Guillermo Del Toro directing TH

[Jon S.]

The bashing before the movie is even made, it's kinda sad.

I can't wait to see it, I enjoyed (and continue to enjoy) PJ's films and I expect to enjoy The Hobbit, too.

[Kennashi]

Well I haven't been on the 'moot for very long yet, but from what I can tell, that's the way things are around here. Any Tolkien project that includes Jackson is already considered purist blasphemy and, correct me if I'm wrong, must be bashed!

And anyways, PJ's not the actual director this time around, so hey, this can't be bad news for everybody.

[Kennashi]

MTV: You are treading on very sacred ground. Do you have a message to the fans to reassure them?

Del Toro: If you [go] deep enough you will find people that hate any depiction of Tolkien. They dislike any Tolkien that is not Tolkien. The people that are going to like it are going to like it because I come from a genuine place. And the people that are going to dislike it are going to dislike it because I'm coming from a genuine place. There's no two ways about it. You have to follow your instincts. My message is simple: If you don't think [Peter] did a fabulous job, very likely you won't think I will. If you think he did, I will do my best to make you proud of me.

...Sorry, guys.

[orithil]

Hey I'm sure it will be good and if PJ's producing it, then hopefully he will make sure that the battle of the five armies is freaking HUGE!!

[Curubethion]

What worries me is that Del Toro has read The Hobbit, but that he never managed to make it through LOTR. The only comfort I have is knowing that Sir Ian is likely coming back. He's really gonna be a stickler for Tolkien.

[Willow Oran]

I wouldn't worry about him not having read LotR. 'The Hobbit' is quite capable of standing alone, as it did stand alone as a story before LotR was even a first draft.

Nor would I say that any Tolkien project with PJ is automatically evil. I may vehemently disagree with some of his decisions regarding plot and character shifts, the films have as many good points as they do painful. It's just more amusing to pick on the painful bits.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Del Toro

To what extent has the work of Tolkien influenced you ?

Not at all. I could barely finish The Hobbit. Curiously, that kind of fantasy, never called out to me. I think that fairy tales are in themselves a different genre. Heroic fantasy, in general, leaves me cold. I am more interested in Robert E. Howard’s work of terror than his novels about the muscular Conan. Although there are two writers of fantasy that I think are sublime: Clark Ashton Smith and Lord Dunsany.

Source: http://forums.theonering.com/viewtopic.php?p=3669347

Originally Posted by Del Toro

I was never into heroic fantasy. At all. I don’t like little guys and dragons, hairy feet, hobbits – I’ve never been into that at all. I don’t like sword and sorcery, I hate all that stuff.

Source: http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/btm/...25/del_hobbit/

No comments.

[The Gaffer]

Personally, I find that to be grounds for optimism. The "easy way" to do the Hobbit would be as heroic fantasy. I see the true nature of the book as being more like a fairy tale than Conan the Barbarian.

Originally Posted by That Salon article

It smells of George Lucas

Couldn't disagree more. However:

Originally Posted by That Salon article

there's some evil, greedoid karma at work

is probably closer to the mark.

There's some hilarious (non PG) spite in the comments on that story.

[Jon S.]

Originally Posted by Gordis

Source: http://forums.theonering.com/viewtopic.php?p=3669347

Source: http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/btm/...25/del_hobbit/

No comments.

From the latter:

Look, if del Toro makes these movies and they're terrific, I'll be delighted to eat my words. And there's definitely a bright side to my grim prognostication: If this whole "Hobbit" fiasco reaps what it has sown and goes down in a fiery crash, at least it prevented Sam Raimi from directing these movies.

Always look on the bright side of life!

[Curubethion]

Originally Posted by Willow Oran

I wouldn't worry about him not having read LotR. 'The Hobbit' is quite capable of standing alone, as it did stand alone as a story before LotR was even a first draft.

Eh...

It becomes rather connected to LOTR, especially with how they're playing it up as a prequel (what with the two-movie thing and all). That's one thing that scares me.

[The Dread Pirate Roberts]

What concerns me is that some have classified the very civil discussion in this thread as 'bashing' which seems counter-productive bordering on fishing, to me. There are very few ways to respond to such an accusation that won't result in either argument or someone leaving the thread.

[Jon S.]

Don't hide behind "some." I'm talking to you now, DRP (interpretation aid: said lightheartedly ).

It's nothing more than a nomenclature difference, is all. I, too, deem the discussion in this thread to be civil. "Bash" to me means to knock or criticize, perhaps sometime harshly, but not with incivility. However, now that I'm aware of your sensitivity to the term, I'll use "criticize" the next time as the last reaction I would want to induce in an esteemed fellow Entmooter would be concern, seeming counterproductiveness bordering on fishing, or fear of argumentation.

EDIT: Let's try try the original post again and see how it works with the substitution:

>> The *criticizing* before the movie is even made, it's kinda sad.

>> I can't wait to see it, I enjoyed (and continue to enjoy) PJ's films and I expect to enjoy The Hobbit, too.

Much better!

[Gordis]

What is wrong with fishing?

[Jon S.]

Nothing but, unless you're a sushi devote, killing them afterwards against the nearest rocks in order to eat them on-the-spot-raw is definitely low rent.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Jon S.

>> The *criticizing* before the movie is even made, it's kinda sad.

Then you weren't here when the LoTR movies came out. The boards have always been filled with speculation and (dis/)approval of the rumours we have heard so far about the movies. The fun part is seeing afterwards how much you were right, or how much you fussed and whined over nothing.

(I'm not a native English speaker, but 'bashing' always had a negative image to me instead of merely objective criticism. Is this just me? Just curious.)

[The last sane person]

No, you're not the only one, because bashing IS engative. It is not the same as objective criticism.

[Gordis]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

(I'm not a native English speaker, but 'bashing' always had a negative image to me instead of merely objective criticism. Is this just me? Just curious.)

"Bashing" is certainly bad, but I have never heard any negative connotation to "fishing"

Nothing but, unless you're a sushi devote, killing them afterwards against the nearest rocks in order to eat them on-the-spot-raw is definitely low rent.

It is more merciful to kill them on the spot instead of letting them slowly die of suffocation, IMO.

[Jon S.]

This is the last bandwidth I'm going to spend on this subject and then it's back to LOTR (anyone needing to comment further can have the last word).

Please read closely. There is a difference between being negative and being uncivil. Personally, I find the predictable and repetitive movie bashing on this forum quite negative but not uncivil and therefore deserving of the descriptive but relatively tame term, "bashing."

However, I have also said (just above) that, in deference to those who are linguistically more sensitive than I, I'm happy in the future to substitute "criticize" for "bash" in my posts. Does this work for everyone or do you need more?

Earniel, you can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe you're suggesting that had I been here before my join date of Dec. 2004 to have heard yet worse criticism of the PJ movies, I'd be less sad now about the new movie criticism due to having become inured to it previously. It is OK for me to feel sad about that, too?

One final observation. Some may have noticed that I use my own real name as my user name and my own real picture as my avatar. That's actually something I do on all the forums I frequent because it's my experience that people, generally, are more civil in their cyber-interactions - and yes, rant and bash less - when we are not posting behind fictitious names and pictures. Just food for thought.

IMHO. YMMV. Ad nauseum.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Jon S.

Earniel, you can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe you're suggesting that had I been here before my join date of Dec. 2004 to have heard yet worse criticism of the PJ movies, I'd be less sad now about the new movie criticism due to having become inured to it previously. It is OK for me to feel sad about that, too?

I was merely trying to point out that yes, the movie will get critique (good or bad) on what we read or hear before we can see the entire film. You can feel sad about that if you wish, but we'd rather see you happy. I suppose we'll have to work on that.

[Curubethion]

Yeah, I haven't seen much "bashing" here. I've seen real bashing. Nothing like this. I've seen rabid PJ-despisers...yeah, now they're out there.

Anyway.

What of the idea that a guy who hasn't read LOTR because he wasn't patient enough to read it is directing TH and a film after TH that links it to LOTR?