• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Film The Hobbit

rate this film:

  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/1star.gif[/img]

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • [img]http://i.bluelight.ru/g//543/2stars.gif[/img]

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    5

Skyline_GTR

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Aug 28, 2002
Messages
4,327
McKellen 'sad' at Hobbit decision

BBC News
23 November 2006


Sir Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf in the Lord of the Rings films, has voiced dismay over the decision to drop Peter Jackson as director of The Hobbit.

"I'm very sad as I should have relished revisiting Middle Earth with Peter again," the actor wrote on his website.

"It's hard to imagine any other director matching his achievement in Tolkien country."

Jackson refused to discuss working on the Hobbit until a DVD royalty dispute with New Line Cinema was settled.

But New Line said it had only "limited time" to make the film and was proceeding without the Oscar-winning director.

Angry fans

The announcement has led to an online petition of 1,100 people asking for Jackson to be reinstated.

The petition created calls for The Hobbit to be filmed "the way it was meant to be or not at all".

A website has also been set up urging a boycott of New Line, and fans have used weblogs and forums to question the studio's judgement.

The petition argues that a Hobbit movie without Peter Jackson and his writers and special effects team is not what fans want.

"The characters and scenery will all be new and unfamiliar and props, costumes, and the backdrop of New Zealand will all be lost," it said.

"Most likely even the original actors will not sign on to do it - can you imagine someone other than Ian McKellen playing Gandalf the Grey?"

A user of fan site theonering.net has registered the domain name boycottnewline.com, which links to another petition.

"Something must happen to get New Line and Jackson to talk about the [legal case], which has been hanging over future Tolkein-related productions since 2005," the owner has written.

"The only way to get New Line to budge is to boycott future New Line productions until they sit down and hash things out with Peter Jackson."

'Wrong guy'

Before the story emerged this week, there was already a site - thehobbitfilm.com - encouraging fans to ask top studio executives to get on with making the movie with Jackson.

It urged people to send letters or postcards because "the only way we are going to reach our goal of having a live-action version of The Hobbit from Peter Jackson and his team is by keeping after the studios who own the rights".

However, other fans were more relaxed about the way the project was progressing.

"That's the best news I've heard concerning Peter Jackson in about five years," wrote one person on the ringbearer.org site.

"He's exactly the wrong guy to handle The Hobbit in any way shape or form."

Another, on theonering.net, said: "I'm sure The Hobbit will turn out to be a success even without the help of the great Peter Jackson."

A spokesman for distributor MGM told Variety newspaper that the matter was "far from closed", leaving some people hoping Jackson would return.

"Hopefully they will see the light and involve the two people who have proven worth in telling the stories," one person wrote in the chatroom at theonering.net.

Neither New Line nor MGM was available for further comment.

Link
 
not happy jan
nothappyjan_wideweb__430x294.jpg
 
film: The Hobbit

Peter Jackson's manager says the director won't helm 'The Hobbit'
Dec 18, 2007, 04:24 PM | by Missy Schwartz

Categories: Movie Biz, The Hobbit

As Hollywood Insider reported earlier today, Peter Jackson will executive produce The Hobbit and a sequel, both set to go into pre-production as soon as possible. But although MGM president Harry Sloan told Hollywood Insider there was a chance Jackson himself might end up directing the films, Jackson’s manager Ken Kamins tells HI that was not possible:

“Peter won’t be directing the films because he felt the fans have waited long enough for The Hobbit," Kamis said. "It will take the better part of every day of the next four years to write, direct, and produce the two Hobbit films. Given his current obligations to both The Lovely Bones and Tintin, waiting for Peter, Fran [Walsh, Jackson's life/creative partner), and Philippa [Boyens, co-writer/co-producer] to write, direct, and produce The Hobbit would require the fans wait even longer. By serving as executive producers and having approval over all creative elements of both films, Peter can ensure that the films will be made with the same intimacy and care as if they were writing and directing themselves.”

Despite rumors that Sam Raimi, Alfonso Cuarón, or Guillermo del Toro will be taking over directing duties, sources say that no decisions have been made on that subject, nor has a writer been chosen.

According to New Line co-chief Bob Shaye, the studio plans to meet with Jackson in early 2008 and begin the development process. “All decisions about writers and directors will be made in conjunction with Peter,” Shaye told HI. Another source confirmed that Jackson, Walsh, and Boyens will have director, writer, and cast approval.

It will take some time before anyone begins penning a script for The Hobbit because of the ongoing writers’ strike and Jackson's schedule -- the director is in Pennsylvania shooting The Lovely Bones until February. But surely Jackson is planning a big ole bender back in New Zealand, right? “Honestly, I haven’t talked to Peter!” said Kamins, laughing. “He just got home from Pennsylvania last night!”

-- Additional reporting by Nicole Sperling









anyone knoe anymore on this?
 
I can see making The Hobbit, which could be cool if well done, but what sequel? It's one book, one story; there is no sequel.
 
I have a feeling these movies will either be totally awesome or just plain horrible. The director will make or break this project. I'd be willing to wait a couple years longer for Jackson to do them.
 
the look and feel of the movies is so well established i think there are many directors who could do this project justice.

alasdair
 
have you read the hobbit? its a pretty long story. that's why it is two movies. kind of like how the lord of the rings trilogy ended up being three movies that were like four hours each.

most of the books were divided into two sections anyways labelled "book one" and "book two."

i'd urge anyone who hasn't read these to go and do so because as good as the movies were (they were pretty goddamn good in my mind), the books are absolutely captivating.
 
^I didn't consider they may split it into two parts. "Sequel" is what threw me off.
 
panic_the_digital said:
Two Hobbit movies? Why?


two reasons:

a) money
b) so they can show four hours of running around instead of two.
 
JerryBlunted said:
have you read the hobbit? its a pretty long story. that's why it is two movies.

i can't find the link, but no, they're making a sequel that spans the time in between the hobbit and LotR.

eta: here you go, via the NY times:

The untitled sequel is described as bridging the 60-year gap between the end of J. R. R. Tolkien’s “Hobbit” and the beginning of the “Rings” trilogy.
 
really

that is fucking stupid.

sorry for my confusion, i didn't think anyone would consider tampering with this in such a way.
 
Yeah, they're making a sequel, to cover the time between end of the Hobbit and start of LOTR. The Hobbit could be stretched to four hours, but I think it would suck; they'd include too much wordy unnecessary detail, which works well in the book but maybe not onscreen.

I'm unsure about the value of a sequel; there's probably enough raw material in Tolkien that you could make it quite interesting - Suramon as one of the good guys, the rise of Sauron, etc.

At least it's going to be made/filmed in Wellington, which means Weta will be involved in the effects/look and feel. (Sucks for me that I was living overseas when LOTR was filmed, and will be again when the Hobbit is filmed).
 
Infinite Jest said:
Yeah, they're making a sequel, to cover the time between end of the Hobbit and start of LOTR. The Hobbit could be stretched to four hours, but I think it would suck; they'd include too much wordy unnecessary detail, which works well in the book but maybe not onscreen.

I'm unsure about the value of a sequel; there's probably enough raw material in Tolkien that you could make it quite interesting - Suramon as one of the good guys, the rise of Sauron, etc.

At least it's going to be made/filmed in Wellington, which means Weta will be involved in the effects/look and feel. (Sucks for me that I was living overseas when LOTR was filmed, and will be again when the Hobbit is filmed).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Tolkein never published anything that covers the span between those books. So what hack is going to fuck up this beloved classic?
 
this is bullshit for weaklings and other invalids of society :D
 
panic_the_digital said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Tolkein never published anything that covers the span between those books. So what hack is going to fuck up this beloved classic?

Nothing directly AFAIK, but maybe based on references in other books? It seems like they'll have to make up a lot of it, though. Which will probably not be a good thing.
 
they should scrap the sequel and try to adapt some or all of the silmarillon. like it could be a history/folklore lesson told by gandalf to the hobbits or whatever. the sequel idea pisses me off a little bit, i gotta admit.
 
As much as i've love to see it, I don't think The Silmarillion can be put to film. It's scope is just too large, it dwarfs(!) LOTR really. I guess it might be possible if it was done as a Harry Potter series length of 6 or so movies, following certain stories at a time. The Feanor and Turin sagas would shit on everything.
 
Top