RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,748
Posts: 5,433,246
Members: 24,838
Currently online: 491
Newest member: Mei'konda

TrekToday headlines

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 30 2012, 10:28 PM   #811
JD
Admiral
 
JD's Avatar
 
Location: Arizona, USA
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

As long as there is enough material to do three movies I don't have problem with it. But there sure better be a whole lot of added stuff, because I don't see The Hobbit having enough material to be the main driving story for three movies.
__________________
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it is not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett, Equal Rites
JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2012, 10:52 PM   #812
Emh
Doctor of TARDIS
 
Emh's Avatar
 
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Send a message via ICQ to Emh Send a message via AIM to Emh Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Emh Send a message via Yahoo to Emh
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

I admit I initially thought the split into two films was foolish but I slowly came around to accept the wisdom of it. But three? I'm highly skeptical. And very nervous.

That being said, I do have faith in Peter Jackson and perhaps the third film will be more of a bridging film like the second film was originally envisioned.

Klaus wrote: View Post
Putting PJ through the geek translation matrix:

"Time to show Lucas how to make a frakking prequel trilogy!"


One can only hope.
__________________
"Eccleston was a tiger and Tennant was, well, Tigger. Smith [is] an uncoordinated housecat who pretends that he meant to do that after falling off a piece of furniture." - Lynne M. Thomas

"I'm in Hell and it's full of Avons!" - Vila
Emh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2012, 10:53 PM   #813
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

What will the third movie be called?

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The Hobbit: There and Back Again
The Hobbit: Fuck, it's a dragon!
__________________
I am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2012, 11:05 PM   #814
Emh
Doctor of TARDIS
 
Emh's Avatar
 
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Send a message via ICQ to Emh Send a message via AIM to Emh Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Emh Send a message via Yahoo to Emh
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Well, if it's a bridging film like I hope it is, it'll probably be something along the lines of "Unfinished Tales" or "Lost Tales" or something similar, although I suspect Christopher Tolkien has the rights to those titles (if that's something someone can have).
__________________
"Eccleston was a tiger and Tennant was, well, Tigger. Smith [is] an uncoordinated housecat who pretends that he meant to do that after falling off a piece of furniture." - Lynne M. Thomas

"I'm in Hell and it's full of Avons!" - Vila
Emh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2012, 11:20 PM   #815
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Klaus wrote: View Post
Putting PJ through the geek translation matrix:

"Time to show Lucas how to make a frakking prequel trilogy!"
The difference is Lucas was making it up as he went along. All PJ has to do is follow a preexisting story.
__________________
"Your advertising's just dandy. Folks'd never guess you ain't got a thing to sell."
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2012, 11:47 PM   #816
Starbreaker
Fleet Admiral
 
Starbreaker's Avatar
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
View Starbreaker's Twitter Profile
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Is this material that's already been filmed that is just getting put into a third movie? I could easily see three two hour runtimes instead of two movies at 3+ hours each.
Starbreaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 12:05 AM   #817
Out Of My Vulcan Mind
Vice Admiral
 
Out Of My Vulcan Mind's Avatar
 
Location: Wherever you go, there you are.
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Starbreaker wrote: View Post
Is this material that's already been filmed that is just getting put into a third movie? I could easily see three two hour runtimes instead of two movies at 3+ hours each.
They're going to film more material to expand it to three films.
__________________
"I'll see you in another life, brother."
Out Of My Vulcan Mind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 01:11 AM   #818
DarthPipes
Rear Admiral
 
DarthPipes's Avatar
 
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Damn it. Between the studios greed and Peter Jackson's massive, narccissitic ego they are absolutely determined to ruin The Hobbit. Expanding The Hobbit to two movies was bad enough but three is complete overkill. Three movies for a 300-page book? Really? The appendix only adds another 125. Are the actors even under contract for a possible third movie? Because if they're not, it's clear this is a spur of the moment cash grab/egofest. I hope it doesn't effect shooting for the third season of Sherlock, something I'm even more interested in seeing than The Hobbit, especially after this nonsense.

Jackson's statement is completely ridiculous. That part about the story of Bilbo Baggins story remaning untold is false. If Jackson would just tell the story of THE HOBBIT, it would cover the full story of Bilbo Baggins. Bilbo was just an ordinary guy who went on one great, grand adventure. He returned home after a year and lived a normal life until we meet up with him again in the first LOTR's book. The Hobbit is Bilbo's story. He's the lead character, not meant to be one of many like in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The events going on in Middle-Earth during the book were important but weren't meant to be like the War of the Ring.

If he had stuck with the earlier rumor (The Hobbit and a bridge movie) I think that would have been much better. But he's going with three movies and I'm betting he'll make them three hours each because he's in love with his overrated skills.

Look, I'm hoping I'm wrong about this. But I've seen what happens when Jackson's ego runs amok and it's called King Kong. He took a ninety-minute movie and made it a bloated, three-hour-plus "epic." What did Jackson add to it? A FORTY-FIVE-MINUTE voyage to Skull Island, the casting of Jack Black (he wanted to work with him and miscast him as a thoroughly unlikeable character) and a freaky love story between a woman and a friggin ape. The end result was a film that was both horseshit and forgettable. If Jackson hasn't learned anything from King Kong (and it looks like he hasn't), we might be treated to another bloated "epic." That means Jackson will go the way of Francis Ford Coppola, a once great filmmaker who lost his ability to make classic films because of his own insanity after the 70s.
DarthPipes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 02:04 AM   #819
Starbreaker
Fleet Admiral
 
Starbreaker's Avatar
 
Location: Chattanooga, TN
View Starbreaker's Twitter Profile
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

I don't know what Peter Jackson has to "learn" from King Kong. It had extreme critical acclaim, was nominated for four Oscars, and was the 5th highest grossing film of the year. It wasn't very profitable domestically, but it made $550 million worldwide.
Starbreaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 02:39 AM   #820
Wereghost
Commodore
 
Wereghost's Avatar
 
Location: Ireland.
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

^ And the ending made big babies of some of us.

Kong may be illustrative of the risks involved in stretching The Hobbit to three instalments, though. Didn't PJ ask for more money and a longer running time with that one too? Some might say that it didn't do the movie any favours.

Personally, I think that Jackson, Walsh and Boyens probably know what they're doing with The Hobbit. It's long been hinted that this project is the "real story" to the novel's sanitised kid-friendly account, so it's easy to see how at least it could be stretched to two films. Not sure if the third will be he long-suspected "bridging" film or not, but either way I think we're looking at the insertion of depth and nuance moreso than filler. One of the video diaries has the actors singing a certain ditty from LOTR, so I think these films will borrow heavily from the mythology developed around the original story.

A big concern, though, will be whether the three films will manage to have their own distinct flavours as did the original trilogy. If they don't then audiences could be heartily sick of Bilbo Baggins by the end. But I think (or maybe would like to think ) that rather than this decision being Jackson's great folly, it will instead prove to be something of a coup de grâce. If nothing else, the fact that Bilbo is PJ's favourite Tolkien character is a positive sign.
__________________
Time is the boss of me.
Wereghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 02:50 AM   #821
mswood
Rear Admiral
 
mswood's Avatar
 
Location: 9th level of Hell
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Lord

People need to calm the hell down.

First if you wanted the Hobbit as its written, well no matter the length you are going to be seriously disappointed. Jackson from the get go was making this film fit into the universe he created with his filmed version of LoTR (just as Tolkien later was working on bringing the Hobbit more in line with the universe he created after he originally published the Hobbit).

Seriously go read the Hobbit again. There is very little actual dialogue, whole sequences are exceptionally brief in the book.

I mean how many pages is the Battle of the Five Armies? How about Smaug attacking Laketown and his eventual death? 6 pages for the Battle of the Five Armies. 5 pages for Smaug's attack on Laketown and his death.

Just those two parts in a theatre are probably going to be significant passages. I wouldn't be surprised if together they wouldn't equal 40 plus minutes. Yet they are in total 11 out of 320 pages.

I am sure that all the Dwarves will actually have speaking roles, is that the case in the book? How many of the Dwarves even speak 100 words? Is it one?

LoTR was much more fleshed out material, written much fuller Jackson took 3 books and cut out masive sections of Fellowship and massive sections of Return of the King and he still released 11 hours of footage (he shot enough material to still add another hour without even getting into footage that was no longer valid after rewrites, like Arwen at Helm's Deep).

The Hobbit is written in a far more basic style, with little dialogue and far less background detail yet is still 320 pages. If Tolkien would have written that same tale as an adult piece it would easily be long as 500 pages. With Jackson bringing forth the events that occur at this same period. The White Council the Necromancer, and the battle of Dol Goldur. It would be extremely easy to feel three standard length films. Easy indeed.

The only real issue is where to break each film off. And I think that is the biggest issue they will have.
__________________
My fandom will SALT and BURN your fandom!
mswood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 02:58 AM   #822
Dream
Admiral
 
Dream's Avatar
 
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

This man will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 04:01 AM   #823
Ancient Mariner
Rear Admiral
 
Ancient Mariner's Avatar
 
Location: Sailing for adventure on the Big Blue Wet Thing™
View Ancient Mariner's Twitter Profile
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

If for no other reason, another Hobbit film gives us yet one more fantastic Middle Earth score from Maestro Shore.
__________________
Ancient Mariner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 07:50 AM   #824
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Vice Admiral
 
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

The Quest for more money. Meh.

I agree with those who are pointing to King Kong. Man that is a hard lumbering molasses movie to sit through on rewatch.

I dunno, every single time I've become a fan of a director in modern times, their next work always seems to be massively self-indulgent. Happened to me with Bryan Singer after X-Men 2 (bleh Superman Returns), Peter Jackson after LOTR (King Kong), Sam raimi after Spider-Man 2 (Spider-Man 3), even Nolan isn't immune (Dark Knight Rises, which I do actually like more than any other of these follow-up movies I've mentioned, but event hat feels bloated and self indulgent).

Three movies out of The Hobbit *shakes head*

You know they always talk about respecting Tolkien's work, but how about respecting the story structure he chose? There's a reason those stories are in the Appendices and not in the main plotlines of the books. The Hobbit should imo be one truly great 3 hour movie.
Stone_Cold_Sisko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2012, 08:07 AM   #825
mswood
Rear Admiral
 
mswood's Avatar
 
Location: 9th level of Hell
Re: THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

Darth Pipes

Lets look at your points and actually try and stay calm and rational. Shall we.

Damn it. Between the studios greed and Peter Jackson's massive, narccissitic ego they are absolutely determined to ruin The Hobbit. Expanding The Hobbit to two movies was bad enough but three is complete overkill. Three movies for a 300-page book? Really? The appendix only adds another 125. Are the actors even under contract for a possible third movie? Because if they're not, it's clear this is a spur of the moment cash grab/egofest. I hope it doesn't effect shooting for the third season of Sherlock, something I'm even more interested in seeing than The Hobbit, especially after this nonsense.
First The studio didn't request this, Jackson did. While once presented the studio probably kissed his feet, I think its safe to say it wasn't brought up from a monetary stand point).

The production of the Hobbit was specifically delayed (one of the times at least) specifically to allow Martin Freeman to work both on Sherlock and to be available for the Hobbit. Since he already is scheduled to do pickups for film two next year, I am sure the extra work on top of that will still allow him to film a season 4 (he will already be able to do season three) if both actors agree to a season four (I don't know if that is signed on paper yet).

Now to the big one. You think the Hobbit should be done in one film. Sorry just not going to happen, nor was it ever going to happen if Jackson was writing or producing it, let alone directing it. That's just a Jackson thing, he likes long films, period. Now thinks to the rights issues between MGM and Warners, the studios were only going to be able to get deals made that would basically make them profits by green lighting two films. Sorry but thats the reality of having a property that we have one rights holder getting paid tens of millions who has no involvement in the films, and two studios who are working together, let alone on a project that is coming off the earlier property earning a billion of just the home market in the US, nearly three billion in world wide ticket sales, and billions more in WW home market, TV rights, and merchandising.

But avoid the business side of things. The book is 320 pages long, its dialogue light, as Tolkien rarely writes the dialogue that is going around Bilbo. Its also much less detailed then his later work on LoTR.

From the get go back in the days before Jackson was directing (it was still a two picture film), that we would actually be getting a lot of dialogue that Bilbo heard, but just described. That the Dwarves would each get unique voices (hell in the book do all of them even get lines?). That would greatly expand the scope of the film. We also know that brief passages were going to be shown in detail on the film. From traveling shots, to fighting scenes, to singing scenes. All take little time on paper but consume much more when filmed.

Take two examples, the book takes 11 pages to showcase Smaug versus Laketown and the Battle of the five armies (the book actually spends more time with the trolls). They are less then 1/30th of the written pages. Yet on film are certainly going to consume tens of minutes, probably over half an hour. Even if both those passages only took ten minutes of screen time, that would translate (if the rest of the book consumes the same ratio) a film the length of 300 minutes. Thats 5 hours. Now of course that isn't going to happen, some passages will get edited out, some will go quickly and some will take much, much longer.

That's without using any material from the appendix. As for its 128 pages, you do understand that there can be a passage about the Rising of the Necromancer thats one paragraph, that could consume twenty minutes of screen time when fleshed out and filmed (could be much less could be much more). As sparse as the writing of the Hobbit is, the appendix is even worse.

[quote]Jackson's statement is completely ridiculous. That part about the story of Bilbo Baggins story remaning untold is false./[quote] Actually first you would have to know if anything was cut from the Hobbit. Again Novels are usually cut, and cut dramatically to fit within a standard two hour film.

Look at Fellowship of the Ring Jackson released a 3 and half hour cut of that film, and there are huge sections of that book that aren't any part of the film. And thats again a 3 and a half hour cut of one book. If Jackson filmed everything in that book he would have easily added two hours. Easily.

So since you don't know what wasn't filmed from the Hobbit, you can't rationally make that point. Also since you think a version of the Hobbit that is shorter, which would also be an edited version, your point would also be in error.

The events going on in Middle-Earth during the book were important but weren't meant to be like the War of the Ring.
Actually agree. But here, in the Hobbit we don't get some of those events at all. Now if Jackson wants to devote the majority of the three films to the appendix material, then I would have serious issues, but we don't have any idea. None at all, about how much material in relationship to the material from the Hobbit is going to be in the movie.

Why is it that people think novels must be so heavily edited down to be good? We freely accept Short stories taking 2 plus hours in films, why is it so hard to accept novels taking several films to fully explore them?

Now I am not saying a film that is longer is going to be better. Not at all, nor am I saying a shorter film is going to be better. I think you can have bad short films, and bad long films (or multi films), just like you can have a great short film or a great long film.

Here are two examples.

Jane Austin's Pride & Prejudice a 400 page novel has been done in many forms. Yet the most critically (and I would say publicly as well) successful of these was an 8 part mini series (it took 5 full hours).

Look at the Lord of the Rings, its was intended as one novel, Jackson made three films, and also released director versions that were considerably longer. Yet critical reactions (from reviewers who reviewed both) seem to favor the extended cuts. Which basically equalled 2 full films for each volume. And all three still have major sections that have been edited out (Fellowship and Return of the King have lost the most).

I mean you compare the Hobbit to Kong, yet not LoTR (which I find odd to say the least). One is based on printed works the other isn't. One has extended notes to expand a story the other doesn't. You already mention your dislike for King Kong, how did you feel about the three LoTR films and the extended versions of those films (I assume you have seen them)?
__________________
My fandom will SALT and BURN your fandom!

Last edited by mswood; July 31 2012 at 08:21 AM.
mswood is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
hobbit, lord of the rings, peter jackson, tolkien

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.