The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - Extended Edition 2D 3D Statues 11/5/13

[Ernest Rister]

Not that WETA is starving for work, but WETA is his baby, and the Hobbit project allows WETA to continue R&D on improved visual f/x techniques.

Personally, the first hour of The Hobbit was my favorite part of the movie.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Lindele

However, if you look at The Hobbit book, it is clear that it would not work well in one film. It's episodic structure works great for a book, but not for a film.

Gonna keep saying it...Rankin/Bass produced a 90-minute animated adaptation of the book that worked just fine. Sure, another hour could have fleshed out some elements, but on the whole, especially considering the TV budget they had, their adaptation of Tolkien's book was effective and memorable -- especially the vocal talent. John Huston, the great Paul Frees, Richard Boone, and even Orson Bean -- all wonderful in their roles.

[Lindele]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Gonna keep saying it...Rankin/Bass produced a 90-minute animated adaptation of the book that worked just fine. Sure, another hour could have fleshed out some elements, but on the whole, especially considering the TV budget they had, their adaptation of Tolkien's book was effective and memorable -- especially the vocal talent. John Huston, the great Paul Frees, Richard Boone, and even Orson Bean -- all wonderful in their roles.

Enough said. If you believe the above statement, then there is no point in me arguing with you anymore.

[MacEachaidh]

Originally Posted by Lindele

He is doing these films because he enjoys making movies, and because he thought that it was the right thing to do.

Respectfully, you don't really know why he does anything, any more than anyone else does.

And the money he got for LotR wasn't his fee, but that he accepted a diminished fee in return for a percentage of the profits. That was the whole point behind his lawsuit against Bob Shaye and New Line, who were using creative accountign to say there *was* no profit on Fellowship.

These films were a pre-roduction nightmare that any filmmaker in their right mind would have dropped years ago. But he is passionate about delivering for the fans, and he is passionate about Tolkien's stories. For that he deserves respect and admiration...instead of claims that he made these films for the money. He isn't greedy, and anyone that pays any attention to his role in the community would know that.

You do seem to be overstating things somewhat. I haven't seen anyone use the word "greedy", for instance, other than you.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Lindele

Enough said. If you believe the above statement, then there is no point in me arguing with you anymore.

I don't come here to argue, I come here to talk, and even to learn. I submit that maybe it would be good for your blood pressure to dial down on the insults and the condescending tone. Makes you sound like a kid with a chip on your shoulder.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by MacEachaidh

[Lindele] does seem to be overstating things somewhat. I haven't seen anyone use the word "greedy", for instance, other than you.

Or anyone describing The Hobbit as a "pre-production nightmare". More like a golden opportunity to jump back into Tolkien's world. Have a strong feeling it was more like kids in a candy store, rather than a "nightmare".

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Lindele

Of course there is money to be made, and PJ will probably make hundreds of millions on it. But if you think he is doing it FOR the money, you are wrong. He could do anything he wants, anything. He IS NOT doing The Hobbit strictly for the money. If you don't understand this, then you don't know the director at all.

If you understood what I said, you'd know I never said PJ is strictly doing it for the money...since you're so keen on pointing out what people do/don't understand.
For someone who feels the need to attack anyone/everyone that is offering their: opinion, thoughts, views, etc....you really don't practice what you preach.

Yes, we all know most big name directors love their work, you're not offering anything new here. But big name directors got to be big name directors by making a lot of what: Money. It's just that simple.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I don't come here to argue, I come here to talk, and even to learn. I submit that maybe it would be good for your blood pressure to dial down on the insults and the condescending tone. Makes you sound like a kid with a chip on your shoulder.

Well said Ernest!
I was going to mention that we could all sleep better at night knowing Lindele was here to set everyone straight on everything PJ/Tolkien films. Whew!

[HomerThompson]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Gonna keep saying it...Rankin/Bass produced a 90-minute animated adaptation of the book that worked just fine. Sure, another hour could have fleshed out some elements, but on the whole, especially considering the TV budget they had, their adaptation of Tolkien's book was effective and memorable -- especially the vocal talent. John Huston, the great Paul Frees, Richard Boone, and even Orson Bean -- all wonderful in their roles.

Fans remember it fondly but show it to someone today and it'll be laughed at (frog Gollum, scary green elves). It has charm but is extremely rushed (all the dwarves are pointless characters except for Thorin and maybe Bombur). It also leaves out many, many important details of the story.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by HomerThompson

Fans remember it fondly but show it to someone today and it'll be laughed at (frog Gollum, scary green elves). It has charm but is extremely rushed (all the dwarves are pointless characters except for Thorin and maybe Bombur). It also leaves out many, many important details of the story.

I didn't say it was great, just said it competent and memorable, especially in the voice casting (Paul Frees was a genius -- next to Mel Blanc and maybe Corey Burton, he's the greatest vocal artist for animation who ever lived...just insanely talented). Anyway, the modest little 90-minute made-for-tv cartoon gives truth to the statement that yeah, you could make just one movie out of The Hobbit. Like Jackson's LOTR films, it wouldn't include every single possible thing, but it could be done. I seem to recall Jackson trying to sell a two-film version of LOTR, for example. If he could do LOTR in two, he could have done The Hobbit in one. Just sayin.

[ack_bak]

Will do what I did since the DVD days for these movies:
- rent (Redbox) the theatrical version
- buy the EE version when it is sub $15.

No double dipping for me.

[Resettito]

Come on, it's pretty obvious that three movies is a necessary thing. I saw The Hobbit 3 times, am a big fan of the book, and I started thinking afterwards how it would have worked when it was still two movies.

Honestly, I can't see it. There's a lot going on in the first movie, I can't imagine the first movie having all of this (of course stuff would have been cut) +

[Show spoiler] all the Beorn stuff + Mirkwood stuff + Prison + Barrels

It would have been too much and rushed. I'm reading the book again at the moment (till Laketown basically, where second film will probably end) and there's just so much stuff that's told in a couple of lines or pages that just begs to be expanded.

Bottom line, two movies for this seems unthinkable to me now. At least, we will get a long, lenghty BOFA in all its glory, I just can"t imagine what it's going to look like in HFR........

[SolidBlu]

still no amazon pre-order link?

[Starpower67]

Originally Posted by SolidBlu

still no amazon pre-order link?

There one isn't even available yet for the regular edition which comes out in a month.

[Lindele]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I don't come here to argue, I come here to talk, and even to learn. I submit that maybe it would be good for your blood pressure to dial down on the insults and the condescending tone. Makes you sound like a kid with a chip on your shoulder.

You didn't come here to argue...yet when I said something about The Hobbit novel justifying three films you argued that Rankin/Bass did it in one.
I was simply saying that if you consider the Rankin/Bass version a successful adaptation then there is no point in me arguing with you anymore. You started it my friend.
As far as my blood pressure, it is fine. I don't think I insulted anybody, and if I sound condescending it is because I am trying to cater to the ignorance in some of the above comments.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Lindele

You didn't come here to argue...yet when I said something about The Hobbit novel justifying three films you argued that Rankin/Bass did it in one.
I was simply saying that if you consider the Rankin/Bass version a successful adaptation then there is no point in me arguing with you anymore. You started it my friend.
As far as my blood pressure, it is fine. I don't think I insulted anybody, and if I sound condescending it is because I am trying to cater to the ignorance in some of the above comments.

That sums it up right there!

[Lindele]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Well said Ernest!
I was going to mention that we could all sleep better at night knowing Lindele was here to set everyone straight on everything PJ/Tolkien films. Whew!

I'm sorry if my defending of PJ and co. offends you. It seems that the majority of the posters on here are determined to convince themselves and each other that PJ has set out to destroy The Hobbit, and has nothing but money in mind.
All I can do is try. Try reading this blog...
http://davidferryjr.tumblr.com/post/...the-box-office

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Lindele

I'm sorry if my defending of PJ and co. offends you. It seems that the majority of the posters on here are determined to convince themselves and each other that PJ has set out to destroy The Hobbit, and has nothing but money in mind.
All I can do is try. Try reading this blog...
http://davidferryjr.tumblr.com/post/...the-box-office

Clearly you just don't get it. So I will explain: Your defense/insight about PJ/The Hobbit/LotR is fine. It's your condescending tone, and calling other ignorant that won't be tolerated for long in these forums.
Everyone here is stating their...wait for it...OPINION. Opinions are neither right, nor wrong. They are opinions.
You have stated yours, lets others have their say. There's no need to attack someone over their opinion.

[Lindele]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Or anyone describing The Hobbit as a "pre-production nightmare". More like a golden opportunity to jump back into Tolkien's world. Have a strong feeling it was more like kids in a candy store, rather than a "nightmare".

Well perhaps you weren't following along in what was most certainly the most intense and frustrating 5 years any film in history has ever had to go through.
I'm not saying the opportunity to make The Hobbit was a fun one, but it took years of painful lawsuits and other 'pre-production nightmares' to finally get these films made.

[Lindele]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Clearly you just don't get it. So I will explain: Your defense/insight about PJ/The Hobbit/LotR is fine. It's your condescending tone, and calling other ignorant that won't be tolerated for long in these forums.
Everyone here is stating their...wait for it...OPINION. Opinions are neither right, nor wrong. They are opinions.
You have stated yours, lets others have their say. There's no need to attack someone over their opinion.

Ok, I apologize. I do seem to forget that all opinions are right on these forums.