The Hobbit: A Minimum of Six More Hours of Middle Earth!! (Hours Subject to Increase)

[Morris Schæffer]

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/

:pritch::pritch:

[Qrazy]

While that's good and all... erm... sequel to the hobbit??

[Morris Schæffer]

Now it seems that Jackson is only producing. Can we delete this thread already?:sad:

[Qrazy]

Now it seems that Jackson is only producing. Can we delete this thread already?:sad:

If he's exec producing he can direct too. Hopefully he will.

I'm not keen on a sequel to The Hobbit itself but maybe they'll take a story from the Silmarillion and flesh it out.

[ledfloyd]

are they splitting the hobbit into two films or what? this is goofy.

[Saya]

Maybe they'll use the stuff in the LOTR appendix to make a sequel and at the same time bridge the gap between The Hobbit and LOTR.

[number8]

I have my suspicions.

Exec Producers tend to be less hands-on and more about the financial aspects. I was confused as to why they greenlit this project at the same time as the announcement of the Jackson/New Line settlement. Especially if Jackson ends up not directing anyway. Then it hit me.

I think the way they settled their problem was a promised hefty backend on The Hobbit. Jackson will be busy with Tintin since it's another trilogy he's taking on, so he won't be able to work on The Hobbit, but New Line probably offered him a settlement to end the lawsuit in the form of a big EP credit and a hefty split of the profits. Essentially, Jackson will be raking in big bucks w/o the grunt work he did for LOTR.

[Wryan]

A film dedicated entirely to ancillary backstory?

Really?

I can't decide if that's worthwhile or wasteful.

[Qrazy]

A film dedicated entirely to ancillary backstory?

Really?

I can't decide if that's worthwhile or wasteful.

Have you read The Hobbit? It's its own story.

[Wryan]

Have you read The Hobbit? It's its own story.

The articles regarding the topic say there will likely be two movies: one of The Hobbit proper and one of ancillary backstory that bridges TH and FOTR.

So....as I said:

"A film dedicated entirely to ancillary backstory?

Really?

I can't decide if that's worthwhile or wasteful."

[Qrazy]

The articles regarding the topic say there will likely be two movies: one of The Hobbit proper and one of ancillary backstory that bridges TH and FOTR.

So....as I said:

"A film dedicated entirely to ancillary backstory?

Really?

I can't decide if that's worthwhile or wasteful."

Ah right, right sorry about that.

[Yxklyx]

The second movie should be made in the style of The Falls - starting with A for Aragorn, etc...

[Dukefrukem]

so are these stories as cool as the LOTR? or what?

[[ETM]]

so are these stories as cool as the LOTR? or what?

Cool?

(pretty much definitive Hobbit spoilers):
A whoooole bunch of dwarves instead of one + Bilbo? A shapeshifter? Shelob's offspring in a creepy forest? Legolas' kin in a huge battle that is neither a flashback nor an invention? A fricken' dragon sleeping on top of great treasure in a fricken' underground ruined city? Giant eagles that don't only drop people off at volcanoes but also tak and kick ass? Gollum? GOLLUM?!

If done right, I'd say yes.:P

[Dukefrukem]

what do people expect castnig wise for this film?

[[ETM]]

what do people expect castnig wise for this film?

I only hope McKellen and Lee don't die before they start filming.

[Dukefrukem]

;17941']I only hope McKellen and Lee don't die before they start filming.

:lol:

i was thinking that the other day when they were showing LotR on TV. I was wondering... what would have happened if McKellen died while filming these movies.

[Morris Schæffer]

Could McKellen really be back? I know he's eager to return, but isn't he supposed to be much younger? How much time transpires between The Hobbit and Fellowship? Still, McKellen as Gandalf the White already looked much younger than his Grey counterpart so it is possible. I can only hope.

And I'd love to see two movies instead of one and I'll asume that if they opt for two, the material is there.

[[ETM]]

McKellen is not that old, the magic of makeup and special effects can do wonders (remember X-Men 3?). Lee is who I'm worried about... they should at least put a Saruman cameo into The Hobbit, and there's no Saruman without him.

[Qrazy]

Meh, you don't really need Saruman for The Hobbit. McKellen will be fine, he'll be back to old grizzly grey face.

I just hope they get a good Bilbo. Any thoughts? ... Heath Ledger?

[Morris Schæffer]

;17947']McKellen is not that old, the magic of makeup and special effects can do wonders (remember X-Men 3?). Lee is who I'm worried about... they should at least put a Saruman cameo into The Hobbit, and there's no Saruman without him.

Lee was that crucial to making Saruman work? Yes, the man's got a booming voice, but similar vocal chords can no doubt be found with a little work. I didn't think Saruman was a very textured character. He felt more like a symbol of evil, kinda like Sauron's eye. Indeed, he was basically a glorified messenger, prepping for the return of Sauron and informing his master of progress. All I remember from Lee is spouting grandiose things while staring into his palantir. They could even pull a Maul and have Lee's vocal chords be used by a different actor. That said, if at all possible, I'd like Lee to return, but I don't see how it is of paramount importance. Whereas McKellen...

Frankly, I don't even remember Saruman in The Hobbit so why the pressing need for a cameo?

[Spinal]

A film dedicated entirely to ancillary backstory?

Really?

I can't decide if that's worthwhile or wasteful.

Did you see the Star Wars prequels?

[Morris Schæffer]

Did you see the Star Wars prequels?

Lucas has always said that the existing trilogy were parts 4~6 and that someday we would see parts 1~3. True, it wasn't exactly worthwhile and some definitely feels like filler (apart from "Sith"), but the situation is likely trickier in the case of Tolkien's universe. One book is one movie and everything else has to be cobbled together from other material related to Middle-Earth. If there's enough, fine. If not, then we have a problem because in the case of The Hobbit, the writers can't start making stuff up. Lucas could because it was his universe to begin with.

[Duncan]

How did Bilbo's aging work again? Didn't he look the same back then as he did in LOTR because of the ring or something? My mental geekopedia is failing me.

[Sycophant]

Did you see the Star Wars prequels?
Okay. Wasteful, then.

[Melville]

I just hope they get a good Bilbo. Any thoughts? ... Heath Ledger?
My vote is for Jamie Oliver. If any full-grown man looks like a hobbit, it's him.

[Morris Schæffer]

How did Bilbo's aging work again? Didn't he look the same back then as he did in LOTR because of the ring or something? My mental geekopedia is failing me.

McKellen's Gandalf does say to Bilbo in "Fellowship" that he hasn't aged a single day so perhaps that was a pre-emptive strike by Jackson and writers to ensure Holm could be back. I'm pretty sure they weren't thinking that far ahead though.

[[ETM]]

Frankly, I don't even remember Saruman in The Hobbit so why the pressing need for a cameo?

You know they'll put him in. And to me Lee is more crucial to his role than McKellen for Gandalf. That's, like, my opinion, man.

[[ETM]]

I just hope they get a good Bilbo. Any thoughts? ... Heath Ledger?

Or Brad Pitt?

I vote for a new face. So many good overlooked actors out there, one of them has to be similar enough to Holm.

[Sven]

If they wanna make it a part of the LOTR series, they can't have anyone other than Holm do it. There are flashbacks in the movie to Holm-as-Bilbo finding the ring.

[Morris Schæffer]

;17993']You know they'll put him in. And to me Lee is more crucial to his role than McKellen for Gandalf. That's, like, my opinion, man.

That's, like, really odd. ;)

[[ETM]]

That's, like, really odd. ;)

Odd makes the life interesting.

iosos - Holm has survived cancer since LOTR and will be 78 when they start shooting... I'm pretty certain he can't do it.

[Ivan Drago]

Saruman was in The Hobbit? I don't recall that. But I haven't read the book in a while....

This will be made into 2 movies? Oh boy.

[Sven]

;18002']iosos - Holm has survived cancer since LOTR and will be 78 when they start shooting... I'm pretty certain he can't do it.

Yeah. It'll screw up the continuity for sure, but I figured that he'd probably be out. It's like Moira Kelly playing Donna in the Twin Peaks prequel.

[[ETM]]

Saruman was in The Hobbit? I don't recall that.

He wasn't, but they might decide to use him if they indeed go for the expanded story... in the book, Gandalf just tells the others about the White Council and their fight against Dol Guldur and the Necromancer (then only suspected by them to be Sauron himself). Saruman the White lead the Council.

It would actually tie in rather nicely with LOTR and provide some memorable imagery, as well as the (brief) return of Galadriel and several other Elven lords as Council members...

Btw, do we need to spoiler Hobbit plot points?

[number8]

Although, didn't Holm and McKellen both said that they'd be really disappointed if they do The Hobbit without them?

[KK2.0]

Although, didn't Holm and McKellen both said that they'd be really disappointed if they do The Hobbit without them?

If i remeber well, they actually went to Jackson to express their interest in The Hobbit.

I think the idea of a movie based in the Appendices can actually work. They already added a bunch of references to these in the LOTR movies and their extended cuts, right?

The list of details on The One Ring website actually has some stuff i'd like to watch.

copy and pasty:

Events that could be included in such a bridge movie:

* The White Council meets to discuss The Necromancer (aka Sauron)
* The White Council (including Saruman and Gandalf) attack The Necromancer’s stronghold at Dol Guldur. This is to prevent Sauron from searching the river for the Ring. Sauron abandons Dol Guldur and takes up residence in Mordor.
* Gollum leaves the mountain, searching for the “thief” Baggins.
* Sauron declared himself openly, starting to gather power to Mordor.
* Aragorn searches the wilds for Gollum.
* Aragorn’s engagement to Arwen.
* Frodo’s birth.

the one in bold would actually be kickass

[Spinal]

(apart from "Sith")

Keep telling yourself that. :)

[Sven]

Keep telling yourself that. :)

Sadly, I've given out all my rep.

[number8]

Since watching it again on Cable, I've come to realize that yeah, Sith is also a terrible movie. I think the fact that Clones was so scorchingly bad had me forgiving Sith for its meager few moments of brilliance.

[KK2.0]

Yeah, Sith was the only episode of the prequels i purchased, based on my first positive reactions but, after rewatching it, I realized that what actually made me enjoy it were the bridges to the old trilogy, more than the film itself. Pure nostalgia.

[[ETM]]

I've come to realize that yeah, Sith is also a terrible movie. I think the fact that Clones was so scorchingly bad had me forgiving Sith for its meager few moments of brilliance.

I can sign this.

[Sven]

Since watching it again on Cable, I've come to realize that yeah, Sith is also a terrible movie. I think the fact that Clones was so scorchingly bad had me forgiving Sith for its meager few moments of brilliance.

Alas, far far far far far too many critics felt similarly. I actually thought Sith was pretty easily the worst of the three.

[Morris Schæffer]

Yeah yeah, let's just stick to The Hobbit gents.:P:)

[Morris Schæffer]

http://www.mania.com/56965.html

I guess the bearded one isn't directing then. :sad:

This, with Avatar, is my most anticipated flick on the horizon and it's so odd that a Tintin movie of all things is the proverbial fly in the ointment.

[transmogrifier]

http://www.mania.com/56965.html

I guess the bearded one isn't directing then. :sad:

This, with Avatar, is my most anticipated flick on the horizon and it's so odd that a Tintin movie of all things is the proverbial fly in the ointment.

Good, Jackson should be going on to other things in his career.

[Morris Schæffer]

Good, Jackson should be going on to other things in his career.

No! He should do what I want him to do.:)

[Qrazy]

If they wanna make it a part of the LOTR series, they can't have anyone other than Holm do it. There are flashbacks in the movie to Holm-as-Bilbo finding the ring.

Hilarious to think that if this was Lucas's project after recasting Bilbo as Hayden Christensen he'd probably go back and digitally insert Christensen's face over all of the old Bilbo footage in The Lord of the Rings.

[Qrazy]

No! He should do what I want him to do.:)

Agreed.

[Qrazy]

Alas, far far far far far too many critics felt similarly. I actually thought Sith was pretty easily the worst of the three.

I agree that all the films range from mediocre to bad but I mean come on now.

[Sven]

I agree that all the films range from mediocre to bad but I mean come on now.

Where are we going?

[Sycophant]

I agree that all the films range from suicide-inducing to painfully interminable but I mean come on now.Fixed.

[Watashi]

Sith has John Williams' best score in a decade, so it can't be bad.

[KK2.0]

Sith has John Williams' best score in a decade, so it can't be bad.

It Is.


Yeah yeah, let's just stick to The Hobbit gents.:P:)

ok, i'll stop now. :P

[DSNT]

Guillermo del Toro in line for Hobbit (http://www.slashfilm.com/2007/12/20/guillermo-del-toro-in-line-for-the-hobbit/).

*ears perk up*

What are the chances Raimi backs down from this project?

[Qrazy]

Where are we going?

Little China.

[Sven]

Little China.

You know what to expect when iosos and Qrazy go where the East meets the West...

http://www.soundtrackcollector.com/images/movie/large/Big_Trouble_In_Little_China.jp g

[MadMan]

While I'm all in favor of Holm being casted as Bilbo I think they could do it with some other actor. That said I'm firmly against anyone but Ian McKellen playing Gandalf the Gray. Period. And I'm wondering who they will cast for the dwarves that accompany Bilbo on his quest. Plus the thought of seeing Smorg in action sounds really awesome, along with the big ass battle at the end of the book (I can't remember what its called-its been a long time since I last read The Hobbit).

[Qrazy]

While I'm all in favor of Holm being casted as Bilbo I think they could do it with some other actor. That said I'm firmly against anyone but Ian McKellen playing Gandalf the Gray. Period. And I'm wondering who they will cast for the dwarves that accompany Bilbo on his quest. Plus the thought of seeing Smorg in action sounds really awesome, along with the big ass battle at the end of the book (I can't remember what its called-its been a long time since I last read The Hobbit).

Maybe they'll do some character development on the Eagles. They do talk and stuff don't they? Or is my memory hazy?

[Morris Schæffer]

I don't dislike Del Toro, but it feels so damn wrong to have anyone other than Jackson helming this. It's gonna take a while before I'm able to get used to it.
Still, let's hope the rest of the team remains the same, meaning Shore, Lesnie, and cast. That will go a long way in assuaging my fears.

[[ETM]]

Plus the thought of seeing Smorg in action sounds really awesome, along with the big ass battle at the end of the book (I can't remember what its called-its been a long time since I last read The Hobbit).

Smorg?:frustrated:

;)

Battle of the Five Armies, MM.

[KK2.0]

OMG too many good news/promises in that arcticle.

- Sam Raimi doing a new horror movie in the vein of Evil Dead

- Confirmation that the second film will be based on the LOTR's Appendices, The Hobbit will be the first film only.

- Guillermo Del Toro will be free in time for production and imo he's a better choice.

If all those things come true...

[Ezee E]

I'd rather see Guillermo Del Toro take on other projects. Oh well, maybe that will lead to better things for him then.

[MadMan]

;18518']Smorg?:frustrated:

;)

Battle of the Five Armies, MM.How do you spell it then? I forgot. And oh yeah it is called Battle of the Five Armies. I think I need to revisit it and maybe even the LOTRs as well.


Maybe they'll do some character development on the Eagles. They do talk and stuff don't they? Or is my memory hazy?I don't remember if they really tackle the Eagles in any sort of detail or if they talk either.

And while I'd love to have Jackson doing it as long as a good director makes this film I'm fine with Jackson only being the film's producer.

[Morris Schæffer]

Smaug ;)

[MadMan]

Smaug ;)Danke my good man :)

[number8]

Woo hoo.

Guillermo. Del. Fuckin. Toro.

[MadMan]

Really? That's fantastic news. I trust his capable hands as much as I would trust Peter Jackson making this picture.

[D_Davis]

I hope it's not Del Toro. I'm just not in the Del Toro camp. I haven't truly liked anything he has done...

Maybe this will be the first! Gotta stay positive. :)

[Ezee E]

I hope it's not Del Toro. I'm just not in the Del Toro camp. I haven't truly liked anything he has done...

Maybe this will be the first! Gotta stay positive. :)
Have you seen all of his movies? It seems you'd like at least one of his.

[Raiders]

I hope it's not Del Toro. I'm just not in the Del Toro camp. I haven't truly liked anything he has done...

Understandable. He's no Michael Bay.

[Morris Schæffer]

His studio pictures have certainly made me question his capacities as a LotR director, but considering that one of Jackson's first movies is a film about homicidal muppets, I think my fears are unwarranted. Plus, Weta Digital, Shore, Lesnie, New-Zealand and hopefully some of the cast members will return so that's a huge chunk of the original team already. Moreover, no doubt Jackson will remain on standby to share his experience amassed during the shoot of the previous trilogy. Oh dear, I still don't sound particularly reassured do I? :) I'll warm to it eventually. Pan's Labyrinth was perhaps ample evidence that this could work like a charm.

[D_Davis]

Have you seen all of his movies? It seems you'd like at least one of his.

Yeah I have. The one I like the most is Blade II, but even this one has parts that really bug me.

[Ezee E]

Yeah I have. The one I like the most is Blade II, but even this one has parts that really bug me.
Yeah, WWF fighting at the end killed what was a surprisingly masterful first half. The sewer and club scenes are amazing in that movie.

[D_Davis]

Yeah, WWF fighting at the end killed what was a surprisingly masterful first half. The sewer and club scenes are amazing in that movie.

Yeah - it has some awesome moments, but IMO, Del Toro always drops the ball when it comes to the details. What happened to Donny Yen's character? Unless I am mistaken, he just vanishes half way through the film.

I think with Del Toro, I really want to like his films, and he seems like such a strong champion of genre cinema that maybe I scrutinize his films too much because of all the praise they usually get.

[D_Davis]

Understandable. He's no Michael Bay.

He's no Tsui Hark, Lau Kar Leung, Chang Cheh, King Hu, Sergio Leone, Coen Brothers, or Chan-wook Park either.

What's your point?


Oh wait, I see what you did there. It's the old "you like some of Michael Bay's films so your opinion is shit" argument.

;)

[MadMan]

Yeah, WWF fighting at the end killed what was a surprisingly masterful first half. The sewer and club scenes are amazing in that movie.I agree, plus the whole thing with the vampire emperor and his daughter was lame soap opera shit that I found really annoying. Still the freaky super vampires were really cool also.

[[ETM]]

What happened to Donny Yen's character? Unless I am mistaken, he just vanishes half way through the film.

I think he was ripped to pieces in the club scene.

[D_Davis]

;29945']I think he was ripped to pieces in the club scene.

I can't remember if the actually show this or not. I need to rewatch it it.

Del Toro's commentary on the DVD is awesome though. I love to listen to the guy talk about genre cinema.

[Raiders]

Oh wait, I see what you did there. It's the old "you like some of Michael Bay's films so your opinion is shit" argument.

;)

I would never...

[Wryan]

AICN:

Del Toro likely to direct both? Jackson and DT likely to work together to write?

I'm peeing myself atm!

[lovejuice]

He's no Tsui Hark, Lau Kar Leung, Chang Cheh, King Hu, Sergio Leone, Coen Brothers, or Chan-wook Park either.

What's your point?


Oh wait, I see what you did there. It's the old "you like some of Michael Bay's films so your opinion is shit" argument.

;)

i'm really with you here. i'm not a del toro fan. hell boy is perhaps my favorite. haven't watched mimic or cronos, but that thing with weird goat-like creature, and some little girl doing something with some big girl in a forest, while some war's going on, and bang bang, then some mother marries some evil step father who's also a fascist, and then bang bang, and more people die doesn't really impress me either.

but i give him edge over michael bay.

[Raiders]

but that thing with weird goat-like creature, and some little girl doing something with some big girl in a forest, while some war's going on, and bang bang, then some mother marries some evil step father who's also a fascist, and then bang bang, and more people die doesn't really impress me either.

This is possibly the most pointless and bizarre post ever. You couldn't just say its name? Or is that not condescending enough?

[Grouchy]

Mimic is the only Del Toro film I found less than excellent. A lot less than excellent, actually.

But Cronos is a fucking masterpiece. I wish that movie was more well known. It's the ultimate post-modern vampire film. Better than Ferrara's Addiction or Scott's The Hunger.

[Rowland]

The first half hour of Mimic is excellent, mostly because of its genuinely creepy and visually gorgeous atmospherics, but the rest just devolves into unimaginative, albeit essentially engaging, sub-Aliens schtick.

[Wryan]

I adore Mimic.

[transmogrifier]

I'm just glad Jackson's not doing them. He needs to be directing other things.

[Grouchy]

The first half hour of Mimic is excellent, mostly because of its genuinely creepy and visually gorgeous atmospherics, but the rest just devolves into unimaginative, albeit essentially engaging, sub-Aliens schtick.
It's true, it starts pretty good, but it's derivative Hollywood monster garbage by the time it ends. It's the only movie where I think the mainstream got to Del Toro's head.

My favorites are Cronos and The Devil's Backbone, plus both have the added value of Federico Luppi's awesome acting talent.

[lovejuice]

This is possibly the most pointless and bizarre post ever. You couldn't just say its name? Or is that not condescending enough?

i just think it's funny everyone here swoons over one of the most insignificant films i have watched recently. i'm actually trying to emulate the onion's article on harry potter -- can't find the link. let's just say it's my fail attempt at humour.

[megladon8]

i just think it's funny everyone here swoons over one of the most insignificant films i have watched recently. i'm actually trying to emulate the onion's article on harry potter -- can't find the link. let's just say it's my fail attempt at humour.


I blame it on the language barrier :)

But I'm really happy about this news - not only can Jackson move on, but Del Toro seems like a great choice for this type of film.

We can at least be guaranteed it'll look gorgeous.

[[ETM]]

i just think it's funny everyone here swoons over one of the most insignificant films i have watched recently.

It's not "everyone here", it's "pretty much everyone else in the world, except lovejuice". I could formulate a few reasons why I consider the film significant, but I'm rather interested in hearing yours...

[Sven]

;30128']It's not "everyone here", it's "pretty much everyone else in the world, except lovejuice".

And iosos. Let's not forget iosos.

[Wryan]

So.......

Smaug: British or no?

[EvilShoe]

So.......

Smaug: British or no?
There was a terrific British dragon available, but unfortunately Winston slayed it.

[[ETM]]

And iosos. Let's not forget iosos.

The more the merrier.

And - Smaug = British

[D_Davis]

so are these stories as cool as the LOTR? or what?

More cool. Way more cool. And shorter!

[lovejuice]

;30128']It's not "everyone here", it's "pretty much everyone else in the world, except lovejuice". I could formulate a few reasons why I consider the film significant, but I'm rather interested in hearing yours...

not to hijack the thread, but d and iosos already sat on this pan's hot seat, so i think i will take my turn. :D

:spoiler:

my problem is i find the movie -- and this is not a hyperbole -- most inconsistent in its logic. from the way ofelia is built, i can't see her eating that grape esp. after del toro shows us freaky pictures on the wall. that should be enough to kill anyone's appetite. (it sure does the audiences'.) the same goes with the maid and the general. after cutting open his mouth, why does she just walk away? and the climax between ofelia and the faun, doesn't he mention he just want a jot of blood not killing the baby? i was so reminded of that scene in the first pirate of the caribbean when rush gives knightley that look and says something like "what do you expect? i just want a drop of blood."

these are small things, but i can cite a few more, and together they make one plot-hole percolated movie. if this were del toro's only attempt, i might be able to forgive him, but i find the exact same problem with devil's backbone. del toro seems to have a good idea that he wants thing a and thing b , but somehow doesn't really care about maneuvering how thing a can lead to thing b. the fact that these small problems can be easily remedied actually make them even more annoying.

[D_Davis]

my problem is i find the movie -- and this is not a hyperbole -- most inconsistent in its logic. from the way ofelia is built, i can't see her eating that grape esp. after del toro shows us freaky pictures on the wall.

And here it is. This is the part that totally broke the film for me, and made me start to pull everything else apart. This was totally inconsistent, as was much of the film. Characters did things that made zero sense, and in doing so they put themselves in stupid situations. I think that Del Toro has a problem with consistency, now that you mention it.

Why did that lady hide the key in the kitchen, the busiest room in the entire house? (for suspense!)

Why did the revolutionaries even need a key to open a wooden door hanged to a wooden shack, when they clearly had explosives and guns? (suspense!)

Why was Ophelia given a second chance after she ate the grape? (Because Del Toro wrote himself into a corner!)

Why did Pan initially send her to the hall of the pale man without the protection of the little fairy?

If there are no consequences for a hero's misdeeds, then their heroic journey is vapid.

The film is just full of things that make no sense, things that break the narrative and the characters.

I feel this way about most everything that Del Toro has done, including The Orphanage which he recently produced.

Dammit lovejuice, why did you have to remind me of this!

:)

[Raiders]

Why did that lady hide the key in the kitchen, the busiest room in the entire house? (for suspense!)

Seems like the room the captain and his men are least likely to be in. It is a servant's room.


Why did the revolutionaries even need a key to open a wooden door hanged to a wooden shack, when they clearly had explosives and guns? (suspense!)

I don't know, why does anyone smuggle anything? Seems to me it would be pretty foolish to just go bombing down to the fascists. Once you have blown off the door, exactly how do you safely get all the supplies back? You would be surrounded and ambushed within seconds.


Why was Ophelia given a second chance after she ate the grape? (Because Del Toro wrote himself into a corner!)

Because the fawn is compassionate and aware that adolescents make mistakes? Unlike you know, the captain.


Why did Pan initially send her to the hall of the pale man without the protection of the little fairy?

Huh?


If there are no consequences for a hero's misdeeds, then their heroic journey is vapid.

This isn't The Odyssey. Ofelia's journey doesn't really have a heroic arc until the very end. Her actions don't really have any effect on the war and except for her brother, she doesn't really save lives. You find her sacrifice vapid because she wasn't eternally left alone by the fawn? (Not to mention her narrow escape seems like a high price to pay for insubordination) It's a freakin' fairytale man. Lighten up.

[lovejuice]

Why did the revolutionaries even need a key to open a wooden door hanged to a wooden shack, when they clearly had explosives and guns? (suspense!)



I don't know, why does anyone smuggle anything? Seems to me it would be pretty foolish to just go bombing down to the fascists. Once you have blown off the door, exactly how do you safely get all the supplies back? You would be surrounded and ambushed within seconds.


ah yes, this is another scene that really bugs me. the revolutionaries already blow the train (or just the rail) up at that point. so they're going to be hunted and killed anyway. in fact if i remember the scene correctly, they are in the middle of a battle, so this little decorum with the door is utmost strange. or are you trying to suggest they might run out of bullets/explosions if they use them on the door? that seems odd.

unless of course memory plays trick on me, and the scene is completely different.


It's a freakin' fairytale man. Lighten up.

the thing is i have no problem at all with blade II or hell boy since plot holes in that kinda movies are always expected. it seems like del toro wants Pan to be more than just a fairytale though.

[D_Davis]

Huh?


When Pan first sends her to the Pale Man, she doesn't go. I can't remember why, I think her mother gets sick or something. He then gets mad, or something, and tells her to go again, but this time he gives her that little fairy thing. Why didn't he give this to her when she was supposed to go the first time?

Yes I know it's a Fairytale, it's just not a very good one. For a film this highly praised and regarded, I expect more in terms of a consistent narrative and consistent character actions and reactions.

And that's the thing, I expect more from Del Toro because his name so often brings a sparkle to the eyes of film fans. I just don't see it.

[Raiders]

ah yes, this is another scene that really bug me. the revolutionaries already blow the train (or just the rail) up at that point. so they're going to be hunted and killed anyway. in fact if i remember the scene correctly, they are in the middle of a small battle, so this little decorum with the door is utmost strange.

unless of course memory plays trick on me, and the scene is completely different.

But the train is not located at the fascist base. I'm not saying they couldn't have blown off the door. I'm saying it would have been pointless and idiotic. They would have had no way of taking the supplies back. They would have been caught in an enclosed barn surrounded by soldiers.

[D_Davis]

ah yes, this is another scene that really bug me. the revolutionaries already blow the train (or just the rail) up at that point. so they're going to be hunted and killed anyway. in fact if i remember the scene correctly, they are in the middle of a small battle, so this little decorum with the door is utmost strange.

unless of course memory plays trick on me, and the scene is completely different.

Yeah - they blow up the train to get the soldiers away from the wooden shack? WTF? And it didn't even work! They were already fighting at the house, around the shack. Why didn't they just use a tiny bit of explosive to blow open the wooden door of the shack? Or maybe an axe or something. This way, the lady wouldn't even have to hide the stupid key. Another example of bad plotting.

Man, I've forgotten how much I hate this film.

[Raiders]

This is absurdly ridiculous. You could pick apart a lot of films this way. It is counterintuitive.

I have no means to which to respond to nitpicking plot points, so I'll just leave this alone.

[D_Davis]

the thing is i have no problem at all with blade II or hell boy since plot holes in that kinda movies are always expected. it seems like del toro wants Pan to be more than just a fairytale though.

Right. I watch a lot of Z-grade trash and B-grade genre films. I expect plot holes in these kinds of films, sometimes, it's part of the charm. However, when a film is universally praised like Pan's is, and is nominated for an Oscar, and is touted as a genre masterpiece, I expect much, much more. I expect it to b as good as the great genre films I champion. "It's just a fairytale," is no excuse for bad plotting and characterizations, especially when this film is supposed to represent the best of the best.

I guess I just don't see what is so special about the film.

[D_Davis]

This is absurdly ridiculous. You could pick apart a lot of films this way. It is counterintuitive.

I have no means to which to respond to nitpicking plot points, so I'll just leave this alone.

You probably haven't, but if you listen to the podcast I did on the film you would understand why I reacted to this film the way I did.

I was not engaged by it, not once. At every turn I felt myself being pushed away by something. Usually, I am not nit-picky, at all. However, when a film fails to engage me on any level, be it cerebral or emotional, then I turn to studying the bones of it - the plot - and with Pan's the more unengaged I felt, the more problems I saw in the narrative and in the way the characters acted and reacted.

If you care to listen, here is the link:

http://www.genrebusters.com/podcast/episode15.mp3

You may not agree with what I am saying, but I think my feelings will be more clear.

I also review My Beautiful Girl Mari in this episode.

[[ETM]]

I have no means to which to respond to nitpicking plot points, so I'll just leave this alone.

Indeed.

[Ezee E]

D-Davis has always been close to taking the podium away from Iosos.

He may have it now.

:)

[D_Davis]

D-Davis has always been close to taking the podium away from Iosos.

He may have it now.

:)

The podium's big enough for both of us. It's a joint chairmanship.

[Grouchy]

The thing is, a couple of plot holes aren't enough to kill a film that has so many aesthetic and artistic values going for it. I agree with a couple of those (specially the grapes thing and why the maid didn't kill the general when she was given the chance), but they don't come even close to killing the film for me and I can't see it really doing it for everyone else.

I will agree with something - The Devil's Backbone shares a lot of themes and the historical background with Pan's Labyrinth and, in retrospect, is a superior film with a clearer plot and better characters.

By the way, since we're so deep into Del Toro hijacking, a plot question about Pan's Labyrinth.

Has anyone noticed that, while the movie shares the ambiguity of the best "lost girl" subgenre of fantastic literature (Wizard of Oz, Alice in Wonderland), there's a moment where the fantasy world affects the real one, when Ofelia draws a chalk trap door in the wall that actually allows her to escape the room she's trapped in. What was up with that?

[Wryan]

my problem is i find the movie -- and this is not a hyperbole -- most inconsistent in its logic. from the way ofelia is built, i can't see her eating that grape esp. after del toro shows us freaky pictures on the wall. that should be enough to kill anyone's appetite. (it sure does the audiences'.) the same goes with the maid and the general. after cutting open his mouth, why does she just walk away? and the climax between ofelia and the faun, doesn't he mention he just want a jot of blood not killing the baby? i was so reminded of that scene in the first pirate of the caribbean when rush gives knightley that look and says something like "what do you expect? i just want a drop of blood."

First of all, isn't Ofelia 11 or 12 - very pointedly not an adolescent* and literally still a child? Do we really need an internal narration in her head or a later explanation for why she eats the grape? She's a child. It looks tasty. Someone explicitly told her NOT to do something and, par for the course, she's curious. I don't see what the big hoo-hah is all about.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the maid leave the compound after cutting the general? It's not like he was unconscious on the floor and she had a "perfect" opportunity to kill him. He's an insanely dangerous man. If I was in her place, and was able to distract him long enough, I'd get my ass out of there too. Having said that, my memory on the scene is hazy. I want to buy the dvd soon to rewatch.

At climax, didn't faun ask her to "sacrifice" the baby? Wasn't that word used? Again, I'm hazy here, but my impression during the film was that he was asking her to kill the child, and not just take a drop of blood. Even if it was just a drop of blood, Ofelia likely would still see it as wrong to harm her brother.

Also, doesn't her mother die in the film? Couldn't that be considered punishment enough for making the mistake in her second task? That's pretty harsh for a "vapid" heroic arc.

EDIT: *Referring to someone else calling her an adolescent, not lovejuice.

[Wryan]

Why was Ophelia given a second chance after she ate the grape? (Because Del Toro wrote himself into a corner!)

Because she paid for her mistake with her mother's death.


The film is just full of things that make no sense, things that break the narrative and the characters.

Naw, it's not. :)

[Wryan]

When Pan first sends her to the Pale Man, she doesn't go. I can't remember why, I think her mother gets sick or something. He then gets mad, or something, and tells her to go again, but this time he gives her that little fairy thing. Why didn't he give this to her when she was supposed to go the first time?

Second time, it's incentive to get her to go. Didn't think he'd need incentive the first time but something got in the way.

[Yxklyx]

I'd be very curious to know what the tone of this film will be. Will it follow in the footsteps of LOTR or will it be lighter? Surely, it can't be darker but with del Toro it certainly might be.

[Wryan]

Has anyone noticed that, while the movie shares the ambiguity of the best "lost girl" subgenre of fantastic literature (Wizard of Oz, Alice in Wonderland), there's a moment where the fantasy world affects the real one, when Ofelia draws a chalk trap door in the wall that actually allows her to escape the room she's trapped in. What was up with that?

Wait, which room "she's trapped in"? The pale man's room or her bedroom that leads to the Pale Man's room? In any case, can't we basically say she's imagining everything anyway? Loathe as I am to scrape up the "it's all in her head" approach, but the General didn't see the faun she was talking to in the labyrinth at the end.

[Wryan]

I'd be very curious to know what the tone of this film will be. Will it follow in the footsteps of LOTR or will it be lighter? Surely, it can't be darker but with del Toro it certainly might be.

I always got the impression from the hobbit that it was dark for a kid's book, but not LOTR dark. It's jaunty fun at times, "scary" in the way a child would be scared, and adventurous.

[Yxklyx]

I always got the impression from the hobbit that it was dark for a kid's book, but not LOTR dark. It's jaunty fun at times, "scary" in the way a child would be scared, and adventurous.

Well yeah, it really reads as a Harry Potter of its day. They could make it like HP (are the HP movies making money?) or something could be said for keeping the same tone as in LOTR - either way would be fine by me as long as it turns out well.

[lovejuice]

The thing is, a couple of plot holes aren't enough to kill a film that has so many aesthetic and artistic values going for it. I agree with a couple of those (specially the grapes thing and why the maid didn't kill the general when she was given the chance), but they don't come even close to killing the film for me and I can't see it really doing it for everyone else.


in a way i agree with this statement. one of the first thing i say to my friend as we walk away from theatre is this is among a few chances they get it right in a lot of arenas i really want to forgive its short-coming.

and in a way i did. i don't hate it. i just see enough of its flaws not to like it that much.

[D_Davis]

Naw, it's not. :)

Why you!

One of my pet peeves, especially in a film that is striving to be more than just a throw away genre film, is when the dramatic tension of a narrative is built from contrivances and inconsistent characterizations.

I think Pan's is swimming in such problems. So is the Orphanage...

I expected more from this film because it is so highly regarded.

[Duncan]

I really need to see Pan's Labyrinth again. I was initially moved by the film's climax, but a little distance made me think it was exploitive. Now I'm just ambivalent. I couldn't make a convincing argument either way, but I figure I'm leaning further towards the negative camp.

[MadMan]

All of this debate makes me realize that I should probably go see Pan's Labyrinth. I'm so insanely behind on viewings from this decade, and yet out of pure boredom I'm writting up commentary for a planned Top 10 for the 2000s anyways....

[Wryan]

Why you!

One of my pet peeves, especially in a film that is striving to be more than just a throw away genre film, is when the dramatic tension of a narrative is built from contrivances and inconsistent characterizations.

I think Pan's is swimming in such problems. So is the Orphanage...

I expected more from this film because it is so highly regarded.

Which is why I think it's so funny that I like/love both of those films, heh.

[number8]

The whole key vs explosives conversation is absurd.

Yes, they can blow up the door. But they have a key. It would be more effective and cooler if I kick my front door off its hinges every time I come home, but I have a key, for cryin out loud.

[D_Davis]

Never mind.

I shouldn't spend so much time talking about a film I hate.

:)

[[ETM]]

The whole key issue is so ridiculous, I can't even get myself to respond properly...

[Grouchy]

Wait, which room "she's trapped in"? The pale man's room or her bedroom that leads to the Pale Man's room? In any case, can't we basically say she's imagining everything anyway? Loathe as I am to scrape up the "it's all in her head" approach, but the General didn't see the faun she was talking to in the labyrinth at the end.
No, no, I mean near the end of the film, when she uses the chalk again to escape the room she's trapped in when the revolutionaries attack. She draws it in the wall and gets away through that. The fantasy genre depends on the ambiguity - maybe it's all on her head. When she creates a door with chalk, the fantasy becomes something else. Del Toro is stating outright that the Faun and all the creatures exist.

[Wryan]

No, no, I mean near the end of the film, when she uses the chalk again to escape the room she's trapped in when the revolutionaries attack. She draws it in the wall and gets away through that. The fantasy genre depends on the ambiguity - maybe it's all on her head. When she creates a door with chalk, the fantasy becomes something else. Del Toro is stating outright that the Faun and all the creatures exist.

I remember it once, but I'll definitely have to rewatch then soon cause I don't remember the second chalkdoor at all. Hmm....

[Grouchy]

I remember it once, but I'll definitely have to rewatch then soon cause I don't remember the second chalkdoor at all. Hmm....
It will be a good excuse for me to watch it again too, so let's go with it.

[Wryan]

I just bought the 2-disc dvd tonight so I'll watch it tomorrow or something. :)

[Wryan]

Watched it again and the "glaring inconsistencies" are even less apparent than before.

One, she eats the grape after she has unlocked the door and retrieved the knife. She might have guessed that, finishing her task, she was free to eat something if she wished. Plus, like I said before, it looked good.

Two, the faeries with her emphatically point out the middle door for her key, as does the illustration in the book. However, she feels instinctively that this is wrong and chooses the left door instead, which turns out to be right. When desiring the grape, the faeries tell her here, also emphatically, that she must not eat. Well, she might reason, they were wrong before...

Three, Mercedes stabs the general three times before cutting this mouth. She bolts after that. She very easily could have reasoned that her attack would kill him and that she wouldn't need to hover over his body until he was dead when she knew she had to get outta there.

Four, the faun doesn't give her a second chance [and the final task] until after the mandrake root has been tossed in the fire and until after her mother has died.

Five, explosives are rare and shouldn't be wasted when you have a key. They are to be used when you have trucks to blow up and shit.

Now, on to Grouchy's comment about the second chalk door. It does indeed exist. However, we don't literally see her crawl out of the door. The faun tells her she'll have to make another door. After that, we don't literally know how she got out. It might have been a second chalk door (thus allowing fantasy to intrude directly into reality) or she could have broken the lock on the door or who knows what else. In fact, I don't recall if the General mentioned the door was locked at all. He just told a henchman to watch it and her. Perhaps it wasn't actually locked. Dunno, hazy on that point. Mercedes sees the chalk outline on the wall, but maybe Ofelia drew it and it didn't work and she was forced to find another way out. Call it lazy writing if you want, I don't care. It's an interesting point for debate, but it didn't lessen or improve my liking of the movie.

[Grouchy]

Now, on to Grouchy's comment about the second chalk door. It does indeed exist. However, we don't literally see her crawl out of the door. The faun tells her she'll have to make another door. After that, we don't literally know how she got out. It might have been a second chalk door (thus allowing fantasy to intrude directly into reality) or she could have broken the lock on the door or who knows what else. In fact, I don't recall if the General mentioned the door was locked at all. He just told a henchman to watch it and her. Perhaps it wasn't actually locked. Dunno, hazy on that point. Mercedes sees the chalk outline on the wall, but maybe Ofelia drew it and it didn't work and she was forced to find another way out. Call it lazy writing if you want, I don't care. It's an interesting point for debate, but it didn't lessen or improve my liking of the movie.[/spoiler]
Nor does it lessen mine, it's just something I was always curious about. On this tradition of story about a young boy or girl who enters an imaginary world, it's usually unclear all the way through whether that world exists or is just a figment of the protagonist's imagination. I thought that, with that scene, Del Toro was breaking that tradition.

Glad to have that clarified. I haven't seen it again yet, though.

[Sycophant]

Bad news? http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/the-hobbit-in-trouble/

Hollywood accounting is the worst.

[MadMan]

Bad news? http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/the-hobbit-in-trouble/

Hollywood accounting is the worst.Nooooo!!!! I want this movie to happen very much so. Damn.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Bad news? http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/the-hobbit-in-trouble/


Nope. Good news.

[Winston*]

Kurosawa Fan hates the happiness of others. He's a dick like that.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Kurosawa Fan hates the happiness of others. He's a dick like that.

Seriously. Fuck you guys.

[D_Davis]

I would rather see Jackson and del Toro create their own fantasy and film that. Or maybe adapt a book that is less popular, and more deserving, like the Elric saga, or Weaveworld, or Gormenghast. All of these are far more interesting than the Hobbit, and contain the kinds of fantasy worlds rarely seen in cinema.

[megladon8]

I would rather see Jackson and del Toro create their own fantasy and film that. Or maybe adapt a book that is less popular, and more deserving, like the Elric saga, or Weaveworld, or Gormenghast. All of these are far more interesting than the Hobbit, and contain the kinds of fantasy worlds rarely seen in cinema.


I very much agree.

It's just that, sadly, these movies need to make money. And with fantasy series' like Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and Chronicles of Narnia, there's already a fanbase so huge that the films are a guaranteed success - whether they're actually "good" or not.

With something like "Weaveworld" or the "Elric" saga, both could make fantastic, beautiful films, but they'd be a risk for the studios. And risks are not something big studios like to take very often.

They'd rather play it safe with something that's already huge and popular.

Though you know all this already an all too well.

[lovejuice]

I would rather see Jackson and del Toro create their own fantasy and film that. Or maybe adapt a book that is less popular, and more deserving, like the Elric saga, or Weaveworld, or Gormenghast. All of these are far more interesting than the Hobbit, and contain the kinds of fantasy worlds rarely seen in cinema.

i only agree with your second sentence. adapting a book is a way to kick fameless, penniless authors out of obscurity.

[Sycophant]

The only good thing that can happen to humanity right now that would be Jackson and del Toro collaborating on a Hobbit adaptation.

[Morris Schæffer]

Hi Harry,

Yesterday evening I was able to go to "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring - Score Performed Live to the Epic Motion Picture" in Lucerne in Switzerland.

Composer Howard Shore attended, and participated in a small session on the scoring the music for FOTR.

Towards the end the audience had the opportunity to ask some questions. One person asked about his involvement in THE HOBBIT. Mr. Shore replied that he is involved. Apparently he has been working on ideas since working on the THE TWO TOWERS.

For Mr. Shore it will be the first time he will be working with Guillermo del Toro.

Regards
Kris

I don't know who Kris is, but I'll take his word for it.

[Ezee E]

I guess it's official now.

[Sycophant]

Suddenly, del Toro doing The Hobbit became an insanely attractive prospect to me. I'm totally game.

[Sxottlan]

So I guess I'm confused. Is Film 1 going to be The Hobbit and then Film 2 is a completely original film to bridge the film with the trilogy? I thought both films were supposed to be The Hobbit, but the way it was described in the press release made it sound like it would be something else entirely.

[Morris Schæffer]

I think that two Hobbit films is just impossible seeing as the book is rather non-epic and deprived of the multitude of set pieces present in The Lord of the Rings. What I don't understand is fans thinking it's great that McKellen returns as Gandalf, but feel less certain about Holm reprising his role as Bilbo. If one can return, why can't the other?

[Dead & Messed Up]

I think that two Hobbit films is just impossible seeing as the book is rather non-epic and deprived of the multitude of set pieces present in The Lord of the Rings. What I don't understand is fans thinking it's great that McKellen returns as Gandalf, but feel less certain about Holm reprising his role as Bilbo. If one can return, why can't the other?

Because one character ages and the other doesn't?

[[ETM]]

What I don't understand is fans thinking it's great that McKellen returns as Gandalf, but feel less certain about Holm reprising his role as Bilbo. If one can return, why can't the other?

Bilbo is far too young in The Hobbit, and the role is far too demanding for Holm to be able to even imagine doing it. I suppose they could use some sort of movie magic to make it happen, but I think having Bilbo as a single complete performance is essential for the success of the films.

[number8]

The solution is simple. Get Elijah Wood to play Bilbo, and dub his dialogue with Holm.

Then get Leonard Nimoy to collaborate with Howard Shore.

[MadMan]

The solution is simple. Get Elijah Wood to play Bilbo, and dub his dialogue with Holm.

Then get Leonard Nimoy to collaborate with Howard Shore.This makes the most sense to me.

[SirNewt]

Meh, you don't really need Saruman for The Hobbit. McKellen will be fine, he'll be back to old grizzly grey face.

I just hope they get a good Bilbo. Any thoughts? ... Heath Ledger?

If they want continuity with Jackson's other stuff they very well could cast Ian Holme, make him up to look like he did in LotR and bingo! According to the books I believe Bilbo was about sixty when he set off and didn't age after possessing the ring. He was under appreciated in LotR anyway. Of course, there probably isn't enough sex appeal in saggy little man questing along with the Snow White rejects. . . so. . . they'll probably get Jason Statham.

[Qrazy]

If they want continuity with Jackson's other stuff they very well could cast Ian Holme, make him up to look like he did in LotR and bingo! According to the books I believe Bilbo was about sixty when he set off and didn't age after possessing the ring. He was under appreciated in LotR anyway. Of course, there probably isn't enough sex appeal in saggy little man questing along with the Snow White rejects. . . so. . . they'll probably get Jason Statham.

Don't get me wrong I love Holm. I just think he's become too old for the role.

Anyway all casting aside let's just hope Weta opens up the vaults or something and we get some production design consistency... Fellowship of the ring Bilbo's stone trolls anyone?

[Spinal]

Do we need/want to change the thread title?

[[ETM]]

Anyway all casting aside let's just hope Weta opens up the vaults or something and we get some production design consistency... Fellowship of the ring Bilbo's stone trolls anyone?

Those came straight from an Alan Lee painting so there's no danger.

[SirNewt]

Do we need/want to change the thread title?

AV whore!

Always just waiting for the next chimp eh?

[MadMan]

AV whore!

Always just waiting for the next chimp eh?His rep power bar says that "Spinal is just really nice." What a bunch of crap. We all know that Spinal is really the evil overlord mod who rules this place with an iron fist. Raiders is just a puppet....a puppet I tell you! :eek:

[Wryan]

And here I was bummed that Del Toro wouldn't likely be selected to direct the last Potter film. Now he's directing the hobbit. Hell yes, I say. He gets to both adapt and do "original" material. Seems like a fun compromise. Can't friggin wait to see what he does. I won't expect as "faithful" a rendition as PJ did, but that'll be half the fun.

Can't wait to see his visualization of Smaug.

[DavidSeven]

Interview with Guillermo Del Toro (http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1586421/story.jhtml)


MTV: Will Ian Holm return as Bilbo?

Del Toro: [Holm] certainly is the paragon we aspire to. He will be involved in some manner, I'm sure. But at his age ... it's too early to tell. We are just in the early stages. It's too early to make commitments of that sort. We prefer to let the screenplay and the way the character comes to life guide us in the casting. I have many people in mind. Anything [else] I say will be used against me in a court of law. [Laughs.]

MTV: Andy Serkis [Gollum] and Ian McKellan [Gandalf] are involved though, yes?

Del Toro: We can be pretty sure that we're getting back Andy, Ian, [composer] Howard Shore and [conceptual designer] John Howe. I am going to supplement the team of designers with other choices. People that come from the comic book worlds, not in the superhero sense, but the darker, more European type of comics. We're going to enhance the team of artists that conceptualized the first trilogy to create this earlier, more golden time and the way it starts to get tarnished.

[Qrazy]

Interview with Guillermo Del Toro (http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1586421/story.jhtml)

Lord of the Rings comic books? Ehh...

[Rowland]

Del Toro is a stronger visual stylist than Peter Jackson, and since I've read that he doesn't even like the source material that much, I hope that means he's going to give us a loose, personalized adaptation.

[Grouchy]

Lord of the Rings comic books? Ehh...
Heh, did you even read what the guy said?

[Qrazy]

Heh, did you even read what the guy said?

Yes, did you? Yes? Wonderful.

[Qrazy]

Del Toro is a stronger visual stylist than Peter Jackson.

Not really.

[Rowland]

Not really.Really.

[Qrazy]

Really.

No.

http://www.neomanox.com/manoxfilms/images/BalrogGandalf.jpg

Jackson's ability to use a camera far, far outstrips Del Toro's.

[Rowland]

That image you used is a poor example, given that it's just a pretty bit of art direction, most of the credit going to whoever designed the monster, but you're probably right about Jackson being a more nimble visual director.

[Qrazy]

That image you used is a poor example, given that it's just a pretty bit of art direction, most of the credit going to whoever designed the monster, but you're probably right about Jackson being a more nimble visual director.

Come on, give Andrew Lesnie as well as Jackson some credit. I had trouble finding good shots online for some reason but... long shot of King Kong getting captured, looking out from his perch on skull island, on the empire state... Shadowfax rearing before the charge at Helm's deep, Arwen looking on Aragorn's coffin in the flash foward, Arwen and Aragorn kissing at Rivendale... it's not just set and art design, Jackson storyboards and executes his shots superbly... every once in a while he'll get a bit indulgent but that's usually a narrative/action/adventure/set piece indulgence and the shots he's using to tell his story aren't what are superfluous.

If anything it's Del Toro who relies all the more heavily on superb creature design/art direction. Whether or not one prefers one director over another or Del Toro's gritty aesthetic, Jackson is the more proficient storyboarder... In the same way that Spielberg is a better visual storyboarder than Lucas.

Let's not forget that Jackson packs tons of interesting visual experiments into his films as well... the wraith ring world, shutter speed in Urukai fights and in the Aragorn tracking section... using dozens of lights to give a unique retinal reflection to Galadriel, and the elf lords, etc.

[Wryan]

Del Toro is a stronger visual stylist than Peter Jackson, and since I've read that he doesn't even like the source material that much, I hope that means he's going to give us a loose, personalized adaptation.

Glad you liked Dead Alive!

[Grouchy]

Yes, did you? Yes? Wonderful.
I did. You didn't. You've never seen Gone with the Wind either.

Basic facts.

[Rowland]

Glad you liked Dead Alive!Oh yeah, I've been a fan for years. I've introduced countless people to its quirky charms.

[Qrazy]

I did. You didn't. You've never seen Gone with the Wind either.

Basic facts.

Anyway I just prefer he keeps the illustrative input the first film had like Alan Lee and others... we don't need a Frank Miller et al. approach to the material.

[Grouchy]

Anyway I just prefer he keeps the illustrative input the first film had like Alan Lee and others... we don't need a Frank Miller et al. approach to the material.
He said European comics. He probably means someone like Juan Giménez, Enki Bilial or even Moebius. People who are into drawing fantasy. Not Frank Miller.

[Doclop]

Wow, I didn't know del Toro was doing this. I just went from only sort of caring about The Hobbit to being super excited! Cool.

[Morris Schæffer]

the full Q&A transcript:

http://www.wetanz.com/holics/index.php?itemid=695&catid=2#more


nolcai Hello. Are you planning to use some location in italy?
Peter Jackson Hi nolcai it is unlikely we will shoot any of the Hobbit of Italy, but I would love come to Italy for a vacation, you should tell me the best places to visit.
Guillermo del Toro Not really- But I love Italy...

:)

[Qrazy]

the full Q&A transcript:

http://www.wetanz.com/holics/index.php?itemid=695&catid=2#more



:)

That all sounds very promising... they're keeping the original design team and location/character templates, so I'm happy and optimistic.

[number8]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2008/20080528.jpg

[[ETM]]

Del Toro is actually posting at the uber-nerdy TheOneRing.Net forums (yes, I'm a poster there, too). It's awesome when a director is talking to people this early in the process.

[Raiders]

Trotter_the_Ranger What will be the title for the second movie? Guillermo del Toro Too early- but not "H2 Electric Boogaloo" that has been discarded.



:lol:

[Sven]

If there's one movie that I wish I had liked more, it's Pan's Labyrinth.

[Qrazy]

If there's one movie that I wish I had liked more, it's Pan's Labyrinth.

Yeah I'm kind of with you on this... I liked it but I felt it had fairly deeply rooted problems... still the fantasy elements greatly outstripped the real world elements (as often seems to be the case), so I have more faith in a pure fantasy film from the guy. PL is the strongest thing he's done so far imo so at least he's on top of his game.

[Sven]

Yeah I'm kind of with you on this... I liked it but I felt it had fairly deeply rooted problems... still the fantasy elements greatly outstripped the real world elements (as often seems to be the case), so I have more faith in a pure fantasy film from the guy. PL is the strongest thing he's done so far imo so at least he's on top of his game.

You really liked it more than The Devil's Backbone?

[Qrazy]

You really liked it more than The Devil's Backbone?

Ah that's the only one I haven't seen yet.

[Sven]

Ah that's the only one I haven't seen yet.

It's real good.

[Qrazy]

It's real good.

This looks interesting... http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0287856/

Cuaron and Del Toro...

[[ETM]]

Ah that's the only one I haven't seen yet.

Compared to Pan's, it lacks focus, and the story is all over the place, with not a lot of satisfying resolutions among all the plot threads. The characters are, IMO, not as compelling, but overall it is a great early attempt and a movie definitely worth a recommendation.

[Qrazy]

;69169']Compared to Pan's, it lacks focus, and the story is all over the place, with not a lot of satisfying resolutions among all the plot threads. The characters are, IMO, not as compelling, but overall it is a great early attempt and a movie definitely worth a recommendation.

Hmmm... well aside from his pre-Cronos work it's all I have left to see, so I might as well give it a looksie... I'll get back to you both on my conclusions.

[Grouchy]

;69169']Compared to Pan's, it lacks focus, and the story is all over the place, with not a lot of satisfying resolutions among all the plot threads. The characters are, IMO, not as compelling, but overall it is a great early attempt and a movie definitely worth a recommendation.
Wow, totally and radically disagree. I'd just about reverse everything you just said.

Devil's Backbone has a lot more focus, the characters are more compelling, the conflict more nuanced, and the resolution is a lot more powerful. And I fucking loved Pan's Labyrinth.

[[ETM]]

Wow, totally and radically disagree. I'd just about reverse everything you just said.

Devil's Backbone has a lot more focus, the characters are more compelling, the conflict more nuanced, and the resolution is a lot more powerful.

Well, that's what discussion is for, right? In the proper thread, of course.


And I fucking loved Pan's Labyrinth.

Agreed on that at least.

[Mara]

They're rumoring James McAvoy for Bilbo... I think he'd be a great choice.

[[ETM]]

They're rumoring James McAvoy for Bilbo... I think he'd be a great choice.

I've heard Tony Shalhoub. Del Toro has posted that him and Jackson already have a "dream candidate" on top of their list, but he refused to say anything further on the subject.

[[ETM]]

Heh... DelToro posted this like half an hour ago:


As the opening of "Hellboy II: The Golden Army" draws near I feel the urge to reiterate a fair warning. The Aesthetics of the film are quite "Pop" and colorful and -obviously- more influenced by the hyper-saturated palette of a Kirby comic book than a Fairy Tale or a Fantasy work.

Please do not get confused by either the palette of the film or its tone. It uses the comedic and interpersonal banter from the first film and the monster design is quite outlandish and colorful. We made a deliberate move away from the Celtic / Nordic aesthetics present in most Fantasy films because we knew we could NOT out do bigger productions (like LOTR) at that game.

We are a $85 m dollar film and we tried to find our own "look" so we endeavoured to create a very idiosyncratic melange of Arabic architecture and design and Oriental motifs. We took Japanese suit of armour patterns allowed it to be imbued by Celtic motifs, etc- you can see some of that in the trailer.

Our Elfland is more akin to Dunsany or perhaps even Moorcock in its aesthetics, using the stark contrast of dark against white skin and golden eyes.

Our magical world is broader and freer -even surreal at times- and suits the tone of this film.

I am exceedingly aware of Genres and moreso when I mix them and / or mix them together. Most of Hellboy will give you almost no indication of what will come to pass with the HOBBIT. There is, however a PROLOGUE done with Old Wooden Puppets that will share some faint traces that eventually you will be able to find in certain passages in the forthcoming movie. But even then, please do not take this as a verbatim through line.

When I started HBII I had NO inkling that the HOBBIT would really come my way and I wanted to use the Fantasy Worlds that lie beneath as a metaphor of all that mankind is extinguishing with its unedning greed.

It is my dearest hope that this message will prevent speculation of what in "Pan's Labyrinth" or "Hellboy II" will indicate what the HOBBIT will be. In time there will be definite aesthetic choices that will guide the film towards a yuxtaposition of PJ's and my visual proclivities but I think it will only be visible in retrospect and it would be almost impossible -and rather perverse- to try and divine it at this stage.

The same goes for tone and theme. Nevertheless, if some of you enjoyed the first :Hellboy" or "Pan's Labyrinth" for that matter I would love to have you grace a theater with your derriere and allow our tale to find you-

All the Best

GDT

He's really going all out to prevent people rushing to conclusions and internet frenzy over anything and everything Hobbit.

[Sycophant]

I hear for his The Hobbit del Toro is going to use the same screenplay from Pan's Labyrinth, but will replace Ofelia with Bilbo. And he'll use an earlier draft of the Hellboy II screenplay for the second, made-up film, in which Bilbo will discover the ring will transport him to modern-day America where he'll hang out with Doug Jones in a Niles suit.

[[ETM]]

You forgot the Wesley Snipes/Blade cameo in the Mirkwood dungeon.

[number8]

I hear that Bard the Bowman is played by Donnie Yen.

[Wryan]

yuxstaposition.

I love you GDT.

[[ETM]]

yuxstaposition.

I love you GDT.

His written English is actually surprisingly good. I barely understand him when he speaks it.:)

[Saya]

Guillermo Del Toro talks a bit about The Hobbit:


On Preparing for The Hobbit:
"I find you have to discipline yourself to write in the morning, and then watch and read in the afternoons stuff that seems relevant, even in a tangential way. For example, reading or watching World War I documentaries or books that I think inform The Hobbit, strangely enough, because I believe it is a book born out of Tolkien's generation's experience with World War I and the disappointment of being in that field and seeing all those values kind of collapse. I think it's a turning point that you need to familiarize yourself with. I'm starting. Peter Jackson is such a fan of that historical moment and obsessive collector of World War I memorabilia, and he owns several genuine, life-size working reproductions of planes, tanks, cannons, ships! He has the perfect obsessive reproductions of uniforms of that time for armies of about 120 soldiers… each. I asked him which books he recommended… because I wouldn't be watching Krull or The Dark Crystal, I need to find my OWN way into the story. That's the same way I did Pan's Labyrinth or Devil's Backbone, by watching stuff you wouldn't think about."

On the Dragon Smaug:
"All my life I've been fascinated by dragons. I was born under the Chinese sign of The Dragon. All my life I'm collecting dragons. It's such a powerful symbol, and in the context of The Hobbit it is used to cast its shadow through the entire narrative. Essentially, Smaug represents so many things: greed, pride… he's 'the Magnificent,' after all. The way his shadow is cast in the narrative you cannot then show it and have it be one thing, he has to be the embodiment of all those things. He's one of the few dragons that will have enormous scenes with lines. He has some of the most beautiful dialogue in those scenes! The design, I'm pretty sure that will be the last design we will sign off on, and the first design we have attempted. It is certainly a matter of turning every stone before figuring out what he looks like, because what he looks like will tell you what he is."

On the Wargs:
"There will be different sensibilities involved in this movie than there were in the original trilogy. First of all, because we have the travelogues in The Hobbit which goes to places and variations on races that were not addressed in the trilogy. My belief on the 'Wargs' issue is that the classical incarnation of the demonic wolf in Nordic mythology is not a hyena-shaped creature. It is a wolf. The archetype is a wolf, so we're going to go back to the slender, archetypical wolf that is, I think, the inspiration for Tolkien. Listen… if we were having a drink two years from now I would spill the beans, because I'm a pretty easy guy about spilling the beans, but I can't in this instance I can't because it's three years from now… believe me, I am jumping up-and-down inside this fat body!"

[Wryan]

I'm still quite unsold on the second movie idea, but I'm as ready as fuck for TH.

[Morris Schæffer]

I'm still quite unsold on the second movie idea, but I'm as ready as fuck for TH.

That sounds pretty dang ready.

Hihi, I said "dang." I used a Palinism.

[Saya]

I'm still quite unsold on the second movie idea, but I'm as ready as fuck for TH.

Same here. MTV spoke with Del Toro about that by the way:



‘Hobbit’ Films Will Be One ‘Continuous Journey,’ Promises Guillermo Del Toro (http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2008/10/07/hobbit-films-will-be-one-continuous-journey-promises-guillermo-del-toro/)

What’s better than a second breakfast? For fans of J.R.R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth legendarium, it’s the thought of two separate “Hobbit” films, the first of which comes our way in 2011.

But what could be even better still than two “Hobbit” films? How about just one? Make that one movie in two parts, director Guillermo del Toro insisted in an exclusive interview with MTV News, refusing, like Tolkien himself before him, to fractionalize his overall story into component parts.

“The reality is that we stopped talking the first movie and second movie, and we just started taking about the movie - the two episodes, or two parts, as if they were a single piece of narrative,” he said of scriptwriting meetings between “Lord of the Rings” director Peter Jackson, his filmmaking team of Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, and del Toro himself.

“We don’t even call it the bridge movie, we just call it ‘The Movie.’ And this is great. When we found what reverberated, and we found it in one of our virtual meetings - we understood. It’s a movie.”

Intended or not, the methodology ties in nicely with the material, since Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” story, popularized in three separate volumes, was similarly intended to be one large, single volume work.

Practically, the division (or lack thereof) means little in so far as solving the narrative riddles of the second episode. (What will the second episode contain? What characters will return, etc?) Well, except for the very end that is, which will lead right into “The Fellowship of the Ring,” del Toro revealed.

“We all agree that if we do our job right, it should all feel like a continuous journey. That’s what we’re striving for,” Del Toro said. “You should see a movie that’s five pictures long. If we do our job right, you put in ‘The Hobbit’ and you wind up watching the entire Pentology!”

And let me be the (second) to say: That would be one heck of a long day.

“But it’s a good day!” Del Toro laughed with my colleague Josh Horowitz. “Better than paying taxes!”

As for the end of the first episode, the movie everyone assumed will follow the events of the novel fairly accurately? Where in the text will it finish?

“We are finding out,” GDT quipped. “I think Smaug dies in the first movie. So draw your own conclusions.”

[Morris Schæffer]

Whatever Del Toro's opinion on the matter, I really really hope both movies again clock in at 3+ hours.

Still, The Two Towers felt a little cumbersome.

[KK2.0]

i'm not worried with this second Hobbit movie, Jackson and crew know their stuff and i had no problems with changes made to the LOTR films.

In fact, i'm curious because i have never even read the appendices of the LOTR trilogy or Silmarillion, and anything they can mix to it will be completely new to me.


Still, The Two Towers felt a little cumbersome.

it's the only extended version that surpasses the theatrical ones imo.

[Yxklyx]

Hmm, I don't think there's even enough material for two 90 minute movies in The Hobbit. I expect lots of new stuff that wasn't in the book.

[[ETM]]

it's the only extended version that surpasses the theatrical ones imo.

That would be the first film. Two Towers suffers from pacing problems, too many problematic departures from source material, and it's too long. All of the additions in FOTR EE were fantastic, too many in TTT were rightfully cut and/or comic relief moments that added nothing to it, IMO of course.

[KK2.0]

;104995']That would be the first film. Two Towers suffers from pacing problems, too many problematic departures from source material, and it's too long. All of the additions in FOTR EE were fantastic, too many in TTT were rightfully cut and/or comic relief moments that added nothing to it, IMO of course.

but on the extended TTT they solved the most glaring problems of the film to me, Treebeard and Faramir, their added scenes not only fleshed out the problematic characters but improved on the film's pacing. FOTR was already perfect as it was, the added scenes only added more cool stuff, TTT left me with a bad taste that the extended cut removed.

IMO of course.

[[ETM]]

FOTR was already perfect as it was, the added scenes only added more cool stuff, TTT left me with a bad taste that the extended cut removed.

My point of view was one of a huge fan of the books. FOTR, perfect pacing or no, infuriated me with the departures from the books, and the additions made it (almost) perfect in my eyes.

[Qrazy]

it's the only extended version that surpasses the theatrical ones imo.

Agreed, Fellowship's additions while fine were unnecessary and Return of the King's additions (aside from a few select scenes) felt even more superfluous to me. The Two Towers additions not only added relevant content but they provided a more interesting aesthetic balance to the film.

[Morris Schæffer]

Hmm


And the world exclusives from our 20th birthday issue – guest-edited by Steven Spielberg – continue to pile up…

We’ve known for a while that Peter Jackson and Guillermo Del Toro’s eagerly-awaited adaptation of the Lord Of The Rings prequel, The Hobbit, would comprise two movies, due in December 2011 and 2012. But the make-up of those two movies has been up for debate… until now.

We spoke exclusively to both Del Toro and Jackson for our birthday issue, and they told us the latest, which is…

“We’ve decided to have The Hobbit span the two movies, including the White Council and the comings and goings of Gandalf to Dol Guldur,” says Del Toro.

“We decided it would be a mistake to try to cram everything into one movie,” adds Jackson. “The essential brief was to do The Hobbit, and it allows us to make The Hobbit in a little more style, if you like, of the [LOTR] trilogy.”

So there you go. The second film will not, as had previously been suggested, a film that will bridge the 60-year gap between The Hobbit and the start of Fellowship Of The Ring.

[Morris Schæffer]

Some expected news:


Here's one to file under, "Well, duh! But also good". Guillermo del Toro told Radio 5, as picked up by The One Ring.net, that Sir Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis and Hugo Weaving would be appearing in The Hobbit.

It won't come as any great surprise to, well, anyone, but it is welcome news that those members of the Lord of the Rings cast who also appear in The Hobbit will be playing the roles they originated in Del Toro's sort-of prequel to Jackson's trilogy.

We're due a Bilbo casting announcement any day now, but we hope that this tidbit of almost-news will keep you going until then.

[Sxottlan]

A familiar place is taking shape again:

http://www-images.theonering.net/images/scrapbook/18595.jpg

[MadMan]

Some expected news:Its good that the easy part of the casting has been quickly filled. Now to await news of who plays the dwarves and the casting of Bilbo. I have no idea who should play any of those parts, however.

[Morris Schæffer]

I just hope del toro isn't going to veer too off course with his adaptations. Jackson's imagining of Middle-Earth was pretty much definitive.

[Sven]

I just hope del toro isn't going to veer too off course with his adaptations. Jackson's imagining of Middle-Earth was pretty much definitive.

Not to keep harping on about how much I dislike Jackson's vision, but I absolutely disagree. I think it is imperative that Del Toro create his own Middle Earth. If there's one strength that Del Toro has, it is production design and to simply reconstruct the look of someone else would be way too saddening.

Plus, it would fit into the great tradition of Tolkien art, which has been approached from all kinds of styles and angles.

[Dukefrukem]

I have a feeling both visions are going to look completely different. That said, I'm not looking forward to this movie.

[Morris Schæffer]

Not to keep harping on about how much I dislike Jackson's vision, but I absolutely disagree. I think it is imperative that Del Toro create his own Middle Earth. If there's one strength that Del Toro has, it is production design and to simply reconstruct the look of someone else would be way too saddening.

Plus, it would fit into the great tradition of Tolkien art, which has been approached from all kinds of styles and angles.

Probably won't be easy because The Hobbit is going to be filmed in New-Zealand and Weta will once more do the FX honors. I wonder if Andrew Lesnie will return as Dop. I just want continuity. If Del Toro can guarantee that by branching of into wildly divergent directions, that's fine by me.

[number8]

Eh, that's not true. I mean, Del Toro has the leeway of making the landscape different since it's centuries apart. The cave trolls, dwarves and Hobbits will look the same, but then there are dragons, etc that Del Toro can create from scratch.

[Wryan]

I genuinely don't know who I want playing Bilbo other than an X-men-youngified Ian Holm.

[number8]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sJmpiYbaE9E/RrLINBZRXrI/AAAAAAAAAFQ/QPw0jDCm_p0/s320/badger.jpg

[Winston*]

Eh, that's not true. I mean, Del Toro has the leeway of making the landscape different since it's centuries apart.

Centuries?

[Qrazy]

I think it was roughly 60 years or so wasn't it?

[Morris Schæffer]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sJmpiYbaE9E/RrLINBZRXrI/AAAAAAAAAFQ/QPw0jDCm_p0/s320/badger.jpg

Lampkin from BSG!!!!!!

:)

But yeah obviously, dragons and such can be created from scratch. It's just that when I've seen The Hobbit I want to be able to visualize that it can easily segue into Jackson's trilogy. I want Del Toro to give me an awesome Smaug, but then also give me incredibly epic scenes featuring Smaug that can compete with the Shelob scene in ROTK. Fact is, The Lord of the Rings is so far ahead of anything Del Toro has done that I'm still not sure whether the Burly Mexican can measure up. But then I remind myself that Jackson started with Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles and Braindead. Not bad movies at all, but in no way revealing that Jackson would at one point go on to helm the biggest movie of all time.

[Sycophant]

So long as this doesn't feel like the highlight real of a del Toro-produced The Hobbit television series, I'll be at least somewhat satisfied.

[trotchky]

I think this movie will be good.

[Morris Schæffer]

Starts filming Summer 2010!

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=26378

[number8]

Something to think about: by the time this comes out, it'll probably be the 10 year anniversary of Fellowship.

[Dukefrukem]

they're starting to look for extras (http://popwatch.ew.com/2009/12/29/all-right-mr-del-toro-and-mr-jackson-im-ready-for-my-the-hobbit-close-up/)

[Yxklyx]

Release pushed back to last quarter of 2012 I read.

[Qrazy]

They're sure taking their sweet time with this.

[Qrazy]

Who else thinks that if these are a success they'll start mining the Silmarillion and expanding on different stories.

[number8]

Who else thinks that if these are a success they'll start mining the Silmarillion and expanding on different stories.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9H09xnhlCQU

[[ETM]]

I wouldn't mind an original telling of something from the Silmarillion. Sure, its imagery is difficult to even imagine, but therein lies the challenge, I think.
I wouldn't want a tie-in adaptation, though. End that with The Hobbit.

[Yxklyx]

The tale of Turin Turambar would be the best in my opinion but I don't think PJ and company should screenwrite any more of these.

[Dukefrukem]

THE HOBBIT's, two films, start shooting in New Zealand in June. Filming will take over a year. Casting in Los Angeles, New York City and London has started. The script too proceeds. The first draft is crammed with old and new friends, again on a quest in Middle Earth.

The director Guillermo del Toro is now living in Wellington, close to the Jacksons' and the studio in Miramar.

http://www.mckellen.com/cinema/index1.htm

[[ETM]]

I guess there's a lot going on behind the scenes... Del Toro couldn't wait...:|
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2010/05/30/36920-guillermo-del-toro-departs-the-hobbit/

[Raiders]

So now Jackson can just direct them, right?

[[ETM]]

I don't know... I don't think he wants to. I'm guessing there would have to be an offer he couldn't refuse for him to do it.

[Wryan]

;263157']I guess there's a lot going on behind the scenes... Del Toro couldn't wait...:|
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2010/05/30/36920-guillermo-del-toro-departs-the-hobbit/

Is this a really late April Fools Day joke or something? Cause that's just about the worst possible news we could have gotten. ARGH.....who now? I really hope this doesn't transition awkwardly.

Who could take this? I'd suggest Alfonso Cuaron, personally.

[number8]

;263160']I don't know... I don't think he wants to. I'm guessing there would have to be an offer he couldn't refuse for him to do it.

Such as not having had a critical hit since 2003 and not having anything lined up?

[[ETM]]

Such as not having had a critical hit since 2003 and not having anything lined up?

He's definitely not desperate. I have always had the feeling that he just doesn't want to do it by himself.

[Grouchy]

I fully understand Del Toro, though. Six years for a dude in his 40s is a commitment, and he probably has more personal films to work on.

Personally, I'm not really desperate for The Hobbit. I'll watch it, sure, but I couldn't give a fuck if they never make the movie.

[transmogrifier]

I hope Jackson goes nowhere near the director's chair. He's on a hiding to nothing if he does.

[Winston*]

I'd like another Hellboy movie more than a Hobbit movie, I think.

[Ezee E]

I'd prefer neither.

[Watashi]

I'd prefer Del Toro mainly as an art director.

I do like Hellboy and Pan's though.

[Winston*]

Probably prefer Jackson overall to Del Toro, but Del Toro's last two films have been much better than Jackson's last two so I dunno.

[Dead & Messed Up]

On the plus side, this means we're a little more like to see this someday:

http://www.ghostofaflea.com/archives/AstoundingStoriesAtTheMountain sOfMadness.jpg

[Sxottlan]

God damn it.

:frustrated:

[Qrazy]

As long as they can get someone even better to fill the director's chair I actually think this is great news. I too think Del Toro is great with art direction and creature design and I'm sure his influence has already been and will be felt in the pre-production process. So as far as I'm considered, unless they scrap his pre-production ideas, then we're already getting the best he has to offer.

[number8]

I'm ambivalent. I'd much rather see Del Toro do Lovecraft than Tolkien, so whatever.

[[ETM]]

It's not like Del Toro leaves, they find someone else and off it goes... I'd love to see the Hobbit done right, or at all, and the whole thing is uncertain at this point.

[kopello]

Even though I have no idea if this will even happen I hope Jackson takes over as director. As much as I appreciate Del Toro being there and giving his input on a lot of the pre production ideas (he has a great imagination) I've never thought much of him as a director so I'm hoping this project moves on with someone else as the director.

I'm a pretty big fan of the LotR trilogy so I'm crossing my fingers that this project is still alive.