they should of make a movie on the hobbit(i know there a cartoon one) because in "lord of the rings" they made Bilbo Baggin look like a wuss. in the hobbit he the hero!.....
peace
What's next for Peter Jackson? He says he has six or seven ideas for movies, "all of them small." But he denies rumours that he has refused to direct The Hobbit, the first Tolkien Middle-earth book, which served as a prologue to The Lord of the Rings.
"Part of me would love to have somebody else make The Hobbit, so I could watch it as an audience member," Jackson says. "On the other hand, it would feel odd.
"Nobody has asked me to do it, but if they did, I would give it serious consideration."
I thought that PJ originally approached studios about doing "The Hobbit," and that that idea eventually led to the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.
Am I imagining things or did someone else hear that too?
And it would make sense that New Line Cinema would own the rights to "The Hobbit" since they gobbled up all the rights to the LOTR trilogy.
Quote from: underdogthey should of make a movie on the hobbit(i know there a cartoon one) because in "lord of the rings" they made Bilbo Baggin look like a wuss. in the hobbit he the hero!.....
peace
That's the point! Bilbo was not an adventurer, he was along for the ride and BECAME a hero through his actions. And Bilbo was frightened being lost and alone and in the darkness of gollum's cave, that was very accurate to the book except without the meeting between the two with the battle of riddles.
jackson will have a hard time recovering from lord of the rings. he'll never work on some as big on his career (it's probably drained him a lot by now), so i'm really curious to see what'll he'll do next and if it works. hopefully he won't pull a james cameron and just disappear from the directing scene after an enormous hit
Quote from: sphinxhopefully he won't pull a james cameron and just disappear from the directing scene after an enormous hit
speaking of which, WwwWHAaaAT?!?! (http://www.apple.com/trailers/disney/ghostsoftheabyss/)
Quote from: sphinxjackson will have a hard time recovering from lord of the rings. he'll never work on some as big on his career (it's probably drained him a lot by now), so i'm really curious to see what'll he'll do next and if it works.
Variety talked to Lord of the Rings writer & producer Fran Walsh, who sheds some light on what's next after the trilogy. "Peter's already very much engaged in 'Return of the King,' and I know he's most proud of the last movie," Walsh said.
They'll next make a small, true story in the vein of Heavenly Creatures, says the trade. One candidate is "As Nature Made Him" which is the true story of a New Zealand doctor who thought he'd found the perfect subject to test his theory that gender can be assigned to newborns. He switched the gender of an eight-month old who was deformed down below in a circumcision mishap.
"The boy was remade and raised as a girl, and it's the story of how that experiment ended so disastrously," Walsh said. Variety adds that Walsh and Jackson will also try to attract other films to their production and fx studios used for "Rings." They need to keep things going until they regain the energy to mount their remake of King Kong.
Wonders if there ever will be a day when everything dumb about the ridiculous lord of the rings movies will ever stop. Oh, fuck, there is still a movie left. Fuck you Peter Jackson! Heavenly Creatures was good, but now this shit? OK, fanboy rage gone, but they were still shit movies.
~rougerum
I can't wait for the LOTR hype to be over myself...back to quietly collecting dust on library shelves and in fanboy's closets. I swear, nobody EVER talked about the retarded fucking trilogy until the movies started getting made.
Quote from: ebeaman69I can't wait for the LOTR hype to be over myself...back to quietly collecting dust on library shelves and in fanboy's closets. I swear, nobody EVER talked about the retarded fucking trilogy until the movies started getting made.
Totally agree. I gave the first LOTR a chance and found it to be terrible. It seemed like a video game, just going from one place to another fighting, it got really old really quick.
Damn... what a bunch of whiners.
Quote from: PawbloeDamn... what a bunch of whiners.
No shit... Jesus fucking christ, we get it! You don't like Lord of the Rings... you don't like movies that would associate you with the mainstream, we understand, you don't have to keep saying it.
Quote from: RegularKarate
you don't like movies that would associate you with the mainstream, .
That is not true
Quote from: RegularKarateQuote from: PawbloeDamn... what a bunch of whiners.
No shit... Jesus fucking christ, we get it! You don't like Lord of the Rings... you don't like movies that would associate you with the mainstream, we understand, you don't have to keep saying it.
Oh christ man...sorry, fuck. I won't say it anymore, my bad. Duck Sauce is right though, it is not true...I don't think the mainstream is all bad...I do like Spider Man, among others.
Quote from: mogwaiQuote from: ebeaman69Sorry sorry sorry...I was just saying...I'll stop now, ok. I don't want to fight over the internet. I wish I hadn't fucking said anything...I always say the wrong fucking thing. I got an idea yesterday though...this is my idea...
I vow on february the 28th of 2003 that from now on that I will think before I say ANYTHING at all controversial. You can quote me on that...put it in your signature as a reminder. Seriously, you can ban me if I don't stick to it.
We're not gonna ban you because you expressed your feelings against a movie. You have to come up with some more dramatic than that. :wink:
Just chill and enjoy posting on the board.
Oh, thanks man, it's just that...they are right, I'll admit it....this isn't the first time I've bashed LOTR. RegularKarate reminded me of that...he is right. It has been established that I hate LOTR and I can shut up about it now and that's what I plan to do. I just wanted to apologize for that. See, I shouldn't have even gone into this thread knowing it was about LOTR. I can't even explain how I think and why I do the things I do sometimes. I just wanted to apologize. I didn't think you guys would ban me.
Dont stop voicing what you think because people get mad.
Quote from: Duck SauceDont stop voicing what you think because people get mad.
Oh, I'm not going to...I don't intend to stop. I'm just going to think about how I am wording my posts and whether or not I'm going to piss anybody off from now on. I feel like that's what I'm being asked to do. I'll still voice my opinions, just more maturely. I can completely change in 2 seconds, I'm always doing that. I realize that I was wrong. I shouldn't have bashed LOTR again.
See, now look what I've done. I've ruined yet another thread by sending it completely off track. I am very sorry about that. Well, at least I learned something this time, right? Keep talking about the Hobbit now, sorry for getting you guys off topic, seriously.
lord of the rings sucks. I'll be tired of saying that when the movies are dead and buried within the realm of talk here. Arguments of being anti commercial movies are silly and unfounded. So another year hits and another Lord of the Rings comes, may the bashing continue.
~rougerum
Lord of the Rings rocks your grandma's hot panties, GT.
bon, that just means it sucks.
~rougerum
Quote from: The Gold Trumpetlord of the rings sucks. I'll be tired of saying that when the movies are dead and buried within the realm of talk here. Arguments of being anti commercial movies are silly and unfounded. So another year hits and another Lord of the Rings comes, may the bashing continue.
~rougerum
I'll probably bash it outside of this place, sure...but I doubt I'll be bashing it anymore around here. If it's only going to piss people off then what's the point?
Anyway, I know I'm probably fucking going to break my vow already and dig a cyber grave for myself here but I gotta say this one last thing...
Regular Karate...saying that I "didn't want to be involved with the mainstream" or whatever just because I don't like LOTR was really childish man...I have to say. Don't jump to conclusions like that. Now, I know what you're thinking...who am I to call you childish? And your right...but I just wanted to point it out and defend my taste in movies, which I know more about than you because, of course, I know what I like. I like a lot of mainstream films just as much as I like a lot of independent films....you were wrong. Just wanted to point that out, don't get mad.
freedom of (not words of conspiracy, libel, slander, or dissing one's mama) speech! Also, with that in mind, Bons ass is mine in the playground after school. Petty complaining.
~rougerum
Quote from: ebeaman69I'll probably bash it outside of this place, sure...but I doubt I'll be bashing it anymore around here. If it's only going to piss people off then what's the point?
Anyway, I know I'm probably fucking going to break my vow already and dig a cyber grave for myself here but I gotta say this one last thing...
Regular Karate...saying that I "didn't want to be involved with the mainstream" or whatever just because I don't like LOTR was really childish man...I have to say. Don't jump to conclusions like that. Now, I know what you're thinking...who am I to call you childish? And your right...but I just wanted to point it out and defend my taste in movies, which I know more about than you because, of course, I know what I like. I like a lot of mainstream films just as much as I like a lot of independent films....you were wrong. Just wanted to point that out, don't get mad.
don't delay, buy it today:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newhorizonpressbooks.com%2Fimages%2Fbooks_lg%2Fstressmanagement.jpg&hash=7765862e6f078ddd74d8791e200fe51bba99ecdb) (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0882821156/ref=lib_rd_btb/104-4410959-4059146?v=glance&s=books)
i think i understand why u don't like todd solondz now..
Quote from: PQuote from: ebeaman69I'll probably bash it outside of this place, sure...but I doubt I'll be bashing it anymore around here. If it's only going to piss people off then what's the point?
Anyway, I know I'm probably fucking going to break my vow already and dig a cyber grave for myself here but I gotta say this one last thing...
Regular Karate...saying that I "didn't want to be involved with the mainstream" or whatever just because I don't like LOTR was really childish man...I have to say. Don't jump to conclusions like that. Now, I know what you're thinking...who am I to call you childish? And your right...but I just wanted to point it out and defend my taste in movies, which I know more about than you because, of course, I know what I like. I like a lot of mainstream films just as much as I like a lot of independent films....you were wrong. Just wanted to point that out, don't get mad.
don't delay, buy it today:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newhorizonpressbooks.com%2Fimages%2Fbooks_lg%2Fstressmanagement.jpg&hash=7765862e6f078ddd74d8791e200fe51bba99ecdb) (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0882821156/ref=lib_rd_btb/104-4410959-4059146?v=glance&s=books)
i think i understand why u don't like todd solondz now..
Lol, thank you! That's what I need...I will not delay. Lol, funny stuff. I definitely do need that...and a sedative or two. I'm sorry.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAlso, with that in mind, Bons ass is mine in the playground after school. Petty complaining.
~rougerum
cmon, bizzatch! You wanna piece!? I'll go fuckin' ork style on you!
Quote from: underdogthey should of make a movie on the hobbit(i know there a cartoon one) because in "lord of the rings" they made Bilbo Baggin look like a wuss. in the hobbit he the hero!.....
peace
Let the Hobbit be. The story of middel-earth would be better of with a self imaginary prelude.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetBons ass is mine
You do what you need to do with bonanzataz's ass, I'll take care of BonBon's just fine. :yabbse-shocked: :yabbse-smiley:
I've heard from two different sources that Peter Jackson was working on a King Kong remake next. I have a link to the working script, too.
king king is the next project. and i have the working script for king kong right here in front of me*
* no i don't**
** shut the fuck up sphinx ***
*** okay
'Hobbitt,' 'Rings' Prequel, in the Works
NEW YORK - Peter Jackson won't be returning to the Shire any time soon. The Oscar-winning director is planning to film "The Hobbit," the prequel to "The Lord of the Rings," trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien, but two studios must first fight over legal rights to the film.
Jackson said New Line Cinema has the rights to make the movie, but MGM has the rights to distribute it.
"I guess MGM's lawyers and New Line's lawyers are going to have a huge amount of fun over the next few years trying to work it all out," he told reporters recently in Los Angeles, according to AP Radio. "I'm obviously busy for a couple of years on 'King Kong' so those lawyers can just go at it for a long time."
"The Hobbit" tells the story of Bilbo Baggins, who found the ring and eventually passes it on to his nephew, Frodo Baggins. Frodo's journey to Mount Doom to destroy the ring is the basis for the "Rings" books and films.
Jackson said if he were going to direct the movie, he'd want it to feel like the rest of the trilogy. On Sunday, Jackson won an Academy Award for best director shared the adapted-screenplay award with his two co-writers for the final "Rings" film, "The Return of the King."
"I'd want Ian McKellen to be back as Gandalf, I'd want it to feel like it was part of the same mythology that we've done with 'Lord of the Rings,'" Jackson said.
"The Return of the King" swept this year's Academy Awards, winning all 11 categories in which it was nominated.
Jackson is in the middle of remaking "King Kong," due out next year, starring Naomi Watts.
sweet
Seeing the Hobbit and returning to Middle-Earth after x years since Return of the King is an experience I look forward to in great anticipation. I'm hoping to get that ticling feeling in my belly, the one I got at the opening scroll of Phantom Menace, and the one you get when you're in love. I'm hoping for the ultimate family flick with this one.
The Hobbit at Least 3 Years Away
Source: AAP March 12, 2005
Director Peter Jackson says it will be at least three years before production may start on "The Lord of the Rings" prequel, The Hobbit, says the AAP.
"Three or four years would be accurate, I would say," Jackson said about the possible film.
Jackson this weekend took a break from his busy schedule filming King Kong in Auckland, stopping by Sydney's Powerhouse Museum to check out the "Lord of the Rings" exhibition.
The rights to J.R.R. Tolkien's novel, "The Hobbit," are split between MGM and New Line Cinema. Jackson said he was keen to return to Middle Earth but that MGM's sale to a consortium led by Sony made the project's future unclear.
"I think there is probably a will and a desire to try and get it made," he added. "But I think it's gonna be a lot of lawyers sitting in a room trying to thrash out a deal before it will ever happen."
The Hobbit Still a Possibility
Alan Lee would like to develop art for it.
The Hobbit still faces legal hurdles before Jackson can make the missing film in the Lord of the Rings saga. However, there's still a chance we'll get to see Bilbo's first journey in a few years' time.
Peter Jackson explained the Hobbit situation to the media during the King Kong premiere gala:
"MGM used to own The Hobbit and then MGM got bought by Sony a few months ago, and so now Sony have the rights — or half of The Hobbit rights, and New Line have the other half. Now, New Line and Sony have to talk to each other and I don't think that anyone's going to call me until those rights issues are resolved. That's entirely between them, so…"
Renowned fantasy artist Alan Lee, who worked for Jackson on both the Lord of the Rings and King Kong, seems to think a movie is still being planned, however. During a presentation of his new book, The Lord of the Rings Sketchbook, in Milan, Lee said that he expected The Hobbit to be made three or four years from now. Lee also answered a few questions for Bad Taste.it, expressing his interest in developing concept artwork for the LOTR prequel.
"If [Peter Jackson does] The Hobbit, it would be nice for me to join the group of artists that would work on it."
If the courtroom disagreements get settled, we might expect a Hobbit announcement at any time. As it is, things don't look too hopeful yet. "Three or four years" is a pretty noncommittal timeline, but the good news is that Jackson still appears interested should the opportunity arise.
please don't happen.
this should never have been given a grapevine thread.
Yeah forget this... lets move on... there are plenty of other new, old, different stories and books he can find... thats a wrap!
New Line doing The Hobbit?
Source: Moviehole
Has the red tape come unstuck long enough for Peter Jackson and New Line to make the much-hankered-for "Lord of the Rings" prequel, "The Hobbit"? Quite possibly.
A spy for TheOneRing.net was recently in the New York offices of New Line Cinema and clearly saw 'The Hobbit' on the film schedule for 2007.
"Please leave my email anonymous as I have some very exciting news to report. I was in New Line's NY offices to discuss upcoming projects when I clearly saw something very intriguing on a year planner. 'The Hobbit' was clearly marked on what looked like July 2007. I couldn't exactly take a moment to investigate the calendar with my audience in the room, but it definitely said 'The Hobbit'. Lets hope this is a PJ project!"
This does fit in with recent rumours suggesting that the WETA workship has indeed begun work on "The Hobbit".
Peter Jackson has always been keen to make the LOTR prequel, but has stressed time and time again that they are complex legal issues that have to be handled before any such film can happen. In short - though New Line has the rights to make the film, MGM have the power to distribute it.
"I think there is probably a will and a desire to try and get it made. But I think it's gonna be a lot of lawyers sitting in a room trying to thrash out a deal before it will ever happen", Jackson said last year.
If the rumour is to believed, it would seem such a partnership may have been agreed on.
"I'd be interested in doing it because I think it would give continuity to the overall chapter", the ever-thinning director said.
Last year, Jackson mentioned a possible 2008 or 2009 release date for such a film, if they could work it out. "Three or four years would be accurate, I would say".
If "The Hobbit" happens – and again, Jackson said it will feature most of the same cast from the previous movies, including Liv Tyler – it'll fix on the hobbit Bilbo Baggins (played by Ian Holm in the previous films) as he travels across the lands of Middle-earth with a band of Dwarves and a wizard named Gandalf on a quest to restore a dwarven kingdom and a great treasure stolen by the dragon, Smaug.
The Hobbit Petition Garners Reaction
Fans one step closer to making a Jackson-directed feature happen.
When it comes to Hollywood, it looks like the squeaky wheel does indeed get the grease. Case in point: Close to 40,000 fans of J.R.R. Tolkein's The Hobbit are one step closer to seeing Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson helm a big screen adaptation for MGM and New Line Cinema.
As reported on TheOneRing.net, a petition to have Jackson and the effects wizards at Weta Workshop tackle The Hobbit — whose film rights are dizzyingly split between MGM and New Line — received 39,116 signatures and was delivered to both studios on Sept. 22. In an unprecedented move, Rick Sands — COO of MGM — actually took time out of his schedule to respond to the fan outcry. Here's what he had to say:
"Peter Jackson's phenomenal success with The Lord of the Rings trilogy makes him the first and most ideal choice for directing The Hobbit. MGM would be thrilled to collaborate with the Academy Award-winning director on this MGM New Line Cinema production. And, I'm sure to the delight of the 50,000 filmgoers who have petitioned us in recent weeks, demanding we bring this film to fruition, we have had a few initial conversations about the project with Mr. Jackson's representatives."
Quote from: Pubrick on December 20, 2005, 03:05:47 AM
please don't happen.
this should never have been given a grapevine thread.
I really don't see the problem here. First of all, there are TRILLIONS (exaggeration) of fans just DYING for this movie to be made. Therefore: it's in demand. Second, he'll make a TON of money! And he did good with the other three. I don't see a problem, it will probably be very good. The Hobbit story was really cool anyway.
I also think anything up and coming can have a Grapevine thread. I mean, I've seen one given to shittier movies.
first of all, i said that 10 months ago. but whatever.
if he does end up making the movie it will be only to get the overbearing fans off his back. he is a nice guy, which is why he can't say no to so many freaks who these days only have Eragon to look forward to in the cinema. he existed before LotR and he made better films before then too. the sooner he can be done with this crap the better.
of course he'll make money, but what the fuck, is he gonna have to adapt the silmarillion after this too? jesus chirst. get over it already. he accomplished everything that anyone could hope for with the LotR trilogy regarding geek adaptations. he gave the fans unprecedented generosity with the extensive DVD releases of those films. he will be inextricably linked with the legend of JRR Tolkien, he doesn't have to bend over every single time the geeks want a new episode.
he'll do the hobbit to help new zealand. then for the love of all that is talented i hope the freaks let the man make films that actually matter.
Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh Talk THE HOBBIT
Source: TheOneRing
Moments ago we received this email from Peter Jackson and his crew down in New Zealand, take a look...
Dear One Ringers,
As you know, there's been a lot of speculation about The Hobbit. We are often asked about when or if this film will ever be made. We have always responded that we would be very interested in making the film - if it were offered to us to make.
You may also be aware that Wingnut Films has bought a lawsuit against New Line, which resulted from an audit we undertook on part of the income of The Fellowship of the Ring. Our attitude with the lawsuit has always been that since it's largely based on differences of opinion about certain accounting practices, we would like an independent body - whether it be a judge, a jury, or a mediator, to look at the issues and make an unbiased ruling. We are happy to accept whatever that ruling is. In our minds, it's not much more complex than that and that's exactly why film contracts include right-to-audit clauses.
However, we have always said that we do not want to discuss The Hobbit with New Line until the lawsuit over New Line's accounting practices is resolved. This is simple common sense - you cannot be in a relationship with a film studio, making a complex, expensive movie and dealing with all the pressures and responsibilities that come with the job, while an unresolved lawsuit exists.
We have also said that we do not want to tie settlement of the lawsuit to making a film of The Hobbit. In other words, we would have to agree to make The Hobbit as a condition of New Line settling our lawsuit. In our minds this is not the right reason to make a film and if a film of The Hobbit went ahead on this basis, it would be doomed. Deciding to make a movie should come from the heart - it's not a matter of business convenience. When you agree to make a film, you're taking on a massive commitment and you need to be driven by an absolute passion to want to get the story on screen. It's that passion, and passion alone, that gives the movie its imagination and heart. To us it is not a cold-blooded business decision.
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.
Ordesky said that New Line has a limited time option on the film rights they have obtained from Saul Zaentz (this has never been conveyed to us before), and because we won't discuss making the movies until the lawsuit is resolved, the studio is going to have to hire another director.
Given that New Line are committed to this course of action, we felt at the very least, we owed you, the fans, a straightforward account of events as they have unfolded for us.
We have always had the greatest support from The Ringers and we are very sorry our involvement with The Hobbit has been ended in this way. Our journey into Tolkien's world started with a phone call from Ken Kamins to Harvey Weinstein in Nov 1995 and ended with a phone call from Mark Ordesky to Ken in Nov 2006. It has been a great 11 years.
This outcome is not what we anticipated or wanted, but neither do we see any positive value in bitterness and rancor. We now have no choice but to let the idea of a film of The Hobbit go and move forward with other projects.
We send our very best wishes to whomever has the privilege of making The Hobbit and look forward to seeing the film on the big screen.
Warmest regards to you all, and thanks for your incredible support over the years.
We got to go there - but not back again ...
Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh
Bad move for New Line, good for Peter Jackson... now he won't be accused of being George Lucas.
If he did make these films, critics would complain that it's more of the same and that LOTR was a more interesting story, both of which would be pretty much true. Comparisons to the Star Wars prequels would be made as well. But now that we'll never know, it seems, everyone is sure that they'll suck without him. New Line will have its hands full finding a director that will make it OK that PJ isn't making them. My bet is we'll hear stories of Alfonso Cuaron, Guillermo del Toro, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, and every other director with an arresting visual style that's not Terry Gilliam being offered the job, but in the end, if they get made at all, they'll go with Brad Silberling or Hammer & Tongs.
THANK GOD.. PJ is seriously lucky, the fates granted him the best career move of a lifetime with the LotR trilogy and now they have intervened when he was about to make the worst. he is truly blessed.
it's like the hand of righteousness acted through the evil greed of new line. funny how they even tempted him with more money, like sheshothim foolishly thought would be the main reason to do it. he's not stupid, he will realise this was a good conclusion.
Quote from: othersparrow on November 20, 2006, 08:40:36 AM
good for Peter Jackson
MGM responds to Hobbit news
Source: Moviehole
Though he thinks he's no longer in the race, MGM says they're not going to give up on Peter Jackson directing "The Hobbit".
Yesterday, the "Lord of the Rings" director told TheOneRing.net that New Line have removed him from the project. The filmmaker's statement also reiterated in detail his stance on "The Hobbit" -- that he is not willing to have a serious conversation about directing the film until his ongoing lawsuit with New Line over what he considers improper accounting practices over "LOTR" profits is settled.
New Line's given reason for proceeding sans Jackson is that the studio's rights to the pic are about to expire, and seeing as the lawsuit with Jackson isn't moving ahead, well, the message was that New Line is.
An MGM spokesperson tells Variety today that they're going to fight for Jackson. The spokesperson states, "The matter of Peter Jackson directing 'The Hobbit' films is far from closed."
You only have to do a Google search for one of the "Rings" forums to see what size backlash this one's had.
Chris Pirrotta, co-founder of TheOneRing.net says "They [the fans] are very upset, - We are seeing calls for everything from letter writing campaigns to a boycott of the studio."
The Lord of the Dead?
Source: Moviehole
No doubt a ploy to keep the infuriated fan boys at bay, New Line are said to have asked Sam Raimi – replacing Peter Jackson – to direct "The Hobbit", according to TheOneRing.net.
The "Spider-Man" and "Evil Dead" filmmaker has a huge following among genre buffs, so the news may just cool a few maddened 'Rings' fans down.
One man that won't be happy with the decision – in fact, he won't be happy until Jackson is re-hired for the job – is actor Ian McKellen, who plays Gandalf in the series.
McKellen tells TheOneRing.net that "It's hard to imagine any other director matching his achievement in Tolkien country."
Jackson Could Still Direct Hobbit
Zaentz wants LOTR helmer.
Just a few days, the news broke that New Line wouldn't hire Peter Jackson to film their movie version of The Hobbit. Jackson himself explained the situation, confirming a lack of involvement due to a lawsuit between his company and New Line, and not due to a lack of enthusiasm for the film.
But what if it's not New Line that gets to make The Hobbit? That could, in fact, turn out to be the case. According to Germany fantasy news site Ebenwald.de, film producer Saul Zaentz expects that New Line's rights to the film will expire and revert back to him next year, at which time he will partner with MGM to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings prequel to life.
The tussle between studios is almost certainly not over, but if Zaentz and MGM end up producing The Hobbit, Jackson is their pick for the job.
"It will definitely be shot by Peter Jackson," said Zaentz. "The question is only when. He wants to shoot another movie first. Next year the rights to The Hobbit will fall back to my company. I suppose that Peter will wait because he knows that he will make the best deal with us. And he is fed up with the studios: to get his profit share on the rings trilogy he had to sue New Line. With us in contrast he knows that he will be paid fairly and artistically supported without reservation." (translation from TheOneRing.net)
It seems clear from Zaentz's statement that Jackson has not actually agreed to any terms yet. As for a timetable, the producer stated he expects production to begin in 2008 or 2009. The Hobbit could also end up as a two-part film, which is a sensible idea considering the winding storyline of the novel.
Variety has an additional comment from MGM on the matter; the studio, which was originally planning to partner with New Line on the Hobbit film, dispute the certainty of Jackson's dismissal by New Line and say the issue is far from closed. Could they be anticipating a Hobbit without Jackson? Will New Line try to rush out a film before their contract to make it expires?
It looks like Peter Jackson will helm these films. In light of this recent article; Jackson, in his letter, is just coming off as coy in the chance New Line may proceed without him and he shouldn't be counting all of his chickens. He is also exasperrating himself of any blame if the case comes to be that. But New Line would be hanging themselves if they rushed this project. What has happened is the beginning a fan base boycott if anyone but Jackson does this project. I doubt Raimi will have the time or interest to involve himself in a project that is headed to backlash so New Line will either bite the bullet and pay off the lawsuit or let the rights fall by the wayside.
Shaye: New Line Blacklists Jackson
Source: Sci-Fi Wire
In the latest comment in the controversy surrounding a proposed movie based on J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit, New Line head Robert Shaye told SCI FI Wire in no uncertain terms that the studio won't work with Lord of the Rings director Peter Jackson on that film or any other film. Ever. At least not as long as Shaye is in charge.
Shaye's comments marked the first time a New Line executive has commented publicly on the fracas since Jackson announced that he has pulled out of the project and also appears to harden New Line's position against Jackson.
"I do not want to make a movie with somebody who is suing me," Shaye—New Line's chief executive officer—said in an interview on Jan. 5 while promoting The Last Mimzy, a New Line family fantasy that marks his first time in a director's chair since 1990's Book of Love. "It will never happen during my watch."
Jackson had told TheOneRing.net in November that he and partner Fran Walsh were bowing out after New Line, which produced the Rings films and has production rights to The Hobbit, told them the studio was moving ahead with the project without them. Jackson has said he won't discuss The Hobbit until a lawsuit against New Line over Rings accounting practices was settled.
As far as Shaye is concerned, Jackson is no longer welcome. "There's a kind of arrogance," Shaye said. "Not that I don't think Peter is a good filmmaker and that he hasn't contributed significantly to filmography and made three very good movies. And I don't even expect him to say 'thank you' for having me make it happen and having New Line make it happen. But to think that I, as a functionary in [a] company that has been around for a long time, but is now owned by a very big conglomerate, would care one bit about trying to cheat the guy, ... he's either had very poor counsel or is completely misinformed and myopic to think that I care whether I give him [anything]."
Shaye, who was also an executive producer on the Rings films, added: "He got a quarter of a billion dollars paid to him so far, justifiably, according to contract, completely right, and this guy, who already has received a quarter of a billion dollars, turns around without wanting to have a discussion with us and sues us and refuses to discuss it unless we just give in to his plan. I don't want to work with that guy anymore. Why would I? So the answer is he will never make any movie with New Line Cinema again while I'm still working for the company."
Shaye said that many of the Rings trilogy actors "suddenly, because, I'm guessing, of Peter's complaint," have declined to participate in celebrating New Line's 40th anniversary. "I'm incredibly offended," he said. "I don't care about Peter Jackson anymore. He wants to have another $100 million or $50 million, whatever he's suing us for. He doesn't want to sit down and talk about it. He thinks that we owe him something after we've paid him over a quarter of a billion dollars. ... Cheers, Peter."
New Line's hardened position against Jackson isn't the end of the story, of course. MGM, which owns the distribution rights to The Hobbit, on Nov. 20 told Variety through a spokesman that "the matter of Peter Jackson directing the Hobbit films is far from closed."
In his own online statement, Jackson said that New Line executive Mark Ordesky, who shepherded the Rings trilogy, argued that New Line is dumping Jackson because the studio has a "limited time option" on the film rights, obtained from Saul Zaentz.
Peter Jackson Answers Lord Of The Rants
Source: Nikki Finke; Deadline Hollywood
I have Peter Jackson's response today to New Line's Bob Shaye telling SCI FI Wire that the studio won't work with the Lord of the Rings franchise director on the proposed movie based on J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit, or any other film. Ever. "I do not want to make a movie with somebody who is suing me. It will never happen during my watch." Shaye said this and more in an interview on January 5th while promoting the film he's directed, The Last Mimzy. Shaye's comments included personal attacks on Jackson, calling him "arrogant... misinformed... myopic..." Shaye also said he was "offended" that many of the Rings trilogy actors "suddenly, because, I'm guessing, of Peter's complaint," have declined to participate in celebrating New Line's 40th anniversary. And Shaye, who himself is obscenely wealthy, kept making a big deal about "the quarter of a billion dollars" paid to Jackson already for the Rings trilogy.
But here's what Peter Jackson says:
"Our issue with New Line Cinema has only ever been about their refusal to account for financial anomalies that surfaced from a partial audit of The Fellowship of the Ring. Contrary to recent comments made by Bob Shaye, we attempted to discuss the issues raised by the Fellowship audit with New Line for over a year but the studio was and continues to be completely uncooperative. This has compelled us to file a lawsuit to pursue our contractual rights under the law. Nobody likes taking legal action, but the studio left us with no alternative. For over two years, New Line has denied us the ability to audit The Two Towers and The Return of the King, despite repeated requests. Film auditing is a common and straightforward practice within the industry and we don't understand why New Line Cinema has taken this position. In light of these circumstances, I didn't think it was appropriate for me to be involved in New Line Cinema's 40th Anniversary video. I have never discussed this video with any of the cast of The Lord of the Rings. The issues that Bob Shaye has with the cast pre-date this law suit by many years. Fundamentally, our legal action is about holding New Line to its contractual obligations and promises. It is regrettable that Bob has chosen to make it personal. I have always had the highest respect and affection for Bob and other senior management at New Line and continue to do so."
Wow, I can't even imagine a Hobbit film without Peter Jackson at the helm.
I get the feeling Brett Ratner's name is going to appear in this thread shortly.
Monaghan, Bean and Tolkien on The Hobbit clash
Source: Moviehole
Many of the former inhabitants of Middle Earth are coming out of the woodwork to voice their opinion – or lack of – on the whole Peter Jackson Vs. Robert Shaye 'Who will direct The Hobbit?' predicament.
Dominic Monaghan, who played pint-sized Merry (and yes, that is what his girlfriend Evangeline Lily likes to call it in the film, says he's a bit wary to pick a side – if only because he hasn't had any trouble with the filmmaker or the studio that produced the "Lord of the Rings" movie.
He tells IF Magazine, "This is a very iffy subject that you have to be careful with professionally as an actor because I've worked with New Line Cinema and I've worked with Pete Jackson and I have good relationships with both of them. My personal feeling as a fan is I think it's a real shame that New Line and Pete Jackson don't seem to be able to work out what's going to happen with THE HOBBIT. I think fans of that franchise would like to see New Line Studios attached with Pete Jackson directing.
"I would bend walls to work with Pete Jackson again, so it's unfortunate that it's turned into a battle of words. For me personally, I can't get involved in that because you're just going to come away with your hands dirty and you're not going to look good."
Meantime, Sean Bean, who played Boromir in the fantasy trilogy, told Moviehole that he's open to the idea of coming back for "The Hobbit" – but it'll depend on who New Line gets to replace Jackson.
"It's very much a creation of Peter Jackson. It's difficult for me to answer that question because I haven't heard about it. It depends on the circumstances, the many, many circumstances. The director, the writing, the whole idea behind it and what they are trying to achieve."
And finally – for the moment, anyway - J.R.R. Tolkien's great grandson Royd Tolkien shared his thoughts on the controversy over at his MySpace page.
"I've had a bunch of people asking my opinion on the recent New Line / Peter Jackson / Hobbit news. These are my thoughts... Before Peter made 'Lord Of The Rings' all I knew of his work was that I really enjoyed his films. That all changed a few years ago. He's not only a filmmaker, he's someone that I now trust and respect. Before the films were made I held massive reservations and fears that JRRT and LOTR would be used as merely a tool for producing revenue and would result ultimately in a substandard film. But it's different now, and it's different because of Peter.
"3 weeks ago those feelings returned. Without him, 'The Hobbit' will become what I had earlier feared LOTR was to become. To find a new director after the time and dedication Peter and all his people put in would not just be wrong, it would also be a bad decision.
"Now I know and understand that some purists would disagree with me, and whilst I again understand and agree with their right to have an opinion, just imagine how bad it could have been without Peter at the helm. Peter didn't just direct a film, he brought together a highly impressive team.
"Think about the different elements of his team; first there was the thoughtfulness and professionalism of Richard Taylor and everyone at Weta who realised the complex detail needed to make it believable; secondly the way Howard Shore's beautiful music compliments and binds the film. In addition to this there is the wonderfully detailed concepts of Alan Lee and John Howe, both of whose insights helped craft the feel of the film. The fabulous costumes of Ngila Dickson, the photography and vision of Andrew Lesnie, and New Zealand, a country that lends itself perfectly to Middle Earth with its breathtaking and varied landscapes. All of these elements and many more were brought together by Peter.
"How could a different director do what Peter has done? How would they find a similar team of people who have the knowledge, passion and understanding of a world they helped create? Surely that doesn't make any sense when Peter already holds the key. I do understand and agree with Peter's position, although I only know on the surface what must be a very difficult and frustrating decision for him. I know it's not simply a matter of saying yes. There's a mountain of issues that lie between New Line and Peter, but there must be some way to resolve this.
"I imagine there's been an awful lot of letters and conversations between both camps, heels have been dug in and hair pulled out. If only there was some way to sort out the stalemate between them and find that common ground and resolution which is needed to do justice to such an important book.
"Whilst I don't know the inner relationship between New Line and Peter, what i do know is that they backed him, all those years ago, to produce LOTR. For that part and many more they played, I'm forever grateful.
"When I saw the end result on screen, knowing that everyone had played a part in putting it there, and were all united in putting it there, it made me smile. I'm sorry but has everyone forgot those simple smiles? Isn't that what making films is all about? If Peter hadn't made LOTR with the respect he showed to my Great Grandfather, I'd not have felt compelled to voice my opinion."
do you guys think of his "well it says here in my speech, hello, my name is Bob Shaye" joke that bombed at the magnolia premiere in 'that moment' whenever you hear his name like I do?
Raimi to Helm The Hobbit?
From the New York POST, PAGE SIX:
NEW HELMER FOR 'HOBBIT'?
FANS of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy are praying for a miracle now that Peter Jackson has officially been severed from "The Hobbit" - and that miracle may be Sam Raimi. Sources say the pressure is on the "Spider-Man" director to helm the project. Raimi, a talented horror and fantasy vet, was approached by New Line Cinema late last year about doing the "Rings" prequel, but no deal was reached. Neither Raimi's agent, his producing partner nor New Line returned our calls. But Raimi is a busy man these days. He recently signed on to produce "The Shadow" and has several other flicks in the hopper. Harry Knowles, who runs the influential movie Web site aintitcoolnews.com, said even though Raimi's name has been bandied about, "Without Peter and Ian McKellan, who stated he won't do it unless Peter directs, I don't think anybody wants to see a 'Hobbit' film. At this juncture, it's on the shakiest of grounds." A few days ago, New Line boss Bob Shaye said he wouldn't work with Jackson again because the director is suing the studio for more of the "Rings" trilogy profits.
Can't wait to see Bruce Campbell as Smog.
Dead Hobbits Society
Weir rumored as director candidate.
Spider-Man 3 director Sam Raimi may be the frontrunner to helm The Hobbit for New Line Cinema -- seeing as how the studio has banned Lord of the Rings filmmaker Peter Jackson from directing it -- but now there's a juicy rumor that the studio may be pursuing another director as well.
According to Ain't It Cool News, Aussie director Peter Weir (Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World) is "being approached" by New Line to direct it.
Weir's eclectic filmography includes Witness, The Year of Living Dangerously, Dead Poets Society, Gallipoli, The Mosquito Coast, Fearless and The Truman Show.
For his part, Raimi has repeatedly said that, while he's open to the possibility of directing The Hobbit, he won't make a decision about what his next project will be until he has put Spider-Man 3 fully behind him and taken a break.
Quote from: MacGuffin on May 10, 2007, 12:31:02 PM
Raimi said that ... he won't make a decision about what his next project will be until he has put Spider-Man 3 fully behind him
in his back pocket.
i really hope raimi's thirst for blood wins out here and he gets the job. weir would make a better movie but i would hate to see another great director waste years of his life on something that will be forgotten after 3 hours by all except a deranged fanbase that will want to make him their slave.
A midlife crisis at New Line
Source: Los Angeles Times
IT'S not unusual for a studio marketing chief to get the boot after a string of box-office failures. But only at New Line Cinema, the studio that often seems to be operating in an alternate universe from the rest of the movie business, could the head of marketing be fired after opening the studio's biggest hit in two years.
That's what happened this week to Russell Schwartz, the respected New Line marketing chief who departed Monday barely two weeks after opening "Hairspray," a movie nearing the $100-million mark, making it the studio's biggest hit since 2005's "Wedding Crashers." Schwartz, who is being replaced by Fox TV marketer Chris Carlisle, oversaw a variety of successes, in particular "Lord of the Rings." But he ended up taking the heat for a string of recent failures, including "The Last Mimzy," a film directed by studio founder Bob Shaye.
As it turns out, Schwartz's departure is just one of many wrenching changes sweeping through the studio. Though New Line made a big fuss celebrating its 40th anniversary this year, the studio has been mired in a horrific slump. The real question facing New Line, with the contracts of its co-chairmen Shaye and Michael Lynne up next September, is whether the studio can be turned around in time to save it.
Relations have been rocky with parent company Time Warner, which many people believe is eager to turn New Line into a less autonomous production entity if Shaye and Lynne depart. For now, the studio ranks last in box-office revenue among all majors. By summer's end, it will have released just six films -- and that's counting "Full of It," a drippy comedy so bad it merited only a one-city release this spring. The studio is counting on "Rush Hour 3" to match "Hairspray's" success, but the rest of year is full of nagging question marks.
September brings "Mr. Woodcock," a Billy Bob Thornton-starring comedy that has bounced around the release schedule for a year, its humor so off the mark that the studio brought in "Crashers" director David Dobkin to do three weeks of re-shoots. "Rendition," a Reese Witherspoon-starring thriller due in October, was so mystifying to preview audiences that its ending has been re-edited to allay audience confusion.
"Martian Child," a romantic comedy due in October after being pulled from earlier release dates, has also undergone surgery, with director Jerry Zucker brought in to shoot new footage. That leaves a lot riding on "The Golden Compass," a fantasy epic that's being positioned as a successor to "Rings." But even "Golden Compass" has soared over its original $180-million budget because of re-shoots, though the studio has limited exposure because of extensive foreign pre-sales and outside investors.
New Line's biggest challenge is finding a way to focus its fuzzy identity. Once a cutting-edge youth comedy and horror film factory, it has lost much of its creative energy. Lionsgate, a hungry indie studio, has replaced New Line as the horror-film franchise leader. Bigger studios have wooed away a variety of hot comics who had their first hits at New Line. Because of various financial deals, New Line's back-end gross deals are worth less than rival studios', meaning the studio is usually the last stop for movie star projects.
If there is any good news here, it's that the studio is trying to reinvent its entire filmmaking process. "We've had a couple of bad years and it's very hard to figure out -- is it the films or is it the marketing?" says the famously blunt Shaye. "It felt like a disservice to everyone to just patch things up. I wanted someone with a fresh approach. It's exciting to me that Chris is from another medium -- he won't have the 'same old, same old' attitude. When you're in a rut, your job is to lift yourself out, which is something we're trying to do on the production side too."
Last October, production chief Toby Emmerich led his entire development staff off to a two-day retreat at the Ojai Valley Inn. "It was a way of saying -- what did we do wrong and how can we fix it?" he explains.
The most dramatic change to come out of the retreat was a new studio attitude toward marketing, which may have played a role in the arrival of Carlisle, a proactive marketer known for such innovations as giving away free DVDs of TV episodes in magazines like Entertainment Weekly.
"We'd always been a very script-driven company," Emmerich says. "But now, with so much competitive pressure in the marketplace, we have to focus as much on marketing as on the script. If we'd had a vision of the one-sheet when we were hearing a pitch, not just after we've made the movie, maybe we wouldn't have suffered through so many of our mistakes."
Emmerich not only invited OTX market research guru Kevin Goetz to speak to the troops, he had him do a market test of some of the films they had in development. "He's the guy who's there when the rubber meets the road, so having him assess the marketability of our casting ideas was a lot better litmus test than a bunch of development execs sitting around talking about whether the third act worked or not."
The studio has also been scrambling to recapture an old strength -- delivering against-the-grain movies. Many of the studio's biggest hits have been with films no one else would make, like "Lord of the Rings," or films in out-of-favor genres, as with "Wedding Crashers," which set off an explosion of R-rated comedies after the genre had been abandoned by studios eager to make safer PG-13 fare.
The studio begins production next month on the big-screen version of "Sex and the City," a project Warner Bros. passed on, despite the presence of all four female stars from the TV series. It is also making "My Sister's Keeper," a Cameron Diaz-starring drama about a dying girl who needs a kidney from her sister. It is a film rival studios would dismiss as a Lifetime TV movie, but New Line is banking on director Nick Cassavetes, who delivered a surprise hit for the studio with "The Notebook."
When it comes to counterintuitive thinking, nothing beats making a sequel to "Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle," a 2004 stoner comedy that was a box-office dud. "Everyone said, 'Are you out of your mind?' Why would you want to do a sequel for a movie that lost money!' " recounts Emmerich. However, the original film was a DVD smash, much like the first installments in the "Austin Powers" series that spawned hit sequels for the studio. Emmerich believes the "Kumar" sequel, due next spring, is more outrageous than the original, citing a plot twist in which its heroes escape from Guantanamo Bay and end up getting high with the president.
"At our test screening," he explains, "George Bush was the highest-rated character in the whole film."
Eager to move ahead with "The Hobbit," New Line has quietly been trying to mend fences with "Rings" filmmaker Peter Jackson, who has sued the company over his share of profits from the first "Rings" films. When asked if it was true that company insiders had been in talks with Jackson's reps, Shaye replied, "Yes, that's a fair statement. Notwithstanding our personal quarrels, I really respect and admire Peter and would love for him to be creatively involved in some way in 'The Hobbit.' "
Moving ahead with "The Hobbit" would tie in to another pivotal New Line issue: In an era when Hollywood is deluged with equity money, will Shaye and Lynne make a run at buying back New Line from Time Warner? Shaye's response was worthy of a U.N. diplomat: "We have not expressed that point of view publicly. And if we ever do, [Time Warner chiefs] Dick Parsons and Jeff Bewkes would be the first to know about it."
A lot is riding on whether New Line can reinvigorate itself. It's often the company on the skids that is most willing to take the kind of daring risk that can turn everything around. Staking the company's future on "Lord of the Rings" was one of the great long-shot gambles in Hollywood history. The real question about New Line is: Can lightning strike twice?
Quote from: MacGuffin on August 13, 2007, 10:34:22 AM
The real question about New Line is: Can lightning strike twice?
with titles like The Last Mimzy, Full of It, and Mr Woodcock being approved, and with rush hour blood on their hands, lightning should strike as many times as it takes to burn the place down.
You forgot Snakes on a Plane... and the Final Destination Trilogy :doh:
'Hobbit' back on track as twin bill
New Line settles dispute with Jackson
Source: Variety
After settling a lawsuit with Peter Jackson on "The Lord of the Rings," New Line co-chairmen/co-CEOs Bob Shaye and Michael Lynne announced jointly with MGM chairman Harry Sloan that the way is clear to turn JRR Tolkien's "The Hobbit" into two live action films.
Rabid fans might be disappointed to know that Jackson and his partner Fran Walsh are on board solely as exec producers at this point. But if Jackson doesn't ultimately direct, the resolution clears the way for "Spider-Man" helmer Sam Raimi to direct the film. While Shaye said that no creative decisions have yet been made, Raimi has long been interested but only if Jackson was involved.
Jackson and Walsh wrote the blockbuster Oscar-winning "LOTR trilogy with Philippa Boyens. The studios are planning to shoot "The Hobbit" simultaneously, as was done on the original trilogy. Aside from continuity of making the films together, New Line and Jackson brought in the trio of films for a spectacularly cost-efficient $400 million. The trilogy had a total worldwide gross just shy of $3 billion.
Pending a resolution of the writer's strike, the studios hope to get a script written and begin production sometime in 2009. MGM and New Line will co-finance the films, with New Line running production and distributing in domestic territories. MGM will distribute internationally.
The key to moving forward was settling all litigation between Jackson and New Line over monies owed the filmmaker. Requests for audits on the receipts from the three films turned into an ugly dispute between the filmmaker, Shaye and Lynne.
"We are very pleased we have been able to resolve our differences, and that Peter and Fran will be actively and creatively involved with 'The Hobbit' movies," Shaye said. "We know they will bring the same passion, care and talent to these films that they so ably accomplished with the trilogy."
Sloan, who had been touting the series as a linchpin in his plans to revive MGM, said: "Peter Jackson has proven himself as the filmmaker who can bring the extraordinary imagination of Tolkien to life and we full-heartedly agree with the fans worldwide who know he should be making 'The Hobbit.' Now that we are all in agreement on 'The Hobbit,' we can focus on assembling the production team that will capture this phenomenal tale in film."
Confirming the settlement, Jackson said: "I'm very pleased that we've been able to put our differences behind us, so that we may begin a new chapter with our old friends at New Line. 'The Lord of the Rings' is a legacy we proudly share with Bob and Michael, and together, we share that legacy with millions of loyal fans all over the world. We are delighted to continue our journey through Middle Earth."
Del Toro doubles up for 'Hobbit'
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Guillermo del Toro is in talks to direct back-to-back installments of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Hobbit," which is being co-financed by New Line and MGM.
Del Toro's name was on a short list of directors who could tackle the project, one of the most anticipated literary adaptations of the past decade. An ill-chosen director for "Hobbit" could put billions of dollars at stake for New Line and MGM and could turn off an audience that encompasses millions of passionate readers, Tolkien fans and obsessive geeks.
Few filmmakers have the cachet that del Toro has, as well as a deep love for the source material, an assured grasp of fantasy filmmaking and an understanding and command of geek culture as well as its respect. Del Toro has built that goodwill through such films as the Oscar-nominated "Pan's Labyrinth," "Hellboy," "Blade 2" (which was made by New Line) and "The Devil's Backbone."
For New Line, making "Hobbit" had become a priority in the wake of its billion-dollar success of the Oscar-winning "The Lord of the Rings" movies, which were co-written and directed by Peter Jackson. Jackson wanted to adapt "Hobbit," but when he got into a dispute with the studio over profit participation, the project went into limbo; neither New Line nor MGM, both rights-holders to the film, wanted to risk alienating fans of the trilogy by making an adaptation that didn't have Jackson's involvement.
The December resolution of the Jackson suit, facilitated by MGM CEO Harry Sloan, paved the way for "Hobbit" to get back on the road to the screen. However, because of other commitments that included "The Lovely Bones" and "Tintin," Jackson could not take on writing and directing roles, opting instead to become an executive producer with approval over creative elements of the pair of films.
Because of the strike, no writer has been hired to adapt Tolkien's children's classic, though that process will be fast-tracked once it's resolved. Del Toro and Jackson will oversee "Hobbit's" writing.
Principal photography for the films, which will be shot simultaneously, is tentatively set for 2009. The production budget is estimated at $150 million per film. The release of the first film is slated for 2010 and the second in 2011.
"Hobbit," which Tolkien initially wrote for his children, was published in the U.K. in 1937 to wide acclaim. It centered on Bilbo Baggins, a hobbit who joins a group of dwarves and the wizard Gandalf on a quest to find the treasure of a dragon named Smaug. Tolkien went on to write "The Lord of the Rings" 17 years later.
Del Toro is putting the finishing touches on Universal's summer release "Hellboy 2: The Golden Army" and recently produced the critically acclaimed ghost story "The Orphanage." He is repped by Endeavor and Exile Entertainment.
I can see the trailer now: Gandalf walking across a beach yelling "Bilbo! Bilbo!"
Tolkien estate sues New Line
Claims studio failed to provide cut of profits
Source: Variety
The Tolkien Trust (a British charity that manages the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien) and publisher HarperCollins brought a $150 million lawsuit against New Line Cinema on Monday, claiming the trust has not received any of its gross profit participation payments for the three films based on the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. The suit was filed Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court.
In addition to the $150 million in compensatory damages, the suit seeks punitive damages, and most important, a declaration from the court that the plaintiffs can terminate any further rights New Line may have to the Tolkien works under the agreements -- including "The Hobbit," a feature adaptation of which is due to be produced by Peter Jackson, director of the "Rings" trilogy, for New Line and MGM.
According to the suit, although the "Lord of the Rings" films produced by New Line are among the most financially successful films ever created, with worldwide gross receipts of nearly $6 billion, New Line has failed to pay the plaintiffs any portion of the gross profit participation to which they are entitled under their deal.
Bonnie Eskenazi, who represents the trust, said, "New Line has brought new meaning to the phrase 'creative accounting.' I cannot imagine how on earth New Line will argue to a jury that these films could gross literally billions of dollars, and yet the creator's heirs, who are entitled to a share of gross receipts, don't get a penny."
New Line declined to comment on the suit.
As outlined in the complaint, which alleges breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud, among several other causes of action, the Tolkien trust is entitled to 7.5% gross profit participation under a 1969 agreement originally made with United Artists. Over the years, the rights passed from UA to Saul Zaentz to Miramax and, ultimately, to New Line.
The trust, run by Tolkien's now elderly children in the U.K., supports a wide range of charitable causes including Save the Children Fund, the Darfur Appeal, Asia Earthquake Appeal and the World Cancer Research Foundation.
While the main thrust of the complaint is that the trust has been paid nothing, the suit enumerates several areas of contention: underreporting homevideo revenue; $100 million payments to Zaentz and Miramax are treated as costs of the film; destruction of documents; and a refusal to allow any audit on the second and third films of the trilogy.
The "Rings" trilogy has been a magnet for litigation. Jackson settled his 2005 suit with New Line in December. He'd claimed he was shortchanged on profit participation, and during the war of words, New Line topper Bob Shaye said he would never work with Jackson again. With the settlement of the lawsuit, New Line announced that Jackson would produce, but not direct, "The Hobbit."
Producer Saul Zaentz, who at one time owned the film rights to the Tolkien properties, has sued New Line over profit participation twice, most recently in December. The suit alleges New Line has refused to make records available to Zaentz's auditors to allow them to conduct an audit, making it impossible to verify whether his profit participation statements are accurate.
Guillermo del Toro on The Hobbit
Source: ComingSoon
On April 2nd, Guillermo del Toro posted the following regarding The Hobbit and its sequel on the official message boards for Hellboy II: The Golden Army:
Whew- Not yet. BUT there has been a lot of movement. And for the last few weeks there has been a lot of creative / cast / crew / visual talks and agreements and we have witnessed great progress in areas that I cannot disclose or that have already leaked from other sources.
I am dying to share news but I have to be patient and wait until the papers are done and my attachment is real. Nevertheless- a LOT of progress in defining the films, their cast and crew. And, may I add, we are all happily in synch about all creative aspects so far and all willing and eager to move forth.
I cannot say more but if all's well the time will come To talk of many things: Of shoes -- and ships -- and sealing wax -- Of cabbages -- and kings --
May Luck be with us
GDT
PD my silnece means nothing more than the fact that we are RUNNING against an impossible deadline on the HBII film, poster, campaign, ADR, VFX, etc I am SWAMPED.
BUT- Expect good things in the next 2 weeks and a nice item at COMICON. See you there-
New Line Cinema is planning a 2010 release for the first "Hobbit" film and a 2011 release for the second.
Guillermo del Toro to direct 'Hobbit'
Filmmaker signs on helm feature and sequel
Source: Variety
In a major step forward on "The Hobbit," Guillermo del Toro has signed on to direct the New Line-MGM tentpole and its sequel.
The widely expected announcement -- which had been rumored for several weeks -- came Thursday afternoon jointly from exec producers Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh, New Line president Toby Emmerich, and Mary Parent, newly named chief of MGM's Worldwide Motion Picture Group.
Del Toro's moving to New Zealand for the next four years to work with Jackson and his Wingnut and Weta production teams. He'll direct the two films back to back, with the sequel dealing with the 60-year period between "The Hobbit" and "The Fellowship of the Ring," the first of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy.
New Line is overseeing development and will manage production. Both pics are being co-produced and co-financed by New Line Cinema and MGM, with Warner Bros. distributing domestically and MGM handling international.
Del Toro won't leave for New Zealand immediately as he's still in post-production on U's "Hellboy 2," due out in July. His previous pic, "Pan's Labyrinth," was released through New Line's Picturehouse and set a record as the highest grossing Spanish language film in U.S. box office history.
The official signing of Del Toro comes four months after New Line settled a lawsuit with Jackson over "The Lord of the Rings" and announced that it had agreed with MGM to turn J.R.R. Tolkien's "Hobbit" into two live-action films. Sam Raimi had been preceived as the initial front-runner as director but Del Toro had emerged in recent months as the likely candidate.
The studios didn't give a start date on production and don't yet have a script. Though no screenplay deal's been set, it's expected that the "LOTR" scripting team of Jackson, Walsh and Philippa Boyens will collaborate with Del Toro.
With Del Toro blocking out four years for the project, it's likely that the studios are aiming at starting shooting next year and releasing the films in late 2011 and 2012.
Jackson's WETA stages, post-production and visual effects facilities -- built for "The Lord of the Rings" -- will be used for both films. And New Zealand will again be the site of Middle-earth, with the story centering on Bilbo Baggins taking the Ring of Power from Gollum.
Quote from: MacGuffin on April 24, 2008, 07:11:45 PM
Guillermo del Toro to direct 'Hobbit'
Filmmaker signs on helm feature and sequel
He'll direct the two films back to back, with the sequel dealing with the 60-year period between "The Hobbit" and "The Fellowship of the Ring," the first of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy.
Considering that to the best of my knowledge Tolkien never wrote about this period, this means they're going to make it up themselves?
Guillermo Del Toro Addresses 'Hobbit' Fans' Concerns, Talks Possible Casting
'If you don't think Peter [Jackson] did a fabulous job, very likely you won't think I will,' director says.
Source: MTV
When Guillermo del Toro was officially announced as the director of "The Hobbit" and a second, transitional film last week, it became The Day Middle-earth Stood Still for every J.R.R. Tolkien fan.
How would the visionary director of "Pan's Labyrinth" and "Hellboy" approach hobbits and dwarves, riddles and Rivendell, the Battle of Five Armies and the great dragon Smaug? And perhaps most important, just what is that second film going to be about, anyway?
For his part, Del Toro is more than happy to discuss what he's got in his pocketses — and up his sleeve as well — revealing to MTV News his vision for the second film, his views on heroic fantasy (and how they've changed), his dream cast, the look and feel of "The Hobbit," his favorite scenes and more.
MTV: Peter Jackson created a defined film vocabulary for the look and feel of Middle-earth. How will you make it your own? Will you have to subvert yourself?
Guillermo del Toro: We are not attempting to do an exact replication. "The Hobbit" occurs a little over a half-century before the events of "Lord of the Rings." It transverses areas of Middle-earth that Peter did touch on [but also] many others he did not. There are many creatures he did not touch. I am expecting to create a large portion that is very new.
On the other hand, I am very comfortable living within the walls of the world he created during the second half of the second film. It's a world I absolutely love, visually. When you come to a film with a lot of precedents, you have to come to it with a lot of humility and a lot of enthusiasm. No matter what, you end up putting your stamp on it. Everything feels right to me. I don't worry about subverting myself.
MTV: Just two years ago, you were quoted as saying, "I was never into heroic fantasy." Did your views change?
Del Toro: I wasn't. I completely gravitated towards horror. For whatever reason, I never hooked into sword and sorcery. I really rediscovered fantasy through my love of filmmakers as a filmmaker. Something kind of popped and jelled. I now can empathize with one side of the fantasy genre without ever wandering into lubricated musclemen with giant swords. "The Hobbit" occupies a particular seat in fantasy that is irreplaceable. They can dredge up old cadavers in my closet. I'm not running for president. I'm a f---ing filmmaker! I'm just trying to make the movie I want to.
MTV: How do you view the transition period of the second film within the context of the larger "legendarium"?
Del Toro: [The intervening years between "The Hobbit" and "LOTR"] is the transition from the golden years to the rise of Sauron. It's essentially the beginning of civil war and uprisings. It's a very interesting time.
MTV: How much of that film, then, will be based on Tolkien's writings?
Del Toro: We're going to start with "The Hobbit," in the writing process. We'll see if we can fully contain it in one movie, which I think is perfectly possible. We'll take it from there. We just outlined what we want out of [the second film]. We outlined what we expect to tell. It's just plans and ideas right now.
MTV: Do you know who your protagonist would be in the second one? Gollum, perhaps? Or Aragorn? Gandalf?
Del Toro: [It's much more about] trying to reconcile the facts of the first movie with a slightly different point of view. You would be able to see events that were not witnessed in the first film [like driving the Necromancer from Mirkwood]. You would come to them in a roundabout way.
MTV: Do you view "The Hobbit" as a children's story?
Del Toro: I view it as such generally. It belongs on that shelf on the bookshelf. But what is quite touching and miraculous to me about it is that it also reflects the transition from innocence to the loss of innocence. It is a story about a beautifully carefree creature who learns about war and violence. The movie turns darker as it progresses. Don't expect me to do "The Neverending Story." I feel that my zone of comfort is perfectly met with this film — otherwise I wouldn't do it.
MTV: Will Ian Holm return as Bilbo?
Del Toro: [Holm] certainly is the paragon we aspire to. He will be involved in some manner, I'm sure. But at his age ... it's too early to tell. We are just in the early stages. It's too early to make commitments of that sort. We prefer to let the screenplay and the way the character comes to life guide us in the casting. I have many people in mind. Anything [else] I say will be used against me in a court of law. [Laughs.]
MTV: Andy Serkis [Gollum] and Ian McKellan [Gandalf] are involved though, yes?
Del Toro: We can be pretty sure that we're getting back Andy, Ian, [composer] Howard Shore and [conceptual designer] John Howe. I am going to supplement the team of designers with other choices. People that come from the comic book worlds, not in the superhero sense, but the darker, more European type of comics. We're going to enhance the team of artists that conceptualized the first trilogy to create this earlier, more golden time and the way it starts to get tarnished.
MTV: Is there a scene in "The Hobbit" you're most excited to bring to life?
Del Toro: The most beautiful scene in the book, I believe, is [the chapter] "Riddles in the Dark." I truly love it from a literary point of view and from an atmospheric point of view. It is my hope that when "The Hobbit" gets scary, it will get really scary. Peter is a master of the macabre, but I think these scary moments will have a tonal distinction from the original trilogy.
[But] the thing I've been most excited about are the spiders in Mirkwood. Smaug is one of my favorite characters in literature. It's such a beautiful and symbolic creature, totemic in what it represents and the power it has. My favorite creature in all of fantasy would be the dragon because of that book.
MTV: Do you have an idea for how you want Smaug to appear?
Del Toro: Well, yeah, but why spoil it? I do. One of the first things I discussed with Peter was that and the look and feel of the spiders, how they move. Those are the flavors that you will not enjoy until the plate is served.
MTV: You are treading on very sacred ground. Do you have a message to the fans to reassure them?
Del Toro: If you [go] deep enough you will find people that hate any depiction of Tolkien. They dislike any Tolkien that is not Tolkien. The people that are going to like it are going to like it because I come from a genuine place. And the people that are going to dislike it are going to dislike it because I'm coming from a genuine place. There's no two ways about it. You have to follow your instincts. My message is simple: If you don't think [Peter] did a fabulous job, very likely you won't think I will. If you think he did, I will do my best to make you proud of me.
I am getting more excited about these films by the day. Would be awesome for a Aragorn-centered film starring Viggo.
I have full confidence in GDT - if you squint he even looks a bit like PJ.
McKellen to reprise Gandalf role in "Hobbit"
British actor Ian McKellen will reprise the role of the wizard Gandalf in the upcoming movies based on J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Hobbit," he told a film magazine.
The 68-year-old star played the part in the hugely successful "Lord of the Rings" trilogy directed by Peter Jackson. Mexican filmmaker Guillermo del Toro has been named to direct two films based on "The Hobbit."
"Yes, it's true," McKellen told Empire magazine.
"I spoke to Guillermo in the very room that Peter Jackson offered me the part and he confirmed that I would be reprising the role. Obviously, it's not a part that you turn down, I loved playing Gandalf."
Del Toro, whose credits include "Pan's Labyrinth," will move to New Zealand for the next four years to work on both "Hobbit" films with executive producer Jackson, according to New Line Cinema and Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios.
The studios have said that filming will begin in 2009, with tentative release dates set of 2010 for the first film and 2011 for the sequel.
Del Toro, Jackson Talk Hobbit
Source: SciFi Wire
Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro, who will respectively executive-produce and direct two upcoming films based on J.R.R. Tolkien's novel The Hobbit, interacted with each other and fans during an international Internet chat dubbed "An Unexpected Party," answering dozens of the 6,000-plus questions sent in and offering tidbits about things to come.
According to the filmmakers, 2009 will be dedicated to preproduction on both movies, with the films set to be shot back-to-back in New Zealand in 2010. The Hobbit will open in December 2011, followed by the tentatively titled Film Two in 2012. Several actors and behind-the-scenes figures from Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy are confirmed or likely to return, among them co-stars Ian McKellen and Andy Serkis, writer-producers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, composer Howard Shore and conceptual designers Alan Lee and John Howe.
Del Toro and Jackson confirmed that the first film will tell the story of The Hobbit, while the second will be an original tale bridging the period between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. And, they said, del Toro's films will be designed to stand on their own while syncing up with Jackson's Rings trilogy.
"I believe that it's a little bit of both; the world must feel like the same world, [in] the aspect ratio, music, essential established costume and production design trademarks," del Toro wrote from England. "But I would love to bring a lot of new flavors to the table. The Hobbit is, in essence, an overture to a massive symphonic work, so main themes are reprised, but new modulations and new colors are introduced, thematically and texturally."
Jackson, who was in New Zealand, added, "I love Guillermo's symphonic allusion. The 'overture' can have a different flavor, a different texture, yet be a carefully crafted introduction to what's to follow. Film Two is perfect to dramatize the shift in Middle-earth that propels us into the dark days of LOTR. If LOTR is World War I, then The Hobbit is like an Edwardian adventure tale, set in the days before [the] world notices the looming storm clouds."
Jackson, responding to a question about why he chose not to direct The Hobbit films, explained that "essentially competing against my own movies" seemed to be an unsatisfying way to spend the next five years. However, he wrote, "I love Tolkien and care deeply about the movies we made. I couldn't bear the idea of somebody else making them without our involvement. Being a writer and producer is the perfect way for me to work here. Guillermo has the ultimate responsibility of directing, and for him it's easier to make these movies feel different, simply because he's not me, and he therefore has an original vision, with new ideas to offer."
Del Toro, meanwhile, explained that The Hobbit was the only one of Tolkien's works with which he connected as a youth and that he dreamt of Mirkwood and Smaug for "ages." However, once he saw that Jackson had undertaken the Lord of the Rings trilogy he assumed that The Hobbit "would never come to be" for him. When it did, he leapt at the opportunity.
"The proposition of spending half a decade [to] craft these films received, as Peter will attest, a five-second 'YES' from me," del Toro wrote. "To people in my industry I'm usually a guy that tries to generate his own projects, and I remain very elusive when people try and attach me to big projects. For decades I have passed on films of enormous scope, but this is a fantastic privilege and I immediately said, 'Yes.'"
I am pumped for this because everyone seems to be doing it for the right reasons. I am still skeptical of this original "Film Two" idea however...I don't like the idea of Del Torro, Walsh, et al trying to write what Tolkein would have.
Guillermo Del Toro Answers 'Hobbit' Fans' Questions About Returning 'Rings' Cast, Religion And More'
The promise of that land is absolutely mind-boggling!' director gushes about upcoming films.
By Shawn Adler; MTV
The word "visionary" gets thrown around these days all too casually, but director Guillermo del Toro is one man for whom it is both earned and wholly appropriate. Now, with the release of "Hellboy II: The Golden Army" only two weeks away, del Toro is already shifting his vision to the future, training his childlike gaze on Bilbo Baggins, Gandalf the Grey, Thorin Oakenshield and other beloved characters from J.R.R. Tolkien's famous legendarium.
MTV News recently sat down with del Toro and brought along a whole host of fan questions on "The Hobbit" (as well as some of our own). The Mexican director talked about why Peter Jackson told him to lose weight, which "LOTR" stars might be returning and how Tolkien's personal faith will influence the project. (And don't forget to head over to the MTV Movies blog for even more answers from del Toro.)
Q: In the past year, I've spoken with Viggo Mortensen, Cate Blanchett, Elijah Wood, Sean Astin and Orlando Bloom, and all of them say they want back in. Who should wait by the phone? — MTV News
Del Toro: They said that? I'm a f---ing fan of all of them! The thing is that here and there in the book, in the existing book, there are places to have them almost casually, in secondary roles that are not that important but that would be incredibly enhancing as cameos go. But it is the second movie that is the treasure trove of possibilities. I believe the second movie will be present as an opportunity of enthusiasm and creation. I frankly look forward to that one so much. I really want us to prove that we have a solid concept for that, but the promise of that land is absolutely mind-boggling! I can't wait to mount on the horse and ride, and I hate horses!
Q: When can we hope to hear the title of [the second "Hobbit" film]? — Blueman
Del Toro: When we know where we are going to take it. We are going to have the big pow-wow about story and script, and start those processes officially after taking notes and readings and talking. Then we'll know. Funnily enough, I think the title is incredibly delicate on the second film because it will immediately tell you what it is. It cannot be "The Hobbit 2" because that sounds like "Electric Boogaloo"! [Laughs]
Q: You've repeatedly mentioned your desire to include Ian Holm, but given a lot of circumstances, it seems unlikely to me that he would return for all the action. Would you use him as a narrator, or in a framing device? Something like him reading "There and Back Again" to young hobbits? — MTV News
Del Toro: If Ian Holm is able and willing and in health and in disposition, I would love more than anything to use him. ... I think a lot of people don't take into account the inevitable physical exertion that making two movies back-to-back entails.
So that said, I think that there are many possibilities to keep Ian Holm involved in the movie. I will be as tricky as I can to keep him involved. A narration would be one resource I would absolutely embrace. But as I said before, I believe he created a beautiful, memorable character. He owns it, and we have to honor that. If there is any recasting for the younger part and so forth, it will permeate that decision and affect it. At the end of the day, the answer is we will keep him as involved as humanly and physically possible.
Q: What's the best advice Peter Jackson gave to you about this process? — MTV News
Del Toro: To lose weight! He said to me, "Lose weight, man, because you are not going to survive it if you are that fat!"
Q: Tolkien was a man of deep faith. Do you foresee exploring any theological or spiritual themes in making "The Hobbit" movie ? — K. Cassidy
Del Toro: I believe "The Hobbit" is a narrative that contains characters that are very symbolic of certain human traits. Obviously, pride and greed are easily found in Smaug the Dragon. Then the humble, sort of a sturdy moral fiber that Bilbo has very much represents the idea that Tolkien had about the little English man, the average English man. The dwarves represent other qualities, the elves represent other qualities and, like, in any fairy tale or fantasy narrative that is worth it, all these characters conform to a view of the world that is spiritual, ethical and moral. I think that this morality, this spiritual tale, will play a [large] part in the movie.
Q: I am wondering if you have given any thought to ways you might incorporate some of Tolkien's insights via his paintings and sketches? — Arathorn Jax
Del Toro: I think Tolkien has a great sense of design in his paintings. He has this fusion between medieval illuminations, art nouveau and art deco. It's a very strange fusion. Obviously, there is a guideline there to be followed — up to a point! I do intend to use some of the cues that he laid out that were not used in the trilogy. They will be another influence [I use]; they will not be a dogma just to follow verbatim.
'Hobbit' duo adds writing duties
Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro to pen adaptations
Source: Hollywood Reporter
Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro's search for writers for "The Hobbit" and its companion film has ended, with the filmmakers deciding that no one is better suited for the task than they are.
Del Toro, who is directing the movies, will team with the "Lord of the Rings" filmmaker and "Hobbit" executive producer Jackson to adapt the J.R.R. Tolkien book and write its follow-up. Also joining them in the writers room are Frank Walsh and Philippa Boyens, both of whom collaborated with Jackson on the "Rings" trilogy.
The news caps off an eight-month search for a scribe to tackle the coveted task of bringing the literary classic to the big screen. When Jackson and New Line resolved their differences over profit participation in the "Rings" films, Jackson said he would not be writing the "Hobbit" movies because of other commitments, though he does have approval over creative elements in his role as exec producer.
Later, when del Toro came aboard, the deal was that the two would oversee the search for scribes and the writing. In the interim, three factors came into play: 1) The filmmakers saw their schedules open up, 2) During the general discussions about the films, they realized how much affection they had for the material, and 3) They also realized that in order to make the release dates, the process required people intimate with Tolkien's world of Middle Earth. All led to the decision that they would do the honors themselves along with Walsh and Boyens.
"Hobbit," written by Tolkien for his children years before the "Rings" trilogy, follows a young Bilbo Baggins, who finds his comfortable life turned upside down when the wizard Gandalf takes him on a journey for a hoard of treasure that involves trolls, humans, Gollum and his ring of invisibility and a dragon named Smaug.
"Hobbit" and its sequel are being co-produced, co-financed and co-distributed by New Line and MGM, with New Line managing production and handling domestic distribution through Warner Bros. and MGM distributing internationally.
The films will be shot simultaneously, with principal photography tentatively set for a late-2009 start. New Line and MGM hope to release "Hobbit" in 2011 and its sequel the following year.
nice.
'Hobbit' Films Will Be One 'Continuous Journey,' Promises Guillermo Del Toro
Source: MTV
What's better than a second breakfast? For fans of J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth legendarium, it's the thought of two separate "Hobbit" films, the first of which comes our way in 2011.
But what could be even better still than two "Hobbit" films? How about just one? Make that one movie in two parts, director Guillermo del Toro insisted in an exclusive interview with MTV News, refusing, like Tolkien himself before him, to fractionalize his overall story into component parts.
"The reality is that we stopped talking the first movie and second movie, and we just started taking about the movie - the two episodes, or two parts, as if they were a single piece of narrative," he said of scriptwriting meetings between "Lord of the Rings" director Peter Jackson, his filmmaking team of Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, and del Toro himself.
"We don't even call it the bridge movie, we just call it 'The Movie.' And this is great. When we found what reverberated, and we found it in one of our virtual meetings - we understood. It's a movie."
Intended or not, the methodology ties in nicely with the material, since Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" story, popularized in three separate volumes, was similarly intended to be one large, single volume work.
Practically, the division (or lack thereof) means little in so far as solving the narrative riddles of the second episode. (What will the second episode contain? What characters will return, etc?) Well, except for the very end that is, which will lead right into "The Fellowship of the Ring," del Toro revealed.
"We all agree that if we do our job right, it should all feel like a continuous journey. That's what we're striving for," Del Toro said. "You should see a movie that's five pictures long. If we do our job right, you put in 'The Hobbit' and you wind up watching the entire Pentology!"
And let me be the (second) to say: That would be one heck of a long day.
"But it's a good day!" Del Toro laughed with my colleague Josh Horowitz. "Better than paying taxes!"
As for the end of the first episode, the movie everyone assumed will follow the events of the novel fairly accurately? Where in the text will it finish?
"We are finding out," GDT quipped. "I think Smaug dies in the first movie. So draw your own conclusions."
Guillermo del Toro Gives Hobbit Update
ComingSoon.net talked to director Guillermo del Toro about The Hobbit and its sequel last night at an event for the new Hellboy II: The Golden Army DVD.
He says they won't start the casting process until they've finished writing: "Literally, like every week, what you discover writing the two movies, writing the two stories, it changes. So, every week there's a discovery, and anything we say this week would be contradicted next week. Certainly that would be true in casting. Why create hopes or why create expectations if down the line you're going to go, 'You know what? That was not a good idea.'"
Regarding the creatures, he says there are so many more to be explored in "The Hobbit" films that were not explored in "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. "We want to do a muscle-driven, radio-controlled suits for a couple of things. I already started that with Wink in 'Hellboy II.' Wink was pushed as far as we could within the time limits and the budget limits of the movie and we're going to take what we learned and apply it.
"Smaug is the creature in 'The Hobbit.' The way Tolkien wrote it, already, is magnificent. It's already a fantastic character. So, obviously, dragons, you ask every person what their best favorite dragon is, they will give you a different answer. In my mind, what we're going to attempt on the design of this creature and the creation of this creature needs to push the envelope beyond anything you've ever seen on that kind of creature.
"There is some stuff that has been done with dragons that I find... there are very few landmarks created for me. One of the best and one of the strongest landmarks that almost nobody can overcome is 'Dragonslayer.' The design of the Vermithrax Pejorative is perhaps one of the most perfect creature designs ever made. So, what you have to be careful is not to try to be distinctive just to be distinctive, but Smaug has certain characteristics that make him unique already. I am bursting at the seams about spilling the beans, but I won't because I would be shot."
Dominic Monaghan Planning To Return For 'Lord Of The Rings' Prequels
Actor says 'Hobbit' producers want to 'bring back some of those characters' that 'LOTR' fans know and love.
Source: MTV
PARK CITY, Utah — In the eyes of many geeks, "Star Wars" ruined its perfect batting average by going back to the well, as did "Indiana Jones" and several other notable franchises. But now, Dominic Monaghan is promising that "Lord of the Rings" won't leave a similar bad-sequel aftertaste in the mouths of its beloved fans.
And, to ensure it, Monaghan and his fellow Hobbits are making plans to once again return to Middle-earth.
"They really want us to come back, and I think there's a really strong chance that we might be back," Monaghan revealed to MTV News at the Sundance Film Festival, doing publicity for his Slamdance breakout "I Sell the Dead."
While it remains to be seen whether his old friends Elijah Wood, Sean Astin and Billy Boyd feel the same way about returning for "The Hobbit" or another possible prequel in development, Monaghan was eager to add his name to the returning "LOTR" talents. "It's being produced by Peter Jackson, who obviously made the first films, and his special-effects company are making it," he explained. "It's directed by Guillermo del Toro, who I think, outside of Peter Jackson, would be the number-one person to give this any amount of the tenderness that it deserves. Obviously, Ian McKellen's going to be back for it, and Andy Serkis is going to be back for it."
As die-hard fans of J.R.R. Tolkien know all too well, however, the participation of Monaghan and friends means that new scenes will have to be added to the beloved book. "We're not in 'The Hobbit,' no, but I think the idea in [Jackson's, Del Toro's and the other producers'] heads is that the trilogy of the 'Lord of the Rings' films was so beloved by the fans that they're really keen to try to say thank you for the support that they gave to the 'Lord of the Rings' movies and possibly bring back some of those characters that they know and love," he explained of new story lines.
"It's a completely different story," Monaghan continued. "You don't have the same characters all the way through it. And I always read 'The Hobbit' as being more of a children's introduction to the story, and then 'Lord of the Rings' was kind of the main piece."
As for the "going back to the well too many times" stigma that haunted Indiana Jones last year, Monaghan insists he isn't afraid of pushing his perfect record as Meriadoc "Merry" Brandybuck a bit further.
"I don't really see myself retiring [Merry]. I don't have any kind of retirement ideas," said Monaghan, whose angst-ridden "Lost" character Charlie Pace has brought him an equal amount of fame in recent years. "You obviously want to be careful that you're playing the same beats. You just re-explore that character. And I think once you're in your Hobbit feet and your Hobbit costume, it's pretty easy to get back in there.
"And you would watch the films," he said of his plans to prepare to play Merry again. "And try to understand the tonality of what you were trying to play. I was trying to play a boy, like an 11-year-old boy [in the original films], so I would just go back into what it was like to be a boy and have that sense of innocence [again]. So it's not a huge push to get me back in there.
"I've been chatting with Pete and [writers] Fran [Walsh] and Philippa [Boyens] about the chance of us coming back," he said of the recent activity that fans all over the world will undoubtedly find precious. "I think the fans of the first three 'Lord of the Rings' films will be charmed by going back into the world."
'Hobbit' Director Guillermo Del Toro Says Script, Visualization, Casting Under Way
'We are already about a good third of the road [along] with some of the creatures,' director says.
Source: MTV
With work on "The Hobbit" really starting to move forward, Guillermo del Toro updated MTV News this week with exclusive scripting, casting and pre-production news, including confirmation that "Hellboy" creator Mike Mignola will be coming aboard for early visualization.
"We are sketching and designing with Weta's John Howe, and [Adam Lee]," del Toro offered. "Mike Mignola is coming soon. He's going to do a stint on the design team."
This is good news for fans of Mignola, who worked with del Toro on both "Hellboy" films as well as providing some art for "Pan's Labyrinth."
"In about two, three months we're going to full-on have more designers come on ... from outside Weta. But we are already about a good third of the road [along] with some of the creatures — some really interesting and strong designs."
The script is currently del Toro's biggest task, though he was reluctant to specify exactly how far along he is at the moment.
"We're working on the outline. We did the cards, and then after the cards, we're fleshing out the outline. It's a titanic task. It sounds easy, but, uh, it's, I think, the harder thing to untangle."
Casting is still at a very early stage, but del Toro revealed that there's a very short list of names that he would like to see playing Bilbo Baggins.
"I can say safely, about four," he explained, but at this stage he has not talked with any of them.
"We make it a point not to talk to them — or any other actors that are not confirmed — because I think it's bad policy."
One of the biggest questions on the minds of Tolkien fans right now is what the current plan is for the proposed second del Toro entry, one that would bridge the gap between When asked whether that one had a title yet, del Toro could only joke, "I think that if I told you anything right now ... there's a sniper across the road."
World Excl: Jackson/Del Toro Talk Hobbit
The duo reveal the make-up of both films
Source: Empire Online
And the world exclusives from our 20th birthday issue – guest-edited by Steven Spielberg – continue to pile up...
We've known for a while that Peter Jackson and Guillermo Del Toro's eagerly-awaited adaptation of the Lord Of The Rings prequel, The Hobbit, would comprise two movies, due in December 2011 and 2012. But the make-up of those two movies has been up for debate... until now.
We spoke exclusively to both Del Toro and Jackson for our birthday issue, and they told us the latest, which is...
"We've decided to have The Hobbit span the two movies, including the White Council and the comings and goings of Gandalf to Dol Guldur," says Del Toro.
"We decided it would be a mistake to try to cram everything into one movie," adds Jackson. "The essential brief was to do The Hobbit, and it allows us to make The Hobbit in a little more style, if you like, of the [LOTR] trilogy."
So there you go. The second film will not, as had previously been suggested, a film that will bridge the 60-year gap between The Hobbit and the start of Fellowship Of The Ring.
Hugo Weaving to Return for The Hobbit
Source: TheOneRing.net
Guillermo del Toro has confirmed in a chat with BBC Radio 5's Simon Mayo (at the 02:10:55 mark) that Hugo Weaving will reunite with Andy Serkis and Ian McKellen in The Hobbit.
Del Toro says the trio will return "...as the roles they originated in the trilogy." Weaving of course played Elrond in "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy.
The first of the two films is scheduled to be released in December of 2011 followed by the second in December of 2012.
SDCC: Peter Jackson Gives a 'Hobbit' Progress Report
by Elisabeth Rappe; Cinematical
While speaking to fans during Comic Con, Peter Jackson revealed that The Hobbit is much farther away than fans have been led to believe: "Everyone assumes we're casting but we're not," he said. Recently rumors suggested that Jackson (who's producing this time around while Guillermo del Toro directs) would use this time at Con to announce who would play Bilbo Baggins in the much-anticipated double-feature prequel, though not only did he not reveal any names -- he claimed they're not even close to choosing one.
Jackson said that they're three or four weeks away from handing in the first draft of the script, and that the film isn't even really greenlit yet -- they still need to finish writing, get approval on the script, and have the budget approved before we will see any actual progress in the way of casting. While there is no doubt that the film will get made, it's still in that squishy working stage, and we shouldn't be scanning the trades for a Bilbo Baggins casting announcement for a few more months.
Hopefully, though, things will remain on target so that we'll all be able to watch the first Hobbit film when it hits theaters in December of 2011. We'll have more from Peter Jackson in a little while as Cinematical was one of a handful of sites who got to sit down for an intimate chat with the filmmaker. Stay tuned ...
Jackson, del Toro still working on 'Hobbit' scripts
Production on pics expected to begin next summer
Source: Variety
Peter Jackson is predicting production of "The Hobbit" films will start in the middle of next summer, a few months later than expected.
Jackson made the projection in a recent interview with a German web site to promote "The Lovely Bones," which he directed and produced.
Jackson explained he's hoping to complete the second "Hobbit" script -- written with Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens and director Guillermo del Toro -- by the beginning of next year, which would trigger calculation of the budget and setting a start for lensing in New Zealand. "The Hobbit" films are being exec produced by Jackson and Walsh with MGM and New Line co-financing.
No castings have been announced and it's unclear whether "The Hobbit" films will keep their previously announced release dates of December 2011 and December 2012. New Line parent Warner Bros. will handle domestic and MGM will have international.
Tolkien's book, published in 1937, follows the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, who obtains the ring that was the centerpiece for "The Lord of the Rings."
Following the success of the "Rings" trilogy, Jackson sued New Line over profits from the first film. Though they settled in 2007, that slowed development of "The Hobbit."
New Line was then sued last year by Tolkien's heirs and HarperCollins over allegations that the Tolkien Estate had not been the 7.5% of profits to which it was entitled from the three films. The suit, which demanded $220 million in compensation, was settled in September with the terms not disclosed and the heirs asserting that production could go ahead unimpeded.
McKellan: 'Hobbit' to begin shooting in July
New Line hasn't officially announced start date
Source: Variety
Ian McKellan is predicting that the first of the two "Hobbit" films will start shooting in July, even though New Line hasn't officially greenlit the pics.
"We have not set a start date yet," a New Line spokeswoman said Wednesday.
Peter Jackson has been aiming to complete the second "Hobbit" script -- written with Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens and director Guillermo del Toro -- which would trigger calculation of the budget and setting a start for lensing in New Zealand.
"The Hobbit" films are being exec produced by Jackson and Walsh with MGM and New Line co-financing. The two pics are based on JRR Tolkien's novel, which follows the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, who obtains the ring that was the centerpiece for "The Lord of the Rings."
McKellan declared on his personal web site that shooting will begin in New Zealand with filming taking more than a year.
"Casting in Los Angeles, New York City and London has started," McKellan added. "The first draft is crammed with old and new friends, again on a quest in Middle Earth. The director Guillermo del Toro is now living in Wellington, close to the Jacksons' and the studio in Miramar."
Tolkien's novel is set 60 years before "The Lord of the Rings." A few "Rings" cast members, such as Andy Serkis and McKellen, will make return appearances in "The Hobbit."
New Line shares financing rights with MGM/UA, which bought the original rights in 1969. The Lion could conceivably sell those rights as part of MGM's restructuring.
Warner topper Alan Horn said earlier this year that the most probable scenario would be a release of the first film in the fourth quarter of 2012.
Filmmaker Del Toro to give 'Hobbit' new look
HONG KONG - One of Peter Jackson's frequent collaborators says the "Lord of the Rings" director passed the torch to Mexican filmmaker Guillermo del Toro to give the trilogy's two-part prequel, "The Hobbit," a fresh look.
After the huge success of the "Rings" series, Jackson is now working on adapting the J.R.R. Tolkien fantasy novel that takes place before the trilogy. But this time the Oscar-winning New Zealand filmmaker is producing and working on the script, relinquishing directing duties to Del Toro, whose credits include "Pan's Labyrinth" and the two "Hellboy" movies.
Longtime Jackson collaborator, art designer Richard Taylor, says he thinks his friend gave up the director's chair "probably because he's spent so long in Middle Earth ... and probably felt a director such as Guillermo could bring something passionate and unique and original and new to the content for the sake of the fans," referring to the imaginary world where the novels are set.
"It's an absolute delight to be working with Guillermo Del Toro. We've all enjoyed his craft as seen in 'Pan's Labyrinth' and the 'Hellboy' movies. His unique aesthetic and storytelling style brings a lovely aesthetic to the world and one we're enjoying being part of," Taylor told The Associated Press on Monday in Hong Kong, where he is attending a digital entertainment conference at the technology park Cyberport.
The Weta Workshop president said his team has started designing the landscape and characters in "The Hobbit," but that he was unclear when shooting on the New Line Cinema production will start in New Zealand.
"We're just patiently waiting for it to begin. It's been in early development for a while. I'm sure it will get going some time soon," Taylor said.
He said he will stick to a consistent look for the main characters that appear in both the "Rings" series and "The Hobbit."
Taylor, who also won Oscars for his work on the "Rings" series, said he doesn't know if "The Hobbit" will be released in 3-D, but said the Weta team will take advantage of technological advancements since the first trilogy.
"Like any film, there will be an effort to utilize the tools that are available to us today to achieve visual images that will excite and intrigue an audience as we did try 10 years ago."
Hobbit script is done: Peter Jackson says what's next
Source: SciFi Wire
Peter Jackson, who is producing the two Hobbit movies, spoke with Moviefone to clear up those rumors about a start date, casting and whether the movies are delayed.
About the only thing he'll confirm is that the script for the two proposed movies is now complete:
"We've just delivered the script. Literally last week, we delivered the second of the two screenplays -- the first draft. So the studio's got both scripts now, which is a milestone; and if anything was holding it up, it was us doing the screenplays, because we'd just been writing as fast as we can, but it took us this long to get them finished. So we take whatever responsibility there is for the speed. And we're now in the process of budgeting the films, and then hopefully we'll get to a budget the studio [people] are happy with, and they'll greenlight the movies and we'll announce the shooting dates. I'd be pretty optimistic that we'll be shooting before the end of the year. I would imagine October, November, we'd be shooting by. I'm not announcing it, though."
One big hangup, of course, is the fate of MGM, one of the studios that holds the rights. It's still being sorted out how the financially troubled studio will be saved, and that means there's no green light yet for the Hobbit movies.
"Well, it's not really been delayed, because we've never announced the date," Jackson told the site. "I mean it's sort of interesting because the studio [MGM] has never greenlit The Hobbit, so therefore The Hobbit has never been officially announced as a 'go' project, nor have we ever announced a date. But there's so much interest that people—newspapers and magazines, of their own account, say, ah, it's likely to film in May, it's likely to film in June, it's likely to film in September. People make this stuff up. And then if it's not filming in June, you get a story saying, 'The Hobbit's been delayed.' But it's never actually been announced."
Until the production receives a green light, producers can't cast or set up a schedule, Jackson added. "But I would imagine that if we get a green light within the next month or two, we would be hopefully making some casting announcements by, I guess, the middle of the year. We've done a little bit of auditioning, but we haven't really done any meetings with actors or anything yet. We've just been totally committed to the scripts. Everything's a little bit later than what people assume it is. I think people think we've been sort of doing secret casting."
Stay tuned for more news!
Does anyone who doesn't light their own farts on fire care about The Hobbit movie that's never going to be made?
Quote from: Stefen on April 19, 2010, 01:14:01 AM
Does anyone who doesn't light their own farts on fire care about The Hobbit movie that's never going to be made?
I got halfway through the article and an elitist thought came to my brain, "Is this the state of Cinema to give a shit about this?" The LOTR craze smacks of the Star Wars fandom but yet it's being legitimized in topical corners that not even Star Wars could breach. These films will be made and if they are halfway reminiscent of the first three films then new reasons will be invented to explain how they have broken new barriers or whatever. I like Del Toro and I imagine he will do a lot of good things for the franchise, but I can safely say that even if I like these new movies, it won't be for the reasons the majority of the fan base does. Normally not a problem, but the fan worship for these movies is always at a fervor pitch and can inspire you to easily hold unfair viewpoints about the movies.
Pretty sure it's going to be made. And I'm sure if Del Toro, Jackson et al have devoted years of their lives to this and relocated in Del Toro's case, that yes, people do care and will be a massive hit.
Not a huge Rings fan, but of course a decade on there is the inevitable backlash against a movie franchise that is really quite good.
The Hobbit has the potential to be an even bigger movie than LOTR because it has an extremely wide appeal. 5 year olds kid will definitely get it more than LOTR. It's a quest rather than a big epic war so it's simpler for your mom too.
I hope it gets made in 2D though
3D will have died a death by the time this comes out. Surely.
yes, the rings movies were not perfect (except two towers extended, that's some wild shit) but they had a lot of soul and too much going on in cinematic terms to just be dismissed. when someone says "but I hated them" I'm like "too bad, dude".
It's an equal dismissal to just say they are valuable.
I don't get it. Do you want me to write a review here of those films? They've been argued to death, won 300 oscars, made 800 fortunes and displayed insane amounts of great work from every department that composes a film production, including great acting, memorable music, tremendous battle scenes, awesome cinematography, and so on. Before they were even made everyone said they were unfilmable, I mean really...the backlash is just because they were so successful, not because those films were actually, you know, bad.
anyone can burn down a barn.
No, not a call for an on-the-spot review. Just a general complaint of my own about how people feel able to get away from saying "why" if all they do is like something. Matters of taste appreciation have more leeway with getting with explaining yourself than being against a movie. Maybe written in the wrong manner by moi, but not a huge offense (I hope) so who gives a shit?
Maybe they are just good movies. It's a touch tiring having to explaining the why's of liking or not liking something. Kind of like showing the work behind the answers you had in schoolwork.
Quote from: Derek on April 23, 2010, 04:21:42 PM
Maybe they are just good movies. It's a touch tiring having to explaining the why's of liking or not liking something. Kind of like showing the work behind the answers you had in schoolwork.
Lord of the Rings is more than just a "it was a good movie". A lot of times we do just like movies because they fancy themselves to our personalities in indescribable ways. Those are basic emotions for basic movies, but Lord of the Rings won Oscars and its fan base says the series is something more. I don't think people should be forced to say why the movie is great whenever mentioning it, but they should be able to explain how it is great when they do go on rants about its greatness where all they are doing is explaining the movie in adjectives that are similar to "great" or "fantastic". I know people who do that often so they should be held to some standards of explanation.
When people go on about a movie, they want what they are saying to seem important. Doing so should require some actual ideas about a movie.
I get it now. Still, you can't just act as if people being excited about another three rings movies directed by guillermo fucking del toro is some sort of sign of the decadence of western civilization because you think the films are not groundbreaking or something. Anyway, point taken.
Guillermo del Toro Confirms Hobbit Delay
Source: ComingSoon
Speaking moments ago at a press conference for his latest production, Splice, Guillermo del Toro responded to questions about the state of The Hobbit, saying that the film does not have a start date, nor will it until MGM sorts out its financial troubles.
"It's not greenlit," said del Toro, "That's categorical... We've been caught in a very tangled negotiation... There cannot be any start dates until the MGM situation gets resolved. They do hold a considerable portion of the rights."
Responding to rumors that the film would shoot in 3D, del Toro said that, while 3D remains a possiblity, it has been discussed "literally once" in the production offices and it is not being planned at this time. The current production budget has been drawn without 3D in mind.
Admitting no predictable timeline for a start date, del Toro theorized one possible outcome that would see MGM sharing or selling off the rights. Nevertheless, he feels confident that the film will move forward as soon as a decision is made.
"We have designed all the creatures," he said, "We've designed the sets and the wardrobe. We have done animatics and planned battles sequences.... We are very, very prepared for when it is finally triggered."
Guillermo del Toro is out. Still co-writing.
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2010/05/30/36920-guillermo-del-toro-departs-the-hobbit/
And Alexandro, just saw your reply. Way to overshoot what you think is my overreaction with a pretty good overreaction of your own and how much you actually think I care about all of this. What I said fell along the lines of annoyance. No reason to think I believe there is decadence in Western civilization or whatever.
Hmmmm....not completely unexpected. This MGM deal is stupid, gonna limit probably the amount of times Daniel Craig will be Bond. Would have been nice to see those Del Toro movies. Its too bad he spent a couple of years focusing on what probably amounts to production design for a franchise which has a lot of production design already established.
so he didn't wanna commit another three years when he's already spent three getting to this point?
this sounds like the dumbest decision ever. there will be no shortage of NON idiots looking to take up this job. it was a guarranteed GAZILLION dollars. what a fucking idiot. i guess he already has enuff money for all the twinky rolls he'll ever need in his life.. he just made someone else's career.
he better actually do something in the next three years or this was an utterly stupid decision, my suspicion is that the real reason is bigger than that.. maybe he slept with PJ's "girlfriend" or whatever, maybe she lost interest in old pete after he lost all that weight cos she had always been a chubby chaser. maybe guillermo took the wrong kind of mushrooms at one of philippa boyens' pagan ceremonies. actuallly that is DEFINITELY what must hav happened, he took the shrooms and at the peak of the biggest trip of his life met the terrible Cthulhu who told him to quit this hobbit crap and make that lovecraft film.
the next day del toro got up at the crack of dawn to tell PJ. he ran to jackson's house and found little pete tending to his garden while simultaneously having a video conference with spielbergo about tintin. del toro apologized first for his abrupt interruption at this early hour, and second for what he was about to get off his chest. PJ took the news calmly and, immediately, still kneeled over his oregano patch, called theonering.net founder Gaylord Nerdlinger to announce the news. Del toro felt a great weight lift off his shoulders and once PJ was done on the phone, got down and thanked him profusely for all he had done. meanwhile, inside the house, Fran Walsh neared a window to see what the commotion was on her front lawn... only to see Del Toro talking to a garden gnome.
:bravo:
Quote from: Gold Trumpet on May 30, 2010, 05:56:58 PM
And Alexandro, just saw your reply. Way to overshoot what you think is my overreaction with a pretty good overreaction of your own and how much you actually think I care about all of this. What I said fell along the lines of annoyance. No reason to think I believe there is decadence in Western civilization or whatever.
dude, I was joking.
Considering we debate all the time, it's hard to tell online about jokes, but glad it's that.
Peter Jackson now says he MIGHT direct The Hobbit
Source: SciFi Wire
With director Guillermo del Toro now having left The Hobbit, all eyes have turned naturally to The Lord of the Rings director (and Hobbit co-producer and co-screenwriter) Peter Jackson to get behind the camera again. But Jackson's manager, Ken Kamins, dismissed that possibility, telling EW.com that it's "not something he can consider at this time as he has other commitments to other projects," among them his collaboration with Steven Spielberg on the two-part adaptation of The Adventures of Tintin.
Jackson, however, has not ruled out directing, saying to New Zealand's Dominion Post, "If that's what I have to do to protect Warner Bros' investment, then obviously that's one angle which I'll explore."
The financial woes of MGM Studios, which co-owns the rights to The Hobbit with Warner Brothers Pictures, are apparently what led del Toro to bow out of directing after two years of developing it as two films and co-writing the scripts with Jackson and co-producers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens.
MGM was put up for sale late last year. The legendary studio has several lucrative franchises in its portfolio—including the James Bond series and The Hobbit—but also a massive $3.7 billion debt. As a result, no one's been rushing to snatch the studio up.
Although the company has made scheduled payments on The Hobbit and preproduction has been ongoing, the possibility of a sale or even bankruptcy makes going forward with shooting the movies a dicey proposition. A source told EW.com that MGM's problems have no impact on the movie and that it has always been slated to start filming at the end of 2010, but if that's the case, why would del Toro leave?
With two years of his life already devoted to the project and another two to three years needed, plus other commitments piling up (including adaptations of Frankenstein and H.P. Lovecraft's At the Mountains of Madness), it seems del Toro decided he could not wait around any longer. There's also been speculation that he's not keen on the rumored possibility of shooting The Hobbit in 3-D. He revealed in a conference call with reporters last week that "3-D has been discussed literally once ... is there a chance it will become 3-D in the future? Maybe. Right now, it's not being planned as such."
Pubrick shamed him into it.
Brett Ratner will take over. Save yo money. Move on.
If that happens then it's an upgrade.
Guillermo del Toro Comments More on Hobbit Departure
Source: ComingSoon
A week ago, Guillermo del Toro announced he was no longer going to direct The Hobbit films and promised the fans to comment more on his departure. He has now done so at TheOneRing.net forums and you can read his update below:
So, here I am again. As promised, I am posting a longer message before the week's end.
I have to thank those of you that have supported me from the start as well as those that converted along the way. And even say farewell to those that never did convert or believed.
I will miss Mr. Crere, the faith of Compa and Sir DennisC, the wisdom of Voronwe, the joy of Grammaboodawg, the support of Kangi Ska and so many, many others
Now, Pasi, et al- that is what is quite uncommon even on big films. Pete and co stuck to LOTR for years, I've developed films for years and I have shot many a movie on location... but rarely do you relocate for such massive amount of time specially when you have to do major ironclad agreements to put in deep freeze other contractual obligations with multiple studios.
My commitment to the project demanded enormous sacrifices both in personal and professional terms. The consequences of which will ripple for years. I relocated my entire life and family to New Zealand and first came on board in 2008.
So- while the cited delays, contractual complexities or obstacles, cannot be attributed to a single event or entity - you will simply have to believe that they were of sufficient complexity and severity to lead to the current situation. Trust me on this, Pasi- leaving NZ and the Hobbit crew is extremely painful.
As stated before- a wealth of designs, animatics, boards and sculptures is left behind representing accurately my ideas for Mirkwood, Spiders, Wargs, Stone Trolls, etc, etc and everyone (PJ, FW, PB and myself) has the same goal in mind: to try and ensure the best possible transition of the movie to a new director.
I believe these films will happen. Preproduction continues as we speak. The writing team of PJ,FW,PB and myself will keep moving the screenplays forward.
Perhaps even sooner than we may anticipate we will all look at the finished film and then- I will tear up whenever I recognize a set or a creature or a quirk created under my supervision. Everyone on these boards will get two movies. Me? I will be watching filmic family albums. Photos of my children from far away.
I hope you will understand how delicate the subject is for me.
I will drop by now and then, I will read the boards with interest and do hope to see some of you around at SDCC and many other places.
I am not here, however, to provide a blow-by-blow of what happened, but to assure you, as I have, that it has been the toughest situation of my life.
Beyond that- I am simply no longer an official voice for these projects. Be good, be well- and I invite you all to follow me into the next phase of my filmmaking journey.
Sincerely
GDT
who the fuck is "Pasi"?
also:
Quote from: MacGuffin on June 07, 2010, 01:39:45 PM
I will miss Mr. Crere, the faith of Compa and Sir DennisC, the wisdom of Voronwe, the joy of Grammaboodawg, the support of Kangi Ska and so many, many others
NEERRRD.
i have no idea what he's talking about. is he like a full on member of the forums or what? is he talking to some of the members directly by name (that's the best i can guess for who the hell Sir DennisC is).. geez. we've been worshipping the wrong director. if only we were obsessed with a director who was as big a loser as US like GDT seems to be.
Hahahaha, using Brett Ratner as blackmail to get PJ to direct. HILARIOUS.
Can WB & MGM Convince Peter Jackson To Direct 'The Hobbit' Before Brett Ratner Takes It?
source: the playlist as always.
Oh, holy hell. Hot on the heels of yesterday's news that David Yates might have been offered the director's chair on the two "Hobbit" films, Deadline have thrown a few more names into the hat. One of them will make fans of "The Lord of the Rings" series very happy, the other two... well, not so much.
Mike Fleming is reporting that Warner Bros and MGM executives are still trying to convince Peter Jackson, who helmed the original trilogy and is co-writing and producing the new films, that he should finish the job he started and direct "The Hobbit." Reports that MGM executives also asked the director for any spare change he might have on him are, as yet, unconfirmed.
Jackson previously refused to rule the possibility out, although his manager commented that "Peter has obligations and commitments to other films that would make it impossible for him to direct "The Hobbit" at this time, even if it was offered, which it hasn't been." Aside from that, he may have a reluctance to return to the well -- he's got a number of other projects circulating, and might want to move on to something new. Part of us wants the new films to have a different feel to the original,which is what Del Toro would have achieved. But having said that, if there's any truth to some of the other rumored names, we'd urge Jackson to sign on as quickly as possible.
Those names? Well, Fleming confirms that there's been interest from three directors, including the previously rumored David Yates. That's a pick we'd be fine with, but David Dobkin ("Wedding Crashers") and semi-predictably, Brett Ratner are also said to have expressed an interest. We can almost hear the cries of fanboy anguish from here...
To be fair, there's no word if this interest is two-way; it could simply be that the directors have made it known that they'd like to be involved. Either way, it seems that reports that a concrete offer had been made to Yates was incorrect. Deadline say that one of the problems with finding a replacement for Del Toro is that there are so many gross participants (Tolkien's estate, Jackson, Saul Zaentz and Harvey Weinstein, for instance) that there isn't much to offer an A-list director.
Even so, we're not sure there's any excuse to hire Ratner or Dobkin. To be honest, and it's not a popular opinion, we don't believe that Ratner is the Antichrist; he's clearly kind of a douche, and has made mostly terrible films, but he's a more competent, tasteful director than the likes of Michael Bay or McG (which is admittedly pretty faint praise...). Were he to be hired (and he won't...), he'd probably do exactly what he did on "Red Dragon" or "X-Men: The Last Stand" -- pull off a workmanlike aping of the director that he's replaced, leading to a mediocre final project, but not a train wreck. Dobkin, however, would be a truly disastrous choice; "Wedding Crashers" was great, but "Fred Claus" was an abomination, and there's nothing in his CV to suggest he could handle anything like "The Hobbit." But five'll get you ten that neither get anywhere near the project, so it's not worth losing any sleep over, Tolkien fans.
Heat Vision also reported yesterday that Sam Raimi's name had been mentioned in connection with the project, but unfortunately he's now signed on to helm Disney's "Oz The Great and Powerful." Yates still looks like the best bet at the moment, unless Jackson can be convinced, but, if they're looking for inspiration, we'd urge WB & MGM execs to look over our list of potential directors for the project...
edit: added a source.
they should just scrap the whole thing. if is not PJ or del toro these films will be fucked.
Del Toro tells how Hobbit fiasco will make his next movie BETTER
Source: SciFi Wire
Guillermo del Toro made a surprise appearance at the Saturn Awards on June 24. He was not on the list of expected guests and didn't have a film up for any category, but he came to celebrate with his buddies anyway. Even he didn't know yet that Peter Jackson would step in and direct the two Hobbit movies. Del Toro just got back in town and was already thinking positively about moving ahead with new films.
"I want to be, if possible, shooting in May next year," del Toro said in Burbank, Calif. "So I need something that is ready to go into preproduction immediately."
That rules out Hellboy III and the Frankenstein project del Toro wants to direct. Neither could have screenplays ready to go by May. "I'm presenting the storylines [for Frankenstein] to Universal, but the screenplay's not ready. Hellboy III is the same, so if we went into Hellboy, it would need to be the next movie after this one or whatever, but I don't know yet."
Del Toro added that he is choosing among three scripts and hopes to make his announcement at Comic-Con in July. He won't get to do Middle-earth, but del Toro has plans to create whole new worlds.
"Those are projects that are really great associations, world-creation projects, big projects," he said. "For me the only alternative was to do a very small movie right now, one of the ones I write that are very freaky, or do a movie where it was a world creation, to sort of go dive in really quickly."
The two years spent in preproduction on The Hobbit won't be a total waste either. The films will ultimately become Peter Jackson's visions and not del Toro's, but the lessons del Toro learned in New Zealand will apply to his next film. That includes script notes from Jackson, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens.
"There were many, many questions that were asked or process that the screenplay was put through that was absolutely new for me," he said. "From the design point of view, I think I learned a lot from John Howe and Alan Lee, who were, in my view, new to my world, and from working with Weta. So what was beautiful was I never stopped learning."
The one thing del Toro's next movie won't be is a quick and easy paycheck. "I didn't want to do a rebound movie. I didn't want to wake up the next morning and say, 'Oh my God, what have I done?' What I was very careful with was reading stuff that I feel completely passionate about."
Actually, leaving The Hobbit allowed del Toro to return to an older idea. Now he's figured out how to make it work, if it becomes his next film. "If the one that I think will happen happens, it's something that started 15 years ago. I wanted to do it 15 years ago. We started, we couldn't do it, it went completely into a beautiful roundabout way and came back to me."
Peter Jackson meeting with 'Hobbit' actors (exclusive)
Source: Hollywood Reporter
"The Hobbit" still has not been officially greenlighted, but director Peter Jackson is in Los Angeles this week quietly meeting with actors. The casting trip, which also included stops in New York and the U.K., underscores the progress being made on a complex series of deals to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's epic fantasy novel to the big screen.
Sources say Jackson's pact with Warner Bros. to direct the two-part "Hobbit" adaptation is close to done, but the sticking point continues to be the dire financial situation at MGM, which holds half the rights to the property.
Warners, which is acting as the lead studio on the co-production, is furiously negotiating with MGM, which is being steered by a committee of creditors and financial stakeholders. Even if Warners wanted to fund the
films itself, that would require a sign-off from the somewhat rudderless MGM.
Jackson, who has been in L.A. since Saturday, is working with casting director Victoria Burrows on assembling what will likely be a large, international cast for the project.
"The Hobbit" has so far taken a bumpy road to the screen. Director Guillermo del Toro abruptly left the project in May, citing scheduling delays. Peter Jackson, who directed the megahit "Lord of the Rings" trilogy and was to serve as a producer on "Hobbit," was then recruited to direct the films. But Jackson has expressed his own concerns about timing, privately telling the studios he would not commit to the project unless the films could be fast-tracked and into theaters in 2012 and 2013.
Jackson's directing deal has not been signed but it is close, and he is proceeding like he's going to make the films. But the fate of "The Hobbit" remains very much uncertain.
'The Hobbit' Rumored To Be Going 3D; New Zealand Government Offers To Mediate Union Spat
Source: The Playlist
Remember earlier this summer when fans cheered during the TheOneRing's Comic Con panel when they announced that the upcoming "The Hobbit" films wouldn't be in 3D? It turns out the celebrations might have been premature. According to the NY Times, as part of the behind-the-scenes dealmaking to get the film made, it looks like the 3D format is back on the table. The format has long been in discussions, with original director Guillermo Del Toro not particularly hot on the idea. However, with a pricetag of $500 million dollars, its no surprise that Warner Bros., New Line and MGM would be pushing for the format if only because it means revenues will get a slight boost thanks to inflated ticket prices. At this point we're too exhausted to care which direction they go in —Peter Jackson could make it a black-and-white 16mm silent comedy for all we care —we just want this film to finally get in front of cameras. As for the nasty union spat that unfurled last week, that saw both Peter Jackson and the studios threatening to move the production away from New Zealand, the country's government has stepped in to try and help. Government ministers are eager to help resolve the dispute, save jobs and keep the production and the economic boost it brings in the country. Prime Minister John Key said, "I would be greatly concerned if the Hobbit movies weren't made in New Zealand, this a $3 billion industry, it employs a lot of people, it's great for New Zealand, it's a great way for marketing New Zealand. If you can't make the Hobbit here frankly what movies are you going to make here?" Meetings are beginning to take place —Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly has already met with Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh —and everyone involved is "hopeful" a solution will be found. Rumors circled late last week that the situation may already be close to being dealt with, as an official studio greenlight is apparently just days away. Meanwhile, "The Hobbit" as cursed sentiment gained uninspired traction this weekend when news of a fire broke out in Jackson's Portsmouth Miniatures Studio which would have been used for the two films. Considering a green light seems imminent, talk of a "curse" seems more than a little hyperbolic. These guys even went so far as to openly speculate that "union thugs" burned down the place. And while it is one of many aggravating set-backs, it doesn't at all seem like the crisis many are making it out to be.
The 3D fad will be long over by the time this ever gets made.
Quote from: Sleepless on October 04, 2010, 08:44:05 PM
The 3D fad will be long over by the time this ever gets made.
They are already starting look into making tv's that are 3D and require no glasses. Next it will be theater projections. I think this is just the beginning of 3D.
Peter Jackson Directing 'The Hobbit'? TOLDJA!
By MIKE FLEMING; Deadline Hollywood
I saw yesterday's breathless reports that Peter Jackson is close to a deal to direct The Hobbit -- and I am bewildered how anyone slaps an "exclusive" tag on a story Deadline broke back on June 25th. That's when Jackson moved from co-writer/producer into the director's chair. Recent reports by the LA Times and NY Times have added some nice details, but I laid out back then the chain of events that are unfolding now. Even before Guillermo del Toro withdrew as director, Warner Bros and MGM had set December 2012 and December 2013 as release dates, replicating the release pattern of the original The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Production has to begin in January or these pictures would get pushed back an entire year -- and who knows if Jackson would have stayed? Deadline advised that MGM's creditors needed to get their heads out of their you-know-where's and either commit funding or step aside to let Warner Bros pay for the films. It was clear those decisions would precede a long-planned prepackaged bankruptcy that won't play out until year's end.
The 3D discussion also goes back before Del Toro departed, but I can confirm a NYT report that they're locked into a 3D two-picture shoot that will cost around $500 million. Unless a third party steps in, Warner Bros most likely funds production because MGM can't. The movement on The Hobbit doesn't help James Bond, which is post-bankruptcy business. If Spyglass partners Roger Birnbaum and Gary Barber close the deal and turn MGM into a stripped down production entity, they will have every studio chasing 007. While Warner Bros, Fox and especially Sony Pictures Entertainment will be players, I hear Paramount stands a good chance. Birnbaum and Barber have a great relationship there as co-financiers of Star Trek, and Paramount can certainly use the films as its distribution deal with Marvel winds to a conclusion.
The big part of The Hobbit story that interests me is how much the 3D decision spurs Warner Bros to convert the original LOTR trilogy into 3D, injecting new life and revenue cycle into the original films. I yawned at the announcement that George Lucas' six Star Wars films will convert to 3D, maybe because I found the prequel underwhelming. But the prospect of a 3D revisit to Middle Earth, the Mines of Moria, Mordor, The Shire, Lothlorien and the epic battles of Helm's Deep and Minas Tirith? Yes, please.
His heart totally isn't in it.
It's businessman Peter Jackson. Might be worse than businessman Steven Spielberg.
Still nowhere as bad as businessman George Lucas.
This movie is a MESS. The only reason anyone seems to want to make it is to make tons of money. It's pretty much the ultimate sellout move by Peter Jackson. You can totally tell he's not into it and is just doing it for the bucks. The fact that he will direct but it won't shoot in New Zealand is pretty shitty. I mean, isn't that his place? I'm sure it will make a billion bucks, but it just seems like everyone involved is involved for the wrong reasons. A passion project this is not.
Jackson blames thesps for 'Hobbit' crisis
Director takes aim at Kiwi unions in TV interview
Source: Variety
SYDNEY -- In a television interview in New Zealand overnight Peter Jackson has put the blame for "The Hobbit" crisis on a handful of actors who "do not actually understand the real repercussions and the situation."
Talking to NZ's TVONE, Jackson also took fire at Council of Trade Unions prexy Helen Kelly, saying she was "behaving like someone who thinks she knows about filmmaking and who hasn't got a goddamn clue."
Kelly remains convinced that "The Hobbit" is being lured overseas by better coin and that Warners knew as early as the weekend that the boycott was set to be lifted. But whether these few days would have had any real effect is not known.
Execs from Warner are heading to New Zealand next week to make a decision on where to shoot the pic that was greenlit recently with Jackson as helmer.
"Up until a month ago, no one had even thought in a million years that this movie was going to leave the country. And then this blacklist was brought on, and the studio said 'What the hell is going on?,' and we tried to figure out what the hell was going on," Jackson said. "At that point confidence in our country as a stable base to make movies started to erode."
i must see that interview!
here it is! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoUN2AGxrnA
this is an excellent scandal.. everyone watch the first 7 mins of the above clip, PJ seriously goes off. i can't imagine any director in america talking like that or getting so angry like this on tv.. the fact he reckons the PRIME MINISTER should get involved plays so perfectly into the image everyone has of new zealand that it's like a small town. it makes you think that PJ is actually the most powerful person in the country.
haha if you watch the second half of the clip it is just hilarious to see these politicians say "the hobbit" so much. this shit is the biggest news in new zealand since those three dudes jumped through that hoop that one time (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PfmzI24eU).
That's for the link, P. To me, the newscast was reminiscent of news in the UK - another small country. I did find it funny the number of times PJ and the minister stuck all the blame with the Australians. Like everything that goes wrong in New Zealand is naturally their fault.
Quote from: P on October 24, 2010, 01:09:45 AM
this shit is the biggest news in new zealand since those three dudes jumped through that hoop that one time (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PfmzI24eU).
haha oh my!
^^ even better, they were four!
I envy New Zeland actually, I wish THAT could be the biggest news in México, instead this weekend around 80 ppl were murdered because of the war against organized crime.... :yabbse-undecided:
____________________________________
Carver: You can't even call this shit a war.
Herc: Why not?
Carver: Wars end.
THE WIRE
Video from the set.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfesknLk5uI
'The Hobbit' Titles Confirmed; Part 1 Hits December 14, 2012 & Part 2 On December 13, 2013
Source: The Playlist
Surviving a studio bankruptcy, a director exiting the project, a possible union strike, and a stomach ulcer, "The Hobbit" is actually happening and in the midst of a 14 month shoot. The highly anticipated pair of films have largely been operating with full interaction with the fans, with Peter Jackson frequently hitting Facebook to provide updates and answer questions, but fans have also been savvy and while today brings the official confirmation of the titles of each film, they've been knocking around for a couple of months now. New Line, Warner Bros. and MGM have announced that the first film will arrive as "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" with the followup titled "The Hobbit: There and Back Again." Referencing/acknowledging the source material directly ("An Unexpected Journey" riffs on "An Unexpected Party," the first chapter of the book while "There And Back Again" is lifted directly). Tolkien-heads should be more than pleased. So, when will you get to see these 3D sequels? Well, "An Unexpected Journey" will land on December 14, 2012. The move will certainly piss off Fox which has Ang Lee's adaptation of "Life Of Pi" scheduled for the same day. We expect it to be moved out of the way shortly. Meanwhile, "There And Back Again" will hit on December 13, 2013 which currently has nothing else slated and we imagine, most studios will steer clear. The press release also recaps the extensive cast, so let's do that shall we? Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Hugo Weaving, Elijah Wood, Andy Serkis, Richard Armitage, Jed Brophy, Adam Brown, John Callen, Stephen Fry, Ryan Gage, Mark Hadlow, Peter Hambleton, Stephen Hunter, William Kircher, Sylvester McCoy, Bret McKenzie, Graham McTavish, Mike Mizrahi, James Nesbitt, Dean O'Gorman, Lee Pace, Mikael Persbrandt, Conan Stevens, Ken Stott, Jeffrey Thomas and Aidan Turner will all feature in the films. Still lots more to come from the Shire.
Has anyone seen the pictures that are on IMDB?
Martin Freeman is pretty excellent casting I'd say.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/)
Kind of excited for this.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.flicksandbits.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F12%2Fthe-hobbit-poster.jpg&hash=9d473c102b3908ab7323e814ad36e1c9853546bb)
Trailer here. (http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thehobbit)
I'm sure the general consensus is going to be that it's great to see Gandalf, Frodo, Gollum, etc back in action, but I'm not really impressed by that trailer. I'm sure it'll be a great movie and I'll see it regardless, but the inclusion of the dwarves singing has me concerned that PJ and co are adding a lot of padding to these movies from the appendixes of Tolkein's books. Like I said, I'm sure the movies will be great, but I think it's going to serve me better to get excited about stills rather than trailers.
Love the poster though.
Did anyone else feel that the digital photography was so sharp that it was more obvious that it's just full of dudes wearing makeup?
I'm mostly excited to see the 48 fps.
Quote from: matt35mm on December 21, 2011, 09:11:40 AM
I'm mostly excited to see the 48 fps.
I'm worried that the effect will be similar to the "motion smoothing" you can observe on some HDTVs, you know, the absence of motion blur? It gives me a headache AND it looks unnatural and turns everything into cheap video. I hope that will not be the result of these faster frame rates, but that's the way it seems to me.
I assume that it is mostly in aid of the new 3D mode of filmmaking, but I just can't stand behind it.
I agree.
All these new technologies are being created/popularized but none of them LOOK good. 3D is shit to look at, fast frame rates look cheap and ultraslick in a bad way. I don't think I'm being an RK about this, almost everyone agrees. So am I supposed to just stuck it up and deal with my headache?
I may just be a grumpy old man, so maybe we should ask the kids what they think. Stupid as they are, maybe they might know more about this than we do as they are seeing it all with fresh eyes.
Where's that 16 year old newb when you need him?
I don't know how it will look, but I'm always interested in seeing what I haven't seen before.
I saw the trailer for this in 24fps 3D, and wasn't anything special. But, I also saw a trailer for the new Aardman movie PIRATES! BAND OF MISFITS in 3D, and that little extra stutter you get from stop-motion looks terrible in 3D. There is this hollowness to 3D anyway that is exaggerated by any gaps in the motion between frames, so I do suspect that, IF you're gonna do 3D, 48fps will look better.
We rarely ever get to see 48fps proper. As I understand it, that cheap TV look comes from a fast refresh rate on a basically interlaced image, but the result of a 48fps progressive image might be different.
Anyway, I think the final result will be unlike what we have seen before. I'm not saying it'll look good to those who don't like 3D, but it will probably be an improvement on the 3D we've seen so far. I might always prefer 2D, but I'm still interested in seeing technologies get pushed.
I'm not so big a fan of 3D, but kids my age don't really care if something is in 3D or not, I don't think.. but they'll naturally opt for the pricier ticket if 3D is offered to them because I guess it'd "look cooler". Really, I find it makes things a little more cartoon-like, which isn't something I enjoy. And fast frame rates are weird to me. I'm beginning to feel as if movies are becoming more like video games. As intrigued and welcoming (if a little bit hesitant) I am to the idea of film being advanced and forward thinking in new technology, I'm not really liking the direction it's headed in so far. I'm hoping future projects (Like Cuaron's upcoming "Gravity" maybe?) will change my mind about that.
Quote from: matt35mm on December 25, 2011, 08:04:18 PM
I saw the trailer for this in 24fps 3D, and wasn't anything special.
I actually thought it looked as good if not better than the 3D in Hugo. It had real depth to it and matched all the camera movements so it didn't feel like a cheap separation of foreground and background. For some reason, the Alamo Drafthouse really loves the trailer so they showed it twice back to back so I really paid attention to the 3D during the second run and it's pretty impressive for what that trailer is (kind of a zero... though I'm excited to see the movie).
the trailer looks visually fine. the film itself I don't know. the hobbit "stuff" was always the less cool (closer to lamest) in the original trilogy, with everyone being unfunny and corny. the interesting thing about them was seeing frodo losing it step by step because of the ring. the best part of the original trilogy was gollum and his schizophrenic personality. that's why two towers, which was the darker of the three, is my favorite. this one seems to be so much about the damn hobbits I don't know if I will be able to love it. however I trust in this team to pull it off.
motion smoothing, what a pain in the ass. I eliminated that shit from my hdtv as soon as I knew how. that shit can ruin movies.
Somehow I don't think we have to worry this looking overly "motion smoothed." The higher the shutter angle, the more motion blur you have. It seems to me that the 270-degree shutter used would negate some of the smoothness of the 48fps, but not so much so that it makes shooting at 48fps pointless.
http://the-hobbitmovie.com/peter-jackson-answers-why-48-fps-for-the-hobbit/
The news about us filming The Hobbit at 48 frames per second generated a lot of comments. Of course, it's impossible to show you what 48 fps actually looks like outside of a movie cinema, but there were several interesting and insightful questions raised.
We will be completing a "normal" 24 frames per second version—in both digital and 35mm film prints. If we are able to get the Hobbit projected at 48 fps in selected cinemas, there will still be normal-looking 24 fps versions available in cinemas everywhere.
Converting a film shot at 48 fps down to 24 fps is not a hugely difficult process, but it requires testing to achieve the best results. Some of this involves digital processes during post-production. We are also shooting the film a slightly different way, which is a question several of you asked. Normally you shoot a movie with a 180-degree shutter angle. Changing the shutter angle affects the amount of motion blur captured during movement. Reducing the shutter angle gives you the stroby (or jerky) "Saving Private Ryan" look.
However, we're going the other way, shooting at 48 fps with a 270 degree shutter angle. This gives the 48 fps a lovely silky look, and creates a very pleasing look at 24 fps as well. In fact, our DP, Andrew Lesnie, and I prefer the look of 24 fps when it comes from a 48 fps master.
Peter Jackson's 'The Hobbit' Should Hit Theaters at 48-Per-Second Frame Rate
After Jackson and James Cameron championed higher frame rates as a solution to exhibition problems, projection manufacturers are working to support the move in time for the movie's December 14, 2012 release date.
Source: THR
The cinema technology industry is working to give movie goers the opportunity to see The Hobbit: An Unfinished Journey in 3D projected at 48 frames per second when it opens in theaters this December.
The question is, just how many theaters around the world will be able to accommodate this sort of presentation of Peter Jackson's epic fantasy, the first major motion picture to be made at the high frame rate (HFR) of 48 fps.
It is conceivable that it could be tens of thousands, though most manufacturers—at least publicly—are taking a far more conservative wait-and-see approach, noting that theater upgrades will be driven by studio and exhibitors' demand.
Frame rates are the number of images displayed by a projector within one second. Twenty-four frames per second (fps) has long been the standard in cinema, but industry leaders James Cameron and Peter Jackson are among those who propose high frame rates such as 48 or 60, reducing or eliminating jutter and other motion artifacts.
Digital cinema auditoriums are currently not equipped to support 48 fps movies, though work is being done to change that.
Each projector maker will have its own strategy for high frame rate support.
There are roughly 13,000 Sony 4K digital cinema projectors shipped worldwide, and "we expect the majority of those screens to have high frame rate support enabled by the time The Hobbit is released," Sony told The Hollywood Reporter.
Industry leaders explained that Series 2 projectors from Barco, Christie and NEC—all of which used technology from Texas Instruments—would be able to show The Hobbit at a HFR and in 3D with a software upgrade and a piece of hardware call an "integrated media block" (IMB) with 48 fps (and 3D) support. Such IMBs are being developed by several manufacturers such as Christie, whose IMB is expected to be available in June for roughly $10,000.
Don Shaw, senior director, product management, Christie Entertainment Solutions, estimated that worldwide there are between 40,000 and 50,000 installed Series 2 projectors that are capable of being upgraded.
While many have an eye on The Hobbit's December release date for an upgrade, some upgrades might be needed even sooner, since there is speculation that a 48 fps trailer for The Hobbit might be released as early as this summer.
HFRs doen't just affect exhibition; it also impacts production. Jackson is shooting his movie in 3D with Red Epic cameras (various digital cinematography cameras including those from Red already support 48 fps) and 3Ality Technica rigs.
Wellington-based Park Road Post Production has developed a 48 fps postproduction process anchored in color grading and postproduction system Mistika, from a Spain-based equipment maker called SGO. Development of the postproduction process began in 2010.
SGO worked closely with Park Road to enhance the system to meet the needs of the production. "We started with one Mistika and rapidly went to around five ... Now there are tens of machines," said Phil Oatley, head of technology at Park Road Post, who explained that the postproduction company also developed proprietary asset management, automation, and an archival system aimed at 48fps support.
The effort also involved Christie and Barco. Park Road is testing projectors from both companies, running beta software to enable the 48fps capabilities.
A huge challenge across the board is the volume of data that is required for HFRs. Oatley reported that for The Hobbit production shoots 6-12TB of camera data per day. And the shooting schedule (for both parts of the two-part film) involves 265 days of principal photography. (There are roughly 50 days to go).
Oatley said a key aim was to keep the filmmaking process "as familiar as possible." As an example, the film is being edited on an Avid Media Composer at 24 fps in 2D. Park Road has developed a method of taking that edit information into post at 48fps 3D.
With the 48fps system now in place, Oatley said Park Road Post is now prepared to handle future 48 fps productions.
James Cameron, who conducted a high-profile demonstration of the potential of HFRs last year at CinemaCon, has said that he intends to make Avatar 2 and 3 at a HFR.
To support these efforts, standards bodies are looking to add HFRs to digital cinema specifications.
Hopefully it will also be showing at 48 fps without the 3D too.
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/peter-jacksons-48fps-presentation-of-the-hobbit-at-cinemacon-gets-a-mixed-response-20120424
Peter Jackson's 48fps Presentation Of 'The Hobbit' At CinemaCon Gets A Mixed Response
NEWS BY KEVIN JAGERNAUTH | APRIL 24, 2012 4:58 PM
While the fact that Peter Jackson was shooting the upcoming "The Hobbit" films in 3D at 48 frames-per-second rate instead of the standard 24 frames-per-second has been around since proudction started, it gained a bit more steam last week. There were concerns about how prepared (or not) theaters would be for the blockbuster film come December, to show it in the format that Jackson intends it be viewed. The short version is that exhibitors/theater owners will need to upgrade the software on their 3D projectors to handle 48fps, and it's not cheap (about $10,000). However, the selling point is that 48 fps offers a crisp viewing experience, free of any motion artifiacts, juttering or any other anomalies sometimes present in 24 fps screenings. Win/win right? Unfortunately for Jackson, it's not quite a slam dunk. Presenting 10 minutes of footage today in the fancy new format at CinemaCon, the screening left many unimpressed.
On the more negative end of the spectrum was Devin Faraci who took to Twitter to say "Oh no. Not a fan of 48fps. Oh no no no," adding that "THE HOBBIT, frankly, did not look cinematic." Over on his Badass Digest blog he elaborated his thoughts, and essentially, the crisper looking image had the odd effect of making everything seem almost too realistic. "The 48fps footage I saw looked terrible. It looked completely non-cinematic. The sets looked like sets," he explained.
But response from the rest of the crowd, even if negative, was toned with a bit of caution as well. Josh Dickey at Variety had a myriad of thoughts tweeting, "Great Scott, THE HOBBIT in 48 frames-per-second is a thing to behold. Totally different experience. Not all will like the change. 48 fps has an immediacy that is almost jarring. And lighting it just right will be a learning process, as 3D was and still is. 48 fps also, unfortunately, looks a bit like television. But it does bring 3D to a different level."
Peter Sciretta at /Film also had mixed feelings saying, "Saw ten minutes of Hobbit in 48fps 3D. Very exciting, but I'm now very unsure about higher framerates. 48fps feature films will likely divide moviegoers -- I expect to see stronger hate, more so than 3D."
Meanwhile, the usually very picky Jeff Wells was impressed, but also echoed some of Devin Faraci's concerns. "I felt astonished & amazed...the term is WOWED...and yet a bit uncertain about the 48 fps 3D footage from Peter Jackson's 'The Hobbit.' In a word, 48 fps 3D looks like high-def video. It doesn't look 'cinematic', lacking that filtered or gauzy look we're all accustomed to," he tweeted. But it was Alex Billington at First Showing who proabably hit the nail on the head of what unfolded this afternoon: "There are going to be endless debates about 48FPS and how good/bad it looks. I just think we need to get used to change after 80yr of 24FPS."
It's too early to determine the success or failure of this new "format" (for lack of a better term), but calling it a "mistake" (as some people are) based on 10 minutes of footage is premature at best. In fact, much of the reaction today is reminiscent of the same concerns that James Cameron's "Avatar" was met with in the months leading up to its release, that 3D wouldn't be the game changer that Fox was hoping for, and audiences wouldn't be impressed enough to make it a hit. And then it went on to make over 2 billion dollars. But at the current moment, while everyone at CinemaCon is talking about 48fps, to the average regular moviegoer out in the real world? They have no idea what that means.
Just search "48fps" on Twitter and you'll see numerous people who don't know what it is or that "The Hobbit" was even shooting in that format. The problems that 48 fps purports to solve are arguably not even noticed by the average viewer. Terms like "artificating" and "juttering" are terms still best known among hardcore tech heads, not moviegoers, and frankly, that's because when most people watch movies, they aren't seeing those "problems." The only criteria for the average person buying a movie ticket is that the film is good, and that the presentation doesn't take them out of the movie. Will 48 fps be too real? Too digital? Too crisp? And more worryingly, uncinematic? Time will tell.
All told, the sky isn't falling. Yes, footage of "The Hobbit" was shown and people were concerned. But it was a brief bunch of footage that, it could be said, wasn't long enough to allow the viewer to truly settle in and get used to it. Our guess? More footage of the "The Hobbit" will be shown at Comic-Con and many of the people at CinemaCon today, now prepared for how it looks and feels, will start to turn their opinion around. As for the rest of us, we'll see if 48 fps makes a difference or not when "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" opens on December 14th.
We anticipated that reaction at the top of this page, last year.
Cinema is going to shit.
Does Peter Jackson even watch movies?
Peter Jackson To 'Hobbit' HD Naysayers: Wait Until You See The Whole Movie
BY THE DEADLINE TEAM
After less than glowing audience reaction to clips of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey screened in ultra-high-resolution at CinemaCon in Las Vegas, director Peter Jackson says "Nobody is going to stop. This technology is going to keep evolving." But he hopes moviegovers will wait and judge the finished movie when it comes out December 14. Some observers at the CinemaCon presention thought the imagery shot and projected at 48 frames per second was too sharply different visually from the longtime industry standard of 24 frames per second. A three-time Oscar winner echoed Jackson's observation. "I think we should let him finish it and see what it's like then, but it seems a little like the look of a soap opera". Jackson said he noticed that some in the audience seemed to like it more as the show went on. "I just wonder if it they were getting into the dialogue, the characters and the story. That's what happens in the movie. You settle into it."
More info here:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-hobbits-gamechanging-3d-may-be-a-little-too-ga,73007/
Apparently people are comparing it to the look of a soap opera.
you see motion blur in life, so when you see home videos or security cam or soap opera or a 48fps film that contains no blurs, they have this uncanny valley effect on you. I still don't understand the filmmaker's justification in using this format though; as in I don't get how it fits the story or whatever.
i get a little chaffed when i hear how "realistic" these faster frame rates are. I don't agree. It bothers me more that they're so insistent on that point, as if saying it enough times will make it true.
There's motion blur in real life but no jittering, which you get with 24fps. There will probably be motion blur in 48fps as well... I think that'd be more of a shutter speed thing, not a frame rate thing. I can understand, theoretically, why some filmmakers would be attracted to it. That said, I don't think it's a particularly good idea and I'm not looking forward to seeing it widely implemented. I agree that it doesn't look realistic, and I have doubts about how, even after we get used to it, it will ever look better than 24fps.
The Hobbit in particular might be the worst movie to shoot in 48fps. The sets will look like sets and the makeup will look like makeup. I think the next Avatar might be neat though, but that's because it's going to be mostly CGI anyway. I've heard people say that 48fps will be great for video games, and that reasoning might work better for the way that Avatar 2 will look. But The Hobbit? It's a movie that's already prone to looking goofy. 48fps is not gonna help that.
I already have low expectations for The Hobbit in general. I am finding it really difficult not to believe that Peter Jackson has lost everything that ever made him good after The Lovely Bones.
Can't there be a middleground between 24fps and 48fps? I know I've captured video at weird framerates in FCP just to experiment... it can't be that hard with video, right? What are the technical challenges?
I think the higher framerate is meant to help 3D presentations look better. It probably isn't necessary or preferable for 2D screenings.
I'm not sure 10 minutes of footage with unfinished VFX and color correction is the best demo for this. I'll wait until I see this on the big screen to judge. But my instinct tells me that these higher framerates work better for 3D screenings and non-cinematic presentations like amusement park rides and simulations.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman on April 28, 2012, 04:47:22 PM
Can't there be a middleground between 24fps and 48fps? I know I've captured video at weird framerates in FCP just to experiment... it can't be that hard with video, right? What are the technical challenges?
Sure, there can be, but 48fps was chosen to make it easier to extract a 24fps version for theaters that can't handle 48fps. James Cameron and Douglas Trumbull are advocates of even higher framerates, as high as 120fps.
Third 'Hobbit' Film Confirmed
An extra film, announced Monday, will create a second trilogy from director Peter Jackson.
Source: THR
After a three-film Lord of the Rings series, New Line, MGM and Warner Bros. will return to Middle Earth for another trilogy.
The three companies and series architect Peter Jackson announced Monday that The Hobbit, the prequel to the LOTR series that was initially planned to be broken into two parts, will instead be split into three. Sources tell The Hollywood Reporter that the third film will be released in summer 2014. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey hits theaters Dec. 14, and the second film, There and Back Again, is due Dec. 13, 2013.
"Upon recently viewing a cut of the first film, and a chunk of the second, Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and I were very pleased with the way the story was coming together," Jackson said in a statement. "We recognized that the richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, gave rise to a simple question: Do we tell more of the tale? And the answer from our perspective as filmmakers and fans was an unreserved 'yes.'
"We know the strength of our cast and of the characters they have brought to life," the Oscar-winning director continued. "We know creatively how compelling and engaging the story can be, and -- lastly, and most importantly -- we know how much of the tale of Bilbo Baggins, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur would remain untold if we did not fully realize this complex and wonderful adventure. I'm delighted that New Line, MGM and Warner Bros. are equally enthusiastic about bringing fans this expansive tale across three films."
Jackson ran footage of his first Hobbit film -- the first two were shot simultaneously in New Zealand -- at this month's Comic-Con in San Diego. The films star Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins and return from the LOTR series Ian McKellen as Gandalf, Andy Serkis as Smeagol and, in smaller roles, Elijah Wood as Frodo and Orlando Bloom as Legolas.
The director has said he filled in two films with information that the series author, J.R.R. Tolkien, wrote later and put in an appendix at the end of the third LOTR book, The Return of the King. (Jackson's Return of the King won a record-tying 11 Oscars, including best picture, in 2004.) He teased at Comic-Con that he had shot plenty of extra footage.
UGH.
^ agreed.
Instead of letting go of this godforsaken franchise and trying to make a legitimate masterpiece, he's just becoming master p..
http://www.slashfilm.com/revolution-limited-48fps-version-the-hobbit-dramatically-downscaled-distribution/ (http://www.slashfilm.com/revolution-limited-48fps-version-the-hobbit-dramatically-downscaled-distribution/)
The Revolution Will Be Limited: 48FPS Version of 'The Hobbit' Gets Dramatically Downscaled Distribution
Posted on Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 by Russ Fischer
Peter Jackson's adaptation of The Hobbit is a Big Deal for a few different reasons. It's his return to Middle-Earth, and to the stories that established him as one of the biggest directors working today. It is now the beginning of a trilogy, rather than a mere two-film cycle. And, for exhibitors, the most important aspect is that it is the first mainstream film shot with what we'll refer to as HFR (high frame rate).
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey was shot at 48 frames per second, rather than the film industry standard 24fps. The first public presentation of footage, at CinemaCon this past spring, didn't go so well, with audiences finding that the increased detail seen in the HFR footage made the film look cheap, rather than more impressive.
Cinemacon is a particularly bad place for a showing like that to bomb, because it was Jackson and Warner Bros. best moment to convince exhibitors that they should upgrade to equipment that could project the HFR footage. We don't have data on precisely how many cinemas are ready to take the HFR plunge at this point, but we do now know that when The Hobbit opens on December 14 of this year, it will be seen in native HFR projection in only a handful of cities.
Variety reports that people who have seen HFR footage from The Hobbit recently say "the picture now looks vastly better than the test footage shown this April at CinemaCon, which had not yet undergone post-production polishing."
Even so, the HFR version will get a very limited release this December. In part, that's because no theaters are currently HFR-ready, though Variety says that some theaters will be able to work with the standard beginning with a simple software upgrade that goes live next month.
WB will do a very limited release, "perhaps nt even into all major cities," to start getting audiences used to seeing HFR. There may be a wider rollout after the initial opening, but that will no doubt be based on reception to the first release wave.
Go ahead and parse whether this is really a tech issue, or if WB is truly afraid of audience reception to a film that it needs to become a gigantic success. it's worth noting that showing the film in 24fps isn't as simple as making a menu selection, as the footage has to be down-converted to add motion blur and avoid a choppy appearance. That conversion was going to happen regardless of this release pattern, however, as even in a best-case scenario there was never a chance that all possible theaters would be HFR-ready in time for the film's opening.
Here's my dilemma: I want to see the movie in 48fps out of curiosity, but I don't want them to use that ticket sale as an excuse to start making everything 48fps. Should I just buy a ticket for something else and sneak in? Bear in mind I have no morals or ethics to speak of.
Yes.
Quote from: polkablues on August 08, 2012, 11:16:09 AM
Should I just buy a ticket for something else and sneak in? Bear in mind I have no morals or ethics to speak of.
Ah, Brings back many childhood memories :yabbse-smiley:.....
You mean yesterday?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flegacy.kctcs.edu%2Fsnap%2Fimages%2Fsnap-logo.png&hash=a6379e836849303e35e0217698549a2e50b2b686)
Well, not only was it shot at 48 fps it was also shot using the RED camera. The film is going to have an ultra realistic or digital look to it. I imagine even the prints that are converted down to 24 fps are going have a slight digital feel. RED cameras look closer/best to film than any other digital camera but it's still not film. While most of the films shot using the RED have come out looking great, I think for historical and fantasy films like the Hobbit need that "film look." Maybe some sort of ultra Fincher stylized look could work for the right historical drama but I couldn't get pass how out of place the digital look of Public Enemies was while I enjoyed it for Collateral.
Quote from: Brando on August 08, 2012, 05:19:42 PM
shot using the RED camera.
You mean this camera?:
Looks fucking amazing. But yeah, not really a look that suits a movie like THE HOBBIT. I really wish Jackson had gone the PTA road and shot it on 65mm Film. I can only imagine...
It was shot with the Red Epic. Not every movie shot with the same camera looks the same, since they are lit, set designed, and graded differently.
Quote from: Ravi on August 09, 2012, 02:22:51 PM
It was shot with the Red Epic. Not every movie shot with the same camera looks the same, since they are lit, set designed, and graded differently.
CAPTAIN OBVIOUS STRIKES AGAIN!
No, but all kidding aside. Very few people can make Digital look as good as Film (Fincher and Soderbergh for example). I just wish Jackson had shot this on film. I share Brando's opinion:
QuoteI think for historical and fantasy films like the Hobbit need that "film look." Maybe some sort of ultra Fincher stylized look could work for the right historical drama but I couldn't get pass how out of place the digital look of Public Enemies was while I enjoyed it for Collateral.
But whatever, I'm watching the movie either way.
Ravi was also pointing out that The Hobbit was shot with the Red Epic, not the Red One, as the screen-test that you posted was. It's a newer model that shoots at a higher resolution. Not that that means that it will look better, but what Ravi said was still worth noting. It's hard to compare digitally-shot movies because the grading alone makes all the difference, and that's something that you can expect to be tweaked in the next few months, creating a more pleasing image than what we've seen in the trailers and what the people at Cinemacon saw. We don't really know what The Hobbit will look like yet.
I have to say, though, I've got so many doubts about Skinny Peter Jackson. For the past decade he's seemed to be have been more focused on technology than on holding onto the weird sensibilities and humor that made him a different kind of filmmaker in the first place. I don't really think what he shot this on will make a difference to the quality of the film, which I have low expectations for, and my main interest in watching it now is just to see what the fuck this 48fps 3D shit is all about. I've always had tremendous goodwill toward Peter Jackson, but The Lovely Bones was actually THE WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN, and I'm not convinced his heart is even really in this (just taking over the reigns from Guillermo Del Toro to keep the project alive...). I can't bring myself to seriously anticipate the follow-up to The Lovely Fucking Bones. He's gonna have to make an extraordinarily good movie to win me over again. But I don't think that The Hobbit(s) will be it. They'll be aiight, but aiight's just aiight.
He's contracted James Cameron Syndrome: he's so obsessed with being on the cutting edge of the new technology that he cares more about what you can do than about why you should do it.
Yes, but James Cameron wears it better. I'm still a big fan of WETA and I remain excited by what they do, and I realize that Jackson is absolutely central to that. Gollum in The Two Towers was a game changer. I still value Peter Jackson as force in the industry and will always go see what he comes up with. I just don't really believe in him as a director right now. I hope he proves me wrong. All that technology pushing would be totally fine with me if it weren't for the fact that he directed THE WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN.
I'll take the Worst Movie You've Ever Seen over the slice of Wonderbread that was Avatar. At least a terrible movie can still inspire a reaction; Avatar was just... there. It was a dead fly on a windowsill.
Quote from: polkablues on August 09, 2012, 09:29:11 PM
I'll take the Worst Movie You've Ever Seen over the slice of Wonderbread that was Avatar. At least a terrible movie can still inspire a reaction; Avatar was just... there. It was a dead fly on a windowsill.
Yeah... I still cannot believe Michael mann called it one of his favorites movies... :saywhat:
Matt, Lovely Bones is the WORST MOVIE YOU EVER SEEN?... Just wait until you watch some Late 70's - 80's Godard movies, you will want to put forks into your eyeballs.
P.S: I still don't understand why Jackson decided to tell the story from a little dead girl's POV and not from the killer's POV. Makes no fucking sense.
Quote from: InTylerWeTrust on August 09, 2012, 09:41:27 PM
P.S: I still don't understand why Jackson decided to tell the story from a little dead girl's POV and not from the killer's POV. Makes no fucking sense.
That's how it was in the book. I read the book when I thought Lynne Ramsay was gonna do it.
Hmm, I remember Avatar getting lots of strong reactions from people. I can recognize that the story was vanilla, though. I admit that I watched it once, enjoyed it enough, and forgot about it. I guess that's flipped with The Lovely Bones, where everyone else seems to have forgotten about it but I'm still hung up on it.
Quote from: matt35mm on August 09, 2012, 07:52:00 PM
I've got so many doubts about Skinny Peter Jackson.
He's not skinny anymore.
I think it was P that pointed out how much happier he looks being fat and working on hobbits instead of being skinny and working on dead girls.
His weight is drastically different everytime I see him...... He's the New Oprah.
Quote from: RegularKarate on August 10, 2012, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: matt35mm on August 09, 2012, 07:52:00 PM
I've got so many doubts about Skinny Peter Jackson.
He's not skinny anymore.
Well in that case, maybe The Hobbit will be great after all!
"Xixax: Judging Directors talents by how Fat they are...."
Quote from: InTylerWeTrust on August 10, 2012, 11:21:50 AM
"Xixax: Judging Directors talents by how Fat they are...."
Invalidated:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww1.pictures.zimbio.com%2Fgi%2FBrett%2BRatner%2BPlayboy%2BTaschen%2BButt%2BBook%2BLaunch%2BAFn94XxLamKl.jpg&hash=19b46dd977930c4314bc03cf60e302fb28eb8ac8)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdigitaljournal.com%2Fimg%2F5%2F6%2F2%2F4%2F4%2F2%2Fi%2F6%2F3%2F3%2Fo%2F752px-KevinSmithCC08.jpg&hash=a14b8f8e40fd5c84ede41292f16180635a585b07)
POINT TAKEN.
http://www.slashfilm.com/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-tickets-will-cost-the-same-for-48-fps-and-24-fps/
'The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey' Tickets Will Cost The Same For 48 FPS And 24 FPS
Posted on Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 by Germain Lussier
When it comes to premium services, moviegoers are used to paying a little more. Almost all theaters charge more for films that are in IMAX, 3D or feature assigned seating and a lack of commercials. So when Peter Jackson announced that The Hobbit would be shot and distributed in 48 frames per second, the first films ever to do so, most assumed the higher frame rate would result in an increased ticket price. Variety now reports that won't be the case. When The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey hits theaters this December 14, a 3D ticket to see it in 48 frames per second will cost the same as a 3D ticket to see it in 24 frames per second. There's more after the jump.
According to Variety's report, the original thought was for theaters to charge more for the enhanced, 48 frame per second experience of Peter Jackson's latest film. However, since The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey will already be in 3D and that commands a premium rate, Warner Bros. convinced the exhibitors to not charge even more to see the film in 48 frames per second.
Initially, it won't be that big a deal anyway. When the film is released, the majority of screenings will be in the traditional 24 frames per second format and the 48 frame per second screenings will be much more limited. That decision was made after the format was met with controversy when it debuted at CinemaCon earlier this year. However, the feeling is if this enhancement does take off and more filmmakers and films employ the higher frame rate (including the second two films of Jackson's trilogy, James Cameron has pledged to shoot his Avatar sequels in at least 48 frames per second, if not more) there could, eventually, be an additional charge.
Are you surprised the studio and exhibitors voted in favor of the film patron in this decision? How long till you expect to pay more for 48 frames and will you seek out the format come December 14?
Just give it to me in non-3D at 24 fps. And make it not be shit.
Encouraging review from Empire here (http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/reviewcomplete.asp?FID=9834). The word is good on Freeman as Bilbo: "This isn't just Tim-from-The Office or Watson in pointy ears, but an actor at the height of his prowess finding every layer to a character it now seems he was born to play."
This made me really sad.
Expound.
I had just rewatched the original trilogy this week for prob the first time since they came out on DVD a decade ago so they were fresh in my mind. The problems with this were so numerous I thought more didn't work than did. LOTR fans, prepare for your Episode One. :yabbse-sad:
How was the 3D and 48fps?
Quote from: MacGuffin on December 08, 2012, 05:50:46 PM
48fps?
It's probably my dirty mind, but I can't help reading "48 faps".
Quote from: Just Withnail on December 08, 2012, 08:27:02 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin on December 08, 2012, 05:50:46 PM
48fps?
It's probably my dirty mind, but I can't help reading "48 faps".
For some fanboys, this is their spank material.
Quote from: MacGuffin on December 08, 2012, 05:50:46 PM
How was the 3D and 48fps?
Very problematic. In the first few minutes its really awful. It looks best when the actors and camera are completely still and when the camera moves at all (particularly when it moves quickly) it made me a little nauseous though it did get better as it went along.
Quote from: modage on December 09, 2012, 08:08:43 PM
Quote from: MacGuffin on December 08, 2012, 05:50:46 PM
How was the 3D and 48fps?
Very problematic. In the first few minutes its really awful. It looks best when the actors and camera are completely still and when the camera moves at all (particularly when it moves quickly) it made me a little nauseous though it did get better as it went along.
I have a mild version of that reaction to all 3D. sadly the common practice is to have something hit you in the face by moving into the foreground, usually a weapon like a spear. I think the best stuff is actually when they go for wide epic shots, showing off the vastness of a horizon line.
I LOVED it. Didn't felt Episode One at all. It's a children's book, it's not as dark as LOTR ; but, well, Bilbo is so much better than Frodo. And I love the dwarves. And it was a fantastic journey. I was moved and I laughed a lot. The journey worked for me.
I'm not a big fan of The Lord of the Rings movies, so my curiosity about this was mainly about the 48fps stuff. Well, apart from a very video game looking prologue and a brighter 3D projection than usual, I still had an almost 3 hour long movie to sit through. And it kind of worked for me. One of the major problems I had with the Lord of the Rings movies was the pace, with everything happening all the time, a lot of names to keep track of and some cheesy moments to endure. In this, the pace is slower and therefore makes it a lot easier to follow the story with no need for a notebook. It also left a bit more room for the actors and Martin Freeman was good.
It still has some cheese in it, I still don't like the photography in some scenes (usually in elf land or whatever the hell that is), Peter Jackson still enjoys interminable action sequences and the amazing Cate Blanchett still looks like a robot with a very weird voice. It's the kind of movie like the LOTR trilogy that I don't see myself ever watching again, but it was light fun entertainment for the most part.
Quote from: ElPandaRoyal on December 13, 2012, 04:46:01 AM
I still don't like the photography in some scenes (usually in elf land or whatever the hell that is)
IT'S CALLED RIVENDELL OKAY
Quote from: HeywoodRFloyd on December 13, 2012, 05:19:34 AM
Quote from: ElPandaRoyal on December 13, 2012, 04:46:01 AM
I still don't like the photography in some scenes (usually in elf land or whatever the hell that is)
IT'S CALLED RIVENDELL OKAY
:shock: I don't think I'll ever forget it now...
not a particularly devout fan of the series in both film and book form (haven't read them at all), and i also went with the thought of wanting to see the trainwreck for myself. imagine my surprise then when i found myself elated to be back in middle earth and totally enveloped for the vast majority of the running time. the stupid 48fps notwithstanding, i found this to be absorbing and the purist, grandest spectacle since i guess return of the king. which is to say this is a fuckton better than avatar. i'm convinced at this point that mod's only joy in life is seeing the new PTA movie 37 times before anyone else here gets to.
the 48fps IS, in my mind, an out and out mistake and yet another death knell for cinema. the tradeoff in 3d quality isn't worth it. i thought prometheus looked gorgeous and the 3d worked quite well on a technical level, and this in no way was impressive enough to make me think it's the way of the future, especially because the only real difference i noticed is that the live action stuff looks intensely shittier. it looks like an hdtv with all the digital mods cranked way the fuck up. it's the worst during the movie's first 15 minutes or so, which has a lot to do with the content as well. the movie looks like an episode of benny hill by way of the teletubbies, which is true of any moment where the 48fps is especially egregious, and it's numerous throughout the movie.
despite this seemingly insurmountable flaw, i found myself getting lost in the movie, which i think is a testament to the quality of the adaptation. maybe i was just in the mood for some good old fashioned escapism but this delivered far passed what i could believe this movie was capable of. i was thoroughly entertained and moved, and it didn't feel a minute too long. i want to see it again without the hfr to see if this holds up but for now, i really liked, maybe even loved this movie. overstuffed, perhaps, but it comes off as a virtue of generosity more than self indulgence. and it sets up the next film so much better than either of the first two lotr movies. freeman makes for an exceptional bilbo and proves himself more than worthy of being the emotional anchor to the narrative. for this movie to be as big and successful as it is and to just be the setup for the entire story has me really excited for the other two movies.
That was just horrible. I really hope this 48fps thing NEVER CATCHES ON EVER. It's a prime example of WHY films are in 24fps. The whole time I felt like I could see the sets, and the actors ACTING, and the lights LIGHTING. Everything felt fake. I have no idea how you got lost into this movie, it was like the cinematics between loading in a videogame. It's pretty much a complete misdirection in filmmaking, and hopefully this experiment fails horribly.
That being said, I'm sure if I saw it non 3D, non HFR, I might've had a better time with it. I just don't understand how a professional filmmaker like Peter Jackson could even follow through with something like this.
The 48fps does look pretty bad in the first 15 to 20 minutes, with all the scenes in Bilbo's house looking VERY videoish. But once the characters leave the shire the 48fps looked better. Scenes with moodier lighting looked good in 48fps. The higher frame rate really does help with those sweeping camera movements and fast action. The action would have been even smoother if they used a 180-degree shutter instead of a 270-degree shutter. If they weren't required to try to mitigate the smoothness for the 24fps extraction perhaps they would have gone with a 180-degree shutter. I wonder if the CG would have stood out less in the 24fps version. Sometimes it looked very artificial. The use of 3D was fine, though nothing indispensable.
Don't write off a new filmmaking technique on the first film that uses it. Let's see how subsequent films use higher frame rates. In life we do see some amount of motion blur, so CG with higher framerates can look like a video game, but I'm sure that too will improve.
I saw the first three LOTR films, though I don't remember anything from them, so I'm not a LOTR fan. I saw this primarily to check out the 48fps effect, but I did end up mostly entertained by it, even if it is too long, and the film is essentially one battle scene after another.
Is it just me or did some of the one-liners seem out of place? Like, "out of the frying pan..." "could this get any worse?" etc.
The troll scene is amazing in 48 fps. But yeah, it's not worth it. It's a diva move from Jackson, but I didn't really mind. I hope people won't start to shoot in 48 fps, that's all.
PS : I had the first minutes of Star Trek after The Hobbit and, at the beginning, it looked really slow. Weird. :yabbse-grin:
The whole point of cinema is to create an illusion. When you add so many frames things start to become very real, and instead of feeling like I was lost in the reality of the movie, I felt like I was on the set. I love it when films use high frame rate as a tool during specific shots because it has an amazing effect. But in this, I could only enjoy it when it was those aerial moving camera shots that set up the location and a couple others.
PS: Sorry if I sounded insulting to any one of you guys. Everyone has different taste buds.
Setting aside the conversation about whether or not cinema should look totally realistic, the thing about 48fps (after you get used to it) is that it does make things look more realistic.
I think 3D generally looks terrible. Even natively-shot 3D looks like a hollow pop-up book in 24fps. This was the only 3D movie experience I've ever had in which things looked solid. The illusion of 3D finally worked. It looks like the movie is playing on fast-forward, but they do look more 3D. I was giggling throughout the first 5 minutes because it definitely looks like Benny Hill. I find myself wondering if actually a higher frame rate (James Cameron seems keen on 60fps) would work better by completely obliterating the sense of how fast the frames are moving... with 48fps you get a strong sense that this is moving exactly twice as fast as usual.
I am keen to see more HFR (High Frame Rate) stuff, but I think that THE HOBBIT was the absolute wrong choice for an introduction to 48fps. It DOES make things look more realistic, which is to say that a bunch of people in silly costumes on sets look like a bunch of people in silly costumes on sets. It felt like an expensive theater production of THE HOBBIT. The cinematic feeling is lost. Also, a lot of camera moves and editing styles that work for 24fps just look stupid in 48fps. It's so realistic that you can really feel the presence of the camera when it moves. Handheld shots are iffy, too, for this reason.
However, if we're talking about a Michael Haneke movie in HFR, where the camera is very still, it could be really effective. But that's because a Haneke movie could benefit from feeling like a live theatrical production. Except, Haneke movies are just fine the way they are, but in imagining a future where HFR is not a distraction because we're so used to it, it could be used well in movies like that.
48fps is a movement toward virtual reality, and away from cinema. Cinematic tricks don't work as well, but there's something to be explored there to create a new art form that can offer a totally different experience.
CGI does integrate with the real elements quite well, but mostly because everything looks like a video game. But I was more sold that CGI creatures were actually occupying the same space as the actors than I ever have been before.
So actually I was quite surprised by how positive I felt about 3D 48fps, despite thinking that it mostly looked silly throughout THE HOBBIT. I fully expect to get used to the "movie on fast-forward" effect fairly quickly, and then it's just a matter of a project and a director that uses that effectively. I think it'd be super effective for entirely CG animated movies, or for entirely realistic movies. Movies like THE HOBBIT which involve makeup for dwarf noses and hobbit feet and whatnot that are filmed on studio sets of fantastical locations just look silly because we can't be made to believe that it's not silly. Or, makeup people and production design people are just gonna have to step up their game. Otherwise, it looks like a bunch of kids just having some play time. It could still be great for action movies. MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE movies would be great in HFR because it's still essentially based in a real-world look.
I'm now very open to 48fps or higher frame rates, because I think that, as the technology gets finessed and filmmakers learn how to use it effectively, it could lead to some really cool experiences down the line. 24fps will remain the best choice for the Cinematic Experience, but higher frame rates will be able to offer great Virtual Reality Experiences, which could be great for certain kinds of movies.
THE HOBBIT itself is not really worth talking about, though. It is exactly what I thought it would be, and probably is exactly what you think it's going to be. Because it was so unsurprising at every moment, it felt like a non-experience to me, other than the 48fps part of it.
y'all some jaded ass motherfuckers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4an5bT-vY8
Quoteit looks like an hdtv with all the digital mods cranked way the fuck up.
Samsong basically confirmed what I had been thinking while reading over this thread.
I have a setting on my HDTV called "TruMotion", and from what I'm gathering, it adds a similar effect to whatever I'm watching as (I assume) the 48fps does with The Hobbit. I never use it. I almost returned my TV before I realized it was a function that could be turned off. I could hardly stand to watch Synecdoche, New York (a movie I now love) the first time saw it because of this shit.
I'm seeing The Hobbit tonight and I'll take it sans 3D, with a side of 24fps. Thanks.
I am going to see this again in 24fps and 2D.
The movie I liked. Loved it even, in parts. I just had a really hard time paying attention and getting invested because I couldn't stop thinking about the HFR.
I think it's going to find a place. I think lighting, set design, camera movements, etc... will all have to be rethought. Eventually, it will look good with certain films.
This was just a really odd film to start with.
Had a chance to see this in 48 FPS and Dolby Atmos last night.
I personally thought 48 FPS was a wonderful choice for viewers. The first 20ish minutes of the movie are a little odd. It took me a little bit to get used to. But that high frame rate is for action and WOW does 3D action look outstanding in 48 FPS. There were a few moments in that movie where honestly, 24 FPS would have made scenes look worse. My girlfriend commented that normally 3D movies make her sick at times but The Hobbit never did and I attribute that to the higher frame rate and how "smooth" scenes look when the camera pans, etc etc. Don't let the reviews convince you to see it in 24 FPS. At least see it in 48 and judge for yourself.
If you haven't seen an action movie (Brave doesn't count) in Dolby Atmos yet, you're missing out. The audience in my theater were so impressed with just the Dolby Atmos audio demonstration that they applauded. That was a first for me. Never seen an audience clap for the audio alone. Anyway! Outstanding audio mix. There were a few moments in that movie where plain old 7.1 would have dumbed down scenes and made them a little less impressive.
As for the movie itself.
If you loved LOTR and Peter Jackson's treatment of Tolkien's work, you'll love The Hobbit. If you don't care about that, it is a little plodding at times. But I absolutely loved it. The final hour or so is astounding in terms of production quality. It won't win any of the big awards this season but it was a hell of a hoot for Christmas movie-going fun.
I really enjoyed it, but I'm also a huge Tolkien fan.
Bilbo was a bit underdeveloped as a main character and I wasn't as emotionally invested in him (or the others) as I was in the LOTR characters, but Freeman did a good job. He got used to the adventure a bit too fast, I thought. And hopefully we'll get a better sense of the dwarves in the coming films and extended editions.
Also the nice poetic touches are still present and effective. I loved those real-time night-to-day, day-to-night scenes (there was at least three of them).
Mild spoilers?
The stakes are definitely weaker than in LOTR, but I found this to be enjoying and easy enough to invest in. I had to keep reminding myself that the first time I saw LOTR I didn't know the story, and also that Fellowship was (and remains) the weakest film in the trilogy. I imagine (and hope) that the same will be true with the Hobbit. There are some niggling criticisms (the first half was too talky, the second half just went from just action set piece to action set piece), but the main problem is that the film doesn't set up the remaining two thirds of this trilogy. Yes, we know there's going to be a confrontation with a dragon at some point, but the threat of the necromancer and the one ring could have been played up a bit more. Of course, this is supposed to be an "unexpected" journey, so I suppose there's an argument to be made that foreshadowing isn't exactly the order of the day.
Overall, it's a fun movie and a worthy enough successor to the LORT trilogy. The proof of the pudding will come with part two, I'm sure. PJ proves he is Spielberg's successor in terms of a mainstream family-friendly action director. The whole clay troll sequence was like something from vintage Indiana Jones. Perfect? Hardly. But a far cry from the Phantom Menace many were predicting.
Oh... I didn't watch it in 3D, but I do think it was a higher frame rate projection. It seemed much brighter than 24 fps. Shots where the camera moved about vast caverns, etc, were annoying because there was too much blur to see it properly. Some things seemed too "real" but there was nothing that was too distracting, which was something I feared. Personally, I don't feel the higher frame rate was worth it.
Quote from: Sleepless on January 02, 2013, 04:08:33 PM
I had to keep reminding myself that the first time I saw LOTR I didn't know the story, and also that Fellowship was (and remains) the weakest film in the trilogy.
No way brah! It's the best! THE TWO TOWERS is also really good. The last one is whatever.
Also, I'm pretty certain you didn't see it in the high frame rate--that only comes with the 3D version (there was no 2D HFR version released). It's more than just looking brighter. You indicated still seeing some blur, which is not the case with HFR. My guess is that you saw a nice 4K projection of it. The little bit of extra "realism" that you noticed was probably due to the extra resolution. But HFR is not "sort of" different; it's extremely different. If you didn't giggle within the first minute of the film due to the way it looked, you didn't see it in the high frame rate.
Yeah, I wasn't sure at all, so thanks for clarifying. Strike my comments from the record.
But Two Towers was the best.
Opinions on The Hobbit:
Luckily, it had none of the major pacing issues of "The Lovely Bones", or even "King Kong", where you spent too long watching a flower bloom or resigned to watching dudes get screwed over by giant bugs, initiating depression.
I found this movie to click along rather well, although by the end of it, I didn't feel as if I knew any of the characters any better.
Atmospherically, it put you right back in Middle Earth without question, and yes, it was a bit "happier" than LOTR, but I'd rather watch the incidences and stories unfold here sporadically than just seeing people worry about the fate of a single ring. The stakes are lower, so at least they have time to move upward with them. Didn't feel like any main character was gonna DIE in this one. Still enjoyable.
While I wanted to know the Dwarves more as individuals, I enjoyed their Marine-like banter and camaraderie. It was like watching a hockey team.
Didn't mind the CGI because, well, it was well done, although the practical stuff is still preferred. Didn't even mind Kratos riding around on Falcor. In Gollum's case, one could tell that the animation has improved, although let's hope that doesn't mean Zemeckis will go for it again.
My biggest issues were winks at the audience (which were mild here, but they kinda rub me the wrong way at times), the Gandalf Deus Ex Machina (he's savin' the day again!), and, to make it an even three, the previously mentioned lack of character development. I expect we'll give more of a crap in the future installments, once things start to settle in and the Fat Dwarf ends up saving the world or something. Maybe he'll become ruler of the Island.
To end on a positive note, I'm really glad I didn't read the original books, although I know some people think that some ideas were shoe-horned into this movie, namely the rescue by eagles at the end, as a fan service. I watched the Ralph Bakshi one. The eagles were THERE, man! In the TEXT!
So whether or not those Mountain-People/Stone Giants were part of JRR Tolkein's "The Hobbit" is a mystery to me, yet I enjoyed the spectacle of it. That's the kind of cool stuff fantasy is made up of in my mind.
Here's to hoping the next two meld drama and spectacle without...and this might sound silly in this case, but I think you'll know what I mean...sacrificing credibility.
Yup.
I seriously do not care a whit about Jackson's take on Tolkien's work (confirmed by this overlong, dramatically inert movie), so my only real case for seeing it in the theater was to test-drive the supposed New Big Thing of 48 frames-per-second, and it did not disappoint. Wait. No, opposite of that. It disappointed. It did nothing except disappoint.
What the Great Crime was to the Armenians, so is HFR to my ability to enjoy a film.
The best I can say for it is that after two hours or so, my brain stopped actively rebelling against it and it finally approximated to some small degree the experience of watching a film. The worst I can say for it is that is was like watching a cross between a History Channel reenactment and a 1980s BBC series about LARPing. Not even History Channel, one of those weird offshoots of the History Channel you get when you pay for the super-expanded cable package.
As it turns out, 24 frames-per-second is a magic number that should never be fucked with again. The absence of motion blur, the off-putting, stutter-stepping "fast-forward" effect whenever a character moved... rather than the closer resemblance to reality that Peter Jackson promised, 48fps creates this nightmare shadowbox of reality, where your parents have been replaced by realistic alien clones who may or may not be planning to kill you and eat you once you fall asleep. It's the uncanniest of valleys. We as a species need to agree to put the whole idea on a train out of town and pretend it NEVER HAPPENED.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go boil my eyeballs.
Quote from: polkablues on January 05, 2013, 12:43:13 AM
48fps creates this nightmare shadowbox of reality, where your parents have been replaced by realistic alien clones who may or may not be planning to kill you and eat you once you fall asleep.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F0.tqn.com%2Fd%2Fkidstvmovies%2F1%2F0%2FQ%2FN%2Fcora002.jpg&hash=ec381045ceda8ec10927516c54fa0cb720ba6e58)