The Hobbit
Now this is interesting
http://www.theonering.net/staticnews/1163993546.html
Well I wonder who they'd choose now to make The Hobbit. I'm not sure I'm liking the idea of a prequel though that happens after The Hobbit.
http://www.theonering.net/staticnews/1163993546.html
Quote:
A couple of months ago there was a flurry of Hobbit news in the media. MGM, who own a portion of the film rights in The Hobbit, publicly stated they wanted to make the film with us. It was a little weird at the time because nobody from New Line had ever spoken to us about making a film of The Hobbit and the media had some fun with that. Within a week or two of those stories, our Manager Ken Kamins got a call from the co-president of New Line Cinema, Michael Lynne, who in essence told Ken that the way to settle the lawsuit was to get a commitment from us to make the Hobbit, because "that's how these things are done". Michael Lynne said we would stand to make much more money if we tied the lawsuit and the movie deal together and this may well be true, but it's still the worst reason in the world to agree to make a film.
Several years ago, Mark Ordesky told us that New Line have rights to make not just The Hobbit but a second "LOTR prequel", covering the events leading up to those depicted in LOTR. Since then, we've always assumed that we would be asked to make The Hobbit and possibly this second film, back to back, as we did the original movies. We assumed that our lawsuit with the studio would come to a natural conclusion and we would then be free to discuss our ideas with the studio, get excited and jump on board. We've assumed that we would possibly get started on development and design next year, whilst filming The Lovely Bones. We even had a meeting planned with MGM executives to talk through our schedule.
However last week, Mark Ordesky called Ken and told him that New Line would no longer be requiring our services on the Hobbit and the LOTR 'prequel'. This was a courtesy call to let us know that the studio was now actively looking to hire another filmmaker for both projects.
A couple of months ago there was a flurry of Hobbit news in the media. MGM, who own a portion of the film rights in The Hobbit, publicly stated they wanted to make the film with us. It was a little weird at the time because nobody from New Line had ever spoken to us about making a film of The Hobbit and the media had some fun with that. Within a week or two of those stories, our Manager Ken Kamins got a call from the co-president of New Line Cinema, Michael Lynne, who in essence told Ken that the way to settle the lawsuit was to get a commitment from us to make the Hobbit, because "that's how these things are done". Michael Lynne said we would stand to make much more money if we tied the lawsuit and the movie deal together and this may well be true, but it's still the worst reason in the world to agree to make a film.
Several years ago, Mark Ordesky told us that New Line have rights to make not just The Hobbit but a second "LOTR prequel", covering the events leading up to those depicted in LOTR. Since then, we've always assumed that we would be asked to make The Hobbit and possibly this second film, back to back, as we did the original movies. We assumed that our lawsuit with the studio would come to a natural conclusion and we would then be free to discuss our ideas with the studio, get excited and jump on board. We've assumed that we would possibly get started on development and design next year, whilst filming The Lovely Bones. We even had a meeting planned with MGM executives to talk through our schedule.
However last week, Mark Ordesky called Ken and told him that New Line would no longer be requiring our services on the Hobbit and the LOTR 'prequel'. This was a courtesy call to let us know that the studio was now actively looking to hire another filmmaker for both projects.
Well I wonder who they'd choose now to make The Hobbit. I'm not sure I'm liking the idea of a prequel though that happens after The Hobbit.
Comments
...anyone else doing it is reason enough for skepticism.
I'm not sure I'm liking the idea of a prequel though that happens after The Hobbit.
AFAIK nothing happens between The Hobbit and The LotR. Bilbo smoked some pipe weed and Gandalf washed his hair. I think they mean a prequel prior to the Hobbit - maybe the war of the elves and men against Sauron depicted in flashbacks in the LotR, where they got the ring.
In the summer my friends and I watched all three films over three nights-- and even that felt like an accomplishment.
Anyone sit through the whole LOTR series in one day?
In the summer my friends and I watched all three films over three nights-- and even that felt like an accomplishment.
The theatrical releases or the extended editions?
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/....ap/index.html
End of the Hobbit as a success story.
Anyway, I agree with Fangorn. The Hobbit will be great movie if it sticks real close to the book. It's a great book and in my opinion could easily be transferred to the silver screen without anything being added.
No film that I have seen created from a major book was ever completely faithful to the book; various adaptations must be made. The LOR films shared the story with millions of people who had never read the books, but chose to after seeing the films because of their impact, and they shared a very good story.
I read the books as a child many times over and loved them. I also watch the films several times each and loved them. No. They are not completely the same. They are, however, both excellent works.
The moment he cut out Old Tom, Peter Jackson was dead to me. DEAD I TELL YOU!
The moment he cut out old Tom, who had no bearing on the story whatsoever and was indicative that Tolkien's writing style was completely masturbatory, I realized Jackson might have something.
The moment he cut out old Tom, who had no bearing on the story whatsoever and was indicative that Tolkien's writing style was completely masturbatory, I realized Jackson might have something.
Bergermeister: In my post I said why I thought he ruined the end of The Lord of the Rings. Peter took too long with it. It would have been sufficient to cut the crap at the end and just say it was a happy ending. That's my opinion remember I don't think that anyone else said that he ruined it. I think the fact that I didn't particularly enjoy the series in any form whether that's the books or the movies, I didn't really enjoy the story. The Hobbit was the only one I really liked.
PJ'S DIRECTING IT NOW!
Well, if The Sun says it, it's gotta be true! Could you not find a corroborating link from Go Fug Yourself?
I probably got it from Pink is the New Blog.