Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Is it kiss and make up time for New Line and Peter Jackson?

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. I saw word trickle in last night that there might be some bridge re-building going on with Peter Jackson and Bob Shaye/New Line. Actually, it sounds more like New Line more than Shaye... I have a note in with Wingnut, trying to get a statement, but I figured if I waited too much longer then the story would be ancient. And there's already misinformation out there. The exact quote from Shaye is "Notwithstanding our personal quarrels, I really respect and admire Peter and would love for him to be creatively involved in some way in The Hobbit." As you can see, it's far from a greenlighted announcement, which is what's being reported in many places. If I had to wager a guess, I'd say that Shaye was pressured to lay off the personal grudge by Time Warner stock holders who might be interested in having the full fan support that comes with bringing Jackson back to make THE HOBBIT. Or it could just be that he's been turned down by the people he's approached to fill Jackson's spot and the rights might be slipping away. Or maybe he did have a change of heart. I don't know. So, I'd say at best it's a beginning that could lead to us getting THE HOBBIT with Jackson, Weta and the entire gang from RINGS back behind the camera. I'm sure a lot of that will be decided on how much New Line continues to be shady about the money Jackson thinks he's owed, contractually, for the multi-billion dollar trilogy he made for the studio. We'll see... Thanks to "dalbatron" and the dozens of others who have emailed about this.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:04 a.m. CST


    by TheBloop

    Dead Alive Remake Coming! Starring Jason Biggs, Mandy Moore. CGI effects replace makeup! And will be directed by TIM STORY!!!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:04 a.m. CST


    by vezner2007

    If Shaye doesn't eat crow and bring Jackson back, it will be the dumbest decision (financially speaking) that he could ever make. If I were a stock holder, I'd be royally pissed at him right now and demanding that he bring Jackson on at whatever price he asks.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:05 a.m. CST

    what's with this "greenlighted"?

    by half vader

    as opposed to "greenlit"? <p> I was wondering what was happening with this, don't they only have 'til the end of the year?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:05 a.m. CST

    ah shiz...

    by vezner2007

    somewhere behind firsT!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:10 a.m. CST

    Uwe Boll's "The Hobbit," starring Shia LeBeouf

    by Mullah Omar

    Maybe Shaye got worried over what might happen and who might take over if the cast and crew of the LOTR trilogy sat this one out. Then again, he probably just got pressured from shareholders to not screw up their cash cow.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:11 a.m. CST

    Tim Story > Uwe Boll

    by TheBloop

    Tim Story is one of the great visual filmmakers of our time. Uwe Boll? Pffffffst. I guess he can box ok.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:33 a.m. CST

    Why all the guessing? Just ask Jackson.

    by Bronx Cheer

    I thought he and Harry were friends?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:35 a.m. CST

    Fuck Peter Jackson.

    by C Legion

    The Hobbit is full of Dwarves, did you see how he treated Gimli? Comic relief. He turned the Hobbits into a bunch of pussies, especially Frodo. Other than financial reasons there's no need to bring Jackson back, and I couldn't give a shit about their profits, I want a good film (the film will make loads regardless) There's no way he should be directing this, get John Boorman.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:43 a.m. CST

    Oooo let the people with no lives get the knives out!

    by Jugs

    ..Jackson sucks blah blah I'm so important in the film world that what I think matters blah blah Never mind that I've never made a film in my life, but I still know better than that kiwi hack blah de blah and so on and so forth.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:43 a.m. CST

    New Lines Smart..

    by Redfive!

    They relize Jacksons the only one who could and should do The Hobbitt.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:43 a.m. CST

    Probably means...

    by Kurgan

    ...that an Executive Procuder offer is on the table.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:47 a.m. CST

    I never got the worship aspect.

    by Bronx Cheer

    The Lord of the Ring movies were pretty good, but they're not great films. And now that each film is represented by an Extra Bloated Edition, they suffer from what hurt them in their theatrical versions: excess.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:51 a.m. CST


    by C Legion

    This is a place for people to give their opinions, what do you expect? Must we all have made a film in order to give an opinion? Do you need to be a great Chef in order to criticise a shitty meal? A top politician to criticise the idiots in power? Grow up you prick and accept the fact that others see things differently from you.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:58 a.m. CST

    yes people see things differently legion, but to think

    by bongo123

    about making the hobbit with a completely different director, cast and without weta is just plain fucking ignorant and stupid when the first 3 films where a: bloody brilliant movies from the guy that made bad taste of all things and b: made enormous sums of money both theatrically and on home dvd... yeah.. opinions like yours, while just an opinion which your entitled to is still fucking stupid to say the least mate

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:02 a.m. CST

    Mutual love and respect brought them back together!

    by JackPumpkinhead

    Jackson respects and loves money. And so does Shaye.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:04 a.m. CST


    by C Legion

    Judging by your post you clearly have no understanding of Tolkien's world. As for saying that "Nobody will go see The Hobbit if Peter Jackson doesn't direct it" that's bollocks, ask the people that watched LOTR who directed it and 90% won't have a clue, just as with most blockbusters (Spielberg may be the only exception). Internet Geeks and film buffs know about directors, the vast majority of people couldn't give a shit.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:07 a.m. CST

    More info here - incl. Gandalf's thoughts

    by Koola_Norway

    So, you guys should also check out Kristin Thompson's well-written blog-post about all this... she has found quotes from Ian McKellen that supports the rumor that things might be moving at New Line...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:12 a.m. CST

    There's no denying Jackson's formidable talents.

    by Bronx Cheer

    I should say that the films, especially taken as a whole, do represent a monumental undertaking, and by most measures they are wildly successful. As much as I admire the craft of them, I never had the urge to see them a second time. But that's just me. I seem to be one of the few who thinks Gladiator was a silly mess, so there's the power of one opinion for you.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:16 a.m. CST

    X-MEN 3 directed by Brett Ratner....

    by C Legion

    made more money than the first two. I rest my case.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:18 a.m. CST

    "lighted" or "lit" are both acceptable.

    by Bronx Cheer

    You don't see "lighted" used much anymore, I think mostly because it doesn't sound sexy and Madison Ave favors "lit" for that reason, but as far as usage goes, "lighted" is okay.</p> HOWEVER...the word is "green-lighted." It's a hyphenate.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:19 a.m. CST


    by BringingSexyBack

    That's what would happen if this Bob Shaye character sticks around. Time to eject this useless suited douche. Whose dick did he suck to get to a position where he can have a "personal quarrel" with Peter Jackson?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:22 a.m. CST

    I want Peter Dinklage to direct THE HOBBIT.

    by Bronx Cheer

    Is that wrong of me?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:32 a.m. CST

    Bob Shaye gets a lot of shit

    by King Sweyn Forkbeard

    But it was he who had the balls to allow PJ to make three films in the first place. He deserves more respect than he gets for gambling the studio on something like that, something that was far from a surefire success. <P> IF they can get the LOTR crew back together to make the Hobbit through New Line then that would be the best possible outcome in the whole situation. Anything else would be a compromise.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:33 a.m. CST


    by Bronx Cheer

    Willis is Baggins. Get Sam Jackson to come back for a spin as Gandalf. Throw in some reincarnated Alan Rickman action and you've got GOLD, baby. Directed by Nora Ephron.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:38 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson or don't bother...

    by Bono Luthor

    He and his team took some stodgy, at times rather dull material, that had the potential to transfer well to the screen and made some of the best films ever. Go on Tolkie geeks, attack me! Fact is you have your books just the way you like them and unless you all direct your own individual versions of the movies that you have had in your own heads all these years then you'll never be satisfied. I went into the cinema not looking forward to Fellowship due to the fact that I had an ambivalent reaction to the books and ended up having the best time in a cinema that I had since I was a kid. People now know Jackson like they know Lucas and Spielberg. Get out of your basements, wear another colour other than black and stop wasting your time playing role playing games. Essentialist? Moi? Do your worst. I'll be on a boat in the sunshine for the rest of the day. See ya!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:39 a.m. CST

    King Sweyn, the intrawebs are full of that crap.

    by Bronx Cheer

    It's like a kid's game. Set up the producers as the bad guys because they don't understand ART, but it's the producers with balls the size of Texas who help realize the creative vision of people like Jackson. As much as Saul Zantz makes my skin crawl, that man has put his money on the line for some good films. But people still rip him. Yes, he's somewhat noxious. That's sort of an essential ingredient of what makes great producers unholy ass-whompers.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:43 a.m. CST

    And I don't buy that Jackson is the sine qua non.

    by Bronx Cheer

    It's a fairy tale. Their have been some wonderful films made over the last twenty plus years by some wonderfully talented people. Did Jackson make most of them? No.</p> I'd like to see Mira Nair do The Hobbit.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Bronx Cheer!

    by HeWhoCannotBeNamed

    You witty bastard! You're cracking me up this morning. Glad you never changed your name (I recall you pondering this months ago; I believe you moved to Brooklyn or whatever). Never change it bro. Be well. <P> On topic, I love these LotR flicks (I prefer the "bloated" ones as someone quippy described the extended versions), however I am not that interested in The Hobbit. Haven't read any of the four books, but the ring trilogy suffices for me. Maybe they will surprise me with this one as they did with the last three though.....

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:52 a.m. CST

    I'm's laundry time.

    by Bronx Cheer

    But hello to you too, HeWhoCannotBeNamed. The Ring stories are certainly much more majestic and rich than The Hobbit, but there's always room for a good fairy tale. If it's handled with grace and charm, it could be a lovely little movie. This is one reason I think Jackson's a bad choice. It would like getting David Lean to direct a drawing room farce.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:55 a.m. CST

    It would be the smartest thing New Line could ever do

    by cornponious

    ... and everyone knows it. <p> I'm also trying to find my high school yearbook.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:56 a.m. CST

    Damn you Michael Bay

    by i kick tits

    I miss that dude.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:58 a.m. CST


    by i kick tits

    What year is it from?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:03 a.m. CST

    i kick, seriously, your screen name is odious

    by Bronx Cheer

    Can I give you five bucks to change it?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:06 a.m. CST

    Lots of delusion on both sides here.....

    by Hint of Smegma

    ......fuckwits, all, posting such rubbish along the lines of 'no-one will see it without Jackson directing' or 'Jackson sucks'. You are all kidding yourselves on either side of the camp. Whoever directs The Hobbit, it will rake in the cash due to the success of the LOTR trilogy. And while I don't think Jackson is the messiah of fantasy film making so many seem to think, he is a very talented director with more vision and originality than a good 70% of other working directors whichever way you cut it, although for my mind his best so far is King Kong, not the LOTR trilogy which I thought was overblown and not nearly as good as it was painted - Randall's diatribe against it in Clerks 2 was dead on. He knows the worst of the source material to leave out, (Tom Fucking Bombadil for evidence) and what needs to be in, he just needs to tighten up the scenes for any Hobbit movie if LOTR is anything to go by. If he does take it on, great, if he doesn't, so what? Just leaves him free for more interesting projects.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:14 a.m. CST

    Oh, All right then, I'll direct the Hobbit.

    by Ingeld

    I have a few free weekends in November, anyway. Now, can't we all just get along?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:17 a.m. CST

    jeez rabid fanboism

    by Volstaff

    When you say nobody will see The Hobbit without Peter Jackson you must also believe that his name spells box office success.So..what happened with King Kong?Didn't exactly knock that one outta the park did he? There are other directors out there that could do a decent job with this. But seriously who really gives a shit about The Hobbit? The best of Tolkiens story to be told was LOtR.Lets move on to something new.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:29 a.m. CST

    I'd prefer it to be Jackson who directs, but

    by gingeracrockford

    whoever it is, just GET ON WITH IT! I don't want to have to wait as long for this one as I have for Indy 4. It's a surefire hit, why are they faffing around with their massive egos and ridiculous disputes? I've wanted to see a good Hobbit film since I was five! Getting McKellen, Serkis and Weaving back is a must, and for the rest of the cast how about Martin Freeman as Bilbo, Brian Blessed as Thorin, Oliver Platt as Bombur, Billy Connolly as Balin, Brendan Gleeson as Beorn, Brian Cox as the voice of Smaug, Christian Bale as Bard the Bowman and Paul Bettany as Thranduil?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:38 a.m. CST

    Wow, what an interesting development.

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    As for Shaye's/New Line's reasoning, I'd be willing to bet that it's a combination of all the factors that Quint mentioned. I would like to see a clear cut decision announced sometime soon. And I really hope they can get the whole crew back together and let bygones be bygones.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:41 a.m. CST

    King kong made $553,080,025 pretty fucking good

    by bongo123

    in my book, LOTR $868,621,686, Towers $926,284,377 and King $1,129,027,325, thats a fucking helluva a lot of money on just cinema tickets alone for just 4 films! the guys a fucking license to print money and to do the hobbit without him is tantamount to complete and utter lunacy... if i was newlines shareholders id be calling for the head of the cunt that lets jackson and co slip

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:43 a.m. CST

    over 3 fucking billion on just 4 movies!!!!!

    by bongo123

    give it to jackson and anyone that says anything else is an rtard

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:44 a.m. CST


    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    Those are some excellent suggestions for casting. Nice calls all around especially Platt and Bettany.<P>As for Smaug, I think he requires a truly majestic and sonorous voice. While I love Brian Cox, I don't think his timber would be appropriate. I can't think of anyone in particular right now but that will be (IMHO) one of the most crucial elements of the film.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:45 a.m. CST

    And did you all feel the Earth move?

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    Ringy is coming...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 8:59 a.m. CST

    best news i could possibly have...

    by Reynard Muldrake

    over coffee on a saturday morning. thanks, quint! even though it's not "news" yet, i know i know.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:32 a.m. CST

    Dammit, another great one dead: Tony Wilson, RIP

    by Bronx Cheer

    If you don't know him, and you love great music, then you know him.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:36 a.m. CST

    No Spielberg = No Indy 4 / No Jackson = No Hobbit

    by abovo

    Would anyone want to see Indy 4 without Spielberg? No! So why would anyone want to see The Hobbit without Jackson. All of us see how well X3 turned out without Singer.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:43 a.m. CST

    Mr. NG, Bronx

    by half vader

    Hey Nice Gaius, I was thinking exactly the same about Ringy. We need some entertinment in here. Boy I remember when I stumbled in not realising what a pathetic little troll (no pun, etc.) he was and foolishly tried to tell him why design decisions are made that have less to do with logic than tone and symbolism and so on. Boy did I ever waste some time there! <p> Thanks Bronx. Yeah but I guess "lighted" just looks and sounds so retarded. Actually no it just sounds like a 4 year old is saying it. "I lighted the candle Daddy!" - ya can't even rely on the dictionary these days with all the stupid shit that's in there now. I hear people use the redundant "fantasticAL" and slap my forehead. Yeah so I'm anal, at least that's on topic, being a Rings tb and all!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Over 3 billion from 4 movies. Pffft.

    by half vader

    Amazing, but means nothing - watch out or you'll become a Michael Bay apologist, with your B.O. = taste argument. <p> I don't even need to use Armageddon - Remember Chuck and Larry opened with a 38 million weekend the other week and topped the B.O. Could there be a better illustration of my point?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:56 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson

    by MaleSheep

    It's good to hear that he might be working on the Hobbit, but I really hope he doesn't do the "split it into two movies" idea that was mentioned on this site a while ago. Also, does anyone else think he would be a good director for the last Harry Potter film? I know it probably won't happen, but it's the only Harry Potter he seems suited to direct. It's epic and very different in many ways from the other books.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:59 a.m. CST

    Gotta love film industry accounting practices...

    by Yeti

    shadier than Linday Lohan's mother's parenting skills.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:01 a.m. CST

    Let an English Director do a REAL version of this book.

    by livingwater

    Let an English Director do a REAL version of this book. PJ has had enough.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:02 a.m. CST

    It's not just Jackson

    by King Sweyn Forkbeard

    It's Weta <P> They come as a package. As would Serkis, McKellen, and the vast majority of the creative team behind the Trilogy. Axing that whole connection to a unit proven in this world and starting afresh would be abject lunacy on the part of the studio. <P> And Brian Cox is a must for the voice of Smaugh, although John Rhys-Davies will probably do it.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Just saw Ghost Rider last night

    by BringingSexyBack

    Someone please put that director out of his/our misery. WTF was that?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:13 a.m. CST

    shyaye with his tail between his legs

    by pipergates

    bout time

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:14 a.m. CST

    Jackson better shoot some footage with McKellen now.

    by Yoda's Ball Sack

    Because by the time all this bullshit gets over with he might be dead.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:16 a.m. CST


    by The Artist FKA Vesuvio

    C'mon, what's wrong with you people? Peter Jackson - Executive Producer alright, but The Hobbit is the kind of movie Alfonso Cuaron has BORN to make. And what a amazing fantasy-themed, character-driven, road movie it will be. Now, my only concern it would be on how the screenwriters would deal with the inevitable, studio-imposed cameos by characters such as Aragorn, Legolas et cetera.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:16 a.m. CST

    pay him what you owe him, you fools!

    by pipergates

    show him the books and settle

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:18 a.m. CST

    yeah Cuaron would do it better. Vaughn too.

    by pipergates

    Jackson is too unstable, undependable.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:19 a.m. CST

    Yes you can Bronx Cheer

    by i kick tits

    I will accept PayPal if you are really serious. But I see your own name contains "Bronx" which leads me to believe you are from New York City. Well I am from Brooklyn, if you want we can meet in person and work this out, we can do that too. Up to you.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:23 a.m. CST

    half vader, I agree...I saw a sign in a window for

    by Bronx Cheer

    a "well-lighted place." I thought, what a dope!, until I realized it is proper usage, just a little uncommon. It's not just you.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:26 a.m. CST

    Forget The Hobbit, Quint, what about Dambusters?

    by Andrew Owens

    C'mon a year ago you did those interviews where Jackson said they had almost finished preproduction and were well underway, then we heard Stephen Fry was writing, then... nothing. Any buzz you can share about it? Oh, and James McAvoy for Bilbo and Wing Commander Guy Gibson.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:30 a.m. CST

    i kick, I actually live in Brooklyn now.

    by Bronx Cheer

    How's about it folks? Who wants to see me and i kick meet? I'll cough up five bucks for the name change, but I would need some assurances that i kick will not change the name to i punch instead!~~~</p> If this happens, I'll post photos online.</p> <p>I won't expect this to be a unilateral act. I'll offer to change my name to Neck Boy permanently in honor of the day I regrettably defended George Lucas' neck pouch from the ridicule by Talkbackers.</p>

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:33 a.m. CST



    *puts on mob boss suit*

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:36 a.m. CST

    The greatest borough of NYC...Brooklyn AICN summit?

    by Bronx Cheer

    We could all get together and burn Memories-of-Murder in effigy. (Just kidding, M-o-M. I need you around here so I don't feel like the massive windbag that I am.)

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:37 a.m. CST

    Back to the flick...Mira Nair for The Hobbit.

    by Bronx Cheer

    Because it would be magical, and because nominating people for jobs in films really works!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:38 a.m. CST

    What about Guillermo Del Toro for the Hobbit?

    by Reynard Muldrake

    I mean I'm all for Peter Jackson and love the man to death...but thought I'd throw it out there. Oh, and Liam Neeson as the wise kindly sage - I know the Hobbit doesn't have it, but this is the one epic he hasn't been in yet for his role.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:41 a.m. CST

    I was hoping for a remake of Finding Forrester

    by Bronx Cheer

    with Neeson in the Connery role and Chris Tucker as the disciple. Gold, I tell ya!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:47 a.m. CST

    bRoOkLyN iN dA hOuSe

    by i kick tits

    what neighborhood? im in bay ridge

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:48 a.m. CST

    There are two types of people who come or came to this

    by emeraldboy

    site. people who love movies. but the talkback has been hijacked by people who really dont understand how movies are made. To some peter jackson is a god who made three of the greatest films of all time. They dont like it when it was pointed that jackson never read his contract or at least the small print. that didnt matter because to the people who revere jackson say that movies are about art not commerce and all execs are stupid and again the people who revere jackson he got screwed by the ugly face of corporate america. They applaud the fact that jackson is not a business man and were on side when he decided to take on New line. I know someone who is at a certain crossroads, this person has done well has won numerous awards internationally. This person knows that awards are nice and all but there comes a time when you get real and setup to the plate commercially and start to make an income. This peron that I know is in it for that for the long haul. This person that I know runs a small film company and this person that I knows that you cannot stay small forever. One can make great movies that are commercially successfull. there is nothing wrong with making money out of the movie business.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Even if things are resolved,PJ has become too expensive

    by Wayne6000

    Even if Mr. Jackson's payment dispute is resolved (which I doubt it will be), he's become far too expensive and would want at least $US 20 mill upfront and / or a heavy cut of The Hobbit's profits to write and direct. They're better off getting a cheaper director.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:59 a.m. CST

    No one will go see it if Jackson doesn't direct?

    by rev_skarekroe

    Bullshit. Let me let you guys in on a little secret - the general public doesn't care about directors. That's film geek territory. Call it "The Hobbit" and they'll go. And frankly, I'd rather not have Jackson direct. He's apparently wanting to turn into some sort of dark epic, which it is very much not. Raimi seemed to understand the book - get him on board.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11 a.m. CST

    Please do it before Holm and McKellen get too old...

    by ZeroCorpse

    or die. Jeez.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:02 a.m. CST

    Young Strider and Legolas will be in The Hobbit!!!

    by ebolamonkey

    They get their memories wiped by Gandalf so they don't remember anything later on. They'll follow up with the "Young Strider Chronicles".

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:05 a.m. CST

    emeraldboy, most people don't know how films are made

    by Bronx Cheer

    It's a strange business sometimes even to the people who work in it. But you make the best point of all in that it is a business and that movies are products. Peter Jackson knows this as well as anyone. If he was all about the art, then why would he care if New Line took a few extra bucks? Principle? Give me a break. He's a solid business man who reminds me of the greats like Mayer and Goldwyn and Lucas, great producers who know how to create spectacle that gets butts into the seats. Money. That's what keeps the cameras cranking. And there's nothing wrong with that! Big profits allow studios to get arty and allow brilliant filmmakers room to work. But all films are not made by the Bigs. The little guys have to eat, too.</p> <p>But I wouldn't complain too much about people hijacking these TBs. The Talkbacks are here for any number of reasons. This isn't a reasonable debate about this and that. This is AICN for fuck's sake. Relax!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:07 a.m. CST

    Jackson to produce...

    by Billy Oblivion

    WETA for effects, and ... wait for it... Terry Gilliam to direct. The Hobbit is actually quite funny, but Jacksons take on humor is rather unsubtle for the material IMO. The Hobbit needs a bit of the Munchausen touch to truly capture the book.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:08 a.m. CST

    Holm can't play Bilbo young, we need Martin Freeman

    by Evil Hobbit

    for young Bilbo!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Chiller TV's Direct Your Own Horror Movie Contest

    by WriteFromLeft

    Maybe Peter would be better off directing for Chiller. And he won't have to audit New Line anymore.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:16 a.m. CST

    Oh and I think Jackson and his team has to come back

    by Evil Hobbit

    At least to produce the flick, I always thought that Alfonso Cuaron would be the best choice to direct the series. I think Jackson would do a marvelous job but maaaaaan it will be such a difficult task for him to top his trilogy. If they allow someone new to give the story a fresh vision I think the film itself will benefit from it. Together with Jacksons and Weta's production guidance we can expect a great Hobbit masterpiece. Think that would be the ideal combination. But if Jackson directs, hell I'm there opening night!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Which means Raimi is free for Spider-Man 4

    by mr teaspoon

    I hope.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Loads of directors could pull this film off besides PJ

    by DirkD13"

    Let's be honest, who thought that he would pull off the Rings trilogy with such panache, after a few low-budget splatterfests, a murder fantasy drama and a mid-budget box-office flop? But directors who could make a great Hobbit are more than 1. Gilliam, Del Toro and Cuaron are obvious choices, but there are surely other great talents out there who could do this (who's to say Antonia Bird wouldn't be ace? or Neil Marshall?)

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:24 a.m. CST

    Raimi needs to leave Spidey alone.

    by Bronx Cheer

    Please. The first was fun, the second was terrific, and the third left me tattered and depressed. Raimi doing Spidey 4 = Men with Vaginas. Just wrong.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:26 a.m. CST



    Crown Heights! The beautiful ladies are out in full swing today! <p> IESB is saying Raimi still wants a crack at the Hobbit... I could see Raimi Directing with PJ Executive Producing.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:26 a.m. CST

    Martin Freeman as Bilbo, Cuaron Directs, Jackson Prod-

    by pipergates

    uces. right on.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:32 a.m. CST

    Eough of the Hobbit

    by Ingeld

    Don't you think it is about time they remade the LOTRs, anyway? Give it a fresh new perspective, get a way from the dated 90's and early 2000s feel of the original. They can employ the latest special effects technology, etc. It can be LOTR for this generation. Oh, alright, if you're that married to the original you can have Elijah Wood play Bilbo if you want.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:39 a.m. CST

    Why does Bilbo have to be 'young'?

    by half vader

    I'm no expert here but the bit that confused me in Fellowship and what people are saying about Bilbo in the Hobbit is why he needs to look younger or be played by a younger actor. <p> They go on about how Bilbo hadn't aged and Gandalf becomes suspicious about the Ring because of that, right? From the moment he found the ring he hardly aged so basically when he found the ring in The Hobbit he looked pretty much as Holm did at the start of Fellowship, right? So why do they need to get a younger actor? The only thing I can think is that they tried to make him look younger in the Fellowship flashback because it's a film language thing where your average audience may not realise it's a flashback if he doesn't look younger. But then why have all the going on explaining how he hadn't changed because the ring had kept his appearance constant? <p> Explanation will be appreciated. <p> Except from raving lunatics like Ringy.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:43 a.m. CST


    by WriteFromLeft

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:43 a.m. CST

    Cuaron would be an awesome alternative

    by Transmetropolitan

    he kicks ass

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Id prefer someone else


    LOTR had to many homoerotic hobbits as it was, imagine a whole movie about a hobbit?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:45 a.m. CST

    Jackson should do the final Potter movies..

    by Judge Briggs

    because Order sucked so many hairy balls. Fucking travesty. Perfect example of a studio trying to get as many people sat and out faster than Bush's approval ratings dropping. We need a Jackson for the final Potter movies! PLLLLLLLEASE!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:45 a.m. CST


    by half vader

    The Hobbit should probably have some good characterisation. Go back and look at the clichéd, misogynistic, simplistic so-called characterisation and motivation in that film. Groovy moments of claustrophobia but fuck me the characters are shit.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:49 a.m. CST

    no more dvd/bluray/hddvd news? reviews?

    by skiff

    You guys have had no video news for ages.I figured harry would have both bluray and hddvd by now. With all the big movies coming out this fall harry would be right on top of things.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Err, sorry Dirk.

    by half vader

    That made no sense, as I edited out the bit where I started talking about THE DESCENT! Woo. Fuck me indeed! I'm goofy!!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:50 a.m. CST

    New Line needs a hit pretty desperately.

    by Barry Egan

    Hairspray looks to be their first $100 million grosser since Wedding Crashers 2 years ago. They need a hit and they need it badly. With Jackson directin The Hobbit they are looking at a film that would gross between $750 million and $1 billion worldwide. For New Line to mend fences with Jackson just makes smart business sense.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:50 a.m. CST

    And posting again at 3 in the morning.

    by half vader

    Woooop! Wooooop! Wooooop!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST

    As much as I loooove LOTR...

    by BrooseTheScharuk

    ...(and I'm talking the "bloated" version, which is -- for me -- the only version), I was still more excited when I heard Peter Weir's name mentioned for the Hobbit than I am about Jackson. I know that all that name-dropping that went on about it a few months ago was really just New Line dipping a few morsels into the water to see if the fish were nibbling, but I'd really like to see new blood (as long as they still prioritize overall track-record over associtation with current box-office success). I really don't want it to play like a "prequel", and that is -- of course -- what we'll get from Jackson. It's not anybody's fault, it's just the laws of the universe. Hell, we'd probably get some sort of approximation of that from anyone who directs, including Weir. I think it kind of sucks that this is getting made after the fact. Imagine how cool it would've been to have the Hobbit come out and be this really charming, comparatively light fantasy yarn, and then -- a few years later -- along comes Fellowship, saying "Hey, kids! Remember the funny little invisiblilty ring that little Mr. Bilbo had so much fun with in his little movie? Well, about that ring..." Of course, we don't know if fate would've played things out as lucratively for the studio in the long run (they would've been different movies made in a different time, and in a different world), but conceptually, it could've been a real H-Bomb! I think that the only way to counteract some of the impact-dulling effect of telling story number one after you've already told story two, is to come at it from a different angle. I know I'm probably in the minority, but I don't go see movies out of heart-sickness for the familiar (although I do sometimes fall ill with that bug, I'll admit). I'd rather see The Hobbit stand alone as a movie than see it as sort of a pop-cultural part two. Who knows really, though -- maybe Jackson feels the same way. Maybe he wishes the Hobbit could've come first. Maybe he'll make it fun and farcical. Maybe There won't be an ominous melody underlying the score every time we see or hear of the the ring. Oh, and I don't think there was anything "gay" about the hobbits in LOTR. In fact, that quality that people who have never watched a movie from the early twentieth century or read any classic literature interpret as "gay" (I know I keep putting quotes around it, but think of it sort of like the way you might hold a dirty diaper or a bag of dog shit; gingerly and at arm's length), could be better described as "old-timey" or, if you want to express it with dislike, disdain, disgust, whatever, you might say "dated" or "archaic" or "naive" or "sentimental" or "maudlin". Of course, the word "gay" would actually be quite at home in the world of Middle Earth, and if you were using it that way -- to describe the joyous, pleasure-loving nature of the little gippers -- you were absolutely correct. But if you want to speak in a more current form of english, you might want to just say "emo". "Gay" is from when I was a kid, which is actually a while ago, when people were stupid (and "gay"). Get with the times. Oh, and finally, to end this appropriately bloated rant on the subject of Tolkien movie adaptations, I STILL CAN'T GET THE IDEA OF MARTIN FREEMAN AS BILBO OUT OF MY HEAD!! Whovever originally threw that out there in the talkbacks, you're a genius! I wannit! I wannit!! Say no to digitally de-aged Ian Holm!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:02 p.m. CST

    I dont know where it came or from who but

    by emeraldboy

    someone made it out that jackson was a bit naieve. the story goes that while he was prepping, the two towers, he re-read his contract and that his when he discovered that when it came to the DVD's jackson, the financial winners were new line cinema. Jackson then contacted his lawyers, who told him him to wait untill the return of the king came and if he wanted to sue New line then he would be free to do so. I dont know if all of this has been settled yet. Jackson did say he the past that the relationship between wingut films and Newline was never all that comfortable. The whole business regarding the DVD's is very odd. I dont know whether the the story about him finding out while prepping the two towers is true or not. Oh and this person I know. Well lets just say that I mentioned this person before on this site and I into got very serious trouble for doing it. Suffice to say, i have to very careful when talking about this person. Seemingly, others in his choosen field got on his case. I learned a lesson, that is you have very careful and never ever relay conversations, especially private ones on the internet especially on talkbacks.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Robert Shaye was quoted as saying...

    by WhoDis

    "They backed a truck full of money up to my house! I'm not made of stone!"<p>Now let's stop this nonsense and get this Hobbit thing started while Ian McKellan's still young. And I second Martin Freeman for Bilbo.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:19 p.m. CST


    by calnorso

    At least Raimi won't be doing this now which is a HUGE relief. I could picture his version of the Hobbit, Bilbo would have a dance number or whatever the hell that was in Spiderman 3

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Regarding Cuaron...

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    If you guys are talking about the Cuaron who directed HP3/PoA... NO THANK YOU. If you are talking about the Cuaron who directed Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN and the amazing CHILDREN OF (FUCKING) MEN, I can see what you're driving at but it would almost be like Scorcese or Spielberg doing it. There is a certain whimsy and sensibility that I've not seen from him that I think would be necessary for THE HOBBIT. No way am I convinced he's the right alternative.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson is the shit!

    by Brian_De_Man

    If they don't do Peter Jackson as the director, then the Hobbit will go from great to a piece of shit.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:34 p.m. CST

    Bob Shaye should direct "The Hobbit."

    by Uncapie

    "The Last Mimsy" is cinematic work of art. The "Citizen Kane" of the 21st Century. All you "Mimsy" hayters out there just don't understand. You never gave the film a chance. I hate all of you and I'm going to bite my "Star Wars" pillow in my "Yoda" jammies to prove it! Sniff.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:36 p.m. CST

    Who would play Bilbo?

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz

    I mean you can bring back everyone else including Ian Mckellen, but Ian Holm is too old at this point to play Bilbo and I would imagine he would decline if he was asked. <BR> <BR> So who could fill those shoes???

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:40 p.m. CST


    by BrooseTheScharuk

    ...Thanks for giving me an excuse to say this again....MARTIN FREEMAN!!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:41 p.m. CST


    by BrooseTheScharuk


  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:46 p.m. CST

    Smaug's Lair (CUARON Style)

    by The Artist FKA Vesuvio

    Let us take a moment to picture a 5 minute sequence of Bilbo infiltrating Smaug's cave, non-stop takes (even if faux ones) like in Children of Men? I get happy thinking about that. BTW Gaius, IMHO, HP3PoA is the better of them all, and I loved the way Cuaron portrayed Hogwarts students acting like, you know, students. Maybe they shoud have saved him, or kept him, to Goblet of Fire. Perhaps by doing this, teenagehood and its rites would've had some relevance in that borefest.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:48 p.m. CST

    How amny have here have seen a short animated film

    by emeraldboy

    called Agricultural report.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:48 p.m. CST

    The Hobbit done in a LOTR Style

    by King Sweyn Forkbeard

    Is exactly what Tolkien wanted to do anyway. He had long planned to rewrite it in a more mature style to bring the two works closer together. <P> Jackson doing it in the same style as he did the Trilogy is right, and it's only sensible TBH. For me, the juvenile style The Hobbit is written in doesn't suit the story.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:49 p.m. CST

    More Peter Jackson updated HOBBIT news!!!!

    by melanarus

    First, let me just point out as much as I dislike BOB SHAYE, he is the reason we have the LOTR trilogy and he was also the one who told PJ to make the LOTR into 3 movies and not 2 as PJ had planned!!! Obviously Bob Shaye and New Line are out to make money and whatever money PJ feels owed to him legally or not I think Bob And NL planned to "payback" to him with a big cut of the Hobbit but I don't think Pj agreed. PJ feels cheated as do a group of actors from the trilogy who also recently sued NL over money owed to them!!! New Line stands to make half as much on Movie tickets (multiple viewing by moviegoers), Dvds and the Dvd box sets and cmon all that merchandising!!!!! They could loose out on hundreds of millions of dollars if they don't get him back and Weta, the actors and not to mention filming in New Zealand. And now NL has not been making big moneymakers either and need the Hobbit, not to mention anyone finacially backing the Hobbit wants PJ and not ANYONE else. The Shadow cast from LOTR trilogy onto anyone else "trying" to make the Hobbit will be compared by EVERYONE who watched it! That's probably one of the main reasons Bob and NL may have had trouble with a director and cast without PJ, no one wants to touch that!!! I love Peter Jackson, but PJ when the hell can you do this one with Lovely Bones and that Tin Tin movie going on? Won't this take like at least two years to start and finish?!! PJ it's to talk back to the talkbackers!!!!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 12:55 p.m. CST

    More Peter Jackson updated HOBBIT news!!!! Part 2

    by melanarus

    Peter, it's time for you to go and save New Lines ass again!! But this time get real paid!!! And while I'm talking, I could easily see two versions of PJ's the Hobbit. a Kid oriented cut and a more mature Lotr style 4 hour cut for everyone else. All I know is PJ, when you announce you are onboard the Hobbit I'll be saving up a few thousand bucks for all the merchandise that will go with my LOTR collection!!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:08 p.m. CST

    What? Have I got aids or something?

    by half vader

    I was being honest about my age/casting question. Not even you Broose? You were going on about it after all. Fuck it. Now it's four in the morning...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:15 p.m. CST

    Do or Die...Bed-Stuy

    by Bronx Cheer

    The Knight, we're practically neighbors.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:16 p.m. CST

    Danny DeVito Should Direct "The Hobbit"

    by WriteFromLeft

    No more Peter Jackson head injuries on the set from all those low door frames.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:18 p.m. CST

    Let's just make that "DO"...there's no "die."

    by Bronx Cheer

    But in a couple of weeks, I'll be Williamsburg.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Hobbit wouldnt be the same..

    by GavinVanDraven

    without Peter Jackson on board you also lose the services of WETA, and the entire look of the film would be different not to mention the ACTORS Mckellen = Gandalf Holm = Bilbo Weaving = Elrond Serkis = Gollum Ryes-Davies (as Gloin) i'm sure he would wear makeup again, for a hefty paycheck. Bloom (as the Mirkwood king's son, just a cameo....) but yeah, imagine if they recast the top 4 there. recasting = disaster

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:22 p.m. CST


    by GavinVanDraven

    need to learn how to post things with commas.... *hits self in head again*

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:29 p.m. CST

    oh fuck not this again

    by mrbong

    Mr Jackson did an excellent job adapting three tiresome contrived novels to the big screen. The Hobbit was a mildly more interesting read, but who gives a fuck if it is filmed or not? as for Jackson, well, his reputation took a hefty knock with the King Dong debacle, didn't it - that will teach directors not to hire that retard Jack Black.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:32 p.m. CST


    by misnomer

    the whole point of the hobbit is that its a kids book. why retroactively change it to make it more in line with the LOTR films??? bollocks. id rather jackson didn't direct this given what his approach will be. 1 movie. 1hr 45 minutes. returning cast. directed by raimi, petersen, whoever. co produced by jackson. weta. done.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:35 p.m. CST

    They shouldnt

    by emeraldboy

    New line should just cut there losses.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:39 p.m. CST

    I could care less if Jackson is the director

    by INWOsuxRED

    The only character who ever really conveyed any type of emotion in the LOTR films was Frodo's sidekick. IF Peter Jackson can make his characters likeable AND he can make a FUN movie, then he should do the Hobbit, but I really didn't see any proof of him being able to do that in LOTR or Kong. Maybe he should just supervise the effects...there aren't any bronto stampedes in the Hobbit, are there?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:43 p.m. CST

    Battle of Five Armies

    by Veni Vidi Vici

    would look fucking amazing on the big screen, not to mention Riddles in the Dark( i get giddy just thinking of that chapter being brought to life). get PJ and the rest of the crew to do this film.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:48 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson is ver capable of making a fun movie

    by GavinVanDraven

    frighteners? dead alive? bad taste? anybody think he cant make a fun film? family film though..... hmmmm. i thought LOTR had some great comedy moments...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:50 p.m. CST


    by Bronx Cheer

    I think I'll write a post-apocalyptic film wherein the five boroughs of NYC are engaged in a savage battle. The winner decides the borough that will be allowed to host the daily tapings of MARTHA and THE TONY DANZA DANCE HOUR.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:52 p.m. CST

    the changes in LOTR were not that big of a deal

    by GavinVanDraven

    PJ explained the changes in Faramir's attitude toward the Hobbits on the DVD. the whole idea of a human inviting them for milk and cookies seems a little out there when you look at the flow of the film.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:53 p.m. CST

    Tim Burton's "The Hobbit"

    by Hervoyel

    Johnny Depp as Bilbo Baggins who can't wear a ring because he's got scissors for hands. Everyone could wear black and white striped waist coats and socks.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Bob Guccioni's "The Hobbit"

    by Hervoyel

    All the dwarves are played by Penthouse Pets and it ends with the orgy of five armies.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:01 p.m. CST

    Bard the bowman....

    by GavinVanDraven

    Liam Neeson.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson's THE HOBBIT

    by Bronx Cheer

    Three hours and forty minutes of smiling, trees, hugs, and reaction shots.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:06 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson for JLA... *sigh*

    by UltimaRex

    George Miller could "do a Jackson" and actually pull it off but if the real Peter Jackson is sitting over there then... why? I'm off to cry now.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:12 p.m. CST

    Give it to Ron Jeremy

    by ThePilgrim

    He'll do Anything...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:16 p.m. CST


    by GavinVanDraven

    i have to disagree with what you just said. but hey, no worries. i am kind of looking at it from the casual viewers perspective. if you hadn't read the book, the book version of Faramir wouldn't seem to fit. IMHO. to each his own. i guess the thing is, nobody will ever make it perfect for everone. somebody will always hate what you do.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:31 p.m. CST

    The reason Jackson excels is because of emotion

    by starlesswinter

    The last hour of ROTK has more emotion than most films today have in their entire running times. I have never cried as much in a film as I did in those moments, and it's because the film was all about character. You can have as many special effects as you want, but they don't cancel out the emotions of the characters. From the "For Frodo" line, to the reactions of the fellowship when they think Frodo might be dead, to "the end of all things" between Frodo and Sam, to "You bow to no one", Frodo's "threads of an old lie" voiceover, and finally to the Grey Havens, the emotion is almost overwhelming. It shines out any CG effect in the film. That also gave us a better ending, because it allowed us to the see the continuing characterization of Frodo and the emotional effects of his journey on him. It wasn't a quick 5 minutes of "everything's happy!"; it showed us that in all wars, people change from their experiences. Faramir's changes were not a big deal. Only purists care about that. It made the character BETTER and gave him a journey, unlike the Faramir in the book with no journey. The book canceled out the rules of the Ring's power in order for some oh-so-convenient help from a new character. It was inconsistent, almost like Tolkien was thinking "I've been too hard on these guys...I need to bring in some help, even if I am changing why this ring is so evil in the first place." I swear, some people only like what's in the book and dislike anything else just because it wasn't in that book. But if it WAS in the book in the first place, then they'd love it. Movie adaptations aren't about directly translating everything from book to screen; take the chance to make things better if they need it, which Faramir's story certainly did.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:36 p.m. CST

    Isn't the point of a remake to "reimagine" it?

    by starlesswinter

    I certainly don't want to see the same exact story retold. Change it a little. I didn't mind the "love story" in Kong, even though it was more of a family-type love than a romantic love. It offered a unique approach on monster movies, giving us a bond rather than the typical "run away! he's coming" plot. However, King Kong as a whole was far too long and bloated. It was still an enjoyable movie, just too long.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:39 p.m. CST

    starlesswinter and Wnanahara7

    by GavinVanDraven

    i couldn't agree more.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:40 p.m. CST


    by starlesswinter

    I don't think Faramir was a carbon copy. Unlike Boromir, he was able to resist the power of the Ring in the end, which is radically different. EVERYONE in the film is tempted by the Ring, so to say Faramir is a copy of Boromir is to say that Isildur is or that Gandalf is. Faramir and Boromir are just similar because they have the same motives. You can't deny that Tolkien set aside the characterization of the Ring in the Faramir chapters. I realize what he stands for, but you can do that without changing how your world works or making an unbelievable angelic character.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:44 p.m. CST

    He STOLE it?

    by starlesswinter

    So, if he had stayed closer to the 1933 version, would he have stolen that too? Monster/Horror films...we have enough of those...sorry, I just happen to think the family-bond story of an ape and a human girl is more interesting. You have 1-18-08 if you want a monster film.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Ok, I'll play the game...the love aspect of KK is from

    by Bronx Cheer

    MIGHTY JOE YOUNG. MJY was a riff on the original KK, so I suppose it's only appropriate that later versions of Kong would borrow from a borrower.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:47 p.m. CST

    kong reminded me of that episode in the simpsons

    by emeraldboy

    WHere ned flanders house gets demolished by tornado and homer in an unprecendented act of both kindness and stupidity rebuilds flanders home. but homer knows noting about DIY and fucks the rebuilding of Neds House. Thats what Jacksons king kong was like.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:53 p.m. CST

    Get Peter onboard NOW

    by performingmonkey

    I only want to see The Hobbit directed by Peter Jackson. It needs to be in the same world he created for LOTR. It needs WETA coming in and doing what they do best. It needs the Battle Of Five Armies to be fucking huge, it needs the Bilbo/Gollum riddle sequence to be classic, iconic like everyone remembers it from the book, it needs Thorin Oakenshield to be played by BRIAN COX and no-one else, it needs Andy Serkis, Ian Mckellen and Hugo Weaving back. They could also potentially cast Orlando Bloom as Legolas's father (who's in this as a bastard elf king who throws Bilbo and the dwarves in his dungeons).

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 2:58 p.m. CST

    They beter get a move on - no one (including myself)

    by Yeti

    is getting any younger.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:06 p.m. CST

    King Kong Lives

    by WriteFromLeft

    Now, what I would do is have Dino DeLaurentis produce the sequel to Jackson's King Kong, only have it be a remake of King Kong Lives, with a guy in a monkey suit doing things. If for no other reason than to hear Dino say, "Oh my God! She's a bigga flop!" after the weekend grosses come in.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:08 p.m. CST

    Wnanahara7, agreed.

    by Bronx Cheer

    But it's still accurate to say they borrowed from themselves. As I said, it was a riff on the original. And I agree with you about the remake of Mighty Joe Young. It had a lot of appeal. And I also agree that the King Kong we saw in Jackson's version was a most amazing creation. While the movie had many problems, one of them surely was not the main character. Astounding work by all involved.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:09 p.m. CST

    Lets have a rumble.

    by i kick tits

    When you're a Jet you're the top cat in town. You're the Gold medal kid with the heavyweight crown.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:10 p.m. CST


    by Bronx Cheer

    I can work a Romeo Juliet story in there and make it a musical. Gangs of NY with dance numbers.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:19 p.m. CST


    by Bronx Cheer

    That got the first chuckle out of me today. Well done, Douchebag! (There, that more like it?)

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Three and a half hours, Meatbiscuit.

    by Bronx Cheer

    Give Petey 210 minutes and he'll give you a dragon.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:30 p.m. CST

    3 hours of crying?

    by starlesswinter

    You need to watch again if that's all you got out of it. I love the hobbits as heroes. They deserve to cry after what they've been through. And it's not all they did; sure they do at the end of every movie, but it's for a realistic reason, you know. I certainly don't want macho heroes who can do anything. Men showing emotion: who would have thought?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:32 p.m. CST

    BOERUM HILL REPRESENT!! (That's the top of Park Slope)

    by slone13

    I don't have much to say that hasn't been written here about Jackson and the Hobbit already (i.e. they shouldn't bother if he ain't involved), I just wanted to further represent my borough. Money Makin' Brooklyn, baby!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:42 p.m. CST

    They only want Jackson back because...

    by Fridge's the only way they'll get people like Ian McKellen from the first three movies back. There's no way those people would be involved with this movie unless Jackson was.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 3:44 p.m. CST

    Holy hell, SoylentMean, you kill!

    by Bronx Cheer

    Rabbits?! That was effin' hilarious! Thanks for the laugh.</p> If you don't want to get mugged in NYC, don't come to town wearing a camera on your chest. Don't wear I Heart NY shirts. Don't block the fucking sidewalk so others can walk unimpeded. Don't point at things. AND DON"T WADDLE. Seriously, you can tell a tourist by the waddle.</p> And don't worry about getting mugged. Come to NYC to enjoy the greatest city in the US. Better to worry about the damned monster rat that tore the head of the SOL. He looks pissed. But I bet he doesn't come to Brooklyn, because we'd kick his cheese-eating ass.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 4:17 p.m. CST

    Zombie Hobbits...Zombits

    by Bronx Cheer

    Now THAT would be good for Jackson.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 4:31 p.m. CST

    After starring in Three of the biggest films of his

    by emeraldboy

    career recently and back to back. Orlando bloom will not do this film just yet. The guy needs space and time as do the others. It is going to take a hell of a lot to make all this happen. it took 4-5 years of pre-production to build those sets in New Zealand, lord of the rings didnt happen over night. Making three films back to back was unprecendented for everyone. New line has to be certain that there is an audience for this movie. Everyone is saying that hiring jackson and the cast means that the movie will happen. Well i am not sure about that. Lord of the rings was a massive production and it needed to be. Putting massive amounts of money into a film is nothing new. The best example is titanic which was beset by shooting delays, it did break box office records but look how long it is taking cameron to come back. a decade. and there is no guarantee that camerons new film will be blockbuster. That is all in the future. either the hobbit is made or not. but it should not be made on the hasty demands of the fans. They should take thier time.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Crying Hobbits?

    by Veni Vidi Vici

    They are more dwarves than hobbits in the book, so you can quit your bitching about seeing more crying hobbits.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 4:54 p.m. CST

    CGI John Candy as Bofur.

    by misnomer

    best sentence ever written.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 4:57 p.m. CST

    No Jack City

    by i kick tits

    I have lived in New York City for my entire life and have never, ever once in 21 years of life been mugged. Never. Once a gang of 16 year olds demanded I "run my pockets" but I said No and they cursed at me. That's about as close as its gotten. You must've been wearing a fanny-pack or something because I have no clue what you're talking about. Never mugged. Groped by mentally ill sexual predators plenty of times, but mugged- no sir.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 5:06 p.m. CST

    You promised you wouldn't talk about that again.

    by Bronx Cheer

    I told you a hundred times, "I'm sorry."

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 5:24 p.m. CST

    PLEASE! Let Peter Dinklage direct and star from a Mamet

    by Bronx Cheer

    script. Set it in Chicagoshire and have Gandalf be a beat cop.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 5:24 p.m. CST

    New Line Cinema's position is basically indefensible

    by Gozu

    Studios should pay their directors the money they owe them. Directors shouldn't have to sue in order to get paid. I hope "The Hobbit" happens, but more-so I hope Jackson gets his fair share. Sure he's made more money than God off "LOTR" but it's the principle of the thing.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 5:54 p.m. CST

    The Hobbit has chosen HD-DVD, here's why...

    by Johnno

    It's curent sales are as high as it'll ever grow.<br><br>That said, I look forward to a Peter Jackson Hobbit. You'd be dumb to change it up! And while they're at it they might as well make Similirion or however that's spelt too. Or if there's nto much there for a concrete story, make anime shorts of it leading up the Hobbit's release. It worked well for Animatrix and Batman's doing it too, heck, just look at the short for Heavenly Sword... But whatever...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:09 p.m. CST

    How Boring. Let's go back to the Harry Potter thread

    by Ringwearer9

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:11 p.m. CST

    If they owe him $20 million, they should pay up.

    by Gozu

    If they don't owe them anything, then they don't. We might find out if this goes to trial. What I'm saying is that if an employer pays you less than what you've earned or what they said they'd pay you, you have to challenge that. It doesn't matter if you're the fry guy at McDonalds or Peter Jackson.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:15 p.m. CST

    The Silmarillion,

    by Lornsorrow

    that is all I want to see. Edited down into an understandable movie. The juvenile story of The Hobbit was never that great for me. I've read it, and read the LOTR trilogy a few times, but I never could find the time to get all the way through the Silmarillion (yet). That's the one that looks real interesting to me, and would probably be a worthy film successor to the LOTR films. Unless someone wants to shoot The Hobbit in a more mature manner and drop some of the juvenile stuff in it.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:28 p.m. CST

    Jackson....nah just dont

    by Fudgemonkey

    Produce it? sure! get Weta, Serkis Mckellen et al on board? fuck yeah! but for me, Jackson screwed the pooch with the ending of the last film. A montage Pete? honestly? slow-mo homoerotica? You're shitting me right? taking away the original ending which for me defined the greatness of the book (the whole post first world war, you cant go home again, scouring of the shire bit) was the biggest directorial fopar since Michael Bay said "yknow pearl harbor really aint about the fight in Hawaii, lets get Afflec in a love story for 3 hours!" Lets get some fresh blood in with a sense of what makes Tolkein's works so compelling please!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:45 p.m. CST

    re: Lornsorrow, the Silmarilion as a movie

    by Ingeld

    While I enjoy the Silmarillion, I do not think it would make a good movie. What makes the Elves interesting is the sense of otherness and mystery. In LOTR, book and movie, they are represented mostly by Legolas. He is otherness is enhanced by the comparison with humans. A movie only about Feanor, Turin and rest of the elves would have to dissolve that otherness and mystery and make them more human and common. Something certainly would be lost.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:51 p.m. CST


    by runfoodrun

    Anyone in the talkback who says Jackson should lay off because he's already made 168 million and should worry about 20 more is an idiot. What person in their right mind in any profession would just walk away from any sum of EARNED money because the people in control refuse to give it to him. He MADE this MONEY and DESERVES it. People don't make movies only for the love of the craft, they do it to MAKE MONEY and get PAID. Foolish comments.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 6:53 p.m. CST


    by runfoodrun

    And if not Jackson, the very best choice, how about Curon.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Hulk SMASH puny hobbits

    by BetaRayBill07

    Hulk no like Shire. Hulk no like puny Gollum. Smash puny ring!!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:09 p.m. CST

    SPOILER- Bilbo seen in Pizza Delivery Garb!!

    by BetaRayBill07

    Sorry, I had to throw that out there.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:19 p.m. CST

    Fred Savage will work for cheap.

    by Flim Springfield


  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:26 p.m. CST

    New Line Gotta Eat

    by CherryValance

    So fitting. Really I don't know what they were thinking. Hopefully it will turn out right.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 7:45 p.m. CST

    Other directors dont have the guts

    by silent 1

    I wont be surprised other directors would have turned down this project it's to big of a task to meet the requirement that Jackson and his team have done.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:19 p.m. CST

    Silmarilion with a script done by Neal Gaiman

    by pipergates

    Silmarilion is basically just a long list of historical happenings, someone with Gaiman's flair for legends full of life, could mine that book like a miner mining the richest ore...and there's enough for a lot of movies there. Pirates of the Caribean could be peanuts compared to the possible earning power of this one.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 9:30 p.m. CST


    by starlesswinter

    Wow, people really need to get over this...the hobbits' relationship is a TRUE friendship with feelings, not "gay" whatsoever. All they ever did was hug and got a kiss on the head; nothing homosexual about that. Sorry if I sound like a fag to you, but I'd rather have a strong friendship like the hobbits' than one of today's so-called friendships: "Hey man, I got some pussy last night...awesome! Let's go get high off our asses!" where everything is about sex. And you obviously need to watch the ending of the ROTK again...there was no montage. We got the idea that all was not right after the war just from Frodo's voiceover "...when in your heart, there is no going back..." That was strong and emotionally effective enough; we didn't need to draw it out with yet another battle.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:09 p.m. CST

    Emeraldboy, Starless

    by half vader

    "Massive amounts of money" Each film cost 86 million, 260 all up. Yeah I guess that's sort of massive by itself, but not in relation to other films. I'm still trying to find out whether that's American or Kiwi dolars. US I think. But anyway they made that money go a long way. <p> Starless, settle down there and get over it yourself! The gay thing, and the crying thing, especially in regards to the hobbits, is now a time-honoured AICN tradition. Stop being so stuffy about the baiting, ya big girl. ;)

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:10 p.m. CST

    but the emotional starings of Frodo was way overdone

    by pipergates

    and yes they did make the friendship look perverted, with all that exaggerated drama...Jackson repeated the overblown emotional staring scenes in King Kong.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:28 p.m. CST

    What was so exaggerated and

    by starlesswinter

    What was so exaggerated and perverted about the friendship, other than the staring?

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Nothing, they're just goofing.

    by Bronx Cheer

    But there was way too much crying. You can't be crying that much if you were armor or carry a sword: RUST!

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:37 p.m. CST

    Curon couldn't handle this movie?

    by runfoodrun

    BS, all he's done is make the Harry Potter franchise watchable, a brillant road/coming of age movie in Y Tu Mama and the brillant, extremely well design and played Children of Men, he'd be perfect for the Hobbit if PJ doesn't do it.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 10:54 p.m. CST


    by starlesswinter

    I like Cuaron more as a visual guy than a storytelling guy, but that's not to say he's bad at all. I particularly love his long takes. The only thing I have against him directing the Hobbit is that he has a very dark visual style with everything he does, and the Hobbit isn't anything like that. I like the Prisoner of Azkaban film, but I think he butchered my favorite moment of the entire HP series, which was the Shrieking Shack scene. The scene was wonderful for me in the book because we get a little more shocking information at a time until you are spellbound by all the threads being tied together in that moment and recognizing all the earlier clues. In the film, it was just rushed through with the facts, making it a little confusing for some people. I completely understand time in adapting a book and am not a purist at all, but sometimes savoring the moment works better.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:12 p.m. CST

    Terry Gilliam for the Hobbit

    by MasterShake

    Is that wrong of me? As much as I love PJ's LOTR, I think Gilliam could blow our minds with the Hobbit.

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:31 p.m. CST

    crying hobbits

    by GavinVanDraven

    as far as i can tell... bilbo is the only hobbit in majority of the book... and i dont think he cries to much. the whole "gay" thing is really retarded. ive seen very tough guys cry because they went through something emotional. your friend or parent dies, you just got married, had your first child, you threw a game winning touchdown pass, you survive a car wreck, you saw a great movie that got to you.... any man would cry in any of those situations. the hobbits went through some traumatic shit in those books. they werent humans remember, they were innocent beings. they were more like children in that respect. so i would expect a little more emotion from them. i think PJ got it right. i didnt see anything gay about the movies. crying is normal. "i did my best." sniffle sniffle "i did my be-e-eeeeeest"

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:32 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson will produce...

    by Bones

    ...And someone else will direct. <p> Possibly Raimi...or DelToro...<p> That way, the New Zealand Crew will be involved, The Wingnut crew will be there for the assist--and There will be new blood in the director's chair giving it the difference it tone it needs to have.<p> The Hobbit, unlike Lord of the Rings, is a children's story and should have a lighter touch than the LOTR Trilogy--but it should still feel like it is connected to those films. Having Jackson on as a producer is the best solution--plus it is an olive branch to the fans, from whom New Line wants money...

  • Aug. 11, 2007, 11:36 p.m. CST

    His Majesty's Dragon

    by Veraxus

    Wasn't Peter Jackson doing Temeraire after Lovely Bones? I'd like The Hobbit, too... but the man can't be everywhere at once and... damn, if it wouldn't be a hard choice.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, midnight CST

    The Silmarilion? Hmmm.... I don't know

    by The Artist FKA Vesuvio

    Am I the only one who thinks The Silmarilion simply doesn't belong to this particular 'age' of cinema? It would be like, I don't know, trying to produce The Matrix back in the 40's. Possible, of course, but somehow unfit. Oh, almost forget... ALFONSO FUCKING CUARON.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 12:55 a.m. CST

    Thanks, Tombodet

    by half vader

    I just thought I remembered Gandalf or someone saying "You haven't aged a day" or something and then being suspicious. Thanks for the info.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 1:23 a.m. CST

    I Don't Know Why They Won't Give Him Whatever He Wants

    by skoobyx

    Its a slam dunk. They pay him $100 mill they still turn a profit on it. Even before the 17 disk collector's edition DVD with life size Gollum statue. I thought studios were all about business.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 2:40 a.m. CST

    Well, at least keep Howard Shore

    by starlesswinter

    I don't know if Shore would be willing without Jackson on board, but Shore's score for the trilogy is amazing beyond words. The level of thematic complexity in the scores (over 80 developing themes!) is simply astounding. Hearing the ominous "History of the Ring" theme when Bilbo finds the Ring would be chill-worthy, but it really shouldn't be used other than that moment...that might be overkill. But what an opportunity for the gorgeous male choir Dwarven music heard in Moria! Or a reprisal of the "Menace of Gollum" theme with the cymbalom during Riddles in the Dark. Even variations of the hobbit material used for the Shire.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 3:46 a.m. CST

    Time Warner stock holders are Cookin the Books!!!!!

    by DOGSOUP

    We know it's true

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 4:37 a.m. CST

    Fuck the Hobbit

    by 300spartansinhell

    I still have hopes for Beowulf and an epic dragon fight, cgi or no cgi. That golden dragon looks kick-ass. Who needs lame Smaug who got killed with one arrow.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 4:42 a.m. CST


    by 300spartansinhell

    the jumping in bed with Frodo scene that takes forever, was exaggereted. I was suprised Legolas wasn´t pulled into bed too by the Hobbits. When Frodo says "Oh Sam" for the tenth time in the films, it was exaggerated.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 5:24 a.m. CST


    by messi

    Okay I stole it too but i'm blatantly putting it there: Tokyo Drift FUCK YOU

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 5:25 a.m. CST

    I kick tits...

    by cornponious

    1989, sadly.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 6:59 a.m. CST

    in all this hobbit and tolkein talk

    by emeraldboy

    there is one figure, who the fans dont like but he is an important figure none the less, christopher tolkien has said that he will not allow anyone to get their hands on the work bequeathed to him by JRR Tolkien.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 7:04 a.m. CST

    The only big movies left

    by messi

    since Transformers has been done are The Simarillion, Justice League, Infinite Crisis. That's it. Can't get any bigger than that. The Revelation is a fucking shitty story, not epic or well written.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 7:22 a.m. CST


    by palewook

    best new series of 2007 and not one talkback about it. wtf.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 8:35 a.m. CST

    There will never be a SILMARILLION movie.

    by Mr. Nice Gaius

    It's too complex and there is no central protagonist.<P>Don't get me wrong, I fucking LOVE the book. But the idea of a film having to introduce a new character every 3 minutes while covering 10,000 years of Middle Earth history is ridiculous.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 8:40 a.m. CST

    The best new series...jekyll?

    by emeraldboy

    No not by a long shot. to each his own i guess. I couldnt Stand it and I found Nessbits overacting incredibly irritating. I hope that if nesbitt gets dr. who he tones his compulsion to overact. the idea of him and tate, will be enough to make me never watch the show again.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 10:21 a.m. CST

    Re: the money Jackson thinks he's owed...

    by Monkey_King

    What're you trying to say here Quint? Are you siding with Shaye and New Line on this, or just being a jealous fanboy prick that Jackson & Co are right and always have been right? Shaye should pay up what Peter's owed, let Peter make THE HOBBIT and reap the benefits of what it will make without screwing over Peter again.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Christopher Tolkien will probably be dead soon

    by King Sweyn Forkbeard

    No more problem there.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 2:17 p.m. CST

    why is so much chris tolkien

    by emeraldboy

    hate. I mean, he doesnt what he inherited filmed. The ralph bakashi thing was well over 20 years ago. but if he doesnt want what he has filmed, its his decision. What is the problem.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 2:33 p.m. CST


    by Johnno

    Make a bunch of anime shorts covering all that stuff and toss it on a DVD. DIfferent directors, different art styles, whatever... Get Miyazaki, Shoji Kawamori, any other US or Japanese director you like that can do fantasy in there and boom good to go...

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 3:57 p.m. CST

    Wnanahara7 thats a great idea

    by slappy jones

    just let the studios pay what they want regardless off what they are legally obliged to. If they want to cut someone 20 - 30 MILLION dollars short then the person owed should just be greatful they got anything. jesus christ....

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 4:15 p.m. CST

    Kiss And Make Up? Has PJ Apologized For KING KONG Yet?

    by LaserPants

    "Look, I'm sorry, I lost my head! I thought since I made a such a sucessful epic with LOTR, that I could do anything! I could take, for instance, a 90 minute monster movie and make it 387 hours long and everybody would love it! HOW WRONG I WAS! It was a bomb! Even the few people who liked it fell asleep. Children were weeping, relationships ended, money just burned on the altar of my hubris! I AM SORRY! I AM SO SO VERY SORRY!!! Please don't make me go back to making hilarious splatter movies! I AM AN EPIC FILM-MAKER! Can you blame me for freaking out? Look what happened to Lucas! Of course, I pulled a Wachowski and went from Lucas '78 to Lucas '99 in just under a year, but, think of my issues! My damage! Psychologically transferring my copious bulk to the utter failure that was KING KONG?! I WAS A FAT KID AND FINALLY I WAS THIN! I had money, women suddenly wanted to talk to me and I... I... lost my head... I, I'm sorry. As penance, I promise I will hire an editor for my next movie which I also promise will be under 90 minutes... and good."<br><br>

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 4:15 p.m. CST

    This is the best news I've heard in a long, long time.

    by brokentusk

    Despite what some people may think about Peter Jackson's LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy, in my mind the only way I (and the majority of the public) will accept a HOBBIT film without it seeming like a blatant cashing-in of the Middle-Earth brand, is to have Jackson involved. To clarify, that isn’t saying that Peter Jackson is the ONLY director that can direct the film (although I have yet to think of another director I’d want to handle the material), but rather that if his name isn’t involved, it will feel cheap on the part of New Line Cinema (to a public unfamiliar with the fact that there really IS a sequel to the trilogy). If this news turns out to be accurate, I'd say that Robert Shaye has probably made the smartest decision of his life (besides green-lighting the trilogy). As I've said before - it's the difference between making millions of dollars... or billions.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 4:36 p.m. CST

    There was a good movie in Kong, under all the fat

    by starlesswinter

    Cut down a serious amount of the boat material and the dino fights and you'll have a great film. The New York scenes (very beginning and very end) were probably my favorite parts of the movie, which is pretty ironic, considering what the movie is SUPPOSED to be about.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 5:06 p.m. CST

    Yeah, Cut About 90+ Minutes Of Fat Out of KING LONG...

    by LaserPants

    You'd have a decent 90+minute movie. At the very least, cut out the entire boat scene -- especially the part where PJ lets us all know he read HEART OF DARKNESS. Yes, we all read it too, thanks, and no, your KING LONG movie is NOWHERE near as good as APOCALYPSE NOW; to even hint at that is ludicrous. You know you're watching padding when a man typing "S-K-U-L-L I-S-L-A-N-D" goes on for about 10 minutes. Or an embarassingly bad CGI dino race goes on for what feels like hours. For a second I thought I was watching Seals and Crofts' LAND OF THE LOST. WATCH OUT MARSHALL, WILL, AND HOLLY! This ain't no routine expedition! No sir!

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 5:16 p.m. CST

    Teh Hobbit roxxxord the soxxxord, dudes...

    by 'Cholera's Ghost

    God I hate it when I start talking like that. But it's uber-infectious! Anyway, the key to this movie is Smaug. The other key to this movie is Smaug. Lastly, they should put a lot of work into Smaug. Also, Smaug should really be paid attention to.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 8:29 p.m. CST


    by TheNorthlander

    The original was an hour and a half. Yet it kept the same beats, with Kong not showing up until the midpoint. So did the 70s remake with Jeff Bridges. Nobody's saying it can't be done, but Jackson's was the long, epic re-interpretation of that story. It's what it was supposed to be.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 8:31 p.m. CST

    King Kong proves that Jackson

    by Damer1

    is merely mortal.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 8:38 p.m. CST

    Film it all damn it!

    by Jaka

    Film The Hobbit, and whatever can hold a filmed narative from the Silmarillion, and film Children of Hurin. Pahleeeeeeease! lol

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 9:30 p.m. CST


    by starlesswinter

    Jackson's version of King Kong was a tribute to the way he viewed it as a kid, which was a huge, epic movie. Of course it's flawed, but I've already mentioned those that previously.

  • Aug. 12, 2007, 9:49 p.m. CST

    that is not even the entire

    by LeviDTinker

    that is not even the entire quote<br> which is from a L.A. Times article in this past fridays Calender section, <br> When asked if it was true that company insiders had been in talks with Jackson's reps,<br> Shaye replied, "Yes, that's a fair statement. Notwithstanding our personal quarrels, I really respect and admire Peter and would love for him to be creatively involved in some way in 'The Hobbit.'

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 2:53 a.m. CST

    to whoever said...

    by GavinVanDraven

    film everything exactly as it was in the book... i gotta ask. in THE HOBBIT, wasnt there a guy called Beorn who transformed into a bear? this could be a little "silly" methinks....

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 4:56 a.m. CST

    About time we got some news on the Hobbit.

    by morGoth

    OK, now that Bob and PJ have kissed and made up (that must mean they're gay Hobbits, right?), get on with it...two movies or nowt! <p> For those who'd be disappointed in an adult version of the Hobbit (like Tolkien's kids, including Chris, wanted in the first place), relax, there's always the book. Also, I think it would be great if we could have as much continuity with Jackson's LoTR as possible. <p> Goofy Dwarves? Yeah, they were pretty stumble-bum at the beginning of the Hobbit but things got serious after Gandalf left 'em to go muck around with the Necromancer.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 6:49 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    nothing is more certain to bring Ringy out from under his bridge than a Jackson-Tolkien adaptation, and all he can do is post a link to a TB where he took a pasting. How disappointing.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 8:10 a.m. CST

    AceVentura 2?

    by Shaw

    Yikes. Anyways, the Martin Freeman idea is brilliant. I think I care less about Jackson than I do about getting the cast back. But no Jackson means the rest of them won't come on board.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 8:49 a.m. CST

    The Hobbit without Jackson...

    by jackalcack

    ...Is like Star Wars without Lucas....Er, maybe not actually.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 9:14 a.m. CST


    by Shaw

    Well to each his own, I give you credit for sticking to your guns. I do like the robotic rhino scene. Maybe there will be room for a robotic rhino in Jackson's Hobbit. I do like the idea of him making two movies, the more the merrier.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 9:23 a.m. CST

    How does a movie that takes in over half a billion in

    by bongo123

    box office receipts get slammed for being a bomb or a failure!!?? what the fuck are you? an idiot? thats a fucking hit in my book, sure it didn't match the rings but so what it sure as hell made loads and Kong itself was absolute perfection in CGI, it had scenes in it that were truly breathtaking, sure you coulda trimmed the fuck outa it but hey its jackson he likes his movies long

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 9:23 a.m. CST

    The Hobbit needs much more care than LOTR

    by pipergates

    The Hobbit is a better book than even LOTR, though it be simpler and more childish, it's even more of a classic. The kind of writing that touches you straight in the soul, if you got one still. There be some scenes in that story that has got to be done with such a care, to not mess up multitudes of mentally visualized sceneries. An even more delicate transformation process is needed. Jackson and his writers had better keep a hold on themselves this time, and keep the goofiness and special effects under control. This story is the heart of the whole middle-earth mythology. We know Jackson & co can get the tone right, just keep it lean and un-bloated and you'll be alright. And there can be no deviation from the story in this one.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Sid and Marty Krofts! / PJ Giant Robot Movie?

    by LaserPants

    I new something about "Seals and Crofts" seemed off!<br><br> I could see a PJ helmed Giant Robot movie. Maybe like Ultraman or Mazinger Z or something. I don't want him anywhere near EVANGELION or GUNDAM cause he'll take that epic scope and jerk off all over it until its a ludicrously overwrought and overlong disaster. Still, if he's forced to keep in under 2 hours (2 and 1/2 hours MAXIMUM), if he's forced to hire an editor and a phalanx of no-men to keep his head together, than yeah, he could definately do it and do it well. I guess we'll see.<br><br> Oh, and theres no reason at all why THE HOBBIT couldn't be done, and done extremely well, in one movie I think it could be done in 2 hour 30 minutes maximum. You might have to trim out some of the walking sequences, of course, which apparently PJ doesn't know how to sum up visually without documenting every single footfall, but it could be done. No reason at all why it should be two movies other than to fleece geeknation for every last penny it has.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 10:51 a.m. CST


    by TheNorthlander

    With that kind of attitude you'll be disappointed no matter what. It's called "adaptation" for a reason - it's adapting a source material to fit a new medium. You don't adapt the medium to fit the source material.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 10:57 a.m. CST


    by Lost Prophet

    once again- BO does not equal quality. People call Kong a failure, because they hated it, and think that it failed artistically. <p>I hate it, and it bores me to tears, but there is no doubt that it was a commercial success.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 10:58 a.m. CST

    Also, if there is one thing that Jackson should be

    by Lost Prophet

    commended for: Trimming Tom Bombadil out of LOTR

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 11:02 a.m. CST

    the PJ or at least Weta giant robot movie was going to

    by half vader

    be Evangelion. But it got scrapped, after a bunch of cool concept art had been done. <p> Who knows, maybe they'll get it up again now that Transformers made so much dough. It sure as shit got fucking Voltron (are you kidding me?) greenlit. Maybe they'll put Neill Blo-whatever his name is on it, as Halo got canned too.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 12:14 p.m. CST

    Hobbit adaptation ok, but no damn dwarf- tossing

    by pipergates

    Northlander, sure a lot us with high regards for the Hobbit the book, are bound to find things we don't agree with in a filmed version. It's not so much the things that need to be taken out, for reason of the flow of the movie, but what upset people is the adding of comic relief or the changing of personalities.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 12:41 p.m. CST


    by Shaw

    Agreed. Some of the added comic-relief was pretty painful. Mostly on the part of Gimli. Hopefully the dwarf humor will be toned down for a Hobbit film. Although their written as being more goofy in the hobbit than in lotr, so we could have 4 hours of bumbling dwaf slapstick. I'd still like to see a Jackson Hobbit but I hope he saves the humor for Son of Kong.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Fuck Jack$on!

    by Lord_Soth

    Everything he brought "creatively" to Rings was utter shite. Get a more ambitious and faithful director.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 5:10 p.m. CST

    Lord of the Rings were books that could be read on any

    by emeraldboy

    level. Anti-war. Anti-urban sprawl. and I could go on. New line ditched the ending of the books for the multiple endings. becuase the book ends on a very bleak note. The shire is destryoed. It does seem that people have a less rosey view of jackson now that all the hype has gone. Harry knowles bought into to it big time. The cast for the lovely bones sounds amazing and I for one cannot wait to see what jackson does with the dam busters. Kong alienated a lot of people it seems. Will that stop me from seeing his films in the future, probably not. I saw the original kong and though dated it is still a masterpiece. I cant understand why Jackson felt he needed to broaden out the story and change the characters and invent knew ones that werent necessary. the only bit of casting that worked was anne Darrow, noami wats. Changing driscoll from a heroic pilot to a love sick playwright was mystifing. and then there was jack black. He turned cal denham into a nasty cynical operator. a man who didnt give a shit, except about making movies. When the original was a more swashbuckling, more adventurous man with an eye for the ladies and witty.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 8:27 p.m. CST


    by LaserPants

    is the best thing to come out of New Zealand, not PJ, though PJ is pretty cool in his own right, FLIGHT OF THE CONCHORDS is much cooler (and funnier). Now that I have shared with this you, I hope that you can rest easier knowing my opinion. May the gods bless you one and all, and may the zombits never munch upon thine codpiece (unless yr into that sort of thang).

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 8:41 p.m. CST

    People who trash Jackson's LOTR...

    by BurnHollywood

    ...Are seriously underestimating how utterly shitty it might have been. I still remember my reaction when I heard the entire opus was being filmed back-to-back-to-back: "Oh, Lord, no." I figured "Fellowship" might break even, "Two Towers" would flop, and "Return" would be straight-to-DVD. Good news "Hobbit" might fall in his lap again...much as I loathed his kitchen-sink approach to "Kong", the guy's got a serious feel for Middle Earth.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 9:08 p.m. CST

    Jackson's not doing Dam Busters

    by half vader

    that's Christian Rivers' baby. Although I'm sure there'll be 'guidance' if that's what you mean. Good to see him giving a great board guy a shot, like the Coens did. <p> Just on Kong, if Black had been that way I don't understand why he wouldn't have said the final "Beauty killed the beast" line and then just stayed there staring at the body long after everyone had gone, staring in disbelief.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 10:26 p.m. CST

    Hmm, not too sure about this

    by Mattyboy122

    Jackson's Rings films range from excellent (Fellowship Extended) to mediocre (Two Towers). The idea that Jackson wanted to do another prequel film along with The Hobbit (the prequel filling in the gap between The Hobbit and LotR) is absolutely ridiculous and wholly unnecessary. Jackson also didn't display the greatest knowledge/respect of Tolkien's writing. In the commentaries he repeatedly discusses his changes to the story as being better than in the original book (which he's almost always wrong about), plus he's also the guy who thought Sauron was, literally, a giant eye. WTF!? It's a fucking metaphor, Petey! Sauron DID have a physical form, even after he lost the ring (his physical form was completely destroyed when the ring was). So we get Jackson goofing by saying 'well, we didn't have Aragorn face Sauron at the end of RotK because it just wasn't faithful to the book,' but we get Sauron the fucking lighthouse. RotK is pretty good, though, but my goodness, Two Towers is a mess. It's all over the place, not just in tone (melodramatic build-up to the Battle of the Hornburg leads to...Legolas surfing on a shield!?), but in terms of editing (ESPECIALLY in the Extended version. It also doesn't help that The Two Towers is the most changed from its book. And the Olympic torch running Uruk Hai was fucking terrible. The Battle of the Hornburg is broken up into two distinct categories: a. hey, that looks like it was shot on a set, and b. hey, that shot is totally cg. There was little/no integration of the two, and it ended up making the battle just look lame and unbelievable (despite a good build-up). Jackson would fix this problem with Pelennor Fields in the third film, which was certainly something to marvel at. At any rate, I'm not too sure about Jackson for The Hobbit. It would be beneficial to get everyone back from the film trilogy (including the effects team), but if it means getting a second unnecessary prequel and a possibly mediocre film, I'm not sure if it's worth it. Weir, I think, would be great, but I'm decidedly undecided.

  • Aug. 13, 2007, 11:03 p.m. CST

    Sauron's Form

    by starlesswinter

    I'm not too sure what Jackson himself thought about the form of Sauron, which certainly SEEMS as if he thought he was a flaming eyeball. However, I distinctly remember Fran Walsh saying that Sauron's eye was a lot more INTERNAL in the book, but they needed a way to somehow visualize him in the film without having him come to battle.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 12:30 a.m. CST

    so Mattyboy, you think Quaron could do better? I do.

    by pipergates

    pretty much agree with your assessment of Jacksons efforts. I think Quaron in his Potter film has shoved much better guiding skills, maintaining the balance between special effects and acting, remaining faithful to the visual design and yet improving on them. And in my mind far superior in sticking to the tone of his tales, be they romantic/sexual romp, distopian futuristic or magically scholastic. Let Quaron direct and Jackson produce. And keep that Raimy man far far away.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 12:33 a.m. CST

    Jackson has magic at times, Quaron all the time

    by pipergates

    he's a genius

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 1:49 a.m. CST

    Amusing to see

    by King Sweyn Forkbeard

    The Anti-Jackson backlash from some. Face it fellas, LOTR was a towering achievement when it was released, remains so to this day, and will continue to be seen as such. "Hype" has fuckall to do with it. <P> I enjoyed Kong for its own sake having never seen the original. Sure, it was overlong, but from Skull Island onwards it was film making on a level few people operating today can even dream of achieving. <P> It'll be nice to see PJ return to smaller scale storytelling (although Bad Taste II is what he should be doing), but lets not pretend that he's not the best option to adapt The Hobbit if a deal can possibly be worked out.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 2:05 a.m. CST

    The only thing I have against Cuaron...

    by starlesswinter

    is that he rushed and therefore ruined the GREATEST scene in the entire Harry Potter series, which was the Shrieking Shack scene. Don't get me wrong: I completely understand time restraints, and he did that well throughout the rest of the film, but some directors need to realize that there are times when a scene works best when it is drawn out. The said example is one that had amazing tension in the book, and while the filmed scene had some of the greatest acting among Thewlis, Oldman, and Rickman, the scene in the book worked much better because of one little revelation told at a time. I'm not asking for a word-for-word translation at all, but not EVERYTHING has to be stripped to its bare minimum. Cuaron doesn't have magic all the time: Harry's crying scene (if it wasn't good, why put it in?), the freeze frame ending. He is much more a visual genius than a narrative genius, but that's not to say he isn't great.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 2:12 a.m. CST

    Cuaron's style might not fit the Hobbit either

    by starlesswinter

    Of the films I've seen of his anyway, Cuaron seems to have almost the same visual style for every film he does, and that makes me wonder if he'd try to push his style into Middle-earth when the tale that needs to be told is nothing like that all. Of course he'd put his unique stamp on it, but there's no need to completely disregard what needs to be done in favor of his favorite way of making films.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 2:47 a.m. CST

    When Did LOTR Become The TalkBack Whipping Boy?

    by skoobyx

    Whatever happened to the Star Wars prequels? Hey, who's up for a George-Lucas-bashing/defending-thread within-a-thread? Huh?

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 4:54 a.m. CST

    New Line need to start lickin' some Kiwi balls...

    by spud mcspud

    ...cos it's been a reeeeeeeeally long time since Wes Craven made them any big bucks. We're talking over a decade since SCREAM, people.<P> Making the HOBBIT without everything that comes with Peter Jackson - set and prop design, Weta SFX, the actors from the LOTR trilogy, hell, even the music - everyone involved with the LOTR trilogy wants Jackson to do this. The ones who figure in the story will come with Jackson if he makes it. Why the fuck is there even an argument about this? If it doesn't fit seamlessly with that amazing trilogy, then is there even a fucking point to making this movie?<P> Damn, and to think I actually used to think the bods at New Line were SMART!

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 5:05 a.m. CST

    Martin fuckin' Freeman? WHAAAAAT?!?

    by spud mcspud

    The same Martin Freeman that made his career playing an embarrassingly shy, stuttering, emotionally crippled Brit in The Office?<P> Then played an embarrassingly shy, stuttering, emotionally crippled Brit in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy?<P> And somewhere in there played an embarrassingly shy, stuttering, emotionally crippled Brit in LOVE ACTUALLY?<P> This guy is the new Hugh Grant NO FUCKING WAY he should be Bilbo. And I HATED The Office. I will not worship at the fat ass of Ricky "plays a twat 'cos he IS a twat" Gervais. It wasn't funny. Several hours of people being bored, a fat manager working out his midlife crisis by behaving like a twat, and we're meant to fall at the feet of this godlike comedy genius? Fuck all that.<P> There is no hope for any actor who emulates Hugh Grant in every movie he does. So if you want Bilbo played as an embarrassingly shy, stuttering, emotionally crippled Brit, Freeman is your man. Crack on.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 5:43 a.m. CST

    OK, so if not a giant flaming eye then what?

    by Tinfang

    Jackson and crew agonized over the representation of Sauron and I think they came up with a visually fantastic concept. Just curious Mattboy, how would you have shown Sauron without it coming off as just another Monster of the Week cheese-fest? Do you think Tolkien's only rendering of Sauron, for example, would've gone over? It looked like the South Carolina Lizard Man after about ten bong hits. Yes, Sauron DID have a physical body so please share with the rest of us exactly what it looked like. Centuries in the making, it's SAURON'S BODY! For better or worse, once Jackson went with the concept he was forced to stay with it and I certainly don't see how it detracted from the tale. And, yes, I remember some Talk Backers wanted to see an armor clad Sauron duking it out with Aragorn at the very end. Yeah, no cliche there no matter how cool Annatar looks in the DVD. Also, the Eye was more than just a metaphor and some physical elements are described in the books. <p> I agree that anyone who can't recognize what Jackson acheived is just a piss filled hater. Any perceived backlash is just a numbers game. Those who appreciate and love what Jackson did really don't need to defend LoTR. The movie speaks for itself, warts and all, and the vast majority of satisfied viewers have said it all in the past. Did I mention the Oscar sweep? <p> Finally, I don't recall Jackson saying his storyline changes were "better than the book". Better in the movie adaptation sense but not the story over-all. I do think Jackson a clod for not seeing the Scouring of the Shire for what it is but he's not alone in not liking bits of the story (someone mentioned Bombadil above) but loving it as a whole. <p> Though I'd prefer a faitful adaptation of The Hobbit, the notion of a "Prequel Hobbit" is rather exciting to this very long time Tolkien fan. Go for it PJ.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 6:35 a.m. CST

    LaserPants you fucking idiot

    by messi

    King Kong made over 500 Million dollars. that's no flop dickhead. and if you think it was long, then you are a fucking idiot, i guarantee you listen to shitty music and couldn't fathom the idea of a 10 minute doom metal song because it doesn't have verse verse chorus verse. fuck you.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 6:37 a.m. CST

    Disagree. Two Towers is my favourite.

    by messi

    Best pacing I have ever seen in a movie. A pure piece of art. It had the flow of a Cult of Luna song. Just every note was long enough, every bar was right, every bit of sustain perfect. But I listen to good music and you cunce don't.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 7:02 a.m. CST

    Bite me Messi

    by Lost Prophet

    You also like transformers. CUnce.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 8:53 a.m. CST

    Jackson's Sauron

    by irritable

    There's a lot of concept art on the RotK Extended Edition depicting various versions of Sauron. It was prepeared while it was still planned to include a Sauron/Aragorn fight near the end of the film. Jackson , Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens were well aware of Tolkien's very fleeting mentions of Sauron's appearance in the book and other Tokien writings. One of their ideas was that Sauron would emerge from the Gates in a beautiful form (contrary to the book and subsequent writings). Many imaginatively creepy versions of Sauron were drawn by Weta. Eventually all were dropped so that the film stayed with the book for the crucial scenes. But I thought the "lighthouse eye" was unintentionally comical at times, a long way from the book and not a very successful as a representation of Sauron's oppressive psychological force. It was a shame Jackson and co. didn't quite manage to solve that adaptation problem, considering how well they brought some other tricky elements to the screen.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 10:47 a.m. CST


    by Shaw

    I agree that Sauron could have been represented in a better way than a giant lighthouse. The only problem is, I can't for the life of me figure out what way that would be.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 12:53 p.m. CST

    Cuaron, Sauron, etc

    by Mattyboy122

    I've never seen any of Cuaron's films, though I've been interested in seeing, at the very least, Children of Men. I've only heard good things about his films. Concerning Sauron: How would I depict Sauron's physical form? Well, he'd look basically like he did when they showed him at the beginning of Fellowship. The eye was a metaphor for Sauron's will and his ability to see into people and corrupt them. Having Sauron the lighthouse was just ri-Goddamn-diculous. To depict the eye, they could've just used a bunch of quick cuts of the eye of Sauron (like they did in Fellowship, aside from the vision Frodo has of the Eye at Barad-dur). And while having Aragorn fight Sauron at the end of RotK might be cliched, it would at least up the ante in terms of tension (especially the bit with Annatar, which could've been beautiful). Sauron had a physical form during the War of the Ring (Gollum mentions seeing Sauron's hand, for one), but in the book he just stayed in Barad-dur during the Battle at the Black Gate. Bringing him to the battle would be dramatic license, yes, but it would still make for a better movie (as opposed to Aragorn fighting a troll, which was, well...random). At any rate, Two Towers has some beautiful moments (Wormtongue's scene with Eowyn, for one), but so much of it is overdone. When Gandalf unveiled himself as being the White Wizard to Theoden, it was so over the top. The choir, the lighting, etc, it was like the gates of heaven were opening or something. And yeah, the tone was all over the place during Helm's Deep. One moment you're supposed to be sad for the elves (which were unnecessary, and Haldir's death was ridiculously cliched), the next you have Aragorn tossing Gimli over to the causeway while the two fight to a rousing adventure score. It was wildly inconsistent. RotK had the same problem toward the end of Pelennor Fields (when the Army of the Dead showed up), but it was so little compared to the rest of the battle which was executed flawlessly, so it wasn't that glaring of an issue (although Legolas single-handedly bringing down an Olyphant was terrible). I've griped a lot about these flicks, but I do like them for the most part, I just feel they get unfairly worshipped (well, Fellowship Extended is amazing enough, but the others have some problems that get overlooked). I don't mean to start any arguments, I was just offering my two cents on the matter.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 1:43 p.m. CST


    by Shaw

    Agreed, Extended Fellowship is amazing (well, minus the dwarf-tossing line). See Children of Men.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Irritable, d'you remember "Sauron the Black Hand?"

    by morGoth

    I still have the concept art showing a very stylized spidery-legged looking hand/throne that showed (well, as much as you can make out) a cyclopian Sauron peering out between the upraised fingers. Pretty creepy looking indeed but definetly a fantasy (no relation to the book) take on the concept. I liked the Exxon Sign of Sauron better though I agree it's not an entirely satisfactory representation. Remember the Tevildo pic? ** Hey, are we getting into a Tailend here? ** <p> Mattyboy...not trying to argue either but you don't really see Sauron in the Last Alliance scene (beginning of Fellowship) either. You see his exquisite suit of armor but not ol' Gorthaur himself. I know, I know...uber nit-picking but you really don't see HIM. As for Aragorn fighting Sauron in the end, nah, didn't want to see that at all and I agree it would've been a cliche. Not to mention detracting from Frodo's pivotal moment. The troll, on the other hand, was a worthy adversary though I'd much rather Pippin would've knifed him (with his original Blade of Westernesse...natch) in his trolly gutty-wuts. Ah well, we gots what we got and maybe the next director who does LoTR will do a verbatim book version AND an un-read general public version. Yeah ,that's gunna happen {[:^)

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Fellowship Extended was strongest, I agree

    by starlesswinter

    I think the main problem with the other two was that they had so many subplots that Jackson had trouble keeping everything together. There are moments in TT and ROTK that outshine moments in FOTR for me, but in terms of the whole package, Fellowship was strongest. While I was brought to tears by a lot of the emotion in ROTK, mostly by Sam, even if some was overdone, Fellowship has the most heart.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 4:42 p.m. CST

    Theoden's speech

    by King Sweyn Forkbeard

    Before the charge of the Rohirrim at Pelennor is the standout moment of the entire trilogy.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 6:53 p.m. CST

    The charge

    by starlesswinter

    I love that they all scream "Death!!" It made me cry the first time I saw it.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 7:59 p.m. CST

    but how could Jackson make trolls without noses?

    by pipergates

    doesnt everybody know that trolls, be they small, medium or giant, all have ginormous noses? without them they just look like any old monster. why didnt they look up Kittelsen's renderings? also some of the orcs looked to much like zombie-rejects, more creatures of slasher movies than of middle earth. and i hated the gay elves. they could have been handsome people without having to be fruitcakes.

  • Aug. 14, 2007, 8:04 p.m. CST

    morgoth only talkbacks about tolkien

    by pipergates


  • Aug. 16, 2007, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Holy bug spit pipergates!

    by morGoth

    If anything I would compare the WETA/John Howe creatures with what Tolkien had illustrated as opposed to Kittelsen (or any other artist). I'm sure you've seen various artist interpretations of Tolkiens creatures and realize that there are an infinite number of possible "looks" that Jackson and crew could've gone with, yes? How in the world could they have satisfied everyone? Gay Elves? GAY Elves?!! Heh, don'tcha mean "pontsy" Elves? Tch, I just don't know why Richard Taylor and John Howe just didn't channel every potential LoTR movie viewer and come up with composites for each creature...then orcs, trolls and Elves would've all looked the same...kinda like Vogons! <p> Yes, you're on to my dirty little secret now. Of course, my posting handle could've clued you into my obvious preference (and interest) in anything to do with possible Hobbit news. Just out of curiosity, are you and the poster Tinfang one and the same?

  • Aug. 16, 2007, 6:17 p.m. CST

    That giant Exxon sign

    by Miami Mofo

    morGoth, your post to irritable about the giant Exxon sign made me laugh because I naturally flashed back to Springsteen's 'Jungleland'. "They'll meet 'neath that giant Exxon sign that brings this fair city light ..." Meanwhile, what's wrong with the one big eye? Anyone look on the back of a dollar bill lately? :~) Glad you got the DVDs morGy. It's about friggin' time! And now I'll close with "Last!"

  • Aug. 17, 2007, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Heh, that's what I thought too Miami.

    by morGoth

    Good enuf fer the dollar bill...good enuf fer Sauron. You know, it could be said that PJ's Eye of Sauron is just that...a physical manifestation (avatar?) of "The Eye" but not really Sauron himself. Yet another trade-off to get the idea of an all-seeing-eye across to the general un-read public. Except for the end of all things, where The Eye is frantically looking around, I thought it a was pretty awesome representation. something out of a real bad dream. At any rate, since all we are ever told about (with Gollum's "one hand" description the sole exception) in the book IS the Eye of Sauron, I thought it was as good a representation of Sauron as any I'd heard proposed. And, it could be said, faithful to the book, yes? <p> I'm about 3/4 the way through the first doc and am enjoying it immensely. Snif, why oh why didn't PJ include more of the Elves in the Last Alliance footage? Really like the scene where Gil-galad and Elrond are leading the Elvish troops up to Mt. Doom. I guess this is just before Gil gets the fried Elf treatment from Sauron. And now I can rest content after seeing Sean Astin's cut foot tragedy. Dang, I though Elijah Wood was going to ask him for a "foot" of blood for a minute (vampire Hobbit?). <p> Oh yeah...LARST!

  • Aug. 17, 2007, 7:15 p.m. CST

    morgoth, scandinavian mythology defines trolls.........

    by pipergates

    as having a big noses. they might be seen as hairy, having trees growing out of their heads, having tails or not having tails, but they do have big long noses. And the ugly thing that appeared in Moria did not look anything like any kind of troll...Not sure if goblins/orkcs can be said to have a defined look in mythology but trolls does, and should even if Tolkien has sampled and altered elements of old universal tales. That to me is the main magical achievement of Tolkien's creation; its a thing that connects directly to the universal mind/shared ancient lore...

  • Aug. 17, 2007, 7:32 p.m. CST

    as for the elves, they were actual gay actors

    by pipergates

    or rather extras, jackson rounded up homosexuals in nz to be pretty background elves. and allowed them to act all effete and over- posing in my opinion, belittling that noble race. there is a face i think next to elrond at the wedding that looks like a transvestite. and i disagree with that definition of elves-though legolas was ok, even the bland bloom did good there. and elrond wasnt bad at all.

  • Aug. 18, 2007, 10:01 a.m. CST

    dont know of this tinfang

    by pipergates

    last? funny

  • Aug. 18, 2007, 4:02 p.m. CST

    nor fanting

    by pipergates


  • Aug. 20, 2007, 7:03 p.m. CST

    "jackson rounded up homosexuals in nz..."

    by morGoth

    No offence my friend, buuuuttt, I don't think Jackson ever said anything like that. In fact, after watching a bit more of the Costa Botes doc (the Fellowship disk), I can point you to around frame 55:20 where you will see the lovely Liz Mullane interviewed. She was the New Zeland casting director and talked about what she was looking for in the way of Elvish extras..."It's important to get people who are really into it and aren't, I dunno, annoying. When you have such specific physical types like Elves, well, everyone can't be an Elf. So therefore my pool (of available people who fit the physical type) is limited. There are 300,000 people in Wellington and I'm trying to find a pool of very tall, very beautiful...aged between 16 and 30 supermodel...available 24 hours for two years." Now, trust me on this, she never once mentioned the requirement that (I'm assuming you mean the male Elves) they be gay. Really, are you trying to troll? Yuk, it's like something that execrable elf_killer would've come up with. The Elf at the wedding made me think of Glorfindel and I thought he looked quite noble. In fact, a perfect representation (in my minds eye) of a noble Elf. <p> C'mon piper if you want to compare fictional creatures then you may argue with John Howe as he was the primary creature designer for LoTR. Yes, PJ had to approve everything and I might add that I didn't particularly care for the look of the cave troll but one can't really say that PJ "got it wrong" about representing a mythical creature. If you want to split hairs, then ask rather why the trolls didn't resemble the Entwives from which Sauron took his stock. Honestly, did you not like the movie for nothing more personal taste nit-picks? <p> Erm, I just thought that you might've picked up on the name Tinfang Warble as he was Tolkien's creation that represented the mythical creature who brings in the dawn by playing his pipes. Just curious and the other poster isn't speaking up either. Cheers…

  • Aug. 20, 2007, 7:03 p.m. CST

    Dang, almost forgot...LAST!

    by morGoth


  • Aug. 20, 2007, 7:05 p.m. CST

    ...and yes,

    by morGoth

    I love double negatives!

  • Aug. 20, 2007, 11:27 p.m. CST

    if a Troll at at least i will be a long nosed one

    by pipergates

    No, i'm not trying to be annoying. i remember reading about Jackson's people approaching (find that term less offensive?) the NZ homosexual community looking for pretty elf-looking fellows. I don't agree with the way the male elves apart from Elrond and Legolas were depicted, they should have been ethereal rather than effeminate. And i don't agree its nitpicking to claim a troll has a big nose, there's no way around that fact, well known at least in scandinavia. And i loved the movies, as i think i said earlier this talkback, but i can still disagree with certain elements of them, cant i? Cause i liked the books a lot more. And think they could have been adapted even better. In my opinion Jackson has not grown fully out of his hacky slasher film epoch, he is very gifted but would have made a better LOTR without those for my name, that's for Syd & Pink & the greatest chapter in The wind in the willows...Tinfang Warble, are you serious he was in Tolkien's books? In what part?...

  • Aug. 20, 2007, 11:39 p.m. CST

    i found Tinfang; first written in 1914

    by pipergates

    "Tinfang Warble": a poem about a dancing musician called a "leprawn" in the first version; the character again appears in the interlude before the BLT pen version of "The Chaining of Melko" & in the first version of "The Tale of Tinúviel" (I.94,106; II.10,59). This poem was rewritten 1920-23 & 1927; 1927 version printed in I.107-108.

  • Aug. 20, 2007, 11:40 p.m. CST

    O the hoot ! O the hoot !

    by pipergates

    Tinfang Warble O the hoot ! O the hoot ! How the trillups on his flute ! O the hoot of Tinfang Warble ! Dancing all alone, Hopping on a stone Flitting like a fawn In the teilight on the lawn, And his name is Tinfang Warble ! The first star has shown And its lamp is blown To a flame of flickering blue. He pipes not to me, He pipes not to thee, He whistles for none of you. His music is his own The tunes of Tinfang Warble !

  • Aug. 21, 2007, 12:03 p.m. CST

    Yep ,you got it piper...

    by morGoth

    Now, if you will kindly explain to me what a "trillup" is, I'll be a happy lad. <p>Dunno at what point you started keeping track of the LoTR filming but I do recall, from Harry's original Twenty Questions to PJ, Jackson discussing just how to make the Elves look more, well, Elvish. I remember a pic that Harry floated that showed a Keanu Reeves looking head shot with the features Photoshopped to give a slightly lees than mannish look. I guess from your perception he didn't achieve that or is it maybe the change was so subtle you didn't notice it. Take a close look particularly at Liv Tyler in her first on-screen appearance as Arwen and compare that with the later scene at the Minas Tirith wedding. She definitly (to me) looks a bit "manipulated" in the face. I honestly don't get as much "effeminate" out of the male Elves as you do but then I'm not looking for it either. We can surely get our minds to perceive things that are flavored by our attitudes, yes? At any rate, let's just leave it that we disagree about that and I still don't recall PJ ever saying any such thing. <p> Yes, please feel free to disagree (I think you already have :) and I'm certainly no sycophant as I have a very long list of carps and complaints myself. I just think that in the larger sense, PJ succeeded wildly in bringing LoTR to the big screen. My cup is full though it doesn't run over. I do agree that Jackson did better in the monster department/battle scenes than he did with the beauty/ethereal stuff. Lorien was a bit too Disneyland for my taste but I also recognize that it was a very tough thing to pull off without it being any cheesier than it was. I guess I'm one of the few people on the planet who wasn't totally put off by "Electric Galadriel Boogaloo." It was the synthetic voice-over that turned me off, however. Much like the over-done treatment given to Gandalf as he's speaking the Ring inscription at the Council of Elrond (EE). For Pete's sake Pete, Ian already HAD a dramatic voice and the way it came off was to be almost unrecognizable as to what he was saying. What muddled it was the voice of Sauron overdub...bad choice (one of the very few though) from the sound editors. Eh, still a nit-pick and especially in view of how much Jackson picked up on Tolkien's own idea of "the hidden vista" aspect of introducing some backstory without the general public getting bogged down in a history lesson. Did you notice the beautiful tapestry behind Arwen and Elrond in Two Towers when he was explaing her "mortal choice"? It depicted the Two Trees of Valinor...surely something that only those familiar with the Silmarillion would pick up. Thanks for including long-time fans PJ. <p> Just curious, what is your take on the scene from Two Towers in Osgilliath where Frodo is holding up the Ring to one of the Nazgul?

  • Aug. 21, 2007, 3:04 p.m. CST

    trillup is pure flute sound effect

    by pipergates

    ..i presume, even my spell-checker doesn't understand that word... its been too long since i saw the movies, and since i've read the books, i don't remember the scene in Osgilliath exactly, just that it perplexed me. do you have an explanation for it?

  • Aug. 22, 2007, 11:55 a.m. CST

    Ah, it makes sense now...

    by morGoth

    ...if I were playing my guitar and did a repeated "pull/hammer" on the string in front of the fretted note, that would be a trill. IOW, a "warble." Heh, pretty neat how ol' Tolkien used the language, yes? <p> The scene I described is where Faramir has decided to turn Frodo and Sam over to Denethor. About this time, the winged Nazgul attack and Frodo runs up to the top of some wall. Then we see the Nazgul rising up in front of him (the Nazgul Harrier jump-jet scene as some describe it). Frodo then offers up the Ring to the Nazgul only to have Faramir shoot the Nazgul's steed and then Sam tackles Frodo. Anyway, it seemed a pretty boneheaded scene (a total PJ fabrication...of course Faramir taking Frodo to Osgilliath in the first place was a total fabrication!) and flies in the logic face of earlier dialogue in Fellowship where Gandalf tells Frodo that the Nazgul are drawn to the Ring's mere presence. OK, so yer telling me that if you hold it up in front of one less than ten feet away he's not going to sense the Ring is right in front of him?!! Even if you go with Faramir driving him off I think that Nazgul would've gone straight to Sauron and told him what he saw. I think any reasonable person would conclude that Sauron would've reacted by sending the entire Minas Morgul garrison to Osgilliath immediately. The scene just didn't make sense to me even though it's wonderful looking. Eh, I just decided this particular Nazgul must've been an idiot and forgot about it even though it didn't seem to fit within the framework of the movie much less the book. In fact, I think that scene made even less sense than the notion of the Witch King being able to defeat Gandalf (not THAT again!) in the RoTK EE.

  • Aug. 22, 2007, 10:41 p.m. CST

    Tolkien's use of language made me switch to english

    by pipergates

    well him and other British authors of his times. English is the second of my three languages but the only one i can completely submerge myself in. It's such a rich and precise fountain of words when well used...Yes the Osgilliath scene made no sense, one of Jackson's several incomprehensible mistakes. If he does do the Hobbit he better stop trying to improve on the already perfect storyline. I still think Quaron could be one of the few possible better choices and wish Jakcson's involvement is limited to production/advices. But to see what Weta would do with Smaug, now that is a thing to look forward to...and who could possibly voice him? Jeremy Irons? I think he comes close to what i have mentally pictured. ...I believe i saw a post of yours long past, talking about i presume your daughters? I got one, that i gave an elfish (elvish?) name to.

  • Aug. 23, 2007, 5:18 a.m. CST

    You must be speaking of...

    by morGoth loverly morGettes, yes? No, I didn't give either of them Elvish names. But I do know of another young lady in my town who was named Eowyn. Just curious, which name did you use? <p> Jeremy Irons...yes, he would do quite nicely as the voice of the Chiefest And Greatest of Calamities. I'll have to think about that one and get back to you.

  • Aug. 23, 2007, 9:33 a.m. CST

    i made a fusion of High Elven with Guarani

    by pipergates

    "Elen", meaning star in the elvish ancient tongue, Quenya, with "Ame", meaning rain in the language of the indigenous Guarani's language, became Amelen.

  • Aug. 23, 2007, 9:44 a.m. CST

    a more imposing voice for Smaug;

    by pipergates

    Christopher Lee, the man has an amazing voice. The speech he gave to his army made the hairs on my back stand up. maybe Timothy Dalton, he gives gives a fine vicious yet elegant voice when required, not sure about his vocal potency though.

  • April 8, 2011, 12:37 p.m. CST


    by Gorthaur_the_Cruel

    You're a real douche You really needed to ask someone on a message board what a trillup is? What you don't know any flute players?