More is less

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

More is less

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> More is less

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

More is less - 31/7/2012 1:57:39 PM

mungo mungo

Posts: 9
Joined: 10/3/2009

I'm sure these films will be great, but it doesn't look like P.J. has anything like the respect for the source material as he did with LOTR. I just can't believe he loves this one in the same way. On the bright side: at some point a real fan of the book will put together an awsome single film fan-edit.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 31

its all about the money money money - 31/7/2012 2:10:17 PM

derek 74

Posts: 1
Joined: 20/3/2012

Sickened over this, how are they going to get three decent film that protect the integrity of the franchise, we are not talking about the matrix sequals here who only had to live up to a screenplay , we have wonderful source material in the hobbit, and the film is called the hobbit so lets stick with the hobbit, i was even upset that there were going to be two films. if the hobbit was made first the anticipation for the lord of the rings would be 10 fold to what it is. i am a massive lord of the rings fan and the way the cart was putbefore the horse was a shame. i read the hobbit and it is onlyok compared to the lord of the rings, 1 ok film i could put up with but 3. no no no . Darth Vadar is still rolling in his grave next to obewan over the prequals.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 32

There will be time! - 31/7/2012 3:25:51 PM

GohandoMax

Posts: 2
Joined: 1/7/2011

My first reaction was that of joy! I mean, with all the thing Tolkien mentions in the book, and don't forget the 125p of the LOTR giving extra material to the Hobbit. It should be quite possible to make the best book adaption of all time with three movies for one book (not any book though!).
If they end up making each movie a little over 90 minutes, then we know they've screwed up... I hope they manage to make everyone last more than 120 minutes, the Hobbit is one of my all time favourite books, so it'll be impossible to get enough.
Well, well. At least they'll have time for character building ;)

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 33

From a practical stand point, its a good idea. - 31/7/2012 3:27:30 PM

Teamwak

Posts: 171
Joined: 15/2/2006

All the sets, costumes, crew, and cast are still there. It would cost a fortune to start again in a few years time. So if PJ thinks that he can tell enough of a story to make a third film, then go for it! We know he will have shot more than two films worth already, and they are obviously using more than just The Hobbit for story, so lets trust them to make a coherant third film. This is not just a cash grab, although that will be a happy side effect for them. This is for the love of the story, and the cast & crew he obviously loves.

And also, why are we bothered? Its a third PJ film from Middle Earth! Why is this even an issue?

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 34

RE: From a practical stand point, its a good idea. - 31/7/2012 6:30:02 PM

LjStronge

Posts: 14
Joined: 30/7/2012

At the end of the day, it is a cash cow and they will continue to pull this crap while there are enough fan boys to go and watch it.

They KNOW that they will fill cinema's and they know that they can rinse ridiculous amounts of money out of fans when they release the 7 special editions that will no doubt be out. Just think of how much they will charge for all 6 LOTR and The Hobbit films combined in Extended 3D Blu-Ray and Jimmy and Fred will HAVE to buy it because god forbid they should own them SEPERATELY!

Until people stop going to watch films that are produced solely to make money then they will continue to just spawn out Baggins walking around for hours on end.

....and they wonder why there is a piracy epidemic!

(in reply to Teamwak)

Post #: 35

ok, a couple of things - 1/8/2012 7:45:32 AM

lrcarey22

Posts: 1
Joined: 8/11/2011

1. the hobbit and LOTR are incredibly different books. if the Hobbit had been written in the same fashion as LOTR (i.e. lengthy descriptions and actual character development) then it easily could have been three books. I mean a LOT happens.
2. character development - in the book, pretty much none of the dwarves (save, maybe Thorin) are explored at all as characters, so they're going to need at least 2 movies to have proper, relatable characters ( I mean there are 14 main characters, which is even more than FOTR)
3. appendices and additional material gives the films a lot of scope to a) link The Hobbit in with LOTR and b) maintain a similar tone
4. The LOTR movies kicked ass so i dont know what everyone's worried about and while they were very true to the books there was still a lot of significant departures (Tom Bombadil, Barrow-Downs, the Huorns, just to name a few) and no-one really complains about those now because what P.J. is good at doing is taking the source material and using it in the best way to make entertaining movies
5. if there was only one film does anyone think he could really do the Battle of Five Armies justice? let along the battle with Smaug, the Mirkwood Spiders, the Wolves, the Goblin-King, the Trolls...I mean, that is a lot of big action sequences for one film. None of the LOTR books have that many big action moments
6. even if it is a cash- grab, who cares?they're still going to have to be good movies to make the money and i for one want to see as much Middle-Earth as possible

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 36

There is no law that forces anybody to buy a ticket or ... - 1/8/2012 3:06:02 PM

BrigittaR

Posts: 1
Joined: 31/1/2012

There'lll be those who'll love it - I'll be among them -, and hose who won't. I don't understand what's the bid deal. Anybody, who thinks it's a cash grab, it is rather easy to stay away from it. Personally, I'can't have enough of Middle Earth and I trust PJ based on his achievement with LOTR. Go Pete!

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 37

RE: Response to Ircarey22 - 2/8/2012 9:20:31 AM

Neilloc

Posts: 5
Joined: 3/10/2006

Ircarey22,

Well played. Nail on the head, on pretty much all of your points. I finished re-reading the hobbit last week in preparation for the movie's release and what struck me more than anything is just how much actually happens. Anyone who thinks a single movie would be the best, most faithful adaptation either has never read the book, hasn't read it since they were a small child, or is just moaning for the sake of moaning.

First film will end with the barrels, and still be 2.5 hrs of epicness, 2nd film will set up the white council and take the dwarves as far as finding the treasure under the mountain, ending with smaugs attack on laketown (what a climactic sequence that will be now), and the 3rd film will begin with dol guldur and end with the five armies. Glorious.

I think this will be an incredibly good decision. Well played PJ.

(in reply to BrigittaR)

Post #: 38

RE: Give him a chance - 3/8/2012 1:12:50 PM

potemkin1925

Posts: 115
Joined: 17/10/2007

AaronGallagher1, I hope you are still reading because you posted the most ridiculous comment.

"And to compare Mr Jackson to George Lucas in the what he is doing is ludicrous. Just look at George Lucas' IMDB page and search for the last original idea or project he did."

Lucas' last projects where Star Wars, Indiana Jones and Red Tails.

Irrelevant of anyones opinions of them, Star Wars and Indiana Jones are his own original ideas and creations and Red Tails is a historical (though not entirely accurate) story that needed to be told.

Jackson's last works, again irrelevant of peoples opinions of them, are all adaptations or remakes. LOTR, The Hobbit, The Lovely Bones are other peoples store and King Kong is a remake.

As far as originality goes, Lucas wins there.

For the record, I am a big fan of both filmmakers (enough though remaking any film is just stupid especially one as perfect as King Kong).

(in reply to AaronGallagher1)

Post #: 39

Fantastic! - 4/8/2012 3:27:59 AM

wgfuzzydunlop1

Posts: 91
Joined: 24/8/2009

That means that Empire will go gaga over THREE films I couldn't give a shit about.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 40

PS... KER-CHING!!! - 4/8/2012 3:34:24 AM

wgfuzzydunlop1

Posts: 91
Joined: 24/8/2009

Dance, my little Hobbit puppets, dance! Stretching a child's book over three movies? Greed. Nothing but greed. Pure and simple.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 41

So many of you guys don't get it.... - 5/8/2012 9:25:23 AM

Mort Grimm

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/7/2008

And... The uninformed whining commences. Sigh. Ok, here's the deal. Tolkiens history and background to middle earth is immense. It stretches back to the beginning of time. It's epic and a great triumph of imagination. Gandalf, Sauran, Saroman, Galadriel... I could go on. There is so much more to these characters than what we've seen. A lot happens in middle earth around the time of the Hobbit, and that is why 3 films is not a cash grab. Jackson's not that kind of guy. This is not stretching a 'child's book' over 3 films- it is more accurately a merging of the hobbit with other important middle earth history. Get educated before you complain. Movie gors sure seem to hate movies these days.

(in reply to Empire Admin)

Post #: 42