Guest maoam Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Ron Howard is attached to direct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nene multiple assgasms Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I'd like to see jim jarmusch's take on bilbo's adventures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAXIMUS MISCHIEF Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 michel gondry and spike jonze with charlie kaufman writing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Terry Gilliam would make a gigantic mess of it, give him the job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Chris Columbus! He did such an inspired job with the first two Harry Potter movies, I'm sure he could bring the same vigor and dynamism to the Hobbit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Adam Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Guy Ritchie. No but seriously. Leave this story alone. This was my favourite story in chilhood, not spoilt by Lords Of The Ring apocalyptic pomposity and walking trees. Is it posible to make not bombastic adventure movie in hollywod? No way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azatoth Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 werner herzog to direct the hobbit...too bad klaus kinski is dead, he would have been a great bilbo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Stardust was chill, but maybe that was made in the uk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr lopez Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 werner herzog to direct the hobbit...too bad klaus kinski is dead, he would have been a great bilbo. i see him more in an inspired movie-stealing cameo as gollum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ruiagnelo Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 There are two options here: Jackson directing it with the possibility of a great success or losing time looking for another director. But i don't understand why del toro is leaving after nearly two years working on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I dunno why anybody thinks it's guaranteed to be good with Jackson at the helm. Anybody notice how badly the LOTR trilogy has aged? It's like embarrassing in retrospect, especially the ROTK, which is the film where Jackson exerted the most creative control. ROTK was absolute nonsense. I really enjoyed the first two, but again, they haven't aged that well. I mean, did The Lovely Bones restore your faith in Jackson as a director? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I dunno why anybody thinks it's guaranteed to be good with Jackson at the helm. Anybody notice how badly the LOTR trilogy has aged? It's like embarrassing in retrospect, especially the ROTK, which is the film where Jackson exerted the most creative control. ROTK was absolute nonsense. I really enjoyed the first two, but again, they haven't aged that well. I mean, did The Lovely Bones restore your faith in Jackson as a director? The same goes for King Kong. It wasn't exactly great, was it? And yeah, The Lovely Bones was horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I dunno why anybody thinks it's guaranteed to be good with Jackson at the helm. Anybody notice how badly the LOTR trilogy has aged? It's like embarrassing in retrospect, especially the ROTK, which is the film where Jackson exerted the most creative control. ROTK was absolute nonsense. I really enjoyed the first two, but again, they haven't aged that well. I mean, did The Lovely Bones restore your faith in Jackson as a director? The same goes for King Kong. It wasn't exactly great, was it? And yeah, The Lovely Bones was horrible. Oh, fuck no, King Kong was hard to sit through. I wanted to leave the theater during the scenes on the boat on the way to the island. WTF/JackBlack/NaomiWatts/JewNose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest theSun Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 i know you snobby fags will probably jump all over me, but all 3 of the LOTRs give me a large BI. in fact, i liked fellowship < TT < rotk. the only things that were stupid were the legolas scenes where he's surfing down stairs or sliding around oliphaunts. i'm a tolkien dork though, but i dunno if that means i should like or hate them. getting the feel of LOTR was the best part of the movie, and certainly not something so easy to accomplish, especially because middle earth is so unimaginably detailed and complex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Wait, you liked ROTK more than the other two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaarg Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I thought the "feel" of Middle earth was pretty much perverted into fancy kitschy new age crap. I'm also a fan of Tolkien! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baph Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 Jackson's LOTR, like Babylon 5, is a big pile of shit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 It's probably going to end up with Gore Verbinski. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEK Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 i thought everybody loved LOTR. i didn't either so, WOOP WOOP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 King Kong was terrible horrible shit. There's maybe four minutes in total worth watching in there, but unfortunately the movie lasts a million hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I loved the Lord of the Rings movies when they were released but I agree with The Overlook that they haven't aged well. A lot of the effects look like crap now. Also, one thing that has always bothered me about Peter Jackson's movies is that weird 5 frames per sec slow motion he loves to use. I don't remember if he used it in King Kong but he definitely did in LOTR and The Lovely Bones. Not only does it look weird but it ruins the overall look/expression of the movie. Maybe I'm just being anal, I don't know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Member Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 He uses it when they're attacked by the inhabitants of the island. It looks like shit. He should go back to making fun splatstick movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 I loved the Lord of the Rings movies when they were released but I agree with The Overlook that they haven't aged well. A lot of the effects look like crap now. Also, one thing that has always bothered me about Peter Jackson's movies is that weird 5 frames per sec slow motion he loves to use. I don't remember if he used it in King Kong but he definitely did in LOTR and The Lovely Bones. Not only does it look weird but it ruins the overall look/expression of the movie. Maybe I'm just being anal, I don't know? No, it's that slow shutter speed effect and it makes moments of ROTK feel like they were inspired by a fucking soap opera. Awful shit and he does it a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirezzi Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 He uses it when they're attacked by the inhabitants of the island. It looks like shit. He should go back to making fun splatstick movies. Oh, that's right...lol, which, by the way, those inhabitants looked like leftover orcs from the WETA workshop. Let's face it. Peter Jackson movies reinforce a sort of blithe, Scotch-Irish, white supremacist attitude toward indigenous people. That's fine, because what was Tolkien good for anyway? Making anglos feel good about themselves and the great white European enterprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest theSun Posted June 2, 2010 Share Posted June 2, 2010 haha yeah i think i liked rotk the best. though it's hard for me to say because that was by far my favorite book. and yes, tolkien definitely has a sort of old school imperialism in him, but at least the easterlings weren't weird space monsters like in 300. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.