Cool News
UPDATED!! Ian McKellen Confirms HOBBIT Start Date...
Merrick again...
McKellen's website stealthily changed THE HOBBIT's start date from June to July. All other information appears to be more-or-less the same.
Merrick here...
This news is neither surprising nor breathtaking - and isn't really "news" in the sense that this is pretty much what we've been hearing for a while now. Still, it's a tasty...confirmation...of unspeakable awesomeness soon to be afoot.
From Ian McKellen's official site (HERE).
THE HOBBIT's, two films, start shooting in New Zealand in June. Filming will take over a year. Casting in Los Angeles, New York City and London has started. The script too proceeds. The first draft is crammed with old and new friends, again on a quest in Middle Earth.
The director Guillermo del Toro is now living in Wellington, close to the Jacksons' and the studio in Miramar.
--- Follow Merrick on Twitter! ---
Merrick here...
This news is neither surprising nor breathtaking - and isn't really "news" in the sense that this is pretty much what we've been hearing for a while now. Still, it's a tasty...confirmation...of unspeakable awesomeness soon to be afoot.
From Ian McKellen's official site (HERE).
THE HOBBIT's, two films, start shooting in New Zealand in June. Filming will take over a year. Casting in Los Angeles, New York City and London has started. The script too proceeds. The first draft is crammed with old and new friends, again on a quest in Middle Earth.
The director Guillermo del Toro is now living in Wellington, close to the Jacksons' and the studio in Miramar.
--- Follow Merrick on Twitter! ---
-
+ Expand All
-
or so I hear
-
Now that would be cool.
-
I mean really, who cares? LOTR's was technically very impressive, but they really don't hold up as decent films. Great literature, bad films. Can't see this being much better.
-
I'm wondering who they'll cast to fill all the dwarf roles!
-
Mar 17, 2010 10:50:13 AM CDT
Corey Haim would have been perfect for this.........
by thedannerdaliel
-
ACTION! WIZARD: YOU SHALL NOT PASS! CUT! sir ian sir ian sir ian
-
they're written down for me, in a script!
-
Mar 17, 2010 10:53:56 AM CDT
From that video, thank goodness some student slacked off on thei
by bubbadestructo
Otherwise Tolkien would have never written "In a hole in the ground, there lived a hobbit"...and what it led to.
-
There. Done.
-
play Gandalf something like 50 years before LotR.
But yeah, we can't possibly ask Ian Holm to do Bilbo. Even if Gandalf said "You haven't aged a day" implying that Bilbo was an old looking fart even when he went on his quest.
He was celebrating his 111th birthday in Fellowship, so he was easily in his 60's when we left with Thorin, and co. Don't tell me CGI and make up couldn't help Ian look like he was in his 60's...
Grumble grumble... repetition repetition repetition..... -
is correct.
-
I love that Seinfeld bit!
-
That interview reminded me of the last Heath Ledger interview, speech pattern and twitchiness abound.
-
First person to type his name is a total dip-shit.
-
Good Wizards? Check. Good monsters? Check. Good music? Check. Making Frodo and Sam not gay? Fail.
-
From that video, he'd be a good choice! Heh heh heh . . .
-
I mean, come on. Let's be honest here.
-
Couldn't ... understand ... a ... word . . .
-
The Capt America casting crap... Least this helps wash the throw up in my mouth down a tad better..
-
Wasn't Frodo 50 at the time of Fellowship? They're not supposed to look too old when they're in their 50's-60's (I think).
-
Bilbo will be played by Hayden Panettiere.
-
...if they start shooting in June. Deffo? Probably? Hopefully? $200 million budget, two films, shooting abroad in less than three months with no leading man= epic fail. Hopefully annoucement soon????
-
no matter what film is being discussed, there are always a handfull of stuck up jack asses who think they are smarter than the rest of us and can see these films for what they "really are". yes I am talking about you Smegma. Oh you are sooo wise, I should have seen it all along. TLOTR trilogy is garbage, thanks for your detailed explanation as to why I should not like these films. "great literature, bad films" what a very well thought out statement, I am sure you have now convinced alot of people that they have been wrong all these years. Bravo to you my friend. Dueche bag!
-
But consistent within the movie versions, we have no idea how old Frodo is. Just Bilbo's stated age at his birthday, and Gandalf's reaction to him, and the flashback to the caves.
-
Mar 17, 2010 11:35:05 AM CDT
50 bucks says McKellen fondled Sean Astins balls
by nomoredirtyjokespleaseweareyanks
and licked his taint.
-
You are correct. I was just saying...
-
the LOTR films are beautiful, yet painfully boring. The pacing is off and the drama is null.
Fellowship was the most entertaining of them all because you felt heart behind the Hobbits on the run and Frodo's relationship with Gandalf THE GREY.
I can enjoy a great fantasy film as easily as the next and absolutely love the Hobbit. I hope for a faithful, light hearted adaption. -
Well...it's his opinion so who am I to say. But damn, I feel bummed out for you guys who couldn't make any emotional connection in TT or ROTK. Especially some of the scenes with Theoden. Bernard owns!
And Kwis Im surprised, you and I are usually pretty in sync with these things. -
... between not liking a film and a "bad" film. Most of those who post here can't make that distinction. I don't care for GONE WITH THE WIND, but to call it a "bad" movie would be out of bounds. If you find LOTR boring or think that the film "doesn't stand up over time" ... one of the dumbest things I've EVER seen posted here, like saying when they made TRANSFORMERS back in the day... then spend your movie allowance on G.I.JOE or RAMBO or whatever other explosion-fest you want. But, please... spare us the hyperbole if you didn't "like" the films. There are plenty of other movies for you children to comment on. Perhaps you could dissect the social landscape of MONSTERS VS. ALIENS if it makes you feel better.
-
I like the films. I think they're good films and I've watched them a few times since they came out on DVD. I think they hold up well but I've never thought they were great films. They're good but not great and I think that's because the best anyone could have done with those books was "good". There are portions that I find great but taken as a whole (together or as three movies) they don't work as well as the books did and that's fine. I expected that and allow for it. I enjoyed Watchmen too and have a lot of the same thoughts on that movie. It didn't work as well as the comic. It simply couldn't. I disagree that they are bad movies though.
-
Basically, the second movie is all Jackson/Walsh/Boyens, no Tolkien. All the most cringeworthy parts of the first three films was the pure Jackson/Walsh shit.
-
Although, I wouldn't be so glib as to say, "meh".
Fellowship is fantastic. Two Towers succeeds in all but its adaptation of Faramir, the whole "is Aragorn dead?" crap, and the Elves at Helm's Deep nonsense. Return of the King is horribly paced and the least exciting and faithful adaptation.
I'm still very glad they were made - the late 90's/early 2000's was a very exciting time in fantasy film-making. -
...that some people don't allow for, which is astonishingly obvious. And that is: Don't expect the books on film. Fuck me, this is so fundamental I feel I'm wasting my time typing it. If you don't grasp that then good luck and move on.
I think elements of the trilogy ARE great. As a whole not so much. The achievement in and of itself does deserve the title of greatness. This was truly catching lightning in a bottle IMHO. -
Both movies are the Hobbit story split over 2 movies. It's not like how they originally said which was to have the second movie as a 'bridge' movie between The Hobbit and LOTR, they threw out that idea. What the two Hobbit movies WILL contain is extra goings-on that Tolkien only hinted at, which is Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel, Elrond and others overthrowing the fortress of Dol Guldur in Mirkwood only to discover that it was in fact Sauron who was occupying it. Considering The Hobbit is the smaller story I think we'll be seeing BIGGER battles than in LOTR. The battles in LOTR are fought by more or less ragtag armies, who's leftover, broken peoples like Rohan. The Battle of Five Armies that features in The Hobbit is a massive full-on fight featuring pretty much every race.
-
There was a time when I couln not even look at the screen as Frodo sent Sam home after eating all the lembas bread and beating on Smeagol...or Denethor on fire running 200 yards to jump to his death et al.
I don't think Peter/Fran/Boyens wanted to make those changes nor thought their ideas were better than Tolkien's. It's just that the medium wouldn't conform to certain aspects of the original narrative. Because face it, if there's one book which does not follow conventional format or narrative it's LOTR. It's kind of a clusterfuck...and hence awesome! -
Oh, is that so? I'm almost more afraid then...at least in the other format I could look forward to one great movie, in all likelihood. So Smaug and the Battle of the Five Armies won't take place until the end of film 2?
-
"GET ON WITH IT!" - Monty Python & The Holy Grail
-
Christopher Lee.
-
Couldn't get past the first 50 pages.
-
I think people have forgotten already how lucky LOTR fans were to end up getting 3 films and to have such a devoted crew to put them together. These films could have ended up A LOT WORSE, and were consider unfilmable for a very long time. Any nitpicks and criticisms aren't looking at the forest for the trees. And maybe some of you just don't like the forest to begin with. A lot of this nitpicks and criticisms were the same for the books themselves.
-
Its not LOTR, but its good stuff with a goofy source material anyway. I disagree with Pan though. It was a good film til the end, it felt like shock value. Blade II was the beginning of Marvel sequels being better than the originals minus FF and Punisher of course.
-
It was my first film after 9/11 and I was an emotional wreck. That the opening of the film made me cry. Has it been so long since Return of the King? I feel like I just saw it.
-
If?
When?
COME THE FUCK ON ALREADY. -
..reason being, that while I really love LOTR, I've always liked the Hobbit better. I hope they don't try to make it too epic, as the tone of the Hobbit is not in the same league with LOTR.
Tone Guillermo Del Toro had in Hellboy would fit in nicely for the Hobbit. -
HIDE YOUR CHICKENS
-
Also please don't let GDT anywhere near the script. Hellboy suffered horribly because of it....at least the films looked nice though.
-
What an epic scene that was. In the Two Towers. Fellowhsip is still my favorite, but the other two films were great as well. ROTK should have ended at the "You Bow to Noone" scene, but eh I don't mind in the long run.
-
"Wasn't Frodo 50 at the time of Fellowship? They're not supposed to look too old when they're in their 50's-60's (I think)."
Frodo had just turned 33 when Gandalf came back to set him on his quest IIRC.
Bilbo was 111 at the start of LOTR, which takes place 60 years after the hobbit. However, as is stated, he hadn't aged a day since that time as you see in the prologue.
So they should get Ian Holm but 10+ years after filming LOTR he probably is getting on a bit now and he may not be able to handle all that the Hobbit would require of him. He's pushing 80 now and 10 years older than Ian Mckellen. -
who noticed that imdb has David Tennant listed as Bilbo? I personally think this would be a wonderful choice as Tennant's jovial style fits Bilbo perfectly.
-
There's also a cadre of people who take criticism of a movie as if it's a personal slight and think they can infer all sorts of things from that persons mention of dislike, virtually always wildly off the mark as you prove. I stated they're impressive technically, they are, but it's my personal opinion that they're not great movies as a whole. It's got nothing to do with me 'seeing through' anything but I do like your attempt to take some sort of intellectual highground against someone who hasn't insulted you, or the movies, in the first place. Saying you don't think somethings great isn't the same as saying somethings shit. My opinion of those movies leads me not to be anticipating the Hobbit with any kind of enthusiasm. Forgive me for mentioning that in a free, open to all talkback. I should've known better.
-
It's scary to contemplate of course. They'll recast Bilbo for this and they may or may not try to find someone who is a reasonable approximation of Holm but there's no way to be certain they'll get it right.... so along comes George Lucas with an offer New Line can't refuse. He'll go in with his crack team of CGI Jedo Masters and make them some "Special Editions" for re-release in 3D or some such shit and one of the things they'll do is replace the new guy in Hobbit with a CGI Ian Holm, or if you prefer since the part is smaller and we can do it for less money we'll nuke Ian Holm in LOTR and replace him with the guy in Hobbit. "It's entirely up to you, my people don't care one way or the other". I started out thinking of this as a semi-amusing post but I'll be damned if that isn't a scary as hell (and entirely possible) thought.
-
They took it down...but I still think Tennant would be a good choice!
-
Like I've said, I think they're terrifically well executed - technically, amazing. But for me they fell flat - the emotion was all too overdone, constantly - too many lingering shots that turned the moment from something genuine and real, to something that was a parody of emotion - or at least, a bad attempt to have a scene say "Look! Look at what they're FEEEEEELLLIING!!!" as it rammed itself down one's throat, ahem. The connections to the films I had were kind of killed by that. I felt they had some excellent choices, conversely, to the much better overall literature - the dropping of the Tom Bombadil sequences was a brilliant choice, they really alter the flow of the books and would have been excrutiating to watch. But overall, I found the 'intent' of each scene to be too heavily stated, as if the director had to lead us everywhere instead of showing us. Couldn't get on with them at all. Impressed, but not able to enjoy them. I have to clarify my earlier post though. They're not bad films, just bad in comparison to the books, but they're very impressive. Backhanded praise I guess, I think the SW prequels were 'impressive' but I fucking hate them. Not so with the LOTR trilogy. I just personally don't like them.
-
Just say so. We're all here for you, sweety.
-
My pick has always been Jesse Eisenberg to play Bilbo, but David Tennant is a fine choice.
-
I don't mind you not liking the films and yes you do have a right to an opinion. I respect posts that give reasons and topics to discuss in a talkback (like your latter posts)But when you post a two line statement using comments like "meh" and "who cares", well that's just lazy and annoying and does not open any doors for discussion.
-
i loved all 3 of the films, but afterwards, i kinda dont like them. dont get me wrong, i respect everything they've done for cinema (enhancing cgi, FINALLY giving fantasy an oscar for best pic, etc...), but i reeeaally cant stand how the penultimate chapter of the entire trilogy was left out! the scouring of the shire was so important because it showed that the 4 little bastards finally came into their own, and needed no help, even against a wizard! hopefully (like 50-100 years from now), someone will take another shot at the trilogy, and prove that you can adapt it cinematically much better than new line's attempt. oh yeah, and dropping material for added arwen bullshit with "i can only act sad" liv tyler is complete bullshit!
-
"And I was very, very drunk!"
-
amazing
-
They look nice but the romance angle was pure garbage. There is no romance in the original source material. They should have had the BPRD investigating other stuff instead of the love story.
-
... the reveal is that this was the sno-globe fantasy of an autistic Dildo Bugger
-
Just a thought...
-
Mar 17, 2010 1:43:39 PM CDT
Vin Diggler. At the time, I wasn't looking for discussion.
by hint_of_smegma
Just stating an opinion. I'm not always in the mood to put everything I think of a certain topic on the page, sometimes the gist will do. It's you actually that opened me up to discussion with your personally insulting reply. Your whole original rebuttal to me is that of someone who's seeing themselves as personally maligned, and that frankly is odd.
-
Getting a bit late in the day to throw the geeks a bone and break the casting for this movie. McAvoy for Bilbo, James Earl Jones for Smaug, and Brian Blessed for anything short, hairy and belicose!
-
All about how the next Doctor after the new guy ends up being Peter Davison again.
And the dream took place inside a department store, for some reason.
And there was no TARDIS.
It was weird. -
Oliver Syngen-Mollusk was my favorite.
-
got Rowley Birkin QC from.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh8CQRerBVA&feature=related
-
I hate when films are less than subtle when handling those scenes. I just don't see that in LOTR but I'm perfectly willing to admit that I'm just so enthralled with the films as not to see it. I can just go with it and nothing so blatant as I've seen in other films.
A few scenes of note: ROTK when Pippin and Gandalf are in Minas Tirith and Pippin tellshim he didn't think it would end like this and Gandalf gives his speech about 'green shores'. Pass the tissue please. Or after the battle...a nice montage of the aftermath with some beatiful music overlayed ( I forgot the singer's name). Also, Theoden saying no parent should have to bury their child. Short scene but man, they really establish solid character. These movies REALLY benefitted from some excellent editing. I think this is a large part of why they work well.
On the other hand...the end scenes with Frodo in Sam's lap on Mt. Doom talking about the Shire and strawberries etc and Sam carries him the rest of the way...doesn't work for me at all. I think that's a great example of what you're talking about. The music cues, the acting...it all feels rushed and carries no weight with me at all. That scen should be kicking my ass at that point and it just doesn't. Also Frodo flopping on the ground as the eye searches like a spotlight irks me. Little nitpiks I feel were done a little heavy-handed... but they don't come close to outweighing my joy at what they got right. -
...but are still no match in flavor for a nice piece of mutton!
-
Gargamel has a fabulous cookbook out. You should try it.
-
...Like, if giant eagles could rescue Frodo and Bilbo from the peaks of Mount Doom, why couldn't they have just flown them there in the first place, negating that harrowing overland trek?
-
He sure seemed to have trouble using it. At least in that video. Don't get me wrong Tolkien wrote great stuff, but I couldn't understand a word he said in that video!
-
Viggo Mortensen wasn't cast as Aragorn until shooting had already begun. He flew in at the last minute to replace somebody (Stuart Townsend, I think?), and that worked out fine. They've got plenty of time to cast Bilbo.
-
hopefully someone can correct me if im wrong as its been awhile since i read the books, but i think in the council of elrond they explained why they couldnt get the eagles to just fly there. i think it had somehting to do with the presence of evil being to strong for the eagles or something like that. but yes it was only the books that explained it and not the movies.
-
That gripe about the eagles is almost as common as it is stupid. You might recall those giant "wraiths on wings" that were hunting Frodo and company — they were supernaturally drawn to the ring. Our heroes had a hard enough time staying hidden in the vast expansive countryside. Soaring into Mordor would have been a very, very silly thing to do.
Sorry about your job, though. Leno is a dick. -
http://tinyurl.com/39k2bb
-
When Gandalf says"you haven't aged a day" did he mean it in the same way people say to old school friends after 20 years "you haven't changed!"Even though they're fat and bald now.
-
I did insult you and I stand behind it still. You came in here and threw out a blanket statement that TLOTR trilogy were "bad films". What kind of response did you expect? You obviously came in looking for a fight and you got one. It's a shame really, because your follow up post are well thought out and I most likely would have enjoyed debating the topic with you. Unfortunatly you chose the troll method of starting an arguement and that is what you got. So I still say that the Smegma that posted the first comment is a deuche bag.
-
...an orc JUST ABOUT to kill one of the hobbits, but then pauses to say something witty like, "I'm going to put a (blank) in your (blank)," and then cue sword/spear/pitchfork bursting through Orc stomach just before he can strike. Oh, man, all 58 of those scenes in LOTR just NEVER get old. Never. never....n ...e..v...e..r.
-
This is my original content - "I mean really, who cares? LOTR's was technically very impressive, but they really don't hold up as decent films. Great literature, bad films. Can't see this being much better." - Now it's hardly coming on and shouting hatred, is it? But you think that deserves a rather badly thought out insult reply. Fair enough. Just remember that not everyone wants to write War and Peace length posts about what they feel on a topic every time, nor does every criticism warrant personal abuse.
-
I thought FOTR was just about flawless. A beautiful film. There were moments of greatness in the subsequent two, but so many other moments that were just HORRIBLE. In fact, Jackson obviously contracted an incredibly fast-moving case of Lucas-itis, a case which obviously hadn't cleared since King Kong came out (an awful, awful movie).
The constant "orc dies just before he can kill you" shots I mentioned above, the complete lack of satisfaction in the battle between The Witch King and Gandalf, the never-ending ending, the 256,032 shots of someone saying "Saruman" in a soft, frightened tone, and, oh, the WORST moment in all three films: the pathetic, cliched, ABSOLUTE GARBAGE decision to have Frodo fall from the ledge, then hold on with one tiny finger (not even remotely possible in Hobbit-land, and something done a billion times already), then be impossibly pulled to safety after hanging there with the audience KNOWING there is zero chance he falls (even those who didn't read the books).
I still think all the films of the trilogy are good overall, but I can't understand some of Jackson's moronic decisions in those last two, as well as the Boyen chick and the other dumbass chick writer who took it upon themselves to "improve" on Tolkien's work.
I'm excited for the Hobbit, but I'm glad we'll get a fresh take.
PETER JACKSON FONDLED THE TAINT OF MY ADULTHOOD!! FONDLED THE TAINT!!! -
Like I've said there were a lot of things I can appreciate in the movies technically, but I do find the emotion just too overwrought, too often. I will say one thing though, that the trilogy contains one of the best scenes of 'mentorship' and beauty of performance I've seen in years, and that was Gandalf's scene with Frodo telling him along the lines of "no-one asks for responsibility when its thrust upon them in dark times, what matters is what one does with it when it happens" - now that bit of performance from McKellen alone, was worth the money spent on all three films. The rest I just couldn't engage with - I can't say which I find more to blame on that score though, the direction or certain casting that pulled me out of the films.
-
...when it comes to Ringbearer9. That guy's got a hate-boner for this franchise like you wouldn't believe. The fact that he hasn't risen from his TB slumber to chime in here is quite remarkable.
-
Please go against the grain folks. PLEASE!
-
Looking back at my post, I may have overeacted a bit. I guess my niggest beef is the comment "who cares". Those two words alone are very irritating. Who cares? we care, that's why we are reading this post. If you don't care, then shrug it off and move on. I don't like Taco Bell, but I don't stop at everyone I pass on my way home and stick my head in the door and yell "Taco Bell Sucks!". What would be the point? I'm not trying to fight, so I say lets move on. Peace.
-
is rubbish! they´re finest fantasy-moviemaking in every aspect. shure, the cgi will maybe lose its step ahead of the time then, but maaan! the design, the casting, the acting, the action, the locations, the beautiful camera-work, and still the good cgi - it´s all rare and perfect. even on todays standards.
-
im not surprised people have nothing but bad to say about a movie on here. EVERY movie gets beat down on these message boards. no actor director or script is ever good enough. sometimes before it is even filmed, much less seen. just the idea of making something into a movie causes some people to spew lines and lines of hate. i wish some of those people would try listing a few movies they do like. i like all sorts of movies. some of the ones that get blasted on here the most have been very entertaining. too bad for them. they are the ones missing out. you will find a whole lot more enjoyment in movies if you just stop nitpicking.
-
You do realize that even if they release it in 3D, you don't *have* to see it that way, right?
-
just look at the bbc radio drama series, excellent adaptation. It includes the scouring of the shire, and is for 98% true to the book (only omits Tom Bombadil). 4 hr per book, ROTK is even shorter, only 3 hrs. compare that to the extended bloated cuts of the movies. My advice, fire Boyens, and hire Brian Sibley.
-
I somewhat disagree. I don't think Jackson was suffering from a "fast-moving case of Lucas-itis". Unless, of course, you mean to say that the fatigue of the extended shooting, editing, and post-production process was really sinking in by the time ROTK came around. I firmly believe that to be the case as some of TTT and ROTK is somewhat rushed and uneven. Yet, one could make the same argument about certain bizarre editing choices made in the theatrical version of FOTR. None of the films are "perfect" (especially to those who really know the books) but their greatness (whether it be in emotional beats or sheer wonder) far outweigh any various shortcomings...which usually boil down to subjective nitpicks.Regarding the writing process of those films, I found Boyens to be the least impressive in terms of her grasp of the story. When you listen to her try to explain their choices in portraying Faramir...it's like, what?!? Tolkien explained it in the book. What you said doesn't make any sense, honey! On the flipside, Fran Walsh seemed to contribute some of the stronger material that made for some of the films' best moments.
-
...it's strange that I'm not really feeling the Del Toro vibe on this one. It may just be that I'm not a big fan of splitting the story into two films. But it's far too early to express any real doubts at this point.
-
My original comment was a throwaway post made when I was bored but I stand by what I've said overall. I appreciate the tone of your last post and agree I was out of order with the "Who cares" part, I can see why that'd annoy you. I tend to post only on films that interest me, good or bad. I'm not exactly known here for spewing hatred but I do talk about films that bug me for genuine reasons here and there. I guess I found the LOTR films to be increasingly disappointing. I've watched each several times since they were released, own the special editions and each time I'm hoping I'll see something in them that makes me like them more, but it's always the opposite. I don't overnitpick movies, heck I still love Krull nearly 30 years later and that's far from a perfect film to say the elast, but there is something about the whole of those films that just doesn't hang right for me - I love the asthetic, the design work, the effects, the way the world was brought to life - but the whole just seemed so much less than the parts to me. Elements of the casting I found unbelievable, especially with the Hobbits (Holm excepted, who was amazing). I've already mentioned to DoctorWho about my problems with the emotional sections of the movies, but I guess I found a lot of the framing of shots as too much an exercise in 'Look at THIS!!' rather than organic direction - too many moneyshots and 'hero' shots which always pull me out of any film. These are a few of the reasons I just can't get behind these movies, but I'm willing to bet while we differ on these films, we can both name more than a few we both love. Peace dude.
-
Because that's almost as long as it took to film the entire LOTR trilogy! Are these films (in extended cut versions no doubt) going to be 4 fucking hours long each? believe me I'm not complaining but maybe there's a chance it will be a whole trilogy!And originally it was going to be one film for the Hobbit and one for a brand new Middle Earth story that had some roots in the Simarillion or whatever that compendium book was. I've never read any of the books but I'm for as much LOTR film as possible because the first trilogy was brilliant. I say a trilogy for The Hobbit and a Trilogy for all the prequel stuff.
-
That's why LOTR was great. Peter Jackson took all the gayness out of it. The books were a bunch of midgets running around holding hands and singing songs. FAGS!@
-
that's good casting. no CG required. saves you a few million....well, not really. the fried chicken bill to feed her will make up for it.
-
.....trilogy doesn't really hold up any more. I can watch the original Star Wars movies over and over again. Same goes for the 3 Godfather movies even though 3 wasn't spot on. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight hold up EXTREMELY well. I'm guessing Nolan will finish that off as trilogy! Fellowship is awesome but time has proven the other two to be kind of weak.
-
He really was reduced to some cheap comedy relief and after some years have passed it does cause me to roll my eyes. Merry and Pippin provided plenty of that and 1,000 times better too. But no amount of nitpiks I've disected diminish my gratitude for what PJ an co pulled off. Just imagine if Hollywood would have gotten a hold of this thing. Holy Christ!
-
He's utter shit in everything and a total prick in person. Yes he's ugly enough to be a Hobbit but so fucking what.
-
with each one. I'd rather Del Toro finished up with Hellboy
-
It was explained in the books. The eagles were servants of the Vala (the gods) and they were only meant to carry messages, not burdens. The gods only intervened enough to give the people of Middle Earth a fighting chance (i.e. they intervened when Bilbo found the ring and then passed it to Frodo, when Gandalf was rescued from Saruman's tower, and in the battle at the Black Gate). They didn't do ALL the work for them, because then the people of Middle Earth would never learn anything from their experiences and become better people.
-
Mar 17, 2010 4:46:22 PM CDT
And for me these are still some of the best movies ever made
by ghost_matt
I still watch the whole trilogy once a year, sometimes twice. They're not perfect. But they're still some of the finest movies I've ever seen, fantasy or otherwise.
-
End of discussion.
-
I was sad that they took David Tennant as Bilbo off of IMDB. I think he would have been a good choice.
-
I have no idea what Freeman is like in person, but there is no arguing the fact that he was brilliant in "The Office."
-
Then Weta can make a younger Bilbo using Ian Holm. It involves a laser scan of the original actor various face poses, and de age cgi sculpt job to the scan. They use the IR 3d head recording gear to record Ian, and this real time 3d face capture stuff is retranslated into the cgi head. They film the movie with a younger actor playing his body. Now all they have to do is Benjamin Button in the new cgi head over the blue head sock wearing body double. Every shot filmed on in a real environment will need to be filmed with cameras that are motion controlled and they will need to be shot twice, once with a clean background plate and no one in frame. Yes it will be hard- yes it will costs assloads of money. It can be done. It would be another one of those "game changer" moments in film. A main character cgi all the time and younger than he actually is in real life. Well Benjamin did that, but under controlled conditions. Middle Earth is very much outside in harsh light and what not all the time.
Does Weta Jackson and The Del have the balls to do it... Do they????????????????
-
for this kind of genre material, having unkind words for LOTR in particular. He comes across as pretty arrogant for an actor with a thin CV and one tiresome brand of shtick. I still regard the original Office highly tho.
-
The way Jackson packed all that action, all that CGI, all that weave of plot and subplot and theme and context, and STILL slip in those perfect moments of shining humanity, is just a freaking man-made miracle. I truly expected dreck when I went to see those films. I was blown away. Spielberg should take lesson from Jackson, and Lucas should beg to wipe his ass. I will be there at the Hobbit movie. The Hobbit is by far my favorite LOTR book, and Jackson has shown me he understand and respects the material. Just hope he gets Smaug right. Recent movie dragons have pretty much sucked ass.
-
Sorry for the bad grammar, and the bandwidth I've just used to apologize for it. :P
-
Number9997 and SlimButNotreally are just dickheads trolling and looking for attention. Congrats, boys: you got it! Everyone thinks you suck. Feel better now?
-
Mar 17, 2010 5:27:43 PM CDT
Even if Ian Holm died before it was done filming.. God forbid
by thejudger
If they scanned him in, digitally resculpted/deaged that scan. Scaned all the major face poses/expressions and vowel formations they needed. This would still work if he passed away before they brought him in to IR facecap his performance while watching a video feed of his scenes with the double and the cast.
If he died in real life before this, and they got those scans. They could hire someone with a similar face or a relative, and all they have to do is strap an IR 3d camera head mount system onto that new persons head and let them act. There facial animations are Retangented through some sort of algorithm based on a facial animation studies between Holm and his successor by judging the differences via a back up 3d recorded session of holm with various facial expression and some speeches that require lots of mouth play acted in moods such as angry, neutral, happy, sad, bored. Sentences like "The fox jumped over the fence, and how now brown cow."
They can use this 3d ir camera recorded backup session as a study against the new persons doing the same thing while strapped into an 3d ir camera rig.
Someone writes a program that computates the differences between them, and it Computates a new control point cage direction effects to make the new guys motions affect the Ian 3d model the same way a real 3d ir camera capture of ians actual face would have.
And there you go.. Should be doing something like this now as a fail safe for Holm and McKellen. So death doesn't stop them from being part of the film -
Correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't Bilbo unconscious for most of it? Presume the film won't cut to black & return us to mounds of dead :)
-
I think the reason LOTR doesn't stand up for some people is they don't like fantasy films. Let's face facts; you need to suspend A LOT of disbelief to dig fantasy films (thus the term, 'fantasy'). Some people aren't good at doing this. A lot of folks were able to suspend disbelief for LOTR because it was an EVENT, and they were excited to see the films. As time passes, and the excitement fades, however, their natural dislike for the fantasy genre diminishes their enjoyment of LOTR. Just a theory for your consideration.
-
I know plenty of people who never read the books who feel they were just alright movies, nothing great. I'm sure they were excellent adaptations but that doesn't mean everyone loves the story line. I'll admit Gollum was awesome though.
-
Mar 17, 2010 5:56:31 PM CDT
Manatee...sorry but it's a theory that doesn't apply with me, at
by hint_of_smegma
Love fantasy movies, always have. From Harryhausen to Peter MacNichol dragon slaying, to Lt. Eddington glaving Beasts and everything inbetween and since. I'll happily sit and watch Dark Crystal or Labyrinth before I'll consider putting on the LOTR trilogy these days - I keep trying with those films, and like I've said they're impressive to look at, but I simply can't enjoy them. They look amazing, it's incredible what Jackson got to screen - but I can't help thinking of them as being not very good as a whole, I get no enjoyment from them beyond McKellen's amazing speech in the mines to Frodo.
-
It also seems to be an in-thing to dismiss someone's criticisms of a movie that you don't agree with by claiming they're jumping on some sort of a bandwagon. An easy way to paint someone as having an unworthy opinion, compared to your own, no? Also, I've not changed any opinion, one minute to the next or even more accurately in the 7 years since the last of those movies was released, about them. I wasn't keen on them then, I'm less keen now.
-
It's all personal taste and opinion, do you see that? I cannot agree in anyway that LOTR's tilogy are the greatest fantasy films ever made. The most successful and technically accomplished, no doubt, but I get more enjoyment from Labyrinth for example than any of the LOTR movies. And Labyrinth is hardly my favourite. I simply don't see them as great films, by far. great achievements yes - but I simply don't enjoy them. I know I'm not the only one, either.
-
This will be one. I know it, you know it. There's nothing better than being a young kid and appreciating the magic of cinema then decades on having this type of news. You know it's not going to suck and you will feel like the kid again. The counterargument is the SW prequels which made one feel like one had just smelt the fart of a person who had eaten a bad diet for ten years and kept it in - no Harry jokes please, he's a vegan. Most of my older friends came out of Attack of the Clones saying 'wowowow it's awessssome' then decided it was shit. That was a huge gap between films, this is less and another theme but same family.
It's going to be good. Possibly 4d by the time it comes out but still..damn good cinema. And when the Hobbit ends after the 2 installments, we will say - ok now what? We don't want Iron Man 5.. now what!! -
he could do no wrong. then came king kong and the talkbackers poured their critical bucket of shit all over his head. they will continue to pour. I pity the guy who makes the next batman movie after chris nolan ends his trilogy. cause as we know Chris nolan can do know wrong so say some of the talkbackers. to paraphrase ben linus the talkback mob are fickle bitches. they already hate cap america and the film hasnt shot yet. and cap hasnot been cast.
-
Tennant would be an interesting choice, top notch thesp outside of Dr Who, and like able persona. I'd be happy with him or McAvoy.
-
with the mediocre Insomnia and Prestige. Too bad the fanboys think otherwise. Also Pan's Labyrinth I must say is so damn overrated. Del Toro's career has just been dry and boring from the get-go.
-
amazing theater experiences for me. Avatar couldn't match it in the slightest bit for me.
-
havent heard it before, but theres no way im the first to think of it...so...
-
I agree I'm in a minority, that's certainly the case. I really wish I saw more in them like you do - it's not like we fantasy fans get event movies like this too often - but I just don't, and I have tried. I'll give The Hobbit a go too, when it hits dvd or download or whatever, see if that strikes me better but if they make them in the same style as the trilogy, I'm not sure that'll be the case.
-
Reunite the cast of Timebandits.
-
the first one, Fellowship, was just damn good. The other 2...? Well I would like to fanedit those into one tight cool flick. Plus add some Warpigs to soundtrack.
-
I agree with you on Del Toro being pretty over-rated, and about Nolan being far from flawless, but don't shit-talk the Prestige, that movie is damn-near perfect.
-
unfortunatly kenny baker and the leader (I forget his name sorry) have passed on. But just picturing the dwarves stumbling around and singing in armor that is too big for them gave me a laugh. Thanks!
-
Who was it, Merry or Pippin? It baffled me.
-
When it focused on the characters more. The next two became world of warcraft videogames sadly. As a trilogy LOTR is pretty dire, weaker than the classic star wars trilogy, where it's widely agreed Wars and Empire was great while Jedi so so and yet it's still better than Fellowship being great (although not near Wars/Empire level) and then the next two lick Return of the Jedi's taint in comparison, heck even the evil dead trilogy stands together more respectably.
-
Never having read the books, I came to the Lord of the Rings movies fresh and without any preconceptions.They turned out to be a completely awesome watch on the big screen, and I liked them even better in their 'extended' versions.Apart from the fact that the final shot should have finished on the camera looking up at the Hobbits when everyone bowed before them, they were a near-perfect movie experience for me.I haven't read The Hobbit either, but I'm looking forward to the return of Gandalf on the screen, and reckon that these next 2 movies are likely to be a great visual experience too.And Smaug the dragon and co. in 3D this time should really kick ass hopefully.
-
wow, Jackson, Del Toro, Hellboy, King Kong, LotR. until this talkback, i didn't realize all the cinematic stuff i liked sucked!...as soon as Nolan's Batman trilogy is done, everybody'll hate him and say they all sucked, then Heath Ledger's Joker'll suck.
Love Hellboy the comic, but the romance shit in the flicks did suck. -
Hahahaha that's the funniest thing I've heard all week. I like Labrynth, but to say its better than LOTR is like saying, I dunno, Dark Crystal is better than Empire Strikes Back. You're comparing caviar with brussel sprouts. Smegma, you are either a hideous troll or you don't know quality if it bit your balls. I'm thinking the former.
-
" I guess my niggest beef" Nice one
-
He played it like a random crackhead, while Nicholson's joker was crazy and funny too.
-
but like Sunshine it's ending just fell apart. Otherwise it was on point to being boss.
-
and also enigmatic. I loved the approach Ledger went with him. Nicholson's was great too in some scenes.
-
your about a year and a half toovlate. The "Heath Ledger Sucks as Joker" trolling died out long ago. Why don't you try and get a little more creative.
-
You didn't like Ledger's Joker? That was fucking inspired, man. He took that character somewhere so much better than I ever thought possible. If you say don't like Ledger's Joker, it's not that... it's that you just don't like Nolan's Batman universe at all. Don't get me wrong. Those movies owe it all to Burton's Batman and Nicholson. They were the ones that took Batman away from the public's perception that Batman had to be campy. Nicholson was great. But you've got to let Ledger's performance have its props too. He took an insanely difficult role to live up to and turned out something amazing. IMO Both Nicholson and Ledger accomplished the most important element to The Joker... the audience needs to fear him, and at the same be bewildered and disgusted by his attitude and demeanor.
-
So happy I'll get to see more of the New Zealand Middle-Earth on film. Can't believe I missed this post, either.
-
It failed to seem necessary. It was obvious the director loved the original but his remake seemed like a vanity project, a personal indulgence, and the ultimate fan film. For all the cheesiness of the 1976 King Kong, its contemporary setting and story give it a legitimacy I didn't feel from Jackson's overdone effort. The original King Kong was not a "period film" and neither was the 1976 version, but Jackson's was and I think that weighed it down.
-
Haven't seen that before.
-
How the fuck can you justify that? Well I don't rememeber anyone back in July 18th 2008 complaining a BIT about his acting - in fact 90% of the TBs were handing him the Academy Award already.
-
but still lip-smacking isn't really as crazy as talking to a charred skeleton you know. Also not too much into Nolanverse, its hyper-realism angle is NOT cool. And also Bale is not better than Keaton, who had heart, Bale is far too cold and seems to be playing a more subdued version of Patrick Bateman (if that is indeed the reason he got the role then they really screwed up) and if i get any more redemption crap in Batman 8 then it will be very bad and not good.
-
Just look at the cast in Inception. Leonardo DiCaprio has no business bossing around the likes of Tom Hardy , JGL, Watanabe and Murphy to name a few. God damn, so much talent and then we have to be subjected to DiCaprio as the lead. What a joke.
-
The Hobbit. The Hobbit, The Hobbit, The Hobbit, The Hobbit, The Hobbit, The Hobbit, The Hobbit!
-
When I think of Sam saying that of the pony in the Bakshi version of Lord of the Rings, I think of Velvet Underground's song "Lonesome Cowboy Bill," which makes me think of it being sung in Sam's voice.
-
..and I'm Bilbo Hicks. And why aren't there any black hobbits in the Shire? I'd nominate Sam Jackson or perhaps Gary Coleman if that were the case.
-
I can't believe Michael Fassbender's name hasn't come up for Bilbo casting rumors. He's young, talented and has a lot of buzz. I think his name was kicked around for a few superhero movies but I think he has a better feel for Bilbo. Although David Tennant is a good choice too.
-
Can't wait to see this...
-
Wish I could AUDITION :(
-
than Rodriguez's Predators.
-
So everybody shut up.
-
Man, you guys will bitch about anything. I haven't seen this much cattiness outside of a fucking Meow Mix commercial. A three movie adaptation wasn't as "satisfying" as a series of novels clocking in at a couple of thousand pages? Exactly what would have made it "satisfying" for you? Did you want the fucking hobbits to jump off the goddamn screen and dance with you? Maybe you forgot, but the last time somebody tried adapting those books, we got Bakshi's LORD OF THE RINGS, which was such a turd that most of THE TWO TOWERS got summarized in a ten minute, badly-narrated clusterfuck of badly-rotoscoped PD footage (and no RETURN OF THE KING at all; that got addressed in an idiosyncratic Rankin/Bass standalone movie most notable for the tune "Frodo Of The Nine Fingers [And The Ring Of Doom!]).
While not exactly the ideal director for the material, the fact that the dude who made THE FRIGHTENERS, MEET THE FEEBLES and BAD TASTE cranked out such an indelible series of epics (and whether you assholes like it or not, they'll still be considered fondly as "epics" decades from now) is a miracle unto itself. And looking at KING KONG and possibly THE LOVELY BONES, we got the right guy at the right time, because he hasn't been blowing off the doors of cinema with his subsequent efforts. Unless you've recently acquired the rights to the material and have a 300 million dollar budget ready to roll on a remake, my advice is to stop bitching about the LORD OF THE RINGS movies and start worrying about Burger King cutting back their goddamn hours on you. -
Lord of the Rings, Star Wars prequels, DelToro, King Kong, and Ledger's Joker. Got it. Now, will someone tell me what is suddenly going to be in the "hate" column next week? I'm tired of not being cool and liking stuff that's apparently complete shit.
-
Him leaving Who was perfect timing for someone wanting to take a good long break before beginning a grueling film shoot.
-
Seconded!
-
2 films over crammed with SHIT when they could have just made 1 good film and then the next year the release of the extendeds
-
They better not fuck this up. It's nowhere near as complex a story as LOTR, but it's long as hell so there's plenty of room to tangle one's self in.
-
The Hobbit is a much different work than LOTR. It is not a Nordic-inspired epic tale of war; it's a fairy tale. I hope GDT doesn't copy every single one of PJ's epic camera sweeps and helicopter shots. That is not what The Hobbit is all about.
And anyone who thinks Jack Nicholson's showy, over-the-top, useless Joker performance is better than Heath Ledger's turn is a fucking DOPE. -
My theory for Avatar's BO is that the public have been so starved for a half-good action/adventure fantasy epic (the last great one was ROTK 6 years before) they were eager to eat up anything half-decent and Avatar came along at the right time. The fact that a piece of shit like Alice In Wonderland is eating up the BO is proof of this. Tron and Hobbit will redefine standards. Anyone hating on one or both is a Cameron disciple afraid of the inevitable comparisons with Avatar and how Avatar will be shown up as being a monumentally unimaginative piece of tosh. Cameron fans be afraid. Be very afraid.
-
Mar 18, 2010 7:41:12 AM CDT
Tolkien, what a bore to listen to. I had to turn it off...
by coughlins laws
I'm just not as excited about this as I once was. I've really cooled on the Lord of the Rings. They were great when I first watched them but my DVDs just sit on the shelf. Kevin Smith did a pretty accurate takedown of the movies...
-
I know that one should make new friends but I don't wanna. The old friends (and faithful to the story) are golden. Oh yeah, don't even think bout 3d please. Hiho, hiho...it's off to film they go.
-
Well, it's mostly dead on but I'll tell you something. There's nothing wrong with the Peter Jackson King King that a truly merciless editor couln't fix.
-
As long as Liam Neeson does not voice Smaug or anything else in the Hobbit, all will be right with the world. Neeson always sounds just like Neeson and that completely breaks immersion. Case-in-point: Aslan as Liam Neeson.
-
Your religion sucks then.
-
then it most likely does not allow wizards (aka false gods) either. So you might as well throw in your copy of Passion of the Christ, close your eyes and keep telling yourself that the rest of society does not exhist.
-
...written in Tolkien-speak.
-
I wanted to point out the irony of a religion that accepts magic-users but only it they're straight.
Uh, what? -
... should we expect a December 2011 release?
-
. . . I feels it in me bones . . .
-
Emile Hirsch as Bilbo.
-
In Rod We Trust.
-
Seriously, give him a different haircut and tell him to play it more "I'm not a burglar" and they'll catch lightning in a bottle ONE MORE TIME!
-
Goddamit he even has a face like a dragon !
-
Lol I completely agree. It is hard to keep up with the virulent fanboy hatred and rage. So now LOTR sucks, which was news to me but I'm sure I will be called a fucking moron for not knowing they are terrible films. So what is next on the 'things that are good but we will call them crap because we are sad, lonely people' list? Star Trek 2? Blade Runner? Tell me, I NEED TO BE COOL DAMMIT!
-
you really gotta start way before an article is 24 hours old.
-
Why would i want to watch a movie with these prancing nancies?
-
...my opinion of what he'd accept and what he wouldn't is a little moot when considering my enjoyment of some fuckin' movies.
Clearly, the identification of the font used on the Expendables poster is clearly more important than Gandalf's sexual orientation.
More importantly, if Gandalf's such a kick-ass wizard how come he doesn't use more spells from the Players Handbook? -
...with humans, dwarves and a dragon, then, I suppose.
-
Huge fan of the books and the movies! I'm beyond excited for these movies.
-
with the exception of the 2nd film. Walk, "oh Frodo", run from bad guys, walk "oh Forod", run from more bad guys and the cycle continues on and on and on for 9 hours.
-
or make sure Bag's wife doesn't find out.
-
You're dumb. That is all.
-
This is excellent news! Can't wait to see what Del Toro and company bang out as a story.
I'm a huge fan of the "Lord of the Rings" films and I'm hopeful the new films continue the masterful storytelling.
Anyone who wasn't moved even a tiny bit by the end of "Return of the King" doesn't deserve to read this site. In fact, what the fuck are you even doing here?
Can't wait for "The Hobbit." -
to all of you. LOTR was great, period. This Monday morning cynicism is ridiculous. All of you drooling, pony-tailed fanboys loved it six/seven years ago.
-
I have confidence in these 2 new movies. There's absouletely no reason not to. It's going to be amazing.
-
I would like to think they would have a Bilbo by the time filming starts. That, or is Guillermo just going to muppet one in?
-
stop the muppet hate!
-
...you know it to be true. Petty know-it-alls bitching about films they enjoyed just years ago. To those of you that don't do this, congrats...you're solid. For the rest of you cumbuckets, FUCK YOU. Go swallow you hacks.
-
Michael Gambon as Radagast The Brown.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 171 total posts 169 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 157 total posts 111 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 138 total posts 75 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 67 total posts 67 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 479 total posts 62 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 59 total posts 59 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 62 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 48 total posts 45 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 181 total posts 30 posts