Peter Jackson to Direct, Movie set for 2012-13

[Tessar]

http://www.hollywood.com/news/The_Ho...e_Helm/7349469


Awwwwwww snap, you guys.

[GrayMouser]

Oh, boy- PJ does "What The Hobbit Should have Been Like If It Had Been Conceived By A Big Hollywood Director With A Lot of Cool Special Effects Instead of Some Stuffy Old English Professor".

I can hardly wait.

[EllethValatari]

I'm actually glad the movies will be directed by Jackson-he did a good job on the LoTR and he can do a good job on the Hobbit. I really don't understand all the outcry against him over the years-no matter what he left out he kept to the main themes of Tolkien's works-and you can't expect any movie adaptation of a book to be perfect and exactly the same. They're two different forms of entertainment.

[mithrand1r]

Originally Posted by EllethValatari

I'm actually glad the movies will be directed by Jackson-he did a good job on the LoTR and he can do a good job on the Hobbit. I really don't understand all the outcry against him over the years-no matter what he left out he kept to the main themes of Tolkien's works-and you can't expect any movie adaptation of a book to be perfect and exactly the same. They're two different forms of entertainment.

In a nutshell, IMO the movies failed as a successful adaptation of the books.

While I enjoyed watching the movies, they were not as good as they could have been. Which is a shame considering the resources that PJ et al had available to produce the films.

Even when looked solely as movies they had some awkward moments.

It has been a while since I have seen the film, but one point I remember.
A big deal was made about how the Ents are not hasty to decide and/or change. They debated whether to help the hobbits or not. After a few days they decided they would not help. On seeing part of the forest destroyed, they quickly decided to change their mind and help the hobbits.

Hopefully better effort can be done with the Hobbit.

[Tessar]

I'm gonna agree that the movies are definitely not the books, but I thought that overall they were great movies just as movies. I'm definitely not expecting the Hobbit to be like the book at this point.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by EllethValatari

I really don't understand all the outcry against him over the years

With such a large and diverse number of fans, it's to be expected that one group's vision of LoTR and Middle-earth isn't going to be shared by everyone.

My expectations of the Hobbit are fairly low. Not that I'm counting on it that it will be a bad movie, but just that I won't be expecting too much of it to be like how I'd like to see The Hobbit. It's a plus that we know how LoTR turned out, The Hobbit is likely to be very similar, at least in look.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by GrayMouser

Oh, boy- PJ does "What The Hobbit Should have Been Like If It Had Been Conceived By A Big Hollywood Director With A Lot of Cool Special Effects Instead of Some Stuffy Old English Professor".

I can hardly wait.

Dittos. Though, I certainly had my reservations about Del Toro at the helm, too; maybe I'm just impossible to please.

[Galin]

I'm not glad, as I must disagree that Jackson did a good job with adapting The Lord of the Rings.

I really don't understand all the outcry against him over the years-no matter what he left out he kept to the main themes of Tolkien's works-and you can't expect any movie adaptation of a book to be perfect and exactly the same. They're two different forms of entertainment.

But how general is one going to characterize this matter of keeping to (arguable) main themes, for instance?

It seems to me that one can make a movie about drugs and power struggles in a given country (for example) and generally keep to the main themes found in Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings too, or intend to -- or at least what one person might argue those themes are.

Anyway, I would say that the last two points (perfect and exactly the same) and (different forms of entertainment) are mutually agreed upon by those who both love and hate Jackson's interpretation.

In other words, those who don't think Jackson did a good job also did not expect a movie adaptation to be exactly the same, nor would they claim that films and books are the same in any case.

[BeardofPants]

You know, it REALLY pisses me off that because I'm considered to be a 'Tolkien purist' that I somehow can't judge a movie on its own merits. Probably most of the long-time posters here can vouch for how fussy mcfussersins I can be about movies, so it's not a particularly long shot that (IMO) the movies fail ON THEIR OWN MERITS because they suck-ASS, not because they fail to meet some impossibly high bar set by my apparently puritanical standards. I think JD back in the day used to word this quite well (roughly paraphrased), "PJ is a hack!" He brings neither any particularly clever directing techniques to the table, nor does he bring any talent. If I really wanted to pay good money to watch some ok-ish CGI, then I'd choose another movie vehicle. Fie on Peter Jackson, FIE I say!

... hah, that almost felt good.

[Peregrina_Took]

I don't understand all the big complaints about the LotR movies. Sure, they weren't nearly as accurate to the books as I would like, but you have to understand that they're adaptions of the books, a sort of differant look at the plot. I treat them as a kind of 'what if', alternate universe sort of thing. As long as you understand that they aren't the books, the movies are really quite tolerable.
And I know that PJ did a better job then I could ever have when it comes to making movies out of LotR. I would have taken one look at those three massive volumes and fainted from the sheer hugeness of it all. Think about it. All that material and details and side stories and contrasts and cultures and a one and a half hour time limit (and budget limitations as well)?

[BeardofPants]

Originally Posted by Peregrina_Took

And I know that PJ did a better job then I could ever have when it comes to making movies out of LotR. I would have taken one look at those three massive volumes and fainted from the sheer hugeness of it all. Think about it. All that material and details and side stories and contrasts and cultures and a one and a half hour time limit (and budget limitations as well)?

... well, yeah. You're not a movie director, are you? Of course he's going to do a better job than you. What kind of argument is that? Discounting someone's complaints about a movie that they themselves don't have the skills to make is a pretty weak argument, IMO.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

I'm with you there. The old walls have to be torn down before the new ones can be built, and it doesn't need to be the same person who does both.

It always annoys me when people criticize a movie, or a book, or a singer, or whatever on valid grounds, and are met with a snarky, "Could YOU do better?" Last I checked, David Denby, Roger Ebert, etc., were not filmmakers, but in no way does that denigrate their appraisals of films. What we criticize is the final product, whether in the end it works or not, and that is laid out in front of all our eyes, for all of us to respond to. If we can't dislike a movie, consistency dictates that we can't like it, either, in which case what the hell is the point of going?

[GrayMouser]

My problem with the movies is that PJ is just not a particularly good story-teller; that's why Fellowship is the best, simply because it deviates least from Tolkien, who whatever his faults, had that in spades..

I'm expecting the Hobbit to be much worse than the LOTR movies because it is a different kind of story- much lighter mood, for one thing, and PJ is nothing if not heavy-handed- why have one T-Rex when you can have three?

The other thing I fear is that, with two of them being made, what we're going to get is not a movie version of "The Hobbit" by JRR Tolkien, but a prequel to the movie LOTR by Peter Jackson

[Tessar]

Hmmm. I think my main reason for loving them is that they are.... for all practical purposes.... super high budget "B" movies with some great actors. I can't think of anything else in the Fantasy genera that is as high quality in terms of scenery, acting, costuming, effects, etc. as LOTR, and I love me some Fantasy movies.

But keep in mind that I am really not a huge "movie" fan anyways. I just tend to not get into movies very much to begin with... so I'm probably not comparing it on the same viewing level as some people here. It's rare for me to watch a movie without someone else prodding me into it, unless it's something like Moulin Rouge... and that's more of a musical anyways.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by GrayMouser

I'm expecting the Hobbit to be much worse than the LOTR movies because it is a different kind of story- much lighter mood, for one thing, and PJ is nothing if not heavy-handed- why have one T-Rex when you can have three?

Aah, King Kong, don't get me started. I think I came close to yelling at the screen at that scene. Bloody inconsistent movie. I do hope he won't repeat the experience with The Hobbit.

[Varnafindë]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

I do hope he won't repeat the experience with The Hobbit.

Do you mean three Smaugs?

[Valandil]

Originally Posted by Varnafindë

Do you mean three Smaugs?

Quite plausible that a magical creature such as a dragon would be able to turn itself into three dragons. And also quite likely it would feel the need to do so when encountering such a fearsome opponent as... a hobbit!

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Varnafindë

Do you mean three Smaugs?

That's a bit obvious, perhaps. A better way, I think, is to go out in full and have Smaug be a female dragon who made her nest in the Lonely Mountain to lay her thousand eggs! Then we'd have a giant mountain full of little Smaug-brood, hungry upon hatching, a bit like the latest Godzilla movie. Heck, I might even vote for an army of baby dragons...

Imagine the merchandising...

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

That's a bit obvious, perhaps. A better way, I think, is to go out in full and have Smaug be a female dragon who made her nest in the Lonely Mountain to lay her thousand eggs!

Of course, she would be played by Helen Mirren.

[Rían]

Has anyone started betting on if Legolas will be in the movie? After all, his daddy is, and it would make sense for him to be in the army ...

Can you imagine a new generation of Leggy fans?!