Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Is It Possible?? A Director Other Than Raimi For THE HOBBIT??

1st by THE KNIGHT	May 9th, 2007 10:52:58 AM
...
First by Mogwrath	May 9th, 2007 10:53:15 AM
?
ALL HELL by THE KNIGHT	May 9th, 2007 10:53:21 AM
I'LL DIRECT!
guess i wasn't first by Mogwrath	May 9th, 2007 10:54:43 AM
peter jackson to direct the hobbit!? I voted YES!
NO RAIMI by THE KNIGHT	May 9th, 2007 10:55:14 AM
Spiderman 3 was a pure let down... He's a nice guy and all but his style is too cheesy... Now if Ridley Scott got on board, that would be something...
ringwearer, come out, come out wherever you are by just pillow talk	May 9th, 2007 10:55:15 AM
I really did like Master and Commander. Again, it is hard to picture Middle Earth without Jackson, but much like Spidey, another director would be welcomed.
Spider-man 3 was the ghey. by Dublin579	May 9th, 2007 10:55:17 AM
so it was.
no jackson no hobbit by jonboy83	May 9th, 2007 10:55:54 AM
pay him his $ you greedy bastards
over rated by darwinwins	May 9th, 2007 10:57:36 AM
jackson AND raimi. that's right, i went there. my friend who is a huge geek for all things related to lord of the rings and i are in agreement that we no longer watch the lord of the rings movies because of the homosexual overtones between sam and frodo which really casts a shadow on the movies. why??
I can't stand the idea of a dark depressing by gboybama	May 9th, 2007 10:58:45 AM
version of the Hobbit, a film that should be full of wonder and adventure. Nipples on Raimi = Emo Bilbo.
'M & C' a great 'Star Trek' film? by Neil Peart	May 9th, 2007 10:59:26 AM
Since I am a huge Patrick O'Brian fan, but most definitely not a trekkie, I'll take your word for it. I did have a friend once who told me that Captain Kirk was based on Forester's Horatio Hornblower. though. Anyhoo, I think Weir would probably be a better director for 'The Hobbit' than Raimi. Don't get me wrong, I love Raimi, but I just think Weir is more suited for the project.
darwinwins by Metrogenic	May 9th, 2007 11:02:51 AM
If that's the reason you no longer watch LOTR, you need to take a long, hard, look at yourself, and then at your friend who is a huge geek for all things related to lord of the rings, and try to figure out why the mere thought of male-on-male affection bothers you guys so much. Seriously, you guys will be great together.
Gollum gotta eat! by illyGraham	May 9th, 2007 11:04:03 AM
We all know this project has Uwe Boll written all over it.
weir could do it by StovetopStuffin'	May 9th, 2007 11:05:48 AM
Raimi needs to get back to doing something he loves. I love the man to death, but I hate what he did with Spidey 3. I felt my heart sink while watching that train wreck.
I'll direct it ! by kingoflight	May 9th, 2007 11:06:31 AM
Just give me a blank cheaque and peter jacksons phone number and i'll do it no questions asked. I am really looking forward to watching this film in about 5-8 years time.
Still in post Spider-Man depression by trombone	May 9th, 2007 11:06:47 AM
So the mention of the name of the man who raped Peter Parker is not good for my emotional state. I AM positive that Jackson is not the ONLY choice. I've loved LOTR since I was 10 and the film-LOTR was OK, but it wasn't all that. And to ask 2 MORE films out of him? Not sure he's got it in him. I just want a good movie to be made. The important thing is that the director take the fantasy seriously and to be able to bring the magic of that world. Peter Weir has done that successfully in a LOT of films: "Dead Poets Society", "Truman Show", "The Witness". Didn't see Master and Commander.
Metrogenic - my thoughts exactly by just pillow talk	May 9th, 2007 11:07:59 AM
Better make sure when you guys go to a movie together, keep a seat between you empty. And get separate popcorns, you wouldn't want your hands to accidentally touch.
If Raimi did the Hobbit, it'd go something like this by chrth	May 9th, 2007 11:11:45 AM
Gandalf calls Bilbo, leaves him a message asking him if he wants to go out on an adventurer. Bilbo returns the call and tells Gandalf he'd love to. Then Bilbo gets attacked by the Sackville-Baggins, who Bilbo gives Amnesia so that they no longer desire Bag End. A gollum hurled from space lands in Bag End, gives Bilbo a ring. Bilbo leaves Gandalf a teary message wishing he'd call back. Meanwhile, Sandyman, the miller (heh, that worked nicely) turns out to be responsible for Frodo's parents dying in a boating accident, and even though Bilbo hasn't adopted Frodo yet, he goes after Sandyman while wearing the ring...
from Stardust to Hobbit by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 11:12:22 AM
¡I know who could do it better, mr. Vaughn!
Merric give me a break dude by MetiphisLabs	May 9th, 2007 11:12:35 AM
Troubling that Sam Raimi might Direct because of Spiderman 3? The man makes one misstep and suddenly it's worrisome he might Direct Hobbit? I think the man deserves way more credit than that, and frankly I'm not gonna forsake him over Spiderman 3 which wasn't as bad as everyone that is wailing about it claims.
Lets not forget... by MetiphisLabs	May 9th, 2007 11:14:13 AM
That early on Raimi and Jackson's styles were quite similar. Seems like a good fit to me.
Wow, I actually suggested Peter Weir... by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2007 11:15:02 AM
...as a viable option after the whole Jackson/Shaye/New Line debacle broke loose. This is a great choice should Jackson be unable to direct "The Hobbit". Weir (or anyone else for that matter) would definitely have his work cut out for him with regards to production design, etc. With New Line being involved, I wonder if Jackson would even be willing to assist Weir in that department.
chrth by trombone	May 9th, 2007 11:15:35 AM
HAHAHAHAAAA!! LOL partner! That is IT! And just when Bilbo is about to whip some serious ass, Sandyman floats away on an eagle. Bilbo takes the ring off and gives it to the Sackville-Bagginses and then blows them up with one of Gandalf's fireworks. DAMN YOU SAM RAIMI!!!
chrth! by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2007 11:15:51 AM
I read the good news. Congratulations!
DAMN YOU SAM RAIMI!!! by trombone	May 9th, 2007 11:16:27 AM
Damn damn damn! What the heck, bro'? Messin' wit' Pete like you done?
Hell...yes by Theta	May 9th, 2007 11:18:38 AM
Sorry, I love PJ as much as the next geek, but Peter Weir on "The Hobbit" gives me wood. The only thing that would give me more wood would be George Miller.
Bilbo at the far side of Middle-earth! by morGoth	May 9th, 2007 11:19:09 AM
Peter Weir is a much more satisfying choice than Raimi. M&C is one of my favorite movies so having the director of that helming Tolkien's Hobbit puts a big Sooty Smile on this puss. Interesting items when you enter his name in IMDB: "His characters often interact with technology, especially television, in ways that harm them or surprise the viewer, e.g. the church big screen TV in The Mosquito Coast (1986); the living room TV and TV control center in The Truman Show (1998); radio playing in the barn in Witness (1985), and so on." I'm thinking of Bilbo finding the One Ring and the effect it has on him (unknown to him, of course). Also: "His films very often deal with people, who find themselves in surroundings, where they do not fit in (e.g. a Philadelphia Cop among the Amish or a progressive teacher on a strictly conservative school)." I guess I don't have to compare that with Bilbo in the company of Dwarves he unexpectedly finds himself.
Raimi? BAH! by cutest_of_borg	May 9th, 2007 11:22:21 AM
Jackson or nothing!
Oz v Kiwi? by krodnoc	May 9th, 2007 11:22:28 AM
A New Zealand director replaced by an Australian one? Sounds like a joke but at least it's better than Raimi.
weir is gret but the only other person i would let by cekma	May 9th, 2007 11:23:09 AM
want to make this is... Del Toro. The imagination, visuals and world and characters he is able to create make him the perfect canidate, and he's friends with peter jackson and would never steer him wrong. Not to mention how faithful/loyal/respectful he is to source material like Hellboy. More thenI can say for Spidey 3, God Venom got raped
Star Trek? i don't get it. Explain it please by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 11:24:30 AM
IRON-MAN = KEVLAR-MAN and shadows of Sandman in Spiderman 3 save money. We need another version of Spiderman 3!!! (no Venom, more Brocke, less dance, less crying)!!!!
darwinwins by cutest_of_borg	May 9th, 2007 11:25:30 AM
How old are you, 12? Only teenage boys and men unsecure in their manhood would even think Frodo and Sams relationship was gay.
cant believe those jerks wont pay jackson by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 11:28:32 AM
greedy idiots messing up the tolkien legacy
Spidey 3 not as bad? by liljuniorbrown	May 9th, 2007 11:28:49 AM
I WANT to love Spiderman 3 and there were so many moments and aspects of the film I liked and wanted to love whole heartedly but come on. A Sandman that really just didn't do anything but cry and whine and he's really a good guy? Venom didn't show up until waaaaay late in the game and then you kill him off? Why did you kill off Venom? Motherfuck Raimi! And with something as petty as some pipes and a fucking Hobgoblin pumpkin bomb? Man, i don't know what made me madder killing off Venom like a pussy or the pistol finger popping Peter Parker who says things like "Cool out baby" or what ever fucking jazz lingo he was spouting. Damn you Micheal Bay? No damn you Sam Raimi!!! No geek pass from me.
Spidey 3 was great by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 11:29:19 AM
So get the hell over it you frigging losers who just want to hate on Spiderman 3 regardless of how good or bad it actually was simply because it is the fad of this website... Glad to see most other reviewers in the country and moviegoers in general disagree... I mean get the hell over it, it was good, the dance scene was funny, the crying fit the scenes, etc... I mean seriously GET THE HELL OVER IT and make your own damn opinion, since its pretty obvious ya'll are brainwashed from this sites views.
How the Mighty Have Fallen by sevenrivera	May 9th, 2007 11:31:52 AM
I remember the joy that greeted the idea of Raimi handling the Hobbit. Most felt Jackson should do it, but if absolutely necessary, Raimi was a solid alternative. How times have changed. Now Raimi is responsible for one of the stinkiest turds since Batman & Robin and I don't want him within 1000 feet of the Hobbit. I don't want him catering the set even. What a horrible start to the summer - Spidey sucked balls, you know Pirates will too and then we've got Michael Bay to top it all off with a big shitburger. Thank God for Hotfuzz.
YouIgnorantGeeks by trombone	May 9th, 2007 11:32:20 AM
Go back to Sony and collect your 30 pieces of silver.
damn you mary jane watson by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 11:32:31 AM
you're a bitch
YouIgnorantgeeks by cutest_of_borg	May 9th, 2007 11:32:56 AM
Careful using "y'all", brother. Your fellow Yankees may run you south of the Mason-Dixon. :)
ludmir88 by trombone	May 9th, 2007 11:33:39 AM
LOL Hahahahah!!!
I'd rather see Weir get it. by Mosquito March	May 9th, 2007 11:33:46 AM
Raimi's losing it.
New Line Joins The Idiot Club!!! by Frank Black	May 9th, 2007 11:33:50 AM
You guys who love The Hobbit should start a massive protest now because I'll tell you right now which shitty director is going to get this project and you can mark my words and remember my voice in your heads... BRETT (Bland and Boring) Rattner will be directing this and I wouldn't be surprised if it is announced as his follow up to Rush Hour 3 or 4 or whatever number they are on!
And who says venom is dead? by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 11:34:01 AM
Where was the body or the symbiote? From what I remember there wasnt a trace of either... not a single bone fragment or nothing... And your going to tell me that pumpkin bomb which caused only a sever burn when it blew up next to Harry would totally and completely incinerate every single molecule of Venom/Brock because it was attached to them or whatever? I dunno that to me wasnt venoms death.
Love Weir... by DocPazuzu	May 9th, 2007 11:36:20 AM
...and Master and Commander, but don't know about his ability to deal with the lighthearted bits. I'm with the guy who mentioned Del Toro. Glad Raimi might be benched on this one.
Hiya cutest... by morGoth	May 9th, 2007 11:37:35 AM
...oh, one of those Jackson purist, eh? Heh, kidding and I basically feel the same way but it just doesn't look like PJ will ever be able to do it. So my first choice is still (and will always be) Jackson to do The Hobbit but Weir is definetly a solid fallback for the number two slot. Yeah, can you believe there are still eejits going on about ghey Hobbits? Grow up already people, once and for all.
Oh, and darwinwins... by DocPazuzu	May 9th, 2007 11:38:46 AM
...I'll bet you and your buddy enjoy your own version of Master and Commander, but like, in a totally not gay way, because you're so secure in your sexuality.
Sylar... by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 11:38:57 AM
Well now you just ruined Heroes for me... I was going to catch up on it on DVD... but now i know part of the plot thanks to your name. You should still see it though, it really is a great movie... and even if these people dont think so, I have no idea how they think it is the 2007 version of Howard the Duck unless they hated the first 2 movies as well.. since I put them all on par with each other and don't see what they think is so drastically different from the first 2.
i wanted to laugh in the crying bridge scene!!! by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 11:39:22 AM
and thats not good
Not brainwashed by Volstaff	May 9th, 2007 11:40:08 AM
Spiderman 3 was "ok", but it was far from great. I don't blame Raimi entirely. Considering all the shit the studio wanted him to include in it, it's kind of a wonder the movie was any good at all. But the guy needs to move on to another project that gets him excited again.
Kirsten Dunsky as Bilbo by Stuntcock Mike	May 9th, 2007 11:40:41 AM
Perfection. Spidey3 stuck bad.
Del Toro is a good choice by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 11:40:42 AM
as long as he doesnt use that fake ugly toad again
Oh come on... by Kid Z	May 9th, 2007 11:40:43 AM
... you just KNOW the suits'll get Brett RatTurd, Tim Sorry or someone equally talentless and hacky to chop out this thing in time for Summer '09!
Perfect choice. by TELF	May 9th, 2007 11:41:25 AM
Too good to be true really.
morGy! by cutest_of_borg	May 9th, 2007 11:44:27 AM
Glad to hear from you. Picked up Children of Hurin but haven't read it yet. I'm sure you can recite the tale backwards but I am looking forward to it as much of the story is new to me. Borgette starts Longwood U. in the fall. Big changes a'comin'. How is the family?
Oh no... by morGoth	May 9th, 2007 11:44:40 AM
...since Weir was born in 1944, doesn't that make him one of those...those...BABY BOOMERS?!! Aieee...don't tell Kid Z or he'll soil his knickers.
Volstaff.. by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 11:44:41 AM
Thats the thing... ok you think its ok, not great... Im not talking about that, that I would accept hearing... its that everyone seems to act like it was one of the worst movies of all time... and its like how is that!?!?!?
Pumpkin bombs have a "plot specific" setting by Logo Lou	May 9th, 2007 11:45:25 AM
Sometimes, they erase groups of executives into skeletons in an instant. Other times, when blown up right next to your face they either rip your mask (Peter) or horribly scar you (Harry), then they go back to completely destroying humans and giant alien goo monsters.
Spiderman 3 The Soup Opera 2007!!! by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 11:49:08 AM
THOMAS HADEN CHURCH WASTED!!!
Peter Weir by kwisatzhaderach	May 9th, 2007 11:49:30 AM
A Peter Weir 'Hobbit' would be 1000 times better than a Peter Jackson 'Hobbit'. I think that, thematically, The Hobbit is a little bit beneath him though.
Logo... by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 11:49:35 AM
Wait they did do that in spiderman 1 didnt the... the executive thing... I dont remember... I remember the spiderman mask thing though. Ok, but fine.. so on superpowered or enhanced people they don't totally destroy them. I still think hes alive.
I dont get it by kilik777	May 9th, 2007 11:50:04 AM
Why is everyone hating on Spiderman 3? It was far better than the other two and im sure it will have a way better replay value to it. The fighting and fx were easily enough to place it above the other two. If the Bruce Campbell cameo and other campy stuff bothered you then you must take these movies way too seriously. By the way Raimi's best movie outside of the Evil Dead Trilogy is easily A Simple Plan. http://tinyurl.com/pv8do
YouIgnorantGeeks by trombone	May 9th, 2007 11:50:12 AM
We hate it because we put so much trust in Raimi and ALL of the HYPE made it look awesome. So when it comes out limp, we are betrayed. They LIED to us, let us down. THAT'S why we hate it. You don't hear us complaining about Rush Hour 3 like that, do you? No. Because NONE of gave a Batman's nipple for it.
Sylar I liked Howard too... by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 11:51:52 AM
I watched that like 10 times as a kid but havent seen it in over 15 years so who knows if I would feel the same... the only reason I used it as that that is widely regarded by most to be one of worst movies ever, so I figured that movie would be the one to use when drawing the parallel.
BUT ... by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 11:53:39 AM
I love the hot girls in the background (Time Square, Jazz Club, The Bugle)nice.
Peter Weir would be fantastic by jimmy_009	May 9th, 2007 11:53:42 AM
But I'd still prefer P.J.
Sam Raimi GETS ZERO RESPECT EVER AGAIN by MattyBoomStar	May 9th, 2007 11:53:46 AM
Ever since he put Macy Gray in the first Spiderman saying "Look everyone! It's Spiderman" I officially hated everything Sam Raimi will ever do again. Spiderman 3 is just the icing on the shit cake he started years ago. Enjoy your money fucker, now go away and let talented people make movies. Raimi is just disgusting garbage.
Merrick, ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!?!?!?!?! by Sinisterjim	May 9th, 2007 11:56:12 AM
"sloppy and disingenuous SPIDER-MAN 3 – and Raimi’s increasing lack of style" Spider-Man 3 may have some flaws, but it's SO FUCKING FAR from being as bad as this insane 'fan'-backlash makes it out to be! and the Raimi hating just cracks me up...this film has Raimi all over it, and any true fan can see his personal touch, especially in scenes like the bad Peter/dance sequence...that's Raimi's love of cinema displayed in a scene more inspired than just about any scene in the franchise! It's obvious that Raimi conects more with the Parker/Spidey from the 60's than the mostly souless Spider-Man from the last twenty or so years. His understanding of the character is clearly more intimate than most "fans" who think everything has to be dark and edgy to fulfil there own narrow, fetishistic mentality. The story is flawed, structural problems, the 3rd act, etc. However, Raimi's directing hand is one of the films saving grace's, he manages to keep a flawed script from overpowering by bringing his style and kinetic filmmaking to the fore front.
The Goblin Surfer vs. The Silver Surfer by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 11:57:39 AM
no thanks.
I think you'll like it cutest... by morGoth	May 9th, 2007 11:58:49 AM
...but compared to "The Hobbit," COH is a real downer. A truly tragic tale in the classical tradition of truly tragic tales. It's got some ass kicking Elves though and a really, really nasty dragon who lives via the spirit of Morgoth. Too bad Christopher Tolkien refuses to sell any movie rights to anything from "The Silmarillion" much less "Children of Hurin." All the morGettes are doing fine, thank'ee kindly. You going to start commuting?
Weir is a great director, by Colonel_Blimp	May 9th, 2007 11:59:43 AM
but is he to much of an auteur for this kind of project? Discuss. As for Spidey 3, I haven't seen such inept filmmaking come out of a major studio since Troy. And the problem wasn't the studio wanting more villains or more action or whatever. The multiple villains actually kinda sorta work (at least up until Venom and Sandman team up. "I hate spider-man cause he won't let me rob banks to save my daughter" Most contrived motivation ever). Actually, I would prefer some more studio-interference if this is what happens when Raimi gets loose reins. Shouldn't the studios have some sort of fail-safe mechanisms for these kinds of situations? And as for the writing...I'm a writer for a pretty crappy TV-soap, and my bosses would NEVER let me get away with the lazy, cliched plot contrivances that SM3 does. Oh, and the acting was shite also. And much of the music. And I thoroughly enjoyed the two first films, and had no desire to see this one fail. I'm ranting I know, I guess my point is that Raimi appears to have become a self indulgent and sloppy director, ie not the best choice for the hobbit.
Peter Weir has more talent in his right ear than Raimi by mmaddox3	May 9th, 2007 12:00:51 PM
Peter Weir is a brilliant pick to direct the hobbit....master & commander would have won dozens of awards had it not come out the same year as....return of the king. HE has an eye for beautiful cinematography, and can add so much depth to his characters, the events the run into and the palces they go to. perfect for middle earth. as far as raimi goes...spidey 3 was blah...and 6 words for the love of the game...bring us weir.
what the hell is wrong with you people?! by JacksonsPole	May 9th, 2007 12:01:28 PM
spiderman 3 was amazing! what is yer problem?! i feel like i'm taking crazy pills. i'm starting to feel like i never want to return to this site, again. i am awestruck by the sheer idiocracy of the opinions...
I'm a yank, morGoth... by Kid Z	May 9th, 2007 12:02:16 PM
...We wear "draws", not "knickers"! We also drive "trucks" instead of "lorries", eat "chips" with our lunch instead of "crisps"; put "relish" on our sandwiches instead of "pickle"; have "cookies" for dessert instead of "biscuits" and go to "bars" to "pick up chicks" instead of going to "pubs" to "pull birds". Basically, it's the same language you use in the UK... just less gay!
But it wasnt limp... by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 12:02:32 PM
Thats the thing....I think what happened was these "fans" (which makes me laugh since most spiderman fans of comic and previous movies LOVED the third one) just put it into their head that no matter what they are going to bitch and complain about this movie, they won't let themselves like it.
George Miller or Julie Taymor! by Calico Pete	May 9th, 2007 12:02:42 PM
Now that my suggestion of Peter Weir has been heard, hear my other candidates: br>George Miller (Babe 2 Pig in the City, Happy Feet, The Road Warrior... if that isn't the right fucking pedigree for this, I don't know what is); Julie Taymor (Titus, the SpiderMan musical, Across the Universe... style, visuals, uniqueness... Titus was amazing ferchrissakes... she'd be perfect!); Tarsem (The Cell, The Fall... people have described The Fall as being visually magnificent and so powerful in its sense of wonder that, well, The Hobbit is the next logical step)
Sinisterjim by trombone	May 9th, 2007 12:03:03 PM
OK you have a point. It's not ALL Raimi's fault. So who put that crappy omelette scene in there? And the Bridge scene? And the Sandman floating away on a cloud scene? And the telephone sequence? And all the crying? Who can I hate? It has to be SOMEONE's fault.
Dr.Connors still have a portion of the symbiote by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:03:21 PM
but who cares???!!
Merrick by Zarles	May 9th, 2007 12:04:05 PM
What does this sentence mean? "As far as I’m concerned, this is a troubling choice give the sloppy and disingenuous SPIDER-MAN 3 – and Raimi’s increasing lack of style." Huh?
Here's who should direct "The Hobbit" by The Central Scrutinizer	May 9th, 2007 12:04:27 PM
If Peter Jackson is REALLY out of the picture they should get Terry Gilliam. Anyone who's seen "Time Bandits" or "Baron Münchhausen" knows what I'm talkin' about. Although there was that partial disaster "The Brothers Grimm".
Peter Jackson or Boycott by mikegator	May 9th, 2007 12:05:12 PM
The bottom line is this. Everyone who invested their time and hard earned dollars in the first three films (theater/DVD) expect a similar work product or they just won't pay. Personally, I think New Line is making a grave error here. They aren't thinking of the fans, they are thinking of profits. These profits won't be anywhere near as high as if Peter Jackson makes the film. Period. If New Line goes through with choosing any other director than Peter Jackson, I will boycott the movie. I may just be 1 fan, but I will never forgive pettiness of this magnitude. This isn't elementary school New Line, settle your differences and get him on board or you lose a fan and gain extra bad word of mouth.
morGoth by cutest_of_borg	May 9th, 2007 12:06:17 PM
I imagine wifey and I will visit once in a while during the semester but don't want to cramp her style. My chief job will be ferrying home for holidays as freshmen cannot drive/park on campus. Beautiful drive from VB, btw. Rolling hills and farmland the entire way. Already looking forward to the drive in Autumn when the leaves are changing. What do you think of the rumored LOTR prequel? Can there be that much going on to fill a 3 hour film? Oh, sure there is the whole Gandalf-White Council stuff and the meeting with Aragorn and - oh yeah! - Dol Guldur scene but really. How are they going to sell it to the mass audience?
Colonel_Blimp by trombone	May 9th, 2007 12:08:23 PM
Thank you for the confirmation. So it really was Raimi? Part of me hoped I could blame it on the execs and contracts. ie Kirsten Dunst says she'll only be in the movie if she can sing for 10 minutes on screen. Or Arad says "we have to have Venom".
Macy Gray... by Kid Z	May 9th, 2007 12:08:41 PM
... didn't even have lines... she just stopped singing, opened her mouth as if to catch a fly and lowered her shades down her nose and looked up like a homeless methhead about to be rolled by an LA cop. Besides, if you've ever heard Macy Gray talk, you'll be glad she had no lines. "Look, it's Spider-Man!" would've come out of her mouth as "Looh, 'z' Spy-Muhh!"
Raimi is the new Bret Ratner by kafka07	May 9th, 2007 12:10:30 PM
I'll take Peter Weir over Raimi anyday. It's so strange, I never thought I'd come to hate Raimi. I now feel like anything he'll touch will turn to shit.
Terry Gilliam needs therapy by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:11:12 PM
Baron Münchhausen or whatever it's weird and "I hate spider-man cause he won't let me rob banks to save my daughter" that's a good one
For now, don't make the Hobbit. by Jakes Nel	May 9th, 2007 12:11:53 PM
Weir is one of the all-time great directors, better even than Jackson, in my opinion. And his Hobbit would certainly be fascinating, but I just don't see him as a summer blockbuster kind of director. M&C is the closest he's come to making a blockbuster and that's probably the way it'll stay. Raimi seems in some ways an obvious choice, but I'd much rather have him do Evil Dead 4. And the words 'imitative'and 'exploitative' do come to mind. Jackson is still the first choice, but please let the man move on to other things. 2 Films is asking a lot. So for now, keep looking, New Line. And if you don't find anyone, please don't rush in and give it to some wannabe. Take your time on this.
Damn you Avi Arad by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:13:42 PM
damn you again.
a grain of sand? by newc0253	May 9th, 2007 12:13:53 PM
i'd take it with the entire fucking gobi desert, personally. Weir's a great director but in his entire career he's never done anything remotely close to this type of film (and to say that Master & Commander is the closest he's come only underscores that). It sounds like fanboys are just emailing in any old speculation at this point, and AICN are running with it.
I'd rather see Weir, Jackson, and Raimi develop... by stlfilmwire	May 9th, 2007 12:16:09 PM
...films based on new material.
Master and Commander by Mr Gorilla	May 9th, 2007 12:16:43 PM
I wish Peter Weir could make two more of these. Would remind everyone that you can have a films series set on boats without having to resort to supernatural mumbo jumbo and a lead actor who winks at the camera every 10 seconds.
Jakes Nel by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2007 12:18:12 PM
That's just it: New Line can't afford to take their time. They have to rush this puppy into production or else the rights revert back to Saentz (I believe) and they lose out on what will most surely be a dragon's hoard of box office ca$h.
HAHAHA by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:18:25 PM
Macy Gray hahahahaha........
being fair to Spidey 3 by Mr Gorilla	May 9th, 2007 12:18:47 PM
It's above average - but it doesn't do justice to the investment Raimi and the viewers had put into the characters and world in the first two films.
This level of Raimi bashing seems uncalled for by Caped Revenger2	May 9th, 2007 12:21:44 PM
How disappointing it is that everyone here is so quick to turn on someone. Spider-Man 3 showed grace, style and originality. The bar has been set very high with these movies - unlike LOTR, this isn't a series with a built-in astounding finish. It must just continue on. It's like reading Amazing Spider-Man #15 and saying that it's not as good as ASM #4. There are natural diminishing returns in a movie series that is not based on a finite story, such as LOTR or the HARRY POTTER series. Considering that, I thought Raimi did a lot to make the movie original and interesting, and not the least of that was with the nightclub sequence, which had a lot of style and humor to it, that still didn't betray the overall tone of the first two movies. It's not like the jazz club scene is the equivalent of Richard Pryor in Superman III. The singing, in my view, adds class to the picture, and is appropriate considering its New York setting. This movie is anything but tone deaf - that would be X3 or the FF movies. And now everyone wants to string up Raimi. I thought Hollywood itself was bad about tossing someone out after one perceived mistep. Raimi did wonders with a comic book character whose style and tenor are incredibly hard to pull off, and he made a multi-billion movie series that appealed to people of all ages throughout the world, and stayed about as close to the spirit of the original comics and character as anyone could ever reasonably expect. To disavow him now, and as thoroughly as can be evidenced here, is extremely disappointing. I think Raimi would be at least as good as Jackson at pulling off another Tolkien movie, and he would find a way to strike a balance between drama and humor, wildly imaginative fantasy and mainstream accessibility - just as he has already done.
Kid Z... by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 12:22:46 PM
Im a yankee yankee.. and Actually I do go to pubs in NY, we call them either or... and I don't wear draws, thats what 80 year old woman call what i wear... I wear pants. And I know alot of people who say pickle for relish... none english...
youignorantgeeks! by avs28785	May 9th, 2007 12:24:06 PM
Dude, you see eddie brock's skeletal structure when the bomb goes off. The only symbiote left is the shit connors has. But no eddie brock cuz he is definately dead. The movie wasn't good and it wasn't bad, it was blah. I was very dissapointed. I wanted to love this movie. It was just too cheesy. Everything felt forced. Everyone is focusing on the bad right now because its a shock. They wanted great. Don't say all the geeks loved it because we are the geeks
I get by avs28785	May 9th, 2007 12:25:07 PM
the star trek thing and i totally fucking agree. Peter Weir would be an interseting choice.
Sam Raimi was compelled to rewrite ... by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:26:49 PM
his badass original script in order to please Avi but not the fans about Venom (Spiderman 4 someone)?
Fine... most of the geeks loved it by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 12:27:11 PM
And I meant geeks as in... well not GEEKS geeks, but geeks. LOl... if that made sense. Like Im not a geek, but im a geek for certain things like Buffy... I mean those type of people.
Children of Hobbits by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 12:29:13 PM
Cuaron would be a fantastic choice too. his was the best Potter.and he doesnt have the hack factor that jackson and Raimi has...
I apologize for Raimi-bashing (oh, and thanks MNG!) by chrth	May 9th, 2007 12:29:31 PM
I just couldn't resist. And you have to admit the Sandyman connection by itself was enough to spur satire.
Not Cuaron, please by chrth	May 9th, 2007 12:32:49 PM
While I agree Azkaban was the best of the Potter films, the Hobbit does not possess the pathos that Cuaron excels at drawing out. I'd go so far as to say Chris Columbus would be a better choice for the Hobbit than Cuaron. Of course, it's all moot anyway. There's no way the film would be better than the Rankin-Bass production.
trombone by Colonel_Blimp	May 9th, 2007 12:33:12 PM
yes, it's raimi's fault. and the "I can't believe it's not Akiva"-writer. I thought I'd never say it, but that movie needed to be more streamlined, more Hollywood if you will. In a movie that's already stretching it's running time, I would rather have some scenes trying to cover over the gaping holes in plot and motivation than ten minute sing and dance and piano-jam routines and overlong "comic"reliefs such as the little girl with the camera and JJJameson. How hard would it be to edit that out when EVERYONE can see it's just overdone and poorly executed? I can't think of any other word than self indulgence. Which is the same problem King Kong had. Which makes me think that maybe PJ's not the best man for Hobbit either. Del Toro would rock! (see how I brought that back on topic, there?)
Sam Raimi is a good director... by BrooseTheScharuk	May 9th, 2007 12:35:46 PM
...of schlock. And I really mean that as a compliment. He knows how to go right over the top with cheesy excess and broad humour. Having said that, A Simple Plan was a very successful exercise in restraint for him (and also my favourite Raimi for that reason). In general, though, when you want More! More! More! Raimi is a guy who will deliver. I refuse to give Spiderman 3 my money, because it is clearly a paycheck for everyone involved, and I no longer sacrifice my hard-earned funds to take a chance on a movie just because a marketing team waves pretty colours and lights in my face and says "come on...you like this stuff" (and- being a huge nerd- I do "like this stuff"). As far as the Hobbit goes, I think Raimi would fuck it up. I think he would take a story that's supposed to feel like a long, eventful journey and turn it into "a race against time, with the future of a world hanging in the balance", or some such thing. And when it tried to be funny, it would try too hard. As a matter of fact, as much as I love LOTR (and that's a lot!), I think Peter Jackson would do pretty much the same thing, treating it as a "prequel" to his original trilogy- full of lame references and unnecessary cameos- and it would feel like little more than a somewhat better version of something George Lucas might shit out to expand his revenue-generating "property". In order to do that, he would have to give it some of the tone of LOTR, and THAT, my friends, is NOT The Hobbit. I don't want to hear ominous echoes of the ring's theme in the score every time Bilbo gazes at the magic jewelry in his hand. The Hobbit is a lighthearted kiddies tale with a few scary bits. What made LOTR- the book, I mean- cool was that it peeled back that layers of cheerful adventure and revealed a much darker and more desperate situation. It said "remember that funny little story about the little man and his magical little ring? Well, it turns out it's not so funny after all." The opportunity to pull that on the audience is- sadly- gone. In a world where The Hobbit and LOTR will both end up as movies, Jackson put the cart before the horse, dramatically speaking. That's not a criticism at all, because- in a world where only one Tolkien adaptation got made into a film- it would have to be LOTR. Having said all that, I think that the only hope of having any of that distinction in style and tone between Hobbit and LOTR that would have been there- along with that dramatic shift in mood that you get from reading the books in order- you need someone fresh, who is maybe not so beholden to the rings movies. I would be thrilled out of my mind if Peter Weir got his hands on it. He's one of the best filmmakers around, in my opinion. And if you look at his earlier Australian work- which no one seems to have mentioned here- you will see that even the Voyager company who do the Criterion Collection dvd's (and- some years ago- laserdiscs) thinks so. Picnic At Hanging Rock, The Last Wave, Gallipoli, and- yes- Master and Commander, are among my favourite movies ever. Can he do humour? Did you see The Truman Show? Certainly, his sense of whimsy is in full play there (I said whimsy, not flat-out hilarity). I also think that Weir would give us a much more real "you are there" sense of Middle Earth, with lots of dirt and texture. I think it might play more "real" than anything the other two might pull off. Sure, it would be seriously awesome if Guillermo Del Toro got on board, but that's never going to happen.
This is for you Avi ... by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:36:25 PM
............../´¯/)......... ..(\¯`\ ............/....//........... ...\\....\ .........../....//............ ....\\....\ ...../´¯/..../´¯\......... ../¯`\....\¯`\ .././.../..../..../.\|_......_\| .\....\....\...\.\.. (.(....(....(..../.)..)..(..(. \....)....)....).) .\................\/.../....\. ..\/................/ ..\................. /........\................../ ....\..............(.......... ..)............../ ......\.............\......... ../............./
MARTIN FREEMAN!!! by Gilkuliehe	May 9th, 2007 12:36:50 PM
Peter Weir rules. Now get Freeman to play Bilbo and make a kick-ass kiddie film. Come on you all know it, THE HOBBIT is no LORD OF THE RINGS.
OH! Didn't work by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:38:43 PM
Damn
Wait, MattyBoomStar, because of one ten-second sequence by Lenny Nero	May 9th, 2007 12:41:44 PM
you hate an entire director's canon of work forever? Now that, good sir, is absolutely ridiculous. How much joy are you denying yourself because of ONE STUPID THING?
Venom... by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 12:43:48 PM
I was fine with him... Is it similar to the comic... well no, but neither is organic webbing, the goblin suit, etc... It was a good venom.
PJ should not do the Hobbit by HornOrSilk	May 9th, 2007 12:47:42 PM
There are many issues as to why. First, the Hobbit is supposed to be written by a different author and a different feel from the Lord of the Rings. A new director would provide this very well. Secondly, Peter Jackson would mess it up -- he wouldn't be able to keep it as it is; he messed things up in the LOTR saying Tolkien was a hack author... and yet all the changes made for a worse plot and some of the worst contrivances ever. Now Raimi I think would still fit the spirit of the Hobbit, and since it is based upon a book and not creating a story out of nowhere, he would create a satisfying version of the film. However if not him, I say they should get Miyazaki to do a live action directorial debut..
gay hobbits by darwinwins	May 9th, 2007 12:48:44 PM
i don't care if the hobbits were gay or not, but when it gets to the point that in every scene, your friends and you're wondering or yelling at the screen, "KISS! KISS! KISS!" it really adds to the humor value. the action scenes are fun still but the movies as a whole just can't be rewatched. fuck 'em hobbits, fucke em hard.
Kirstin Dunst as Gandalf!!!!!!!!!!!!!! by Forestal	May 9th, 2007 12:49:28 PM
Emo Bilbo!!!!!!!! Come on, Raimi, let's drive another franchise into the ground!
Norbit was "the best James Bond film" in many years by ScreamingPenis	May 9th, 2007 12:51:08 PM
think about it before you respond.
He didnt drive it into ground by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 12:51:45 PM
3 great spidey movies isnt driving it into ground..
The reporter sequences sucks by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 12:52:07 PM
sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!big time. That old man in the tv news looks stupid!!
Yeah 3 great spidey movies..... by Forestal	May 9th, 2007 12:54:15 PM
If you like your Spider-Man trilogy ending with an emo musical as its 3rd movie.
I just got off the phone with Peter Weir by ATARI	May 9th, 2007 12:56:02 PM
and he says that this story is a bunch of sh*t.
Gilkuliehe... by BrooseTheScharuk	May 9th, 2007 12:57:46 PM
You are absolutely right!! I have been mulling over who might play Bilbo forever, and you just hit the nail right on the head. Martin Freeman! Brilliant!!
Emo Musical? by YouIgnorantGeeks	May 9th, 2007 01:00:44 PM
how do you figure that?!!?!?
Spiderman Trilogy DVD SET !!! by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 01:00:55 PM
with a polystone figure of Peter Parker crying like a bitch. $99.99 please.
Cuaron by Automaton Overlord	May 9th, 2007 01:03:01 PM
I agree, piper. Y tu mama tambien had that deep hypnotic feel that makes you actualy care about the characters and their situation, and with with Prisoner of Azkaban being so strong and faithfull as an adaptation of a well loved book. Cuaron's definitley got the chops for the hobbit.
"Pubs" in the States... by Kid Z	May 9th, 2007 01:03:31 PM
... Are usually those fake-ass "Irish pubs" with lots of shamrock decor, no actual Irish people, some moron with a guitar doing bad acoustic renditions of old Pogues songs, and lots of that goddawful, watered-down, second-rate, made expressly for export fakeGuiness. Places to be avoided at all costs. And 80 year old grannies wear compression hose, not "draws"!
El Hobbito...? by Bone-In Foray	May 9th, 2007 01:16:56 PM
Not sure if anyone has brought this up yet, but how 'bout Guillermo Del Toro taking the reigns? He seems like a talented young man, and I really think he's really going places.
them hobbits was gay dammit by darwinwins	May 9th, 2007 01:21:15 PM
at least they might as well have been. "oh sam!" "oh frodo!" even my gay friends agreed that them hobbits might as well have made out on screen. then that last shot of them bouncing on the bed. that was the kicker.
Both Jackson and Rami by Fabulous Freak	May 9th, 2007 01:22:25 PM
need to work on original material instead of resurrecting/ re-envisioning old shiat. Get Weir on board, or somebody else who will be sufficiently intimidated enough to be inventive and humble in the approach.
Gregory Hoblit by palimpsest	May 9th, 2007 01:28:35 PM
Just for the puns.
YouIgnorantGeeks by trombone	May 9th, 2007 01:28:41 PM
You have to back up the Spider-Man 3 is "great". What else goes in your "great" category, YIG?
Fucking Turncoat by antonphd	May 9th, 2007 01:31:23 PM
One not perfect movie of a super hero after a career of amazing work and suddenly it's "Raimi’s increasing lack of style" time now? It's one goddamn movie. Give me a break. THAT was just fucked up.
darwinwins by 300 monkeys	May 9th, 2007 01:32:25 PM
You can still watch the awesome Two Towers, as most of the insanely over-the-top male bonding business is in the last part of Fellowship and all over that messy Return of the King. Never struck me as particularly gay, but I agree that Fellowship is impossible to watch because of Sam & Frodo. "Oh, Sam! You are so good and true!" (Never mind how badly they mangled Sam's character: he's supposed to be a little guy, so that his confrontations with Gollum were actual acts of courage instead of the bullying they appeared to be onscreen, to Frodo and to all the rest of us. I have nothing against Sean Astin, but he was THE worst possible choice.)
Thinking about it, though... by palimpsest	May 9th, 2007 01:33:20 PM
1) Jackson, 2) Cuaron, 3) Gilliam, 4) Matthew Vaughn, depending on the reaction to STARDUST, 5) Weir (nice idea, though) 6) Raimi (he really doesn't need this kind of franchise right now, though. Back to the woods and find yourself, Samuel). Hollywood being what it is, Rob Cohen will probably get the gig. If anyone has any real balls outh there, though, they'd give John Boorman the job. EXCALIBUR 2: GOBLIN BOOGALOO, anyone..?
sam raimi's issue by darwinwins	May 9th, 2007 01:36:13 PM
why is spidey emo in the movies? why can't we have smartass spidey without the emo issues? christ, he's like a cry baby child who wasn't hit enough. aunt may can go die in a fire. they overplay those scenes way too much. every time she comes on screen, i want to reach into the screen and choke the life out of her old saggy body.
ron howard by darwinwins	May 9th, 2007 01:42:43 PM
he brought us WILLOW! plus that movie had a lot of midgets in it.
Peter Weir is a great director by CuervoJones	May 9th, 2007 01:43:05 PM
I love Picnic at Hanging Rock. That movie is so creepy.
george lucas by darwinwins	May 9th, 2007 01:44:38 PM
why not, right? i mean he makes three absolute pieces of crap and alllll of you saw it anyway. and i hate every one of you for it.
JACKSON SUCKS BALLS!!! by wolvenom	May 9th, 2007 01:48:01 PM
Fuck jackson and the bag of money he rode in on. He can go shove gold and diamond encrusted broom up his butt all the way to tim-buck-too. That greedy fucking sycophantic "I CREATED LORD OF THE RINGS!" bullshit master. TOLKIEN FUCKING CREATED LORD OF THE RINGS... all Peter 'moneybags' Jackson did was transcribe it to film taking only the juicey parts while using some kickass cgi and special effects... Us fucking tolkien lovers who've read the trilogy a dozen times love him because he did what is the simplest fucking thing for any director to do (but so many fuck up doing it) thats adapting a book to screen by paying respect to what made it so popular in the first place. As long as we get a director that acknowledges what made the hobbit so popular in the first place (ie a magical children's book that transported many young peoples imaginations into a beautifully immersive world of dragons, dwarves, wizards, and hobbits)then we have nothing to worry about. THIS IS A FUCKING GREAT SIGN THAT THEY'RE COURTING THE GUY WHO DID MASTER AND COMMANDER BECAUSE FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD HE FUCKING STAYED TRUE TO WHAT MADE THOSE BOOKS SO POPULAR IN THE FIRST PLACE BY STUDYING THE CHARACTERS AND STAYING TRUE TO THE STORY.... SAM RAIMI IS A GOOD CHOICE TOO BASED ON THE FIRST TWO SPIDERMANS BECAUSE HE PAID RESPECT TO THE SOURCE OF WHY SPIDERMAN IS HELD TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST COMIC HEROES EVER... UNFORTUNATELY SAM RETARD RAIMI FUCKED THAT UP WHEN HE DID SPIDERMAN 3.. he ran out of fuel and fucked up not only venom's character, but peter parker's reason for being spiderman, sandman's imcomprehensible motives, and making maryjane a retard by breaking up with peter as some kind of fucking revenge for harry? LIKE THAT MAKES ANY FUCKING SENSE... everyone in the fucking theatre laughed at that part,... like she cant send him a signal or something or tell him at the bar when he's acting all emo? THE FUCKING EMO PART! DONT GET ME STARTED ON THE EMO PART!! Probably cause he doesn't like venom very much..he's still a fucking jerk for treating venom so poorly
PETER JACKSON by Mr_X	May 9th, 2007 01:53:16 PM
well i thought king dong was self indulgent. but he knows the tolkein universe. Why on middle-earth would you mess up a good thing? think about this greedy execs, the lord of the ring trilogy is the only trilogy that didn't turn to complete shit. With him at the helm he completely delivered pay him mofos
I DONT WANT TO SEE AN EPIC HOBBIT MOVIE! by wolvenom	May 9th, 2007 01:56:21 PM
I want to see a fucking hobbit movie that pays respect to the source. If peter jackson gets his greedy sticky fingerson on the hobbit then all we're going to get is another lord of the rings... HOBBIT IS NOT LORD OF THE RINGS! GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEADS JACKSON LOVERS!!! hobbit should me more like a harry potter movie... light hearted for the most part, some seriousness and gravita, but mostly light hearted awe inspiring. It should be an introduction to the world of middle-earth not some fucking epic garbage like LOTR ... I dont want to see the battle of five armies get drawn out for 3 hours while completely ignoring what bilbo is doing during that time.... I dont want to see a fucking cut away to what sauron and sauruman are doing in mirkwood (you can hint at it because its hinted at at the end of the book) and i dont want to see the ring taking over bilbo like its making him all evil and shit cause it never does in the hobbit..... I want to see THE TRICKSTER BILBO BAGGINS... not the DRUG ADDICTED LEPPER BILBO BAGGINS... you get that through your thick heads JACKSON LOVERS?
What Raimi should do now is... by trombone	May 9th, 2007 02:00:15 PM
A Stallone style AICN interview. He might, just might, win some respect back for standing up and facing the Geek-music
I want the original script of spiderman 3!!! by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 02:01:27 PM
I'm sure there is no Venom. Full Sandman all the time!! and of course no crying and dance stuff. DAMN YOU Avi Arad.
ludmir88 by trombone	May 9th, 2007 02:03:00 PM
THAT is a GREAT idea. I want to see it too. So it's possible Raimi just did a hissy about them not trusting him?
Or shoud THE HOBBIT be by palimpsest	May 9th, 2007 02:03:30 PM
What CARAVAN OF COURAGE was to STAR WARS? Discuss...!
GOOD POINT about the caravan of courage by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 02:07:51 PM
but that sucked like star wars. mehh
10 reasons why New Line NEEDS PJ to direct the Hobbit by melanarus	May 9th, 2007 02:09:46 PM
Here is a list of 20 reasons why New line must get Peter Jackson to direct the Hobbit: 1- Getting any actors back to do the Hobbit like for Gandalf or Gollum. 2- Weta for creating the effects, designs and making of everything in middle earth. (Who the heck do New Line plan on getting to design and CG for the film anyways?) 3- the Saul Zaentz Company owns Tolkien Enterprises and Saul also owns distribution rights for the Hobbit and wants PJ. 4- Getting the writing team to write the Hobbit and the LOTR prequel. 5- Getting Howard Shore for the soundtrack. (Basically getting ANYONE involved from the LOTR trilogy is not going to happen.) 6- Filming in New Zealand. Let's just say the Hobbit might not be welcome to film there without PJ and company. 7- Merchandising. The LOTR was merchandised heavily and the Hobbit will probably not be very successful here without a really good, beloved movie. 8- Movie goers making mulitple viewings of the film at the theater and buying the multiple DVD sets. I'd see the Hobbit movie once in the theater but probably not buy the 2-dvd set and the 4 dvd special edition of the movie. 9- What happens when Wingnut films (PJ) wins the lawsuit against New Line and they look like assholes and didn't let PJ and crew do the Hobbit. WTF! 10- Why the heck take the risk and trouble to get another director and all the people involved with the LOTR and location, tried and true formula justs seems like the right idea. How the hell can New Line can and it's President (or Vice) Michael Lynne can think this is a good idea, it's not!
Alright, whose got the fuckin' ouija board? by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2007 02:10:10 PM
Cause wolvenom must be channeling Ringwearer9. Goddamn. Astral-project much, ass?
Id be very surprised if they couldn't get Ian Mckellen by wolvenom	May 9th, 2007 02:15:03 PM
back for the hobbit without Peter Jackson... I know the bs where he's said he wouldn't do it without peter jackson but seriously come on?!?! how fucking close were they really? As long as they throw a whole shit load of money at ian mckellen I'm sure he's going to do it.... even if he doesn't who gives a shit... they got someone new for dumbledore they can get someone new for gandalf.
MNG: I was thinking the same thing by chrth	May 9th, 2007 02:15:13 PM
Except for the 'ass' part, I'm not one to criticize without provocation.
I'm not ringwearer9 by wolvenom	May 9th, 2007 02:16:20 PM
you peter jackson lovers and your conspiracies
wolvenom by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2007 02:19:11 PM
They got someone new for Dumbledork because Richard Harris FUCKIN' DIED. And it's interesting to see that you think so little of Sir Ian McKellen that he would jump up and down on one leg for a "whole shit load of money".
after all they're not going to have ian holmes back... by wolvenom	May 9th, 2007 02:20:28 PM
so wouldn't it be strange with ian mckellen back? its like making a spidey 4 with kirsten dunst and no tobey mgguire...
Don't die Ian McKellen by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 02:21:12 PM
not yet.!!!!!!
Dumb comparison by MetiphisLabs	May 9th, 2007 02:22:28 PM
Comparing Spiderman 3 to Batman and Robbin loses you all of your film judging cred immediately when you say it. It's a stupid extremist reactionary thing to do and really seperates the smart thinkers from the knee jerk, thoughtless goons that say it. Also in the Spiderman comics Venom could regenerate fully if just a little tiny piece of him was left. So cut the Venom died whining out soon ok?
chrth by Mr. Nice Gaius	May 9th, 2007 02:22:42 PM
Ha! Yeah, sorry about the "ass" part.
M&S / Raimi Bashing by roachy	May 9th, 2007 02:24:54 PM
First off. WOW! I never thought of comparing the two but when you think about it, it IS the best Star Trek movie in ages. Now, while I personally don't condone the level of Raimi bashing going around, I do think with all the creative freedom he had, he should have stuck to his guns(and not Avi Arads) and left Venon and the whole black suit storyline out. It just didn't work. Not one bit. I think Topher Grace was a fine Venon and what not but with considering how little he was involved in the plot as a whole and the way they handled Venon talking, they definitely should have left it out. Kudos go to Raimi for managing to still make such a packed story coherant though.
Master & Commander by odysseus	May 9th, 2007 02:25:35 PM
Awesome (and underappreciated) movie, with a great director.
Somebody explain that comparison!!!! by ludmir88	May 9th, 2007 02:29:32 PM
don't get it!!!
Jackson/Hobbit by odysseus	May 9th, 2007 02:29:52 PM
I do fear that if Jackson tackles HOBBIT, he may not bring the same creative brio he did to LOTR. Remember, the once-heralded Raimi is now being accused of creative burnout on SPIDEY 3. Besides, Jackson's far from perfect -- witness his clunky, indulgent KING KONG.
Star Trek comparison by naked_mandy	May 9th, 2007 02:44:55 PM
Damn, that's actually really apt. Of course, as Nicholas Meyer loves to point out, Star Trek was inspired by Horatio Hornblower. But also, the Aubrey/Maturin relationship is reminiscent of Kirk/Spock, especially with Maturin going off to collect all the scientific samples. The battles and tactics are not far removed from Star Trek. Yeah, too bad "Nemesis" was about 8% as good as "Master and Commander."
Raimi recap by MetiphisLabs	May 9th, 2007 02:45:40 PM
Evil Dead 1 (Amazing, innovative!) Evil Dead 2 (Innovative again and with Humor this time!) Army of Darkness (Cult Classic, Spawned numerous catch phrases) Darkman (Not the most popular Raimi outing, but not bad either) Simple Plan (Brilliant film, a classic) Spiderman 1 (In the upper echelons of comic book movie adaptations in terms of quality) Spiderman 2 (Considered one of the best comic book movies of all time by far more than think otherwise) Spiderman 3 (Dissapointing to our expectations! FUCK Raimi and all of his past accomplishments, burn him at the stake, wipe away everything waaaa waaaa Raimi is a monster) You sound like spoiled brats, seriously, cut the guy some fucking slack. Frankly he's a more amazing storyteller than all of his detractors here. He wins.
oh, and Peter Jackson... by naked_mandy	May 9th, 2007 02:47:35 PM
Peter Jackson MUST come back for this. Even though his sensibility might be a little too bizarre and dark for a story as light as "The Hobbit" (and the same can be said for Raimi - both started as low-budget horror-comedy directors, after all), PJ OWNS the film Middle-Earth. It would just feel wrong having someone else in there. I want to see Jackson's Bag End, and McKellan and Weaving, Jackson's Rivendell, and so forth.
Raimi should be held accountable because... by jslstrauss	May 9th, 2007 02:48:38 PM
Spiderman 3 is one of the most expensive movies ever made, and just like Superman Returns last year, the studio let it become the director's pet project. You can sit there and say that he loves the character of Spiderman and knows more about his inner-workings than most anyone else, but the fact remains that people aren't paying to see a Sam Raimi movie - they are paying to see a Spiderman movie. Go on and complain all you want, but in Spiderman 3 his direction ceased to be a style and became self-indulgent. If Peter Parker's turn to the dark side - as they are hailing it in the media - was supposed to induce laughter at every turn, then I guess they succeeded. But when I saw this movie last Thursday night at midnight, the feeling of disappointment was palpable. Nobody could take this shit seriously. There was a smattering of applause when the credits rolled, but most everyone was talking about how silly and stupid half the scenes in the film were - and how heavy-handed all the "dramatic" moments were. Raimi had a fucking obligation to make this movie as good as it was big, and he failed in most every respect. And why? Because he forgot this was a highly-anticipated blockbuster, and directed instead a personal, inconsistent, incongruous piece of shit. Quit being a fucking apologist because you like the man's other work. You and I both know that if any "lesser" director were to pull this horseshit you'd be on this board typing your goddamn brains out like the rest of us. I'm a fan of Raimi's other work, but I'm willing to admit he royally screwed this one up. And don't tell me I can't feel cheated because I didn't read the comic books or yada-yada-yada, the fact that this was a comic book movie doesn't excuse its poor execution. Toss this one into the shockingly disappointing bin right after Batman & Robin and Superman Returns.
B by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 02:49:52 PM
Oh i think there's plenty of pathos for Quaron to work on in the story of the Hobbit. It might be a simple story but there's a lot of things going on underneath the surface. Columbu's films lack character in my opinion. And i believe most any possible versions would be better than the Rankin-Bass one... Martin Freeman would be perfect as Bilbo man, great idea! And right, whoever does it better not try to change the story to make it more epic or include material that wasnt in the book or all us Tolkienintes will certainly go rabid.
Bilbo Freeman!!! by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 02:50:10 PM
Oh i think there's plenty of pathos for Quaron to work on in the story of the Hobbit. It might be a simple story but there's a lot of things going on underneath the surface. Columbu's films lack character in my opinion. And i believe most any possible versions would be better than the Rankin-Bass one... Martin Freeman would be perfect as Bilbo man, great idea! And right, whoever does it better not try to change the story to make it more epic or include material that wasnt in the book or all us Tolkienintes will certainly go rabid.
NEW HOBBIT by Darth Melkor	May 9th, 2007 02:53:08 PM
With a new director, and probably a new Bilbo, and the lack of Peter Jackson's effects company, they should just make the Hobbit a stand alone film, not try to link it to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. All new actors, all new everything.
morGoth?¿Why is the dragon nasty? by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 02:55:52 PM
"a really, really nasty dragon who lives via the spirit of Morgoth." Could you please elaborate? What do you mean lives via the spirit of Morgoth? Why is it more nasty than other dragons? sounds intriguing...
Peter Jackson for JLA! by UltimaRex	May 9th, 2007 02:55:58 PM
Or Peter Weir considering all the love being heaped on him for being made into a alterative for Raimi. Come on. Does any of Weir's movies say "Hobbit" to any of you? Plus, Weir has Shadow Divers for 2009 so if New Line needs a 2009 Hobbit its Jackson or Raimi. Make your bets...
Weir has always been my first choice for The Hobbit by Cameron1	May 9th, 2007 03:14:25 PM
Jackson would make it too sombre, too much slow-mo and he'd tack on a fucking romance too. Raimi has proven he can't handle large casts. He's pretty fantastic with a small cast and an average budget but when he's got a big cast and a lot of story to cover he seems to mess it up. The Hobbit should move at a rollicking pace it'll still have to be 3 hours to do it any kind of justice but it' a fast, fun children's story at the end of the day.
McKellen is the only Gandalf by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 03:15:37 PM
i dont see anybody doing that role better. Or most other roles either. Did anybody see him as Richard the third? He was so impressive it made the hairs on my neck stand up. Its also got to be made in New Zealand, and with Weta of course. I say Quaron, Vaughn or Del Toro directs, with Jackson as producer. That means settling with the man, New Line!
without Jackson there's no point... by SoylentMean	May 9th, 2007 03:18:40 PM
It will fail like Kirsten Dunst's dental work (was there ever any done, is she British?) While we're kinda on the topic of Peter Jackson where the hell is the deluxe , super awesome Dead Alive edition on DVD, HD-DVD, or Blue Ray? The one that's available stateside is frickin' double sided for crying out softly!
THIS YEAR'S LITTLE MISS STAR TREK: NEMESIS!!! by Err	May 9th, 2007 03:19:35 PM
And just as crappy!
Ratner by Frank Black	May 9th, 2007 03:21:21 PM
Has a pretty open schedule. His next film with Chris Tucker and Eddie Murphy seems far off. Watch New Line dangle him a carrot so he can destroy The Hobbit like he did X-Men. They better swallow their pride and get Jackson back (on that note I hear people defend Kin Kong all of the time but I never hear from anyone who LOVE IT! I did not and preferred ALL of the previous Kongs to his, so...)
colonel blimp by Cameron1	May 9th, 2007 03:25:07 PM
re: Weir being too much of an Auteur...hmm I wouldn't say so reallt. Master and Commander proves he can handle a big studio picture with complicated large scale sequnces, he can create an enitrely believable world in a setting that is very far removed from modern life and he has gift for beautiful visuals. I can understand what you mean but I think he's got enough experience nowadays to tackle this kind of project. And I always thought Jamie Bell would make a good Bilbo, he'd get that jumpy nervousness slowly being replaced by experience and smarts and courage he didn't know he had.
George Miller George Miller George Miller George Miller by Calico Pete	May 9th, 2007 03:26:34 PM
Seriously. None of you has anything to say about this absolutely perfect choice?!?!
sam (the man) raimi stop with the raimi bashing by the_mighty_boosh	May 9th, 2007 03:37:11 PM
what is going on with the raimi bashing? every one wants to get a grip why cant we njoy films for what they are, sam raimi made a good movie not great no but strong enough to take 151 million opening weekend why do we have critique every movie every camera angle every effect, sam raimi is a talent and always has been. why can we not njoy films for films sake like we did when we where kids we went in with no illusions just to see a film we wanted to see because the poster looked cool or you'ed seen the trailer or was by a director you loved that was it and nine times out of ten you came away satisfied happy and lookin forward to the video release all every one wants to see is flashy effects all style over content no heart, spiderman 3 had the flash but had a li'l heart toyes it was a bit of a mess in partsand some stuff seemed a li'l shoe horned in but raimi never wanted a venom movie the geeks did the studio put the preassure on he caved simple as take away venom it would have been a classic the sand man stuff was touching so was the harry stuff it had heart,the action set pieces look amazing to the film is flawed true but raimi is still a fantastic director and will go on to make more great movies if he does the hobbit great but we want another evildead movie!! all i'm saying really is lets get back to our inner child where films are concerened just watch and njoy dont critersize films are fun good or bad just enjoy and all go see this is england the little film that can..
and also by the_mighty_boosh	May 9th, 2007 03:43:33 PM
at least it wasn't another x-men 3 that was not a great film i njoyed it but was dissapointed why because it had no heart the others did nuff said
Oh well by ricarleite	May 9th, 2007 03:48:27 PM
... as long as Bilbo gets emo and do a little piano and acrobatic dance move, we'll be fine. Right? Right. Oh God, movie pictures are dead.
poeticwarriorII... by Damned if I can login	May 9th, 2007 03:51:14 PM
Tell it like it is. man! Beautiful.
Emo... by BrooseTheScharuk	May 9th, 2007 04:06:32 PM
...is a term coined by emotionally stunted TV-bots who can't relate to any human qualities besides greed, self-preservation, covetousness, sadistic voyeurism, vengefulness, and indifferent detachment. If there were more "whiney" people out there, who actually felt pain at rejection, loss, misunderstanding, tragedy; if people in general could actually still muster a little empathy, mutual respect, feelings of deep friendship that might be mistaken by slack-jawed simpletons as "gay", a sense of horror when faced with the acts of cruelty and disregard we perpetrate on one another- we might actually have some sort of a viable future as a species. As it is, this de-sensitized generation will likely meet its own apocalypse glued to the television- as always- while the real world and its pussies crying candy-ass tears falls apart outside. If you think crying betrays weakness, the odds are that you've probably never had anything real happen to you in your life. You probably giggle when someone tells you they love you (if that's ever happened). I feel sad for you. Sincerely. I guess that makes me Emo. It's official: I'm a gay.
Hulk Hogan to play Gandalf by DANZIGG	May 9th, 2007 04:15:52 PM
You shall not pass BROTHER!
Hulk Hogan to play Gandalf by DANZIGG	May 9th, 2007 04:16:02 PM
You shall not pass BROTHER!
Peter Weir made a brilliant film,Picnic at Hanging Rock by Demosthenes2	May 9th, 2007 04:16:04 PM
It was a simple story, and there was nothing that happened that should have made it as creepy as it was. Weir was excellent with atmosphere. Truman Show's great too. But of course we'd all just like the time to pass so that the rights can go back to Jackson.
Hulk Hogan to play Gandalf by DANZIGG	May 9th, 2007 04:16:15 PM
You shall not pass BROTHER!
I vote for another director besides Jackson by BannedOnTheRun	May 9th, 2007 04:42:00 PM
The old animated Hobbit had a cool Gollum, the animated LOTR had a cool (but very different) Gollum, and the live action trilogy had a cool (but very different) Gollum. I don't consider Jackson inseparable from the project. Now, if Kirsten were to leave...
Can we just lay off raimi? by cdubbs727	May 9th, 2007 04:46:40 PM
Seriously, what's with the Raimi bashing? The man made some great, fun horror movies back in the day. He made A Simple Plan, one of the most twisted and brilliant thrillers of the past few years. And he made Spiderman and Spiderman 2, two of the great superhero movies. And yes, he made Spiderman 3. Which wasn't great. But it was a decent movie. It was fun and entertaining, but harmed by overhype and being rushed by the studios. So what? It's a COMIC BOOK MOVIE!! It's not art. And neither is The Hobbit. It's just a fun fantasy story. If Raimi's chosen for the Hobbit, that's fine by me. If Peter Weir chosen, that's good too. It Del Toro happened to be offered it...well, that would be better than good.
The Hobbit: Far Side of the Middle Earth World by skycrapper	May 9th, 2007 05:08:39 PM
Well if they have an awesome subtitle and Russell Crowe with a ponytail, success!
i love this news by Lt. Kaffee	May 9th, 2007 05:17:23 PM
i love master and commander. it's subtle and moving, which is EXACTLY how the hobbit should be. understated yet filled with adventure. the hobbit is completely different than lord of the rings in both scope and tone. peter jackson was all wrong, peter weir is great. i hope this is true.
I've never really been a fan of Sam Raimi's style. by brokentusk	May 9th, 2007 05:24:40 PM
It's not very professional. What I mean is, all his films are shot very wildly - with odd camera angles and a very rapid pace as far as the editing is concerned. I don't mean to sound like I hate Sam Raimi, I think his style suits certain films perfectly... just not films that should be treated as epics. I feel that way about his SPIDER-MAN films... I certainly don't want him anywhere near THE HOBBIT. What Jackson got so right about (most) of THE LORD OF THE RINGS was in the way in which he took his time telling the story (I have issues with the start of FELLOWSHIP because of the way it moves so fast to get the story going). I could go on about how Peter Jackson should be allowed to go back to the world he brought to life on screen, but I can't really add anything other people haven't already said. No Jackson, no HOBBIT.
I've never really been a fan of Sam Raimi's style. by brokentusk	May 9th, 2007 05:25:53 PM
It's not very professional. What I mean is, all his films are shot very wildly - with odd camera angles and a very rapid pace as far as the editing is concerned. I don't mean to sound like I hate Sam Raimi, I think his style suits certain films perfectly... just not films that should be treated as epics. I feel that way about his SPIDER-MAN films... I certainly don't want him anywhere near THE HOBBIT. What Jackson got so right about (most) of THE LORD OF THE RINGS was in the way in which he took his time telling the story (I have issues with the start of FELLOWSHIP because of the way it moves so fast to get the story going). I could go on about how Peter Jackson should be allowed to go back to the world he brought to life on screen, but I can't really add anything other people haven't already said. No Jackson, no HOBBIT.
What Star Trek film is better? by Mgmax	May 9th, 2007 05:26:06 PM
C'mon, really. Is someone really going to make a case for The Wrath of Khan being BETTER than Master and Commander?
I've never really been a fan of Sam Raimi's style. by brokentusk	May 9th, 2007 05:26:59 PM
It's not very professional. What I mean is, all his films are shot very wildly - with odd camera angles and a very rapid pace as far as the editing is concerned. I don't mean to sound like I hate Sam Raimi, I think his style suits certain films perfectly... just not films that should be treated as epics. I feel that way about his SPIDER-MAN films... I certainly don't want him anywhere near THE HOBBIT. What Jackson got so right about (most) of THE LORD OF THE RINGS was in the way in which he took his time telling the story (I have issues with the start of FELLOWSHIP because of the way it moves so fast to get the story going). I could go on about how Peter Jackson should be allowed to go back to the world he brought to life on screen, but I can't really add anything other people haven't already said. No Jackson, no HOBBIT.
I've never really been a fan of Sam Raimi's style. by brokentusk	May 9th, 2007 05:30:27 PM
It's not very professional. What I mean is, all his films are shot very wildly - with odd camera angles and a very rapid pace as far as the editing is concerned. I don't mean to sound like I hate Sam Raimi, I think his style suits certain films perfectly... just not films that should be treated as epics. I feel that way about his SPIDER-MAN films... I certainly don't want him anywhere near THE HOBBIT. What Jackson got so right about (most) of THE LORD OF THE RINGS was in the way in which he took his time telling the story (I have issues with the start of FELLOWSHIP because of the way it moves so fast to get the story going). I could go on about how Peter Jackson should be allowed to go back to the world he brought to life on screen, but I can't really add anything other people haven't already said. No Jackson, no HOBBIT.
Apologies for the million posts! by brokentusk	May 9th, 2007 05:33:57 PM
Sorry guys, there's something wrong with this server. Hopefully the extra posts will get deleted or something.
Peter Weir... by jimmy rabbitte	May 9th, 2007 05:42:37 PM
...is the one name that I can't disagree with out of hand. Master and Commander was one of the best films of the last 3 or 4 years. ...and Merrick calling it the best Star Trek film in years is not a stretch at all. Any action film could take a lesson from M & C.
Too good to be true by Gozu	May 9th, 2007 05:45:01 PM
Sam Raimi just made Sony over $300 million in one weekend. Weir is a much better director, but the bottom line is his films have made less money. Still, Weir is definitely the better choice and I hope they choose talent over hype.
POETIC by THE KNIGHT	May 9th, 2007 05:46:37 PM
is a pure twat...
How Quickly You Geeks Turn by Ky-El	May 9th, 2007 06:06:43 PM
A month ago you would have given your first born to have Raimi direct "The Hobbit". Now one film later he's sudden sloppy and bad choice? Please! Spidey 3 wasn't that bad. Not as as good as 1 & 2 but not a career killer for godsake!
peter jackson by silent 1	May 9th, 2007 06:15:18 PM
the hobbit has to be shot by pete jackson no question other directors would find some way to fuck it up and it has to be shot here in New Zealand
For my part I've always felt that way about Raimi. by brokentusk	May 9th, 2007 06:24:08 PM
It wasn't just SPIDER-MAN 3 that "turned me against him". I have MASSIVE issues with the first two SPIDER-MAN films. In any case, SPIDER-MAN 3 was far from a career killer - isn't the guy who directed STEALTH now making THE MUMMY 3? Raimi will be fine.
Just listen to Bruce on Youtube by HornOrSilk	May 9th, 2007 06:30:46 PM
When talking about Hollywood and B-Movies, he makes the point that Spiderman is a B-movie with a budget (come on, radioactive spiders turning people into heroes? b movie). So don't be surprised if the series shows this B-movie inspiration in it. I don't know what people have against Raimi. Spiderman 3 was good; it wasn't great, but it is no career killer. It did the job it was meant to do. Raimi still has the right feel for the Hobbit (which is an adventure story for kids!)
the Hobbit is some of the finest literature ever by pipergates	May 9th, 2007 06:55:59 PM
and not just some kiddies adventure, and aparently some people doesnt understand that...if they make the movie it has to be made by some that does understand it.
Weir is a much better choice. by superninja	May 9th, 2007 06:56:43 PM
Breathing a sigh of relief.
Peter Weir's good. by TomBodet	May 9th, 2007 06:59:10 PM
Master Nad's Commander is pretty good too! Heck he'd be a worthy director jest for the hades of it.
Yeah, my issue with Raimi on The Hobbit has by superninja	May 9th, 2007 07:09:06 PM
always been his inability to cool it with the RaimiCam, or the HamCam, take your pick. Besides, I don't want Bilbo murdering people and then tearfully forgiving Gollum at the end and handing him the ring.
God, you losers are... well, losers by omarthesnake	May 9th, 2007 07:41:42 PM
Raimi is suddenly a pariah because you didn't approve of how he handled venom, a character forced on him to begin with? Boo fucking hoo. Was Spidey3 perfect? No, it was too long, and didn't make the best use of THChurch, but it's by far, by God, by The Soul of Stan Lee, the BEST third movie in a superhero franchise ever. None of its flaws are even vaguely career-killers, and you guys working your panties into a knot are just funny to watch. Raimi is still a fine director, and would be a good choice for Hobbit. So would some other contenders, so it's no big deal one way or the other.
Peter Weir, good choice; George Miller GREAT choice by Orbots Commander	May 9th, 2007 07:56:39 PM
to direct the Hobbit. I'd watch a Hobbit movie directed by either one of those guys. After catching Happy Feet with my little nephew while also remembering the bad-ass Road Warrior and the also great Babe, I'm convinced George Miller is perfect for The Hobbit adaptation. But again, Peter Weir is a fine choice as well.
Peter Weir could nail it. by dregmobile	May 9th, 2007 08:20:16 PM
That's the first name I've heard that is as good as Jackson's. No Raimi, please.
Hobbit Without Jackson = Nipples On Batman by MarkoOhNo	May 9th, 2007 08:40:02 PM
Seriously. A Hobbit just isn't a Hobbit without the tangy zip of Peter Jackson.
My my, did New Line drop a name on AICN? by Drath	May 9th, 2007 08:43:17 PM
Oh, those coy bitch fuckers! Get back Jackson or give up your hopes of any remaining prestige.
Omarthesnake Has A Point by MarkoOhNo	May 9th, 2007 08:50:27 PM
Although it isn't saying much, Spidey 3 is by far the BEST 3rd film in a superhero series. Superman 3: wank. Batman Forever: wank & then some. Spiderman 3: eh, it's okay. Keep up the good work, Hollywood - you're improving! lol
Risk by hallmitchell	May 9th, 2007 09:11:14 PM
New line: You really want to risk this so you can rip Peter off. Anyway would rather see Weir than Raimi. For some reason I don't want to see an American on this.
my god people Peter Jackson is not that fucking good by mikey mike	May 9th, 2007 10:37:48 PM
stop acting like the world would come to an end if he didn't direct the fucking movie. shit
I'd love to see Cuaron's take on THE HOBBIT by AICN Nazi	May 9th, 2007 11:09:36 PM
Yeah, I know it's been said before, but getting Cuaron would be great. George Miller would be awesome also, but don't his films usually take years and years to complete? Don't want to wait 10 years to see THE HOBBIT.
Give MICHAEL FUCKING BAY The Hobbit by zillabeast	May 9th, 2007 11:40:25 PM
Watch the madness unfold.
on Master & Commander by Deadwood Dan	May 9th, 2007 11:49:09 PM
One of my top five films for the past 15 years or so. I'd watch a Weir directed Hobbit any day of the week.
YES!!!!! Weir would be an incerdible choice! by Laserbrain	May 10th, 2007 12:49:25 AM
He's one of the greatest filmmakers alive. M & C was an extraordinarily directed work. Bring it on!
It's not that PJ himself's the new messiah... by FuzzyWhisper	May 10th, 2007 01:38:03 AM
...despite how many of his critics seem to be accusing those who would have him direct the Hobbit of claiming. The main point, as I see it, is that Peter Jackson managed to rally a tremendously talented team of passionate individuals whose unique contributions--not strictly the director's personal vision--played a a crucial role in molding the Lord of the Rings films into the widely celebrated trilogy it is today. Of course, where PJ goes a veritable army of these specially qualified people follows. Without their creative drive (not to mention the experience gained during the production of LOTR) to see The Hobbit through, I believe it's nowhere near unreasonable to suggest that the film would be a dismal parody of its potential greatness. A director as brilliant as ten Peter Jacksons wouldn't be able to prevent that.
In a perfect world, this would actually happen by Stollentroll	May 10th, 2007 03:27:07 AM
Great choic

Talkbacks

Is It Possible?? A Director Other Than Raimi For THE HOBBIT??