Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

The Entirety of... The Lord of the Rings

Page: 1(2)3

Brigade du jour

13:17 / 09.01.05

Ohhhhh ...

Finally watched the whole thing last night, here are some quick initial reactions to be chewed over (and probably spat out!):

1. I cried from the moment the one ring melts in the molten lava to the moment the hobbits return to the Shire. Literally, a bawling wobbling mess at the end of the bed. No, I'm referring to myself.

2. The Two Towers is comfortably the weakest episode, in fact it really doesn't hang together very well at all as a film in its own right, but that's okay because ...

3. I am now even more convinced in my opinion that The Lord Of The Rings is a film in three parts, as opposed to three separate films. Even to the extent that I think the IMDB should re-classify it thus.

4. Watching the trilogy all in one go is such an immersive experience that the emotional responses are exponentially heightened, particularly at the very end.

5. Go on Eowyn, stab that Witch-King prick right in his stupid invisible face yay!

What do you reckon? Far-too-subjective knee-jerk reactions or does some food-for-thought lurk in there somewhere?

Our Lady Has Left the Building

15:42 / 09.01.05

Has anyone else seen the easter eggs? Seeing as they didn't put them on the UKs of the first two it's nice that they're on the third. Stiller and Vaughan as execs trying to persuade Jackson to do a fourth movie for 'hobbit on hobbit action' reasons...

21:09 / 09.01.05

Easter eggs? Where?!

10:33 / 10.01.05

From the main menu go to "Chapter Select" and then go to the very last screen. Highlight the very last chapter but don't select it, instead press down on the control. You should see a little ring appear near the bottom of the screen. Select that ring and you get the Easter eggs - there's one on each disc of the main feature.

The Stiller/Vaughn sketch is very funny, Dominic Monaghan punking Elijah Wood by pretending to be a German interviewer is not.

11:33 / 20.11.06

Well, this is as good a place for this as any.

Jackson is off The Hobbit

Here's hoping this is some kind of canny negotiation technique.

12:36 / 20.11.06

I'm not really fussed if he's doing it or not. Personally I'd like Cuaron to give it a stab. It'd be good if he could make a deal to get the original actors back and borrow Weta's props, but part of me would like a totally different take on Tolkien.

Keith, like a scientist

12:43 / 20.11.06

Gah, big Tolkien fan, so it'll be difficult, but if Jackson isn't doing it, I'm not sure I can handle seeing it... I think LOTR is really one of those times that they had the perfect person directing the entire affair, the right lining up of people... really bugs me that this might not happen. So much with the Hobbit can be handled wrong. It'll be interesting to see if they can get the actors to come back if Jackson isn't on it, namely McKellen.

12:55 / 20.11.06

Obviously other directors could tackle it, but not many other directors could exert the creative control Jackson had over the franchise. I was speaking to an industry insider the other week who made it very clear that Jackson pretty much had New Line by the balls in that he owned almost the entire production machine - New Line didn't realise just how much power they'd ceded and that Jackson's a right machiavellian bastard when it comes to power politics until it was far too late. Now, according to the same source (who is currently working on His Dark Materials) New Line haven't been keen to repeat the experience, so it looks like whoever's gonna take the reigns will be given much less room to maneouver.

So, yeah, Cuaron might be good, but Cuaron might well not get to make a very Cuaronesque movie.

12:57 / 20.11.06

And, yeah, there's the actor thing. Ian Mac is Gandalf.

Keith, like a scientist

13:29 / 20.11.06

You can tell from the docs how much PJ had in terms of control. It was like his own empire down there, practically, and he oversaw everything. That's the kind of person something like this needs... an obsessive, exacting, clear vision of what he wanted... and, for me, at least, it was the correct way to do it. Not sure I can trust that someone else will do it... it should match up, not be a different vision, in my mind.

Seems like the biggest mistake New Line could make is not getting PJ back for it... billions of dollars are now in the hands of fickle rabid fanboys that could tank the movie as soon as the first thing they see or hear smells bad. It'll be curious what the backlash is. And what effect it will have.

Our Lady Has Left the Building

15:44 / 20.11.06

Is the viewing public really likely to care? I've been wary of them doing the Hobbit because it's a much smaller-scale story, even if you take in to account Smaug the battle of the Lonely Mountain isn't bigger than the Last Battle at the gates of Mordor, GoblinTown isn't the Mines of Moria and so on.

Yes, if these films have to be made them I would prefer to see Jackson and Weta doing it. But for all the fact that the LotR production team were able to manage the fans so that they went along, for the most part, with the changes to the story, there was an ineffable something that made it a smash with people who haven't and won't read the books, there's no guarentee it would happen again.

And two films to do The Hobbit? Really? The entire novel is shorter than one book of LoTR, I would have thought they could have done it all in one movie.

Keith, like a scientist

15:52 / 20.11.06

they have talked about making it a more full storyline and expanding on some of the stuff that Tolkien glossed over (The White Council fighting Sauron and driving him out of Mirkwood, etc.)

I think the general public won't care, but the rabid fans will. And it's possible they could tank the movie before it shows. Who knows what crazy things fans will do when spurned.

17:47 / 20.11.06

I think that's a worthwhile point about fandom, Flowers. It remains to be seen whether the geeks actually wield the kind of power they'd like to have.

On the two film thing, I can see why there's talk of it. The Hobbit is terribly episodic and not at all suited to cinema in its current form. Adding some bulk might make it a bit more adaptable.

08:59 / 05.10.07

Entertainment Weekly have run an article that could well be described as optimistic about Jackson potentially doing The Hobbit. What lifts the soul a little more is that it's the second such article I've seen in the few days. In fact, the first, which I currently can't find the link for, made a very strong case based around, not just Jackson's love of the source material and what looks like the forthcoming end of all the legal wranglings, but financial need. The man is running a huge operation down in the New Zealand, and it looks like the New Zealand film industry is falling on much harder times, The Hobbit could be just the thing to lift it.

17:52 / 18.12.07

It is ON, pervy hobbit fanciers:

Hollywood Insider just received word from New Line and MGM that everything has been resolved in The Hobbit debacle between Peter Jackson and New Line. Jackson will executive produce the pic for a 2010 release, but the studios are still in search of director. Production on The Hobbit will begin immediately ... A rep for MGM says, "This is a slamdunk for everybody."

Internet, commence your bitching in 5, 4, 3, 2...

18:00 / 18.12.07

I just read about it and wanted to post the news! I hope, they can get the same level of quality as with the trilogy. I don´t know if it is really necessary to have two movies, on first glance that seems to be about maximizing the profit as was done with splitting up Grindhouse into two separate movies. And who will direct, Sam Raimi maybe?

18:08 / 18.12.07

Me! Peter, pick me!

I want to make a BIG DRAGON and Dain from the Iron Hills!

18:59 / 18.12.07

Jackson seems to have lost weight recently.

Here, MSNBC is describing the project as "a two-film prequel."

Hmm.

So, what, up to the barrel-riding bit?

(I think I just met Jack's countdown.)

Keith, like a scientist

19:05 / 18.12.07

I have no sense of shame when I tell you there was a part of my brain really worried about this whole thing. Hobbit movies without Peter Jackson would have been really...distressing to this nerd.

Even if he doesn't write or direct, Executive Producing should at least make sure that the tone and look match. Also, thankfully means that Weta and the actors will most likely be involved.

19:09 / 18.12.07

I dunno, Mist, I struggle to imagine how you could adapt the Hobbit without either substantially altering the material or bulking it out. It simply doesn't even approach filmable as is.

19:16 / 18.12.07

Yeah, Jackson lost a shitload of weight right after finishing the press for LotR; I remember being shocked by the set photos from KONG.

As to where the break point is gonna be: looking back at the RINGS movies, Jackson and Walsh structured them as action movies—and that, more than anything, determined where they cut (especially in the 2nd and 3rd movies, which only roughly reflect the content of books). Now, The Hobbit book has number of important storytelling beats, but really only four big action set-pieces:

- spider fight
- goblin capture/Gandalf's return
- Smaug's rampage
- Battle of Five Armies

Break between the two—after the escape from the elves, before Bilbo enters Smaug's den. So, yeah, I reckon you're right on the money, grant.

Long shot of Laketown—lovely model work. Establishing montage of life in that bustling little burg. Cut to the wharfs. Barrels crash into shore: curious Men gather 'round. A wet, bedraggled Dwarf struggles to his feet, and, mustering all the dignity he can, he croaks, "I am Thorin, King Under the Mountain. I... am... returned."

Then he pitches forward, unconscious.

Fade to black.

19:36 / 18.12.07

That's it! You're my story consultant!

We'll do lunch!

Closed for Business Time

20:24 / 18.12.07

OOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!

Now, gimme a coupla days.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

23:53 / 18.12.07

Not quite sure why, or how, it'd be two movies rather than just the one, but fuck it, I'll go see it.

To be fair, it's The Hobbit. I'd go see it even if Uwe Boll was making it.

00:11 / 19.12.07

As to why it's gonna be two movies; it's no LotR, but a lot does happen in The Hobbit—or at least it seems that way to Bilbo. The journey should seem long and arduous. And since much of the conceptual work has already been done, guaranteed it’s going to be a world up on screen that looks and feels real, a world you want to luxuriate in.

That said—I can see it being two 2-hour movies; I really don’t know if The Hobbit can stand up to being 6 hours long. (Then again, I didn’t think King kong could stand up to being 3 hours, and it didn’t seem long at all.)

D brought up something at dinner tonight about the choice to make LotR first, and then turn to The Hobbit—to paint the big picture first, and then go back and linger in some of its cozier corners. And, you know, it makes sense. Better that way, I think, than to do the small-scale tale and then try to blow it out into an epic. After the sheer scale of LotR, The Hobbit will feel positively intimate.

Am now starting to worry about actors: Serkis returning as Gollum is practically a given. But can Jackson get McKellen and Weaving again? And where are they gonna find a young Ian Holm lookalike for Bilbo?

Whoever they find for Bilbo, I’m imagining that Jackson will CG his face in, Hayden Christiansen-style, in Fellowship’s brief flashback to the finding of the Ring, when the inevitable 20th Anniversary Special Edition re-release of the trilogy happens...

04:41 / 19.12.07

sylvester mcoy and ian mckellan meeting with peter jackson in wellington in august just gone makes a lot of sense now...

The Natural Way

07:25 / 19.12.07

McCoy! Fucking amazing!

Re the two movies thing - didn't Jackson at one stage talk about incorporating parts of the Silmarillion?

08:21 / 19.12.07

And where are they gonna find a young Ian Holm lookalike for Bilbo?

Do they have to? Technically Bilbo's meant to look exactly the same at the beginning of Fellowship as he does when he first finds the ring.

Brian Blessed for Beorn!

lord nuneaton savage

09:08 / 19.12.07

SECONDED!

THIRDED!

FOURTHED!

lord nuneaton savage

09:09 / 19.12.07

Like, seriously, can we start a petition? If Blessed gets Beorn I would poo a goat.

10:29 / 19.12.07

Do they have to [find a replacement for Ian Holm]? Technically Bilbo's meant to look exactly the same at the beginning of Fellowship as he does when he first finds the ring.

Well, two things: First off, the Ring retards aging but doesn't stop it entirely, so he should look a little younger. At the start of Fellowship he looks like a hobbit in healthy middle age, rather than a decrepit old gnome—but he's by no means in the prime of life.

More pragmatically: Dude, Ian Holm is currently 76 years old. He looks to be in pretty good shape, but honestly, do you think he'd be up to the rigors of a starring role in a big action movie?

10:32 / 19.12.07

The first film shows him getting the ring on the cave, right? Not that it'd matter, I just want to kill the doubt in my head if I created the scene in my imagination.

11:17 / 19.12.07

Yeah. It's about a twenty-second flashback; there's a single shot of Ian Holm in a brown wig, with adhesive tape stuck to his face to keep it from sagging so he'll look a little younger (seriously—Jackson says so on the commentary track), and he's lying down the whole shot.

The lengths they had to go to in a 20-second flashback would seem to indicate, to me, that it would be spectacularly difficult to sustain the illusion of Ian Holm as a hardy, vigorous fellow in early middle age for four hours of screen time.

11:20 / 19.12.07

Also:

A younger Ian Holm:

Sylvester McCoy today:

Yeah, that'll work.

11:22 / 19.12.07

Aw, thank you. That was bothering me a bit.
(about Bilbo's scene)

Page: 1(2)3