Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

The Truthiness On Who'll Be Making A Cameo In THE HOBBIT!!

The Kidd here...

If in the future, you find yourself wondering if that was really Stephen Colbert you thought you saw in one of Peter Jackson's three parts of THE HOBBIT, the answer is very likely yes.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the Comedy Central host will have a cameo in one of the latter two-thirds of the Tolkien adaptations, although no information is available as to whether it'll be a recognizable on-screen role or merely a background player. 

Colbert is a big fan of Tolkien's works and was flown out to New Zealand last year to watch some filming take place. It was during that visit that he was allowed to also participate in some capacity. 

 

-Billy Donnelly

"The Infamous Billy The Kidd"

BillyTheKidd@aintitcool.com

Follow me on Twitter.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 21, 2012, 9:32 p.m. CST

    first!!

    by Randy

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 9:37 p.m. CST

    I hop he's just like "Middle Earth bar Patron #3" or something.

    by heyoucantlaughatthat

    I feel like John Oliver would be a better fit for the LOTR universe.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 9:41 p.m. CST

    Bilbo Baggins-Great Hobbit, or the Greatest Hobbit?

    by Chuck

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 9:50 p.m. CST

    And people still want to see this pos

    by brobdingnag

    I wrote this series off when they talked about 3d and 48 fps but decided not to go when they announced a third film. This kind of horse-shit does nothing but validate my decision.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 9:54 p.m. CST

    love colbert

    by eoneon

    sweet

  • Apropos of nothing, this just reminded me that that happened.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 9:56 p.m. CST

    He has to be an Eagle

    by David Duchovny

    right?

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:03 p.m. CST

    Boy Band

    by gangrel76547

    It was 'N Sync. They supposedly filmed a cameo as Jedis in Attack of the Clones.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:07 p.m. CST

    He'll be terrified of Beorn, right?

    by Beebop

    #1 on the Threatdown: BEARS.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:16 p.m. CST

    Read this! Michael Bay just won my respect, and Hugo Weaving fell down a few rungs

    by Hardboiled Wonderland

    http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/movies/grumbling-thespian-hugos-mega-whinge-baits-bay-20121022-280f5.html Hugo Weaving whines about a two hour Transformers job that pocketed him $200,000, and Michael Bay -- who I've always disliked -- hits back with a voice of reason and sanity. The world is going to end, my friends -- I agree with Bay!!!

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:17 p.m. CST

    Fuck yeah Michael Bay!!!

    by Hardboiled Wonderland

    Finally, someone in Hollywood standing up to their whinging colleagues with #firstworldproblems.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:18 p.m. CST

    He'll be Smaug's left nut

    by Yotz Von Frelnik

    Oh, sorry! Should've said Right nut!

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:24 p.m. CST

    bret from flight of the conchords

    by jesus 2099

    always takes me out of the movie watching zone when he pops up in lotr

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:32 p.m. CST

    @hardboiled wonderland

    by Lee Rainberg

    I agree with Hugo Weaving. Bay is just blowing what Hugo said out of proportion. Bay has thin skin judging by his social comments over the years, being a bitch as per usual. Bay did in his comments the things he is accusing Hugo of doing.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:37 p.m. CST

    Oh God I hope Colbert has long stringy hair like Denethor

    by D.Vader

    And he's some denizen of Lake Town.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:44 p.m. CST

    Total opposite, Harboiled

    by D.Vader

    Weaving wasn't complaining about a 2 hour job, he was saying how the material didn't connect with him, that he didn't get a sense of who his character was, he didn't get a discussion with the director. In other words, the director, his boss, failed him. And as a result, its not a project he has any connection with. As an actor, you want that sort of thing. If you don't get it, you don't care. Someone asked him the truth and he told it. Bay, on the other hand, reacted in a very sophomoric, spoiled, and whiney cry-baby sort of way and he took it personal (I guess he's tired of actors bad-mouthing his movies, though Weaving didn't do anything of the sort). I'm glad Bay asked actors at the end to donate to a good cause, but in light of the subject HE HIMSELF brought up, that many Americans are out of work and looking for jobs, making that cause be about elephants in Africa seems even more aloof and callous. So yeah. I don't agree with Bay one bit there.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:51 p.m. CST

    RE Weaving, agree with Vader

    by Bass Ackwards

    Weaving wasn't whining, just said the movies were meaningless to him, and given how meaningless they are to almost everyone else, that shouldn't be a surprise. Also, I love the that Bay's idea of *integrity* is shutting up and smiling if someone pays you enough, that explains quite a bit...

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 10:59 p.m. CST

    @leerainberg

    by KGersen

    How on earth did what Bay writes become the equivalent of Weaving's moan? Maybe Weaving was taken out of context or misquoted, but basically that was pretty good putdown from Bay - and this is from someone who didn't go to the cinema to watch the last 2 Transformers films because I hated the first one so much. 200k for 2 hours work? Time to shut the fuck up. Maybe it get's Weaving's got a bit that he's basically famous for genre films - fantasy / sci-fi / comics. Lots of 'serious' actors may get butthurt at that. Celebrities need to sometimes get a grip about what they do and their relative compensation for it, both pecuniary and terms of elevated status / media willing to listen to your views on anything you care to spout off about...Team America did a good job in mocking some of this.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:02 p.m. CST

    Michael Bay vs Huge Weaving

    by Stegman84

    Hugo Weaving said nothing apart from the fact that he did Transformers for the money (like most actors do with such roles) and that he had no personal connection to the part, and that he always has some regrets over doing roles that are for the money given that he prefers to sink his teeth into a role with some proper depth to it, and make a connection to what he is playing. You know, like proper actors are supposed to do. He insulted nobody, bad mouthed nobody, and merely was honest about the fact that he prefers to do it for the art, but some roles are done for the money (which in turn financially allows him to do smaller films strictly for the love of the project or role). And frankly, the $200,000 for a voice role is chump change on a big a-list blockbuster film, I'm surprised getting Weaving was so low, given that a big part of hollywood voice casting these days is all about having a 'name' attached. They actually got a damn good deal. Also, Hugo Weaving does not make 15 million dollars a film, that is just another cheap Bay attempt at painting Hugo Weaving as part of the one percent in his childish rallying cry, while Bay, on the other hand, actually makes more than that on a film. So he's a liar, an asshole, and a massive hypocrite. Fact is Michael Bay has made a career out of crapping on beloved franchises with stuff like the Transformers films, and all of his Platinum Dunes horror remakes that he produced, as well as generally lowering the quality of popcorn cinema in general, and here he throws a petty fucking bitchfit over the fact that Weaving was merely being honest about doing the Transformers films for the money. Like anyone in Transformers is doing it for the fucking art. Yet, funnily enough, I don't seem to recall him going all internet troll rampage on Shia LeBeouf when he came out and said how crap he thought Transformers Revenge of the Fallen was. Hell, he didn't even get quite this pissy at Megan Fox and her little tantrum antics, and she compared him to Hitler! But Hugo Weaving, despite having a solid career, doesn't have any real weight in Hollywood, so that makes him an easier target I guess, so when he dares to say that he did these ones for the money, and had no connection to what was, lets face it, a paper thin role anyhow, and he's suddenly the acting equivalent of the anti-Christ according to the absolute fuckwit that is Michael Bay. And worse still, reactionary fanboys are siding with the guy who has basically crapped all over the Transformers franchise since day one, who is a primary force behind the trend of lazy and useless cash in horror remakes, and who has been spewing out ineffectual lowest common denominator cinema with very little redeeming value for most of his career, over a guy who frankly may not have cared all that much about the role(s) in question, but who still delivered performances that worked and that absolutely nobody actually complained about, so it isn't like he half-a$$ed it and just took the money and phoned it in or anything. He still delivered on exactly what he was paid to do, it just didn't bring him any particular artistic satisfaction while doing so. And yet fuckwit Michael Bay goes off on a mad, childish tear, throwing mud and whining like a ten year old, and reactionary idiot fanboys like Hardboiled actually side with him and his bullshit. I mean are you fucking kidding me? Jesus Christ.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:03 p.m. CST

    Hugo Weaving even...

    by Stegman84

    Fucking auto-correct. Although Huge Weaving would be a cool porn name...

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:14 p.m. CST

    Stegman made a beautiful point

    by D.Vader

    You too Bass Ackwards. Kgersen, I must disagree with you. I believe you fall on the wrong side of this debate.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:18 p.m. CST

    To expound on the previous point

    by D.Vader

    KGersen, you're treating the situation as if Weaving is "spouting off" on anything he wants to talk about (implying his views are in the minority and no one cares to hear them), which is a wrong and misguided assessment of the situation. He was asked about Transformers. He gave his opinion. He didn't badmouth the movie or the director really. He just says he didn't care for the situation in which he worked. If you can't be honest about anything without someone telling you you should "just shut your mouth", especially if what you said is COMPLETELY harmless, then - to use a tired old phrase - The Empire has already won.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:22 p.m. CST

    With any luck, he'll play...

    by Boneyard

    ... a talking bear.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:24 p.m. CST

    And....

    by gangrel76547

    all this Hugo Weaving/Michael Bay stuff has what to do with Stephen Colbert in The Hobbit?

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:32 p.m. CST

    oh god...

    by wcolbert

    I mean I have nothing against him (heck we even share a last name) ... but that just seems reeeally...well... out of place and distracting. If the camera is panning through some middle earth tavern and it comes across Colbert's face.... that is going to instantly take me out of the movie. Just saying :P That's about as distracting as having Terry Crews play a hobbit. Ok, maybe not QUITE that distracting. :P

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:38 p.m. CST

    Too many fucking cameos!!

    by Crooooooow

    Not every character and extra in the movie has to be a *wink wink nudge nudge* moment.

  • I don't like Bay either, but on this he's 100% right. Weaving was being a spoilt little bitch. If it's so fucking meaningless, then consider a career change. 99.9% of Hollywood is meaningless.

  • Oct. 21, 2012, 11:48 p.m. CST

    Fuck off Stegman, I made it very fucking clear that I normally HATE Michael Bay

    by Hardboiled Wonderland

    Reading my fucking posts for chrissakes.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 1:57 a.m. CST

    @d.vader

    by KGersen

    My comment on actors (celebrities) spouting off was not relevant to what Weaving said. I accept that, my mistake. I have no love for Bay but I just think Weaving is being a bit churlish, but to be fair he does say "t was meaningless to me, honestly. I don't mean that in any nasty way.." - fair enough, but why not just say I had very little involvement with the films. Fuck it, I have no dog in this fight. I retract my point re Weaving, but do think some actors have a strange view of their place in the world....the luvvy syndrome as they call it in UK theatre.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 2:05 a.m. CST

    To make it even, how about...

    by Sean

    A mediator...(i'll do) punch Hugo Weaving in the head for his stupid comments and punch Bay in the head for Bad Boys 2, Pearl Harbour, Transformers 2 and The Island (OK maybe he gets a few more punches) and then i'll buy Weaving a beer for his work in The Matrix trilogy and a beer for Bay for The Rock. Done.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 2:14 a.m. CST

    THE NEW VOICE OF SMAUG

    by Mullah Omar

    Maybe PJ could release a shittily-dubbed version of the film as a Blu-Ray easter egg with completely inappropriate voice actors.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 2:15 a.m. CST

    Bar anything else

    by tomdolan04

    How would you feel if your old boss ran around telling colleagues and the world what you earned for a job? <p> Sure the trades may imply rough numbers heavily but come on - the guy supposedly responsible for running the show. Can we have a numbers breakdown of Bays salary and final take of the B.O vrrsus time spent of set 'directing' his actors from his boss at Paramount please? Because in respect of the latter Weaving implies thats fuck all but he was classy enough to spell it out in crayon like Bay

  • Thanks a lot wcolbert.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 2:18 a.m. CST

    Not spell it out in crayon that is

    by tomdolan04

    This article unchallenged and did not connect with me, so I digressed to the Bay/Weaving piece and made typos

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 3:08 a.m. CST

    Tek Jansen crossover?

    by Bedknobs and Boomsticks

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 3:22 a.m. CST

    This is a Hobbit TB.

    by UltimaRex

    Just saying...

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 3:31 a.m. CST

    Anyway...

    by UltimaRex

    The second MOS trailer automatically gets a Hobbit viewing from me. The fact that it's THE HOBBIT also automatically gets a viewing from me. Not seeing it because it should be one (or at a stretch two) movies? OK. I don't agree with you but I see your point. Not seeing it because Colbert has a cameo? No. You're being oversensitive whiners.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 4:03 a.m. CST

    Will it be Stephen Colbert the Actor?

    by JAGUART

    Or Stephen Colbert , the caricatured version of conservative political pundits, the guy that liberals watch for their nightly news.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 4:25 a.m. CST

    Is there more to Weavings quote that I'm missing?

    by Bass Ackwards

    Or do you guys not understand what "whining" means? Weaving isn't remotely complaining about the gig, all he's doing is saying is it was a meaningless paycheck. Big deal? Genuinely not sure what it is you're finding so overboard about that hardboiled?

  • And that has nothing to do with supporting Bay, and everything to do with the fact that Michael Bay is an absolutely hypocritical, thin skinned asshole in regards to this very issue, and one who has tried to build a rallying cry against one, and only one, specific actor, all because that actor chose to be honest in an interview when asked a question, and didn't blow smoke and pray at the altar of Bay about the Transformers films. He also didn't say anything nasty, nor whiny, nor confrontational, despite how hard certain parties are trying to make it look like he did. If you can't see that Michael Bay is trying a pathetic little smoke and mirrors manipulation game here, for no other reason than to big note himself and get all-too-gullible reactionary fanboys on side, then I fear there is little else I can say to open your eyes. Nor will I bother trying.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 8:55 a.m. CST

    Colbert cameo bitchfit?

    by mcgillj

    Couldn't this be like the CAMEO of say Jon Bon Jovi in Young Guns II? You know the one people debated "was that him?" for YEARS??? It's not like he's going to riff on the 1% in the flick. He'll probably be cave troll #3.. if it were some other actor people really wouldn't care.. it'd be like.. "oh that's sooooo cooolll". Colbert is just involved for something he LOVES.. and good on him.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 9:53 a.m. CST

    Hardboiled, I don't hate Bay

    by D.Vader

    So your argument there is null and void. Fact is, Weaving didn't say anything bad about the movie or the director and Bay overreacted.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 9:56 a.m. CST

    kgersen

    by D.Vader

    I agree that some actors have a strange view of their place in the world, but I'd say this situation with Weaving just isn't one of them. We've all done meaningless jobs, especially if you're a freelancer.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 10:16 a.m. CST

    Cool.

    by frank

    It’ll probably be like Peter Jackson’s cameos in LotR. Just a non-speaking role where he is on screen for a few seconds. Like someone said, a resident of Lake Town is probably the best bet, since his set visit was a while back which leaves out the Batte of Five Armies since I don’t think they would have been shooting that yet, and since he is not in the first film he probably wouldn’t be a Mirkwood elf. So I’ll be looking out for him once the party arrives in Laketown in Part 2.

  • Nor did I notice his cameos in his other movies. Not at first. Of course when I first saw LOTR I had no idea what he looked like. So hopefully Colbert's cameo will be equally subtle. Hopefully he'll be made up in such a fashion that we cant even recognize him - dwarf colbert? haha and whereartheducks - I'd like to picture Terry Crews' Hobbit doing that glowstick dance he did in white girls. XD

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 10:51 a.m. CST

    Boo hoo

    by Kremzeek

    These films are going to be great, and all the whiners will be backpeddling all over the place after they see it for themselves. So what if Colbert is in it? You think he's going to get a starring role or something? It'll be just fine. Some of you really need to relax.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 1:50 p.m. CST

    stegman84/d.vader, while, I, too, despise Bay, I have to reluctantly side with him on this matter

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    The fact is that Weaving forfeited any claims to integrity when he signed on to Bay's shit-fests, and took the money, in the first place. It's irrelevant what he was paid. I'm sick of people harping on about these actors' supposed 'honesty' in admitting they only did a particular gig for the money. It may be true, but they vetoed the right to honesty and integrity when they accepted the filthy lucre. They were under no obligation to sign on; they could have said no. Also, Weaving (and also Paul Bettany regarding Iron Man) was saying similar things about his role as The Red Skull in Captain America, therefore his comments cannot be excused as simply potshots at a bad filmmaker who deserves it. So twice over Weaving prefers to take a gig that he cares nothing about? We could excuse him for making a bad decision the one time, but twice? I'm afraid not. Then, of course, there's the small matter of Captain America (and the rest of the Marvel movies) being, if not exactly high cinematic art, at least a competent and well made blockbuster, a cut above Bay's utterly incoherent drivel. So Weaving cannot make a distinction even between good and bad blockbusters, which makes him a pompous ass. He should stick to theater or Oscar-winning dramas if that's how he feels. He'd still be a pompous ass, but at least he'd have personal integrity. I think people who normally hate Bay are siding with him in this instance because, for all his faults, he doesn't pretend to be anything he's not. He makes lowest-common-denominator garbage, and while I've heard him making ridiculous statements in the past, he's never claimed to be an artist or even a top-rank genre filmmaker like Spielberg, Cameron or Jackson. Weaving (who, make no mistake, is a good character actor) on the other hand gets all high and mighty and pretends he's above something, when in reality he's happy to pimp himself out for money and then complain afterwards (even if presented in 'polite' terms). He should have just kept quiet. This is typical 'luvvie' behavior from a certain type of actor, looking down the bridge of their nose at certain types of 'entertainment'. It should rightly be viewed with contempt, for it is an insult to the audiences for, as well as the directors, fellow cast, and crew o,f these productions. Bay should have just kept quiet as well, but we all know he's a loudmouth and has no class, so an angry rebuttal was to be expected. However, he was well within his rights to make such a rebuttal, crude or not. Also, I noticed that AICN did not post a single one of these stories. I'm sick of reading them on other film sites, and yet not having the opportunity to comment on them here (AICN, for all its many, many faults, still offers the best forum for this). Harry and crew are too interested in bullshit contests, giveaways and filler articles these days. They're supposed to be making 'improvements' soon, according to Harry. Yeah, after about three years of inaction on that front, I'll believe that when I see it...

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 2:46 p.m. CST

    I think its bc you are misunderstanding it, Turd

    by D.Vader

    Please tell me where Weaving took "potshots" at a bad filmmaker? Please tell me why he's a pompous ass for simply saying he did not connect with the material? Please tell me how saying "I don't mean that in a nasty way" suddenly becomes a complaint? Or an "insult to the audience"? Come on, this has been blown WAY out of proportion, and the only reason why is bc Bay decided to sling shit back at Weaving. Had Bay not said a word, no one would care.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 4:28 p.m. CST

    Not true, d.vader

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    I've held these opinions since I first read Weaving's initial comments, BEFORE Bay responded. Had Weaving only commented on Transformers I'd have probably ignored his comments. But he didn't; he said the same thing about Captain America, also, which implies something larger, and also makes him a repeat offender. Yes, he tried to couch his comments in respectful terms, but the implications are obvious. Why should Weaving be respected or praised for doing something simply for the money? That makes him a whore and a pimp, and thus he and his ilk are as much responsible for drivel like Transformers as Michael Bay is. He cannot take the money and then try to pass the buck. HE is involved with the production, however loosely, and he is part of it (and of, course, there's the small matter of signing on THREE times for material he did not connect with). This is not limited to Weaving alone; other actors have expressed similar sentiments about movies before, and it always rubs me the wrong way. If they don't care about their work, then why should I? Thus there is certainly an implicit contempt for the audience contained in these types of statements. Weaving isn't an A-lister but he is certainly comfortably well off, so it's not like he has to take any role he's offered simply to put bread on the table.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Now you're going above and beyond what Bay said, Turd

    by D.Vader

    You're calling him a whore and a pimp? Jeezus man, what'd he do to you? Kill your dad, steal your money, and sleep with your mom? Its an overreaction. A total overreaction. NO ONE is "praising" Weaving or saying he should be respected for doing a job for the money. Not one person has said that; you are making that up. His Captain America comments have no place in this debate. I understand what you're going for here, but we're talking about Weaving vs Bay on Weaving's comments on TRANSFORMERS, that's all. So I'll ignore all references to Cap and focus on the topic at hand (the one that isn't The Hobbit, I mean). "He cannot take the money and then try to pass the buck." He's not passing the buck. You're reaching. "there is certainly an implicit contempt for the audience contained in these types of statements" Again, you're reaching. He has explained how he felt no connection to the material. This has fuck-all to do with how the audience would connect with the material. I still stand by what I said, and I'll note you didn't answer any of the questions I posed in my defense above. Its an overreaction.

  • They're in the Shire! They're in Rohan! They're in Gondor! They're fucking everywhere!

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 5:04 p.m. CST

    Ludicrous.

    by DocPazuzu

    So actors should only take jobs that they can "connect" with artistically? And if they can't, they should keep quiet about it? What a load of shit. What is it that creases you guys the most, anyway? I have a feeling it isn't about just taking the money and shutting the fuck up. It's that Weaving doesn't have the masturbatory love for certain properties that you have cherished your entire lives. So he didn't "connect" with the Red Skull. So fucking what. He was an AWESOME Red Skull. That's all that matters. You WISH someone would offer you as assload of cash to do ANYTHING much less voice a cartoon character. Jesus...

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 5:32 p.m. CST

    d.vader

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    His Captain America comments have no place in this debate. I understand what you're going for here, but we're talking about Weaving vs Bay on Weaving's comments on TRANSFORMERS, that's all. So I'll ignore all references to Cap and focus on the topic at hand (the one that isn't The Hobbit, I mean).

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 5:34 p.m. CST

    Ahhh , SHIT

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    Fucking AICN and its antiquated Talkbacks. They cut off an extremely lengthy reply because I used quotations.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 6:10 p.m. CST

    d.vader (2nd attempt and without quotations from your replies))

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    Yes, he is a whore and a pimp. I mean it with no malice; I have nothing personal against Weaving. As I've pointed out, he's a good actor. Nor do I give two fucks about Michael Bay, as anyone familiar with my posting history will know. However if you do a job JUST for the money, and particularly if you don't have to do said job just to make ends meet (unlike most regular folk), then you are a pimp, plain and simple, especially in an 'artistic' profession such as acting. As to who was 'praising' Weaving? Stegman84 was, and I've seen others on film sites doing so; certainly they have been commending him for his supposed 'honesty'. What made you think I was referring to this AICN Talkback alone? Weaving's Capt. America comments, in my opinion, are essential to the conversation because they contextualize and flesh out his statements, and reveal a great deal about his feelings for particular genre roles that he has chosen to take on. I don't give a damn what others were previously discussing here; I'M choosing to address them, and I'm under no compunction to follow any narrow and didactic 'parameters' that others have laid out for this debate. Are you selectively choosing to ignore my Capt. America comments because they add some credence to my opinions? Regarding the next of your complaints, I'm afraid I'm not 'reaching' for anything. It's patently obvious that Weaving is subtly trying to distance himself from the stench of the Transformers movies (which everyone knows are trash) by saying that he's never watched them, doesn't care about the material, and that the work had no meaning. Well, that kind of slipperiness doesn't wash with me, I'm afraid. So yes, he's 'passing the buck'. He took the money, he's part of the enterprise, end of story. Now, concerning you complaints that he didn't say anything in contempt of the audience, I have already explained this. BY DEFINITION, if you are merely phoning in a piece of work then you are showing tacit contempt for the audience. In filmmaking, or any of the arts, there is an implied agreement between the actors, writers, directors et al and the audience that the artist should at least, you know - appear to give a shit. I'm sorry, but some of us actually hold the medium of film to a high standard like that. Perhaps that's naive, but after all, isn't that why we are movie fans in the first place: we believe in the power of the medium and what it can do at its best? And it's worth noting that everything that was ever made that was any good in the art form, was made by people who were invested in what they were doing and passionate about it, even when it came to mass entertainment and mainstream genre movies. Is it any wonder that their is such a plethora of shit blockbusters these days, when such a nonchalant, contemptuous, laissez-faire attitude is adopted by its practitioners? I have actually answered all your questions; you're just choosing to ignore it. If you require further clarification regarding any of my points or your own, I will be happy to provide it. Stand by what you said; I'm standing by what I said. And until someone can provide a convincing argument as to why I am wrong, I will be unlikely to alter my opinions.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 6:25 p.m. CST

    docpazuzu, you're also wrong (although you're comment didn't seem to be specifically addressed to me)

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    I care nothing for the properties in question. I am not a Transformers fan, and while I like the Marvel universe, I am at best a very casual fan of it, and not in any way, shape or form, a fanboy. So I really couldn't care less that Weaving doesn't have unbridled love for these properties, nor would I expect him to. I just demand that he does a job with integrity. If he adopted that approach, it might even elevate the material, at least as far as his part in it was concerned, however slightly. I also suspect that many people, in their desire to stick it to Bay and his Transformers shitfest, are giving Weaving a free pass for his comments. Believe me, I understand it. But unlike others, it doesn't blind me to the reality of what was said. To flip the script, if Weaving had said all this about the LOTR films, would fans have been so forgiving? I think not. It also puzzles me why people think that just because Weaving said something that was hardly incendiary or containing any malice, that his comments must be taken 'on the level'. You have to read between the lines of what people say to get the full picture sometimes. Weaving was trying to be diplomatic, and I don't think he bears any overt ill will towards Bay or Transformers or audiences, but his comments inadvertently reveal plenty - not least of which about himself.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 6:25 p.m. CST

    *your comment

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 6:57 p.m. CST

    Here's an example of what I'm talking about that might make people laugh, but is nonetheless true

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    Remember the cheesy Masters of the Universe film that came out in the 80's? Remember Frank Langella as Skeletor? Well, although not exactly something that was ever going to win awards, based on the nature of the material, that was a terrific and very entertaining performance. Going above and beyond the call of duty, Langella acted that performance as if he was onstage at the Old Vic doing Shakespeare. I remember how Langella said that he was convinced to do that role because his son was a fan of He-Man at the time, and even though he knew nothing of the property, he said he approached it as seriously as any other role he had ever taken, and that it remains one of the favorite roles he has ever played to this day. I always thought was awesome, and respected that kind of attitude to his work. Would it be that everyone involved in filmmaking, from the top down, would tackle any production, no matter how silly, low budget or corny, with the same level of passion and verve! We would all be so much better off if that were so. Yes, MOTA was a cheapo Cannon production from the eighties, based on a children's toy line, and outside of Langella's villain, barely scratches mediocrity; however, Langella ensured that his part was the very best it could be, at the very least. By consequence, he elevated the film in one area, whereas otherwise it might have been totally forgettable. So it's not a question of 'connecting' to the work or loving the property. I doubt that a middle-aged man, such as Langella at the time,'connected' to a kid's cartoon villain on a personal level. Yet he still performed with passion and enthusiasm. All in all, a much better approach that Weaving's dispassionate, 'aw shucks', faux-modest bullshit about taking a role that had no meaning, and that he couldn't care less about, just for the money. I can see through that crap a mile off.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 7:34 p.m. CST

    I Am The Shire And So Can You!

    by Royston Lodge

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Turd, you're still misunderstanding everything

    by D.Vader

    "Yes, he is a whore and a pimp. I mean it with no malice" Sure, but we wouldn't know that unless you explained yourself (which you did) or if we read between the lines, which you suggest we must all do to get to the heart of the matter (which frankly I consider ridiculous). "As to who was 'praising' Weaving? Stegman84 was, and I've seen others on film sites doing so; certainly they have been commending him for his supposed 'honesty'. What made you think I was referring to this AICN Talkback alone?" Uhh, no, Stegman did not, not in the way you described (which was as follows: "Why should Weaving be respected or praised for doing something simply for the money?"). Stegman did not praise him for doing something "simply for the money"; he just explained what Weaving said to others who completely misunderstood him. And why would I think you were referring to this AICN TB alone? Why else would you ask such a question for me to answer when NO ONE here had been praising him? Why ask why he should be praised (on other websites apparently) when we haven't been discussing it? It was an unneeded topic to bring to your argument in this case. "Are you selectively choosing to ignore my Capt. America comments because they add some credence to my opinions?" No, I was ignoring them bc we were discussing Bay vs Weaving, and if you need to bring up another quote to defend your position in this matter, then I think you didn't really have a strong foundation to begin with. As for his Red Skull comments, he says nothing bad about that film or that film's director either. "It's patently obvious that Weaving is subtly trying to distance himself from the stench of the Transformers movies (which everyone knows are trash) by saying that he's never watched them, doesn't care about the material, and that the work had no meaning." Again, you're misunderstanding the entire quote. He NEVER said he never watched the movies. He didn't say the work had no meaning (for others). He was speaking specifically for himself. Just himself. That's what I don't get about your reaction "BY DEFINITION, if you are merely phoning in a piece of work then you are showing tacit contempt for the audience. In filmmaking, or any of the arts, there is an implied agreement between the actors, writers, directors et al and the audience that the artist should at least, you know - appear to give a shit." Wait, so you're blaming Weaving for this? He just explained that he was not given a script, he did not get to meet the director, he didn't know anything else about the movie- and THAT is what he is lamenting. But now you're going to lambast him for "phoning in" the work (which I disagree with, I think he did a fantastic job, even more considering the fact no one gave him context for character or story). It looks to me like he gave a shit. It looks to me like he put as much as he could into the voicework. You know, it is possible to not connect with the material but still give a great performance. But deep down, you might not be happy with yourself or the work (not the movie as a whole), and that's okay. "I have actually answered all your questions; you're just choosing to ignore it. If you require further clarification regarding any of my points or your own, I will be happy to provide it." Well, not exactly. You didn't tell me where he was taking potshots at the filmmaker or how he was insulting the audience (by lamenting *his* lack of connection to the material). You explained that we have to "read between the lines" to understand what he really meant (which was- insults to the movie, filmmaker, and audience), and that's something I wholly disagree with. I think its possible to let people's words stand for themselves without us needing to take them out of context (which has happened here). Look, you don't like what Weaving said, fine. You think he's being a "pompous ass" for saying he had no script or director's input or anything other than the lines he needed to record... okay, I'll disagree. Some actors like that. Some don't. I think its clear Weaving would like to go back to small films and roles that he connects with personally. What's wrong with that. And as for your Skeletor example, its a good one, but it does *not* work in this case. I think Langella gave a terrific performance. I think Weaving gave a really good voice performance. They both gave it their all despite one actor not connecting with the story (bc he didn't have the knowledge or context) and one actor whose connection we know nothing about but can only speculate on. The difference? Langella had a director with him there on set every day to help him with the material. Langella had a script so he knew and understood where his role was in the full context of the rest of the film. Langella was there collaborating with others. It seems like all Weaving had were a few lines and a microphone. And he got paid good money for that, but its nothing he found very fulfilling. Again, you can disagree, but I hope you at least understand he never bad-mouthed Bay or the film, only the process. And that doesn't insult the audience whatsoever.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 8:58 p.m. CST

    d.vader, I think we're just going round in circles here

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    The crux of the matter is this: if he didn't connect with the material, then why is he continuing to accept money for these parts, four times over in fact (three Transformers movies and Capt. America), if he has such laments? It's not like he made a one-off, regrettable decision. Why is stegman84 defending Weaving by saying that he prefers to do small roles that he connects with, instead of blockbusters, and that is as a 'proper' actor should be? (TO ME, that type of comment implies praise). Fine. Then why isn't Weaving BEING a so-called 'proper' actor? You say it's clear he would like to go back to smaller films and what's wrong with that? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. But what's stopping him? I'm attacking Weaving's comments because he is a hypocrite. No one is twisting his arm to take these parts. And the stuff about him not making $20 million a movie is bullshit. Sure, he doesn't make that amount, but after three Matrix movies, V for Vendetta, LOTR films and The Hobbit, Transformers, etc. this guy certainly has more money than most will see in a lifetime. He is comfortably well off. I don't think it's too much of an assumption to believe that. As regards Capt. America, I know he didn't specifically say anything about the director or film, but he repeated the gist of the same sentiments he expressed about Transformers: that he didn't connect with the material and found it meaningless. Also, he DID say he hasn't seen any of the films. I don't if you been reading different quotes from me, or less full ones, but he has definitely said that. And once again, I don't care if he did or didn't badmouth Bay. Bay is an asshole of the highest order and a terrible filmmaker. We can dispute if Weaving's comments imply that, but it is of no matter. It is Weaving's hypocrisy that primarily rankles with me. He saw a script, he knew what the process was, he knew he wasn't going to meet with the director. If he didn't know before he signed on, he knew it after the first film at least. If he felt the way he did, he should have turned down the offer. Then I wouldn't have any complaints.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 8:59 p.m. CST

    *I don't know if you've been reading different quotes from me

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 9:56 p.m. CST

    You're probably right there, Turd

    by D.Vader

    "if he didn't connect with the material, then why is he continuing to accept money for these parts, four times over in fact (three Transformers movies and Capt. America), if he has such laments?" They're called contracts, I'm guessing. "You say it's clear he would like to go back to smaller films and what's wrong with that? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. But what's stopping him? I'm attacking Weaving's comments because he is a hypocrite. No one is twisting his arm to take these parts." So you're saying he can't express regret over taking such parts (which is what he did)? "Also, he DID say he hasn't seen any of the films. I don't if you been reading different quotes from me, or less full ones, but he has definitely said that." I haven't seen any quotes that back that up in regards to this situation. "It is Weaving's hypocrisy that primarily rankles with me. He saw a script, he knew what the process was, he knew he wasn't going to meet with the director. " How do we know this? Are we just guessing? And again, if this is what happened, you're basically saying he can't express regret over his decision? "If he didn't know before he signed on, he knew it after the first film at least." Again, contracts.

  • Oct. 22, 2012, 10:02 p.m. CST

    Hey Turd, let's just shake hands and go hug our wives onstage

    by D.Vader

    I'll buy you a beer after.

  • Oct. 23, 2012, 2:02 a.m. CST

    Hugo Weaving says...

    by lv_426

    I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here in Hollywood. It came to me when I tried to classify this thing we call cinema and I realized that it is not actually art. Every average moviegoer on this planet instinctively develops a natural shit detector for stupidity in films, but you Michael Bay, do not. You move to an area and you blow up stuff with no rhyme or reason until every building is demolished and the only way you can afford to buy more hookers and cocaine is to spread to another area and blow up more buildings. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A hack. Hack directors are a cinematic disease, a cancer of this industry. You're a plague and we are the cure.

  • Oct. 23, 2012, 8:24 a.m. CST

    I'm getting a very bad feeling

    by James_Camera_On

    That The Hobbit is turning into another out-of-control production. That Jackson will do to the Hobbit what he did to King Kong and then some. What should have been one movie is turning into a three movie mega bore. Somewhere, George Lucas is laughing. Perhaps Colbert will be a Jar-Jar like character.

  • PJ's cameo's are bad enough and briefly take me out of the Middle-Earth experience when they pop up...I don't need some Comedy Central hack fucking up my movie going experience. Just because he's a "fan".

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:44 a.m. CST

    WTF? As soon as i see it im gonna say get out of there!

    by Balkin Flabgurter

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:47 a.m. CST

    No way is Peter Jackson going to mess this up though ahaha think about it..

    by Balkin Flabgurter

    Fuck up king-kong? Whatever. Fuck up the Hobbit? career over.

  • Not only is there a huge fanbase with 1,000,000 different perspectives on the story, this is a property people have established as historical, fucking it up will not go lightly for he who treads such a path. As well as having to follow up LOTR, AND make this an engaging 3d experience that doesnt make me mad. He has big balls, like frodo, he does not know what he walks with.

  • Come on guys, its a movie. Ya know, a movie, where recognizable actors are cast all the time? You'll get over seeing Stephen Colbert in a role, just as you got over seeing Magneto and Agent Smith and a Goonie and the Captain of the Titanic in Lord of the Rings. Let's save this false indignation for something that really matters, like an unneeded remake or something.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:16 a.m. CST

    Hugo Weaving

    by krylite

    wasn't even whining! He's not A-list but his acting is bounds better than a lot of a-listers. Recall his scene with Aragorn in ROTK giving him the new sword. That scene could have easily been laughable but it was one of the best bit of fantasy themes ever shown on screen, very believable thanks to Weaving. Recall Sir Alec Guiness saying his lines in Star Wars were a bunch of "rubbish" and Hamil kind of embarassed to say he plays a farm boy all on the record. All before Star Wars opened big. It just looks like Bay is lashing out on relatively harmless interview responses because he knows his hack work is fading. Once bayformers is gone, there's too much new talent in directors which can easily take his place on efx budget movies in the future at probably a more competitive rate.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:59 p.m. CST

    Nice try vader...but no cigar.

    by DoctorWho?

    Fan cameo=Sir Ian Mckellan performance?<p> I think not.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 5:55 p.m. CST

    Will N'SYNC also be there?

    by Nintendarth

    You all enjoy those cartoon Hobbits spinning plates with very little mouth articulation. Enjoy.

  • And he's taking a dump on the fans who got him to megafame. When he did THE MATRIX it was a weird movie with weird ideas. So he did it. He has no use for crap like THE FIRST AVENGER and I'm glad to hear stars standing up and saying NO! to fanboy dreams that these movies are actually for anyone but basement-dwellers. So, yeah, I'm glad he spoke up. My hope would be that this will usher in waves of people crapping on past fantasy movies. Let's hear Shia speak out against the rampant idiocy of TRANSFORMERS. Let's hear Harrison Ford say how truly dumb the STAR WARS movies are if you view them objectively compared, to, say, a French art film with something to say. I'll be laughing it up, fuzzballs. That's some high quality dialogue there! NERF HERDER! Admiral Tarkin, I should've recognized your foul stench as soon as I came aboard. Carrie!!!! Quality stuff.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 6:04 p.m. CST

    Sir Alec Guiness wisely HATED the film STAR WARS!

    by Nintendarth

    From CRACKED.COM: In most people's minds Alec Guinness is Obi-Wan Kenobi. But despite gaining eternal nerd worship and a percentage of future Star Wars earnings for his role (thus making him rich for life), Guinness wasn't a fan of the character. In his autobiography, he mentions a small child coming up to him and saying that he'd seen Star Wars 100 times. And that little boy became Harry Knowles! Probably. Guinness replied that he'd give the kid an autograph if he promised to never watch the movie again and the boy burst into tears. The only thing he hated more than Obi-Wan was children. Why He Regretted It: When it came to Star Wars, Alec Guinness pretty much filled the role of a snooty British person. He called the movies quote banal endquote and quote mumbo-jumbo endquote, and would throw out Star Wars-related fan mail unopened. Guinness also claimed that it was his idea to get Obi-Wan killed off because he wanted a smaller part. That's right, one of the most tragic and mentally scarring scenes from your childhood came about because Alec Guinness thought George Lucas was a talentless hack.