full of thousands of messages. He be more p.o.'ed at us than ready to listen to us.


I see and agree with what you're saying. What then is the right course? How do we make our voices heard without causing those whom we want to hear and need to hear us most to turn a deaf ear to us? A letter-writing campaign, a simple petition as I suggested first, or perhaps an alternate course not yet brought forth!? What can we do to make it clear what we want and insure that it is heard and considered thoroughly? Any comments or suggestions are welcome either from you Juju or anyone reading this.

Thank you all for your time, support, and efforts; Anthony P.


Juju31
The Shire


Dec 21 2007, 3:49am

Post #55 of 65 (203 views)
Shortcut
what course then? - reply [In reply to] Can't Post

Whatever will be the least amount of work/tasks for him to get our message to Peter. The more paper there is (without having to print out an email), the more affect it will have. So, yeah, petitions and individual letters would do it.
I've tried to come up with some things just based on past history and the press articles over the past few days about which we can elaborate.
Harry Sloan has always supported Peter and has been the voice of reason for the past 2 years. If the suit was settled and P is involved at all with The Hobbit, it's due to his efforts. I think his role should be acknowledged and he should be thanked. I also think Bob Shaye should be ignored - or forgiven and made part of the communications. Whatever you want to do.
Peter's operating under the misunderstanding that we don't want to wait. He needs to hear it from whomever (Kamins or Sloan) that, for most of us, this is untrue. Sure, it'll take years to write, prep, shoot and edit and so what? Children grow, are introduced to the books, see the films, join the online forums, and presumably will also look forward to seeing The Hobbit. These are future paying customers so, from a business stand point (good to tell Sloan), time is an asset. More backsides to fill the seats = more $.
With Peter's weight loss, he's in better physical shape with more stamina than he was on LOTR. He can do this. The question in my mind is 'does he want to?' Maybe he really doesn't want to be as involved yet he wants some measure of control. Of course, we don't mention this last part. Crazy
Thoughts? Additional points?


elentari3018
Lorien


Dec 21 2007, 7:19am

Post #56 of 65 (191 views)
Shortcut
Thanks for the address! [In reply to] Can't Post

Definitely will look into writing. :)

"By Elbereth and Luthien the fair, you shall have neither the Ring nor me!" ~Frodo

"And then Gandalf arose and bid all men rise, and they rose, and he said: 'Here is a last hail ere the feast endeth. Last but not least. For I name now those who shall not be forgotten and without whose valour nought else that was done would have availed; and I name before you all Frodo of the Shire and Samwise his servant. And the bards and the minstrels should give them new names: Bronwe athan Harthad and Harthad Uluithiad , Endurance beyond Hope and Hope Unquenchable.." ~Gandalf, The End of the Third Age , from The History of Middle Earth series


Galadriel Lady Of Light
The Shire


Dec 21 2007, 8:17am

Post #57 of 65 (204 views)
Shortcut
I'd Love PJ to do it [In reply to] Can't Post

I can't imagine anyone else directing The Hobbit after what PJ has done with TLOTR films


Hrnbrgr
Registered User

Dec 21 2007, 6:10pm

Post #58 of 65 (194 views)
Shortcut
Jackson--who cares? [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, it was a monumental task to bring LotR to the big screen; however, with the disappointing (very disappointing) film conclusion (the removal of The Scouring of the Shire), I really feel someone else who will consistently stick to the MAIN POINTS of the novel would do a better job. Yes, I know writers/directors can't include everything; however, if you're going to the extent of making three films, don't sell your audience short and totally disregard an incredibly important aspect/theme of the literary work. I would've sat in the theater for an hour or even two hours more (why not a fourth film?)...and so would thousands and thousands (millions?) of other people.


merklynn
Lorien

Dec 21 2007, 6:24pm

Post #59 of 65 (212 views)
Shortcut
ROTK endings... [In reply to] Can't Post

I hear what you are saying. I think the problem was that ROTK doesn't translate well to a Hollywood/mainstream film. ROTK's purpose in the LOTR trilogy (books) is to conclude everything. Really if you look at the trilogy as one giant story (which it is) then you have FOTR as the beginning, TTT as the middle, and ROTK as the end. Because of this, the third book is concluding and tying everything up for hundreds of pages. The concluding that began with the Shire was part of the book and obviously was very important. But when you have a film which is primarily just conclusions, you don't have the same clear movie storytelling format.

There is so much to conclude that you have to find a way of keeping the film with its own unique beginning, middle and end. As it stands, Jackson gave us a lot of endings, which did drag for a lot of the mainstream public. I think you are right that there almost needs to be a fourth mini film (ie a film that is 2 hours or less -- probably not something Jackson can make Wink ) to have handled the Shire / Saruman scenes. But as far as it being cut, I can understand the difficulties of its inclusion when you have to decide what else must be cut to be able to include this scene. Something has to be dropped when you have a film which is pushing past 4 hours. I know it sucks and that it IS a big BIG deal that this important part of ROTK was dropped, but the movies still managed to work well with the changes that were made.


(This post was edited by merklynn on Dec 21 2007, 6:25pm)


HUORN
The Shire

Dec 23 2007, 5:37am

Post #60 of 65 (167 views)
Shortcut
Word [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Yes, it was a monumental task to bring LotR to the big screen; however, with the disappointing (very disappointing) film conclusion (the removal of The Scouring of the Shire), I really feel someone else who will consistently stick to the MAIN POINTS of the novel would do a better job. Yes, I know writers/directors can't include everything; however, if you're going to the extent of making three films, don't sell your audience short and totally disregard an incredibly important aspect/theme of the literary work. I would've sat in the theater for an hour or even two hours more (why not a fourth film?)...and so would thousands and thousands (millions?) of other people.



Can't agree more except.....I kind of like the omission of the scourging of the Shire. I like how Frodo and company return to the Shire and it's as if nothing had happened. I like when all the hobbits are ignoring the four because someone walked in with a prize-winning pumpkin. To me the Shire remainimg unscathed would have been the biggest victory for Aragorn, especially. He and his rangers fought and toiled to keep the north safe and secure enough for the idyllic Shire to exist. I like the ending where that Bubble of innocence was never ruptured.

Other than that right on. I would have still enjoyed scourging ots had it been included.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven

Dec 27 2007, 1:40am

Post #61 of 65 (179 views)
Shortcut
NO! I DON"T Want to Wait. I've been waiting since Extended ROTK came out. [In reply to] Can't Post

Sick of waiting. And I am a little more interested in Mckellen and Lee being in the film than in Jackson directing, so long as he is still involved. Also, call it a bias, I have children whom I would love to have see this while still in the ages where wonder is most potent, not in the oft jaded years that follow. And I have been waiting soo long for this it isn't funny. If it can still be done well, I don't want to wait longer than is needed. As to loyalty, I appreciate Peter's great work, but my loyalty is to The Hobbit itself, rather than solely to him. Let me be clear.

Again, Too much prejudice and jaded pseudo-soothsaying is going on here regarding the hobbit, and much has been forgotten.

First, I call to mind the reactions of many when first we learned that Peter was doing LOTR. Oh, but there were many fearful cries at the prospect of a man famed for The Frighnters and The Feebles tackling Tolkein. And then lo, he did a really good job with the master work, and some were made to bite their tongues.


Yet righteous gripping still persisted, and on a few instances I was among the irrate, though I loved the films overall. "Why was Arwen at The Ford of Bruinein?" Some asked. "Where was Glorfindel?" "Why has Gandalf's magic, so impressive and explosive in the books, been reduced to a shadow of itself?" "Why did Shadowfax kick Denethor into the fire?" , "Why does Galadriel not finish her paragraph of explanation as to why Frodo's coming is as The Footstep of Doom to the Elves?" good questions all, and they went on and on and on.

Now news comes that, even though to our great joy Jackson will be producing, someone else will be directing, and suddenly some of the harshest critics of the trilogy films have forgotten all mistakes made, declared the films (great as they were) to be without any flaw (which they were NOT), and have decided that in all the green world, Jackson alone has the talent to do a good job with what Tolkein has already written wonderfully. Indeed, you are so emphatic, that you would wait until 2015 or later when Mckellen and Christopher Lee, who we all want to see in both films, may well not even be up to reprising their former roles. They are not young men.

Mellon, stop being irrational and give everyone a break and a fair chance. Jackson will be involved in the films, probably heavily. Many of the same sets, props and actors will be used, so the notion that it will feel too different is unlikey. Though it must also be said that film one, The Hobbit, SHOULD feel different. It READS differently, it is a children's fairy tail, with epic aspects, which connects to a larger, true Epic, but is not quite an epic in an of itself. It should have dark and tense moments, but the overall mood should be much more like the first hour and a half of The Fellowship of The Ring, and not at all like the grim mood of The Two Towers and The Return of The king.

With Jackson producing, any good director who reads the material thoroughly and appreciates it will be able to do a good or even excellent job with this film. Alfonso Curaunt, Woflgang Petersen (who worked magic with the original Neverending Story, the only good one in the series) Ridley Scott, possibly even Ron Howard, could all work wonders with the film, under Jackson's direction. It would have Jacksons visual scope and detail, and perhaps leave out his tndency to make crude humour of serious moments (Denethor's passing. And besides, The Hobbit is quite humoruous on its own), and might also avoid adding things that didn't and probably would not have happened (like the breaking of Gandalf's staff by the Witch-King of Angmar in ROTK extended.)

Instead of holding up production with premptive whining, sight unseen, lets focus our efforts on seeing to it that the film is made correctly, whoever directs. Most of the original films best material was where it adhered most closely to the source material, and let us not forget that fear of the dread wrath of uber-fans probably played a factor in Jackson's own careful handling of the epic.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Tim
Tol Eressea


Dec 29 2007, 3:00am

Post #62 of 65 (144 views)
Shortcut
I agree [In reply to] Can't Post

I have no problem with Jackson in an oversight role working with a great director like Raimi or Del Toro (or whomever). I'm actually a bit surprised that we've had such a wait, even considering the legal problems. There's so much money to be made, it's not even funny. The three films grossed in the billions and just made us all extremely hungry for more. And theres soooo much material to draw from they could easily be making Tolkien movies for decades.

In Reply To
Jackson made liberal use of unit directors in the LOTR films, since he couldn't split himself in two or three (even pre-weight loss).

As long as the overarching vision is his, and he has a hand in the script, and he uses directors he trusts, I see no reason why the films couldn't work as Peter Jackson films even if he's not principal director.

And yes, McKellen and Lee aren't getting any younger. Can you imagine Gandalf played by someone else? I certainly can't.


So, where are we going?


stormraven
Registered User

Jan 2 2008, 6:30am

Post #63 of 65 (137 views)
Shortcut
In a word: Yes [In reply to] Can't Post

Gotta agree, PJ's the one, the only, as far as I'm concerned. That's not just blind fan loyalty speaking, either--I work in the business (post production), and I know quality when I see it. I just hope Peter has the integrity to finish what he's started.


labingi_maura
Rivendell


Jan 3 2008, 5:24pm

Post #64 of 65 (167 views)
Shortcut
Yes, but not too long a wait... [In reply to] Can't Post

I think PJ and Fran and Phillipa did a truly superlative job with LOTR (in spite of its flaws, because *nothing* is perfect) and I trust them. And, I want continuity with their vision and style with the next two films. My first choice would be for PJ to direct "The Hobbit" and "The Segue."
But if its a longer wait than, say, three years, I'm afraid that some of the wonderful actors that I'd very much like to see reprise their roles (even if in brief, cameo appearances) may have passed beyond the confines of this world. For their sakes (and ours) it would be better to start filming sooner rather than later.
Plus, I'm impatient with all the delaying nonsense that has been going on thanks to New Line (grumble) and want them to get on with it!
Even more, though, what I want to happen is for PJ to be just as eager and emotionally invested in these next two films as he was in LOTR. If he doesn't feel that way, though, then perhaps Fran would or some other new director that respects PJ and would enjoy working with him. It is corny to say this, but film-making is an art and the feelings of the film's writers and directors have to be very passionate for it to come alive on-screen. It can't just be "another film" to the director, it has to be his or her passion.
-ML / D/p

"I am in fact a hobbit in all but size." - J.R.R.Tolkien

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.