DELETED_74993

Shamikebab said:
He did an ok job but changed too much for the sake of it (that **** bit with Aragorn falling off the cliff and "almost dying" for example) and the last film was just terrible.
Click to expand...

Do you not think it's just a tad ignorant to slate a director responsible for the production of some of the most highly acclaimed films of all time?

He did a decent job with The Lovely Bones as well. Sure Del Toro would have been unbelievable but perhaps risky when catering for a predominantly Hollywood target audience.

kmufc77 said:
Does anyone thing that this will be any good as Peter Jackson is not directing the film?

I desperately hope it is good but i have my doubts.

The lord of the rings trilogy will be hard to live up to after Peter Jacksons Directing.
Click to expand...

If Del Toro is out of the equation I would love to see David Fincher have a go at this, chances are slim though. I wouldn't be surprised if it goes to Spielberg though.
 
id be happy if Peter Jackson did them loved what he did with the lord of the rings films and im sure he would be able to pull this one off. Some rumours have mention Micheal Bay whilst i liked the tranformers films etc i cant see it working
 
Gustov said:
Do you not think it's just a tad ignorant to slate a director responsible for the production of some of the most highly acclaimed films of all time?
Click to expand...

Um...no? Just because it's a popular film series does that mean it is beyond criticism? Star Wars is one of the greatest sci-fi film series of all time, does that mean the ewoks weren't ridiculous? No it doesn't. I've read the books a lot so think I am quite within my rights to comment on things he got wrong, you only have to look at the amount of criticism he got over stuff like Legolas sliding down stairs on a shield to know that it's not perfect.


And we won't even get started on the complete non-ending of the last film, just terribly done.
 
Shamikebab said:
Um...no? Just because it's a popular film series does that mean it is beyond criticism? Star Wars is one of the greatest sci-fi film series of all time, does that mean the ewoks weren't ridiculous? No it doesn't. I've read the books a lot so think I am quite within my rights to comment on things he got wrong, you only have to look at the amount of criticism he got over stuff like Legolas sliding down stairs on a shield to know that it's not perfect.


And we won't even get started on the complete non-ending of the last film, just terribly done.
Click to expand...

He couldn't have done an exact copy of the books though. It just wouldn't have worked as a movie. In fact i'm glad he got rid of a few things from the book as I thought parts of it were boring as hell.

To dismiss his work over a few dodgy scenes is a bit over the top, don't you think?
 
i-bert said:
He couldn't have done an exact copy of the books though. It just wouldn't have worked as a movie. In fact i'm glad he got rid of a few things from the book as I thought parts of it were boring as hell.

To dismiss his work over a few dodgy scenes is a bit over the top, don't you think?
Click to expand...

Where did I say he should have done? Some stuff shouldn't have been included like Tom Bombadil and I completely agree with that...it was the adding crap that I have issue with.

And where did I "dismiss his work"? I own all 3 films so it's not like I don't enjoy them (although the 1st and 2nd are far better than the 3rd) I just think the reason they're brilliant is more to do with how good LOTR is as source material rather than how well Peter Jackson did it. I think having WEAT involved did more for it being good for example.
 
Del Toro would have been great! :mad:

I don't mind Jackson taking the reigns again, although there should be a clause in his contract that states 20 enraged baboons are to be released in his trailer should he ever attempt to direct the ending.
 
Shamikebab said:
Where did I say he should have done? Some stuff shouldn't have been included like Tom Bombadil and I completely agree with that...it was the adding crap that I have issue with.

And where did I "dismiss his work"? I own all 3 films so it's not like I don't enjoy them (although the 1st and 2nd are far better than the 3rd) I just think the reason they're brilliant is more to do with how good LOTR is as source material rather than how well Peter Jackson did it. I think having WEAT involved did more for it being good for example.
Click to expand...

Peter Jackson did an amzing job, end of tbh. You're one of these annoying people that thinks because they read the books that they have some kind of divine right to criticise the film conversion. If he had copied the book exactly then each film would have been 6 hours long and incredibly dull. He used artistic license like every director does and made one of the best trilogies of all time. So what if it had a few duff scenes, what film doesnt? And the ending was great, worked well and thats that.
 
If you can't read my post don't bother replying. You'll see I didn't say I expected an EXACT translation (I even gave an example of stuff he cut out that I agreed wouldn't work), only him not to make up stuff and just add it in

And yes as a fan of the book I do think I have a right to criticise it, anyone has the right to criticise it :confused:


You say it had a few duff scenes? so...surely they can be criticized then?

And the ending was crap, you're the first person I've met (fan of the book or otherwise) who has said it was great. It was cheesy beyond belief (the god awful slow motion running towards each other and hugging), overly drawn out and completely ignored the ending of the book.
 
The ending was farcical. There was an hour of endings, after each fade to black you expected the credits to roll but steady on, there was another ending.
 
HamZilla said:
The ending was farcical. There was an hour of endings, after each fade to black you expected the credits to roll but steady on, there was another ending.
Click to expand...

The ending wasn't long enough!

Seriously though, what were people expecting with the ending, they'd just sat through over nine hours of an epic story and thought it would be wrapped up in under five minutes?

I can see why they removed the Scouring of the Shire (though I would have preferred to see it in there) and thought the ending was good even without it even if the slow-mo happy Hobbits was very cheesey.
 
Jackson may be directing...

In what amounts to a dream come true for fans of Middle Earth, Peter Jackson has decided to direct two installments of The Hobbit, trusted sources are telling me. His deal is being negotiated right now with Warner Bros , New Line, and MGM.
Click to expand...

http://www.deadline.com/2010/06/urgent-peter-jackson-negotiating-to-direct-the-hobbit-films/

http://scifiwire.com/2010/06/peter-jackson-will-be-dir.php

I loved his LOTR trilogy but can't make up my mind if this is good or bad news.
 
Last edited:
qqg3 said:
Jackson may be directing...



http://www.deadline.com/2010/06/urgent-peter-jackson-negotiating-to-direct-the-hobbit-films/

http://scifiwire.com/2010/06/peter-jackson-will-be-dir.php

I loved his LOTR trilogy but can't make up my mind if this is good or bad news.
Click to expand...

very few people could have pulled off the LOTR trilogy as well as jackson done, del toro was one of them.

its laready been said del toro is still helping with writing and had actually got the majority of design work done, this won't change, the only thing that's really changed is the director, so if you add Del Toro's design work (problably the big factor in his assignment as Director in the first place) to Jackson's ability to shoot epic films, this should work quite well in my opinion.

Jackson is the only person i would honestly believe is trustworthy enough to take over and continue on the same path as del toro.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom