Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 43
  1. #16

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    1,278

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    I'm a bit confused with there being two movies. Is the book being split across two movies or is the second movie going to have an entirely new story?

  2. #17

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    22,687

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by Xharryb View Post
    Supposedly, the idea is for one film to be the Hobbit and the other to take place some between those events and the Rings trilogy. Some sort of connecting story. That idea could just be a portion of the second film though combined with parts of the Hobbit. I'm not sure.

    The reason Jackson directing is in question is because he already had a pretty full slate at the moment. He's currently in production on a film and then moves on to working with Speilberg on a trilogy of Tin Tin films. I'm not sure when he finishes up with all of that. Perhaps he'll allow someone else to work on the script while he's filming his other pictures and then come on just to direct. Either that or he could just wind up being a consultant/producer on the Hobbit films. Just having him involved though puts them in a good place, because other key players will be more inclined to come back aboard the project based on his involvement.
    That's what I've heard too.

    As for the idea of the 2nd non-book based movie ... I'm torn. I mean, there is a BIG amount of time between the end of The Hobbit and Fellowship. Granted Tolkien never wrote about it, but it could be interesting.

    I still think that eventually Jackson will Direct. Remember, they are just starting pre-production and the actual filming won't be taking place until 2009. And with all of the re-shoots with the LOTR movies, even after their releases for the DVD's it could stretch well into 2012.

    I'm just not sure some other director will be willing to make that kind of commitment.

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterGracey View Post
    I don't like that idea. They should stick to the books and stop trying to make up extra bits of story. That was a big complaint with people in the LOTR films - messing with the Faramir storyline and adding extra parts to the Aragorn/Arwen story that were unneccessary and out of place.

    There's no need to make a film connecting The Hobbit and LOTR.
    There were definately some parts of the LOTR Trilogy that I took exception to, but those weren't them as alot of the Aragorn/Arwen stuff from the movies came from The Simarillion. IMO leaving out the Scouring of the Shire being the biggest offender. I really didn't like the end of ROTK and am still kind of let-down to this day about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by kirbilicious View Post
    I'm a bit confused with there being two movies. Is the book being split across two movies or is the second movie going to have an entirely new story?
    From what I've heard. The Hobbit will be one movie and then the 2nd movie will be seperate. It's not something that has been published.

    As for the thought of doing a movie about the Simarillion I REALLY don't think it would be possible. The book is a masterpiece IMO because it is Tolkien, but you REALLY have to commit yourself to reading it. It's more of a historical document of people and places than an actual novel.


  3. #18

    • MiceAge Columnist
    • Dateline Disneylander
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Disneyland, U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by sir clinksalot View Post
    There were definately some parts of the LOTR Trilogy that I took exception to, but those weren't them as alot of the Aragorn/Arwen stuff from the movies came from The Simarillion. IMO leaving out the Scouring of the Shire being the biggest offender. I really didn't like the end of ROTK and am still kind of let-down to this day about it.
    Don't get me started on the Scouring of the Shire.

    Photos, news, and commentary every week from Walt Disney's Magic Kingdom!

    | | |

  4. #19

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    1,278

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterGracey View Post
    Don't get me started on the Scouring of the Shire.
    I really didn't miss that at all. In the book, it always seemed so random to me and just tacked on to the ending to make it longer. To me it also seemed to diminish the importance of the final battle. Honestly though, since I thought the books were painful to read (and this is coming from someone who loves to read) I wasn't angry with any of the changes and cuts (even though in RotK the screen didn't need to go black 7 times before the actual ending.)

  5. #20

    • MiceAge Columnist
    • Dateline Disneylander
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Disneyland, U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by kirbilicious View Post
    I really didn't miss that at all. In the book, it always seemed so random to me and just tacked on to the ending to make it longer. To me it also seemed to diminish the importance of the final battle. Honestly though, since I thought the books were painful to read (and this is coming from someone who loves to read) I wasn't angry with any of the changes and cuts (even though in RotK the screen didn't need to go black 7 times before the actual ending.)
    The Scouring of the Shire was incredibly important, at least to me, because it showed that it was necessary for Frodo and the Hobbits to go on the journey. It showed that even the pure innocence of The Shire was vulnerable. Unfortunately, in the film I got a strong feeling like "Well, why did they even bother?" when the Hobbits were all back and nobody even acknowledged them. Their struggles were unfelt in the Shire and in the end seemed like the very thing they left to protect - the Shire - didn't need protecting at all.

    In the book, The Scouring of the Shire showed that it was absolutely necessary for the Hobbits to go on the journey and destroy the Ring. The reclaiming and rebuilding of the Shire also reinforced their equality to the Humans because they were all vulnerable and both races had to rebuild after the battle for Middle Earth.

    Photos, news, and commentary every week from Walt Disney's Magic Kingdom!

    | | |

  6. #21

    • savvy?
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    southern california
    Posts
    11

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Peter Jackson proved to everyone with LOTR that he was the best man for the job, and I'm happy to hear that he's finally being allowed to bring The Hobbit to life! I don't care how they split it up.. you know it's going to be amazing.

  7. #22

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    22,687

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterGracey View Post
    In the book, The Scouring of the Shire showed that it was absolutely necessary for the Hobbits to go on the journey and destroy the Ring. The reclaiming and rebuilding of the Shire also reinforced their equality to the Humans because they were all vulnerable and both races had to rebuild after the battle for Middle Earth.
    Right. The only scene that kind of references that is in Fellowship when Frodo is looking in Galadriel's mirror thing. But to someone who doesn't know the books, it wouldn't have meant anything.

    For the record, I loved the movies. The extended DVD's even better since it had more book stuff. And I'm absolutely THRILLED that they are back on board for the Hobbit. I wouldn't have wanted to see it done by anybody else.

    But with anything ... if your a fan of something (like the books) and somebody makes their own adaptation of something you love, your always going to find something you don't like about them.

    In the long-run, the 20 minute is it the end yet, is it the end yet, is it the end yet ending of ROTK is minor. But since that's pretty much the book-end of the entire trilogy, it's what sticks in my mind and I remember being VERY let-down leaving the theatre after seeing ROTK.


  8. #23

    • Happy Memories
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,282

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    I didn't necesarily find myself missing any parts of the book, but that long series of false endings for ROTK was quite annoying. Could have been done much smoother I'm sure, but it didn't ruin the series for me.

    I read a comment yesterday that the reason PJ won't be directing the Hobbit is that he feels the fans have waited long enough already and if they have to wait for his schedule to open up it would be another year and half before he could even begin the process (not have the movies out, begin production). He doesn't want to do that to the fans. So there's no word yet on who they'll bring in for the writing and directing duties. Obviously, we can't expect too much movement on that front until the writers return to work anyway. SO I have a feeling it might be a while before we see any more big news.




  9. #24

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    22,687

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by Xharryb View Post
    I didn't necesarily find myself missing any parts of the book, but that long series of false endings for ROTK was quite annoying. Could have been done much smoother I'm sure, but it didn't ruin the series for me.

    I read a comment yesterday that the reason PJ won't be directing the Hobbit is that he feels the fans have waited long enough already and if they have to wait for his schedule to open up it would be another year and half before he could even begin the process (not have the movies out, begin production). He doesn't want to do that to the fans. So there's no word yet on who they'll bring in for the writing and directing duties. Obviously, we can't expect too much movement on that front until the writers return to work anyway. SO I have a feeling it might be a while before we see any more big news.
    Didn't ruin it for me either. Just an annoyance. Like I said, I was let-down a bit when I left the theatre on the first viewing. But on subsequent viewings it was better.

    As for parts of the book I missed, the Scouring was the main part. Other than that, I was very happy with what they were able to include and wasn't really annoyed at the liberties they took with some of the storylines. They worked for the movies.

    Interesting about PJ saying that he won't be directing because of the fans. I guarantee if you took a poll of the fans they would rather wait until he could do it.

    If the writers-strike lasts long enough, we may not have a choice.


  10. #25

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    1,278

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by MasterGracey View Post
    The Scouring of the Shire was incredibly important, at least to me, because it showed that it was necessary for Frodo and the Hobbits to go on the journey. It showed that even the pure innocence of The Shire was vulnerable. Unfortunately, in the film I got a strong feeling like "Well, why did they even bother?" when the Hobbits were all back and nobody even acknowledged them. Their struggles were unfelt in the Shire and in the end seemed like the very thing they left to protect - the Shire - didn't need protecting at all.

    In the book, The Scouring of the Shire showed that it was absolutely necessary for the Hobbits to go on the journey and destroy the Ring. The reclaiming and rebuilding of the Shire also reinforced their equality to the Humans because they were all vulnerable and both races had to rebuild after the battle for Middle Earth.
    Very interesting. I never thought about it like that at all but I really do understand now why that event was so important. For some reason though I feel as if it wouldn't have worked well in the film and would have just added to the sense that film refuses to end. I don't think that people who weren't die hard fans of the book would have accepted the Scouring of the Shire very well. After the final battle, one gets the feeling that story is essentially wrapped - the ring has been destoryed, Sauron has been defeated, Aragorn is King. The characters have already fought their battles and endured their hard times, and one expects the characters to go on living peacefully from there. After the preceding fantastic battle scenes, the Scouring might have seemed a bit anti-climatic as well. I understand the importance but I guess I just don't think it would have worked in the movie.
    Last edited by kirbilicious; 12-21-2007 at 10:49 AM.

  11. #26

    • Circle of Ancients
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    22,687

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by kirbilicious View Post
    I guess though none of us could have been too surprised that it was cut since Saruman dies in "Towers".
    Well, technically wasn't it at the beggining of ROTK the extended cut?

    I don't recall if Saruman dying was in the ROTK theatrical since I haven't watched it in awhile. But I seem to remember Gandalf just saying "Keep him locked in his tower" or something to that effect.

    And also as I recall, that was the one thing PJ came out and said they made a mistake on with the theatrical, not resolving the Saruman issue in Towers.

    Can I also add ... I'm stoked that we are talking LOTR again. It's been too long.


  12. #27

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    1,278

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by sir clinksalot View Post
    Well, technically wasn't it at the beggining of ROTK the extended cut?

    I don't recall if Saruman dying was in the ROTK theatrical since I haven't watched it in awhile. But I seem to remember Gandalf just saying "Keep him locked in his tower" or something to that effect.

    And also as I recall, that was the one thing PJ came out and said they made a mistake on with the theatrical, not resolving the Saruman issue in Towers.

    Can I also add ... I'm stoked that we are talking LOTR again. It's been too long.
    Ahh... good point. I haven't watched any of the movies in a year and so my memory is a bit foggy. I forgot that "Towers" ends with the Ents attacking Isengard. Not sure why I would think Saruman died in that one. I'm too young to be this forgetful.

  13. #28

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    1,278

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by sir clinksalot View Post
    Well, technically wasn't it at the beggining of ROTK the extended cut?
    And was it only the extended cut? That's the version I have so it's the only version I've actually seen in the past 3 or 4 years.

  14. #29

    • Happy Memories
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,282

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Yes, Saruman's death was only included in the extended cut. Christopher Lee was quite peeved that his scene had been cut from the theatrical release.




  15. #30

    • MiceAge Columnist
    • Dateline Disneylander
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Disneyland, U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: Peter Jackson, New Line, and MGM to produce two-part "The Hobbit"

    Quote Originally Posted by kirbilicious View Post
    Very interesting. I never thought about it like that at all but I really do understand now why that event was so important. For some reason though I feel as if it wouldn't have worked well in the film and would have just added to the sense that film refuses to end. I don't think that people who weren't die hard fans of the book would have accepted the Scouring of the Shire very well. After the final battle, one gets the feeling that story is essentially wrapped - the ring has been destoryed, Sauron has been defeated, Aragorn is King. The characters have already fought their battles and endured their hard times, and one expects the characters to go on living peacefully from there. After the preceding fantastic battle scenes, the Scouring might have seemed a bit anti-climatic as well. I understand the importance but I guess I just don't think it would have worked in the movie.
    I think that was precisely the reason The Scouring was cut from the film - the normal theatre-going audiences who weren't book die-hards wouldn't have cared and would have been irritated with yet another climax to the film. I think I recall Jackson saying that the Scouring would have diminished the value of the main climax of the film - the destruction of the Ring. So I totally understand why the Scouring was left out and I've come to terms with it, but I still thought the way they handled the Shire at the end of the Return of the King was wreckless - I mean, there were absolutely NO consequences for the Shirefolk. None.


    Quote Originally Posted by sir clinksalot View Post
    Interesting about PJ saying that he won't be directing because of the fans. I guarantee if you took a poll of the fans they would rather wait until he could do it.
    I know I'd be willing to wait. My only concern would be if it would be too long of a wait for Ian McKellen. He seems like he's in good shape for his age - but still, just how long of a wait would we have to wait for PJ to direct? I think if I had to choose, I'd choose McKellen as Gandalf instead of Jackson as Director.

    Photos, news, and commentary every week from Walt Disney's Magic Kingdom!

    | | |

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •