November 21, 2006

• "..their services would not be required on either The Hobbit or a planned prequel to the original trilogy." Woah, woah, there. A planned prequel? Other than 'The Hobbit'? I have a bad feeling about this.
• Wicked, tricksy, false!
• I am very dismayed right now. Jackson created an amazing work, second only to the actual books, with the LOTR trilogy. While there are many fine directors out there, there are none who have the requisite experience, combined with the sensitivity to the original work and the ability to make judicious decisions about what should stay or be cut with regard to the needs of making a film. I daresay, I have already considered passing on The Hobbit since he is not involved.
• I'm glad since I always thought the idea of making the Hobbit was just a lame cash-in. Of course I when I read Tolkien's stuff in junior high I just skipped over all teh stupid songs, so what do I know?
• A planned prequel? Other than 'The Hobbit'? Something out of The Silmarillion, maybe?
• I skipped over the stupid songs and skipped over the stupid battles. Flip flip flip, okay, where's frodo, okay continue....
• IMHO, Tolkien did most of the heavy lifting. I thought Jackson made some really good choices where the visual aspects of the movies were concerned, and at least a few really bad choices where the adaptation of the story was concerned. I'm not convinced that another director couldn't produce something as good. And yeah, the whole 'planned prequel' thing gives me the heebie jeebies.
• "While there are many fine directors out there, there are none who have the requisite experience.." Oh, bullshit. Jackson isn't *that* good. Viz: King Kong. I thought his repetoire of super zooms & wide pans was a bit limited. He didn't come up with the look for everything, he hired a bunch of very talented people, including illustrators who have been painting Tolkien imagery for years, to help him create the right look. And some of the story choices, as noted by Stan the Bat, were sucko. In fact, without the cast & the battles, a lot of that shit was pants. I was most offended by the unnecessary expansion of Arwen's character & the awwwwwfuuul depiction of Galadriel. What was that green screaming shit all about? And tho' Cate Blanchett is a great actress, she has a face like an arse. Galadriel was supposedly the most beautiful Elven woman alive. "I always thought the idea of making the Hobbit was just a lame cash-in." You realise that it's pretty much the essential first part of the story, right? "Something out of The Silmarillion, maybe?" That's probably a bit too far back. Most of that shit is really hoary & would make a boring movie, plus it doesn't tell you anything about the Ring, how it was forged, or any of that. It tells you who Sauron was in relation to Morgoth, but that's it. The Book of Lost Tales has all that stuff about Numenor, the forging of the Rings, the One Ring, etc. The flashback stuff seen at the beginning of the first film is more likely the gear they are thinking of. And with such a huge financial success, it is pretty much a foregone conclusion that they would try to leech some more movies out of it. Which is a pity, as artistically, they should do The Hobbit and just fucking leave it at that. I wish these companies would stop trying to get blood out of a stone & turni everything into a neverending franchise. It kills the quality.
• A planned prequel? Other than 'The Hobbit'? Something out of The Silmarillion, maybe? Now, there's a brilliant idea. Maybe they could get Michael Bay to direct The Silmarillion? Or perhaps Uwe Boll? He works cheap!
• Turni = one of the Dwarfs in the back nobody usually mentions.
• the forging of the Rings, the One Ring, etc. The flashback stuff seen at the beginning of the first film is more likely the gear they are thinking of. Oh yeah! And they could bring Gollum in, only back then he was cuter and made a lot more wise-cracks! I love it!
• Yeah! That wacky Gollum & his funny friend-strangling antics!
• He doesn't have any friends.
• Tom Bombadil - The Untold Story (rated 18) (self post alert) I did LOTR in 25 minutes last year. I played Aragorn, and Shelob. Guess which was harder?
• Viz: King Kong. I thought his repetoire of super zooms & wide pans was a bit limited. Do a shot for shot with the original. You may find a pattern emerges.
• (Parenthetical -- for me, the best thing about Kong is the music. Max Steiner is creating the grammar of modern film music right there, and the clunkers are the best bits of all.)
• Gollum kicks it old school..
• OK. maybe Jackson is't our generation's DW Griffith or anything, but it just seems like hiring someone else is just plain stupid, unless it's saving them 60 kajillion dollars or something. Maybe his other movies aren't that good, but he has a passion for the source material I've seldom seen in any other director. And with respect to Stan and Chy, I don;t see how the story editing could have been any better, considering how much had to be hacked out for time. My beef is: is anyone else's vision going to mesh well enough with Jackson's to make it seem like it's coming from the same place?
• That's okay. His mission instead should be a cinematic version of Lord Foul's Bane featuring Julie and Heatherly.
• Me, I don't want them to make The Hobbit into a film. Even with Jackson at the helm. I have been into these books since I was a kid and I thought the trilogy was great, better than I could have hoped (which is not to say flawless, but that's a different discussion). The Hobbit, the book, is a very important part of everything, and it's a GOOD book, but the tone of it is so much different than the latter three. and it isn't, IMHO, as good. The movie I want to see is Return of the King part 1.5 - The Scouring of the Shire.
• Hey, hey, The Hobbit may have a kiddyish vibe to it, but it has lots of awesome shit in it. The spiders, the trolls, the major battle at the end with the orcs with that huge cloud of bats following them, and of course Smaug the dragon! Super awesome. Plus, Ian Holm must reprise his role as Bilbo at some point.
• Scouring of the Shire can't happen, cos they killed of Saruman after the Orthanc attack. I dunno if that was in the extended version or not, but they filmed it.
• ROTK Part 2 - Buxom Hobbit Barmaids On Mead. Sorry, just thinking about gingham...
• There is some awesome stuff in it, but other than Smaug it is stuff that is basically eclipsed by the events of the other 3. OK, there are many spiders instead of the one Shelob, and the eagles play a larger role, but I think the impact will be greatly dulled by the existence of the other films. Yes, clearly, for that and many reasons Scouring of the Shire can't won't and shouldn't be a film. But, for me, the hobbits coming back to a changed Shire but realizing that they are also changed hobbits and therefore able to deal with it, makes the events of the whole story resonate. I felt the end of Return of the King (the film) lasted a long time but sort of floundered, largely because the required emotional ending (scouring of the Shire) wasn't there. Regardless of Saruman.
• Jackson should try his hand at other fantasy worlds, such as Wheel of Time. Or perhaps direct a Harry Potter movie. Or bring some (any will do) China Mieville story to film.
• I'd love to see him get his hands on a Harry Potter movie... maybe the last one, which (I'm guessing here) seems like it might be sort of battle-y?
• I don't see how the story editing could have been any better Theoden could have been manipulated by Saruman/Grima rather than possessed by him. This, and the unneccessary trip to Osgiliath at the end of 2, were the major sticking points (and near deal-breakers) for me.
• You didn't think elves in Helm's Deep or the reforging of the shards of Narsil or the way the Ents were treated were worse? Heck, I still haven't forgiven Jackson for making Gimli the comic relief.
• The comic relief was everyone pronouncing it 'Morrrrrrdoorrrrrrrr' like they were in an episode of 'Taggart'. Also comparisons with Morden, a few stops south from me.
• >>And with respect to Stan and Chy, I don;t see how the story editing could have been any better I had a big problem with Gimli's transformation into the Comic Relief Dwarf (oh! hey, I see I'm not alone)... and wasn't there some weird bit where Aragorn floats around unconscious and turns into Jesus? I think there was a transfer of focus, too, from the halflings to the Big Folk... But my point wasn't that Jackson did a terrible job. I don't think it'd be possible to perfectly preserve the character of those books, while making them into modern, big-budget, effects-driven movies. What Jackson made is a compromise that's watchable even if you know and love the books, which is no mean feat. But I couldn't beLIEVE he left out the dialog with Saruman after the siege of Orthanc...
• Best meta-ironic line: Two Towers, Sam in Osgiliath saying "By rights we shouldn't even be here." I have many geek-tastic bones to pick about the LOTR movies, and most of all about the second movie. Anyone that would care to hear them probably already knows them. However, Stan the Bat has a point, and I still enjoy watching the trilogy. Plus, have you seen some of the ideas that didn't make it into the movies? I'm amazed that they dodged as many bullets as they did.
• Am I the only person in the world who liked Jackson's Kong? It was atmospheric. It was grandiose. It was provocative. It was cathartic, goddammit.
• I don't think it'd be possible to perfectly preserve the character of those books, while making them into modern, big-budget, effects-driven movies. What Jackson made is a compromise that's watchable even if you know and love the books, which is no mean feat. That was basically my point, only stated much more eloquently. I didn't mean that the choices he made were perfect, only that they were the best anyone could really have done under the same constraints. In an ideal world, of course, I can imagine them being better. But I can't imagine another real-world director, under the same circumstances, carrying it off any better.
• Thank you for the link to Julie and Heatherly, Vin Ethyl. However, I wish to register a complaint: I laughed so hard I fell off my chair and hit my head. But I agree, Peter Jackson could do great things in film in collaboration with those two. And at the risk of going over long, I think Jackson ultimately blew it with LOTR, pretty much the same way David Lynch blew Dune. I think he and Walsh and Boyens made choices regarding the story that were not motivated by any cinematic limitations, but were instead motivated by their desire to "improve" upon the story for their own ends -- put their own mark on it, like dogs and fire hydrants. I loved every minute of the movies, but mostly for the visuals. Which were incomparable.
• By movie three, Jackson was getting a bit Lucas-ish, if you ask me. Epic CGI battles impress no one. But what's up with people complaining about Blanchett as Galadriel? That's just crazy.
• Is it possible that it's more of an issue of the suits at Fine Line not wanting Jackson to be even more identified with the property that they control? "Yeah Peter did some great work, and we're really pleased with his contribution, but we see it as being more of a success for the Fine Line Family™ as a whole, you know?" The only time Hollywood people enjoy giving credit is when they're standing behind a podium with a hunk of shiny metal in their hands. Also: Cate Blanchett? Arse? Madness! Blindness!
• You didn't think elves in Helm's Deep or the reforging of the shards of Narsil or the way the Ents were treated were worse? I'd say that those things, with the exception of the Ents, were just bungled. But the possessed Theoden was in diametric opposition to Tolkien's intent: in the books, Saruman plays off Theoden's already extant insecurities, manipulates his baser feelings, tempts him into torpor and malice; conversely, Gandalf's action isn't to dispell Saruman's influence, but to show it to Theoden, which allows him to make the choice to escape it. And this is very important for a Christian like Tolkien. Evil that exploits the worst parts of us is far more dangerous than a frigging mind-control spell, and a man making a choice to escape its influence is far more meaningful than a man who changes only because one wizards removes the spell of another. Faramir taking the Hobbits to Osgiliath, and then deciding to let them go to Mordor because Frodo offers a Nazgul the Ring is complete nonsense, and I have no idea how Jackson justifies it. And yeah, the Ents didn't make any damn sense either, but I prefer to think that their mistreatment was more the result of time constraints than a complete misunderstanding of their import.
• But what's up with people complaining about Blanchett as Galadriel? That's just crazy. I think she was fantastic as Galadriel, except for the "Dark Queen" speech, which was bollocks due to misdirection and not her acting abilities.
• ...the Ents didn't make any damn sense either, but I prefer to think that their mistreatment was more the result of time constraints than a complete misunderstanding of their import. They would have had more time to treat the Ents as more than bumbling idiots if they hadn't spent so much screen time patching together the drastic non-Tolkien script additions. Good point about Theoden, I'll add that to my list. Speaking of battles, I found it unfortunate that the strategy was all but lost in the adaptation. Eye candy (and very good at that) takes precedence, I guess.
• Did anyone else have a problem with the expanded role of Arwen? She was basically a fucking trophy in the books and in the films she talking ancient dunedain history and causing the waterfall that buries the nine riders. I still watch the films and get a hard but the nerd in must bitch.
• except for the "Dark Queen" speech True dat. Back to the beginning, I'm concerned with Jackson being out of the Hobbit--not because of the directing thing quite so much as to what people mentioned: he has so much passion for the source material (there's also the fact that he as much as any one person can claim to have made the last blockbuster series for Hollywood). Not only that, as many of the fannish folk will attest from watching the behind-the-scenes docs, he gathered a huge group of similarly passionate people to do everything in terms of production design and art direction. Odds are if they're not using Jackson for director, they may not want to use Weta Workshop or Weta Digital for the Hobbit, which would be a shame.
• They would have had more time to treat the Ents as more than bumbling idiots if they hadn't spent so much screen time patching together the drastic non-Tolkien script additions. This was my greatest annoyance. Fair enough you have to cut stuff out to fit the books in to three movies, no problem with that, and sure, you have to fiddle some stuff to cover you bits you've chopped out. But chopping out good, important parts of the story only to fill up that time with crap like the Arwen story, or the bit with Aragorn falling in the river. Grrrr. And while we're nitpicking, I've always hated Jackson's "weird angled zooming closeup of someones face to indicate confusion" shot. It looks stupid, stop doing it.
• Arwen's story in the movies is at least canonical. She did in fact decide to remain in Middle Earth and rule alongside Aragorn in the Age of Men, at least until Aragorn's death, upon which she sunk into despair and passed into Lorien. Aragorn and Arwen are supposed to invoke the memory of the other legendary Elf/Human couple, Beren and Luthien. An abridged version of the tale of Arwen and Aragorn did make it into the Red Book and eventually an appendix of the Lord of the Rings.
• At this point I'd prefer that the Hobbit not get made into a film just so Tolkein doesn't turn into a franchise to be milked dry. The films are flawed (elves dying poetically in Helm's Deep particularly galls me) but so is every other adaptation of the books including the books themselves. It took me three tries before I could finally get past the Tom Bombadil trainwreck in Fellowship the first time I read the series and the BBC radioplay has quite a few clunky musical numbers not to mention the guy playing Aragorn has a very bad lisp. All three are still wildly enjoyable even with the flaws since the story and the world that is created is so entertaining. On the PJ tangent, King Kong could have been a very good film if only someone had forced him to edit the damn thing. I'm not saying Peter can't have his scene where giant maggots swallow people whole while the Pianist shoots Nacho Libre at point blank range with a machine gun to get a giant cricket off his ass, just put it in the extended DVD.
• It's like Nerd Crossfire in here.
• "...the Tom Bombadil trainwreck..." Oh, Jaysus, that's just blasphemy! If you don't get Tom Bombadil, you don't get Tolkien.
• Maybe it's not too late for him to option Farmer Giles of Ham?
• It's like Nerd Crossfire in here. Heh. <jon stewart>You're hurting Middle Earth</jon stewart>
• Yeah, now I'm seeing Chyren as Tucker Carlson with a mithril bowtie.
• I just thought of a sequel! The Further Adventures of Eomer! See, what happens is that Eomer decides to go questing for the. . . uh. . . something in Moria probably, and Gandalf comes back from America and forges him a new magic ring that, and I like this part, gives him super strength, and the ability to fly! And Saruman's kind of like Jason or Freddy, so even if he dies in one movie he can come back in the next. Maybe Gollum is wishing at the Magic Elven Wishing Pool, and he says "I wish Saruman was still alive", so the next scene is Saruman rising slowly up out of the Magic Wishing Pool, and his face is all decomposed. And we'll get that Tom Bombadil guy that everyone is always going on about, he'll be like the guy that gives Eomer some super cool weaponry like a bow that shoots magic glowing arrows and a big stick that grows really long and a magic hat, only every time he pulls something out of it he gets the wrong thing! Like maybe he wants orc-poison, but when he puts his hand in the hat, he pulls out poison orcs instead! Ha! What's he going to do with poison orcs!?! Nothin', that's what!
• Not bad Nick, but must include a Tom Bombadil/Gimli "I'm the short beardy comedy relief"/"No. I am" running schtick.
• HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I LOVE IT - PETER JACKSON
• "I'm seeing Chyren as Tucker Carlson with a mithril bowtie." That is deeply, deeply offensive.
• But you gotta admit, it kind of turns you on, doesn't it?
• >>It's like Nerd Crossfire in here. I wanna cast Magic Missile.
• "it kind of turns you on, doesn't it?" /checks penis no. Tucker Carlson is one of the few people I viscerally want to punch very hard in the face. He just has that kind of look, irrespective of his putrid intellect & facile grasp of politics. He should avoid me at all costs, because I would cross the street to punch the guy.
• After seeing Jackson butcher King Kong I'd rather he keep his paws well away from The Hobbit; or any other film for that matter.
• I'm gonna jump on the nerdpile here and beg to differ. Nobody, nobody ever blew it as badly as David Lynch with Dune. Nobody.
• But, but, the script! "And how can this be?" "Muuuuaaaaad-DIB!"
• Dune was butchered by the studio. I like it, as a flawed masterpiece. If you could read the lips of the Guildsman when he said "The Bene Gesserit Witch Must Leave", what do you think he says? I read: "floating on stars"
• I'm gonna jump on the nerdpile here and beg to differ. Nobody, nobody ever blew it as badly as David Lynch with Dune. I beg to differ with your differing beggery, whoever put together that travesty of an "extended edition" of Dune blew it worse than David Lynch.
• Didn't Lynch want to take his name off of that project, or am I just making shit up again?
• He did take his name off of the extended edition. It's officially "an Alan Smithee Film".
• We tried to watch "Eraserhead" last night, but the DVD was scratched and we only made it about 40 minutes in. Lynch insists that DVDs of his films have no chapter stops, so we couldn't skip over the damaged part. Thanks, Dave! Your priciples ruined our evening! I would like to know what Chy thinks about Lynch's use of sound in his films. Like, how does he make them fucked-up sounds?
• Or, um .... not. *cough*
• After seeing Jackson butcher King Kong I'd rather he keep his paws well away from The Hobbit; or any other film for that matter. I'd be interested in a point-by-point explanation of how he "butchered"* Kong, but I suspect this is just a shitty little drive-by written by someone who's got no feeling for the original anyway. Don't make any more films, Jackson, you "butcher"**! *summary quote **actual quotation with verb repurposed as noun
• At issue: what rights will be held by whom in future. So this may not be the last word on Jackson's directing The Hobbit or other material from Tolkien. But in any case, lots of publicity beforehand means greater potential audience, greater profits!
• Oh the humanity! Just for the record, if someone turned Hamlet into a book without changing it it would be a shitty story. Oh wait, that's right it is; I remember grade nine and eleven English class. Great play tho'. I loved the books; I loved the movies. And if you really want to kick Jackson's balls to deter him from manhandling your little precious, why don't you mention Bad Taste? You sicken me. I am vomiting into my horror-palsied hands and trying in futility to shove it back down my sobbing throat in order to hide my shame. You sick fucks.
• Bad Taste was fun. Meet the Feebles was funner. David Lynch's fucked up sounds: industrial noise & various other things. I forget how he did the mewling baby thing sound in Eraserhead.
• Lynch's Dune had amazing design work (costumes, props, sets), and some not bad performances, but the story was so truncated it was problematic. The SciFi channel did a 6 hour Dune that was quite good, but their design was by no means as striking or memorable as the work in the Lynch version. The only reason I ever read the book was because of the Lynch movie.
• Yeah, thanks Chy. ;-P
• I'm a big fan of Lynch and his movie for Dune, as well. But, if you take five goddamn years to make a movie and still have a hillariously melodramatic performance (echoing silent film, but with sound) coming out of Francesca Annis at the death of the Duke, well, it better be on purpose. And I suppose, according to the kitshy jazz he throws around on most of his other projects, it was.
• I've never read the books. Lynch's Dune has stayed with me visually, even though I've never understood it. The miniseries has stayed somewhat infomationallly, though it was hardly the representation such a significant book justified. For those who have read the books, I'd guess Lynch did a more artistic treatment, while the miniseries was more literal.
• Anyone besides me ever play the Dune game? I believe it was one of those Bookcase Games. I was pretty good as I recall.
• I LOVED the Dune game! There are probably still a few kanly cards kicking around my boxes of books if I looked.
• A truly great game. . . mostly. Some serious rules ambiguities are a problem, but such great back stabbing fun. You could still buy a French version with an English rules insert up until a few years ago.
• The Hobbit *will* be directed by Peter Jackson.
• So sayeth Chyren the Great and Powerful. Are you picking up Aintitcool rumors in your fillings or what? Tell us more, man!
• I prefer "Le Grand Chyren". ;) Producer Saul Zaentz owns 'Tolkien Enterprises' - he bought the rights to Tolkien's works in the '70s. New Line made the deal with him to make the movies, but like all such contracts, it is limited by time, because an astute investor is not going to let a property like that get away. And, it is next year that the rights to The Hobbit revert to Zaentz. Peter Jackson knows this. Further, Zaentz has said he will definitely get Jackson to direct. Since Jackson is angry with New Line over being screwed for his profits, he will probably wait & sign with Zaentz who has now publicly made assurances that he will pay Jackson fairly & support any creative choices he sees fit to make. That is, unless New Line can make a Hobbit movie in under a year, before the rights revert to Zaentz. :)
• I was pretty good as I recall. Hah. I meant *It* was pretty good. I was actually mediocre at it, as I was only about 13 when I played.
• That is, unless New Line can make a Hobbit movie in under a year, before the rights revert to Zaentz. Now that would be kind of interesting. I'm crossing my fingers for Uwe Boll if they choose this gambit.
• Actually, Koko, I thought you were brilliant. Best thing in it.
• Uwe Boll YES! Pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease ...
• I don't care about Peter Jackson anymore
• 50 - 100 million? That's it?? Geez, he totally got rooked. /ironical