Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh out of "The Hobbit"

Sat May 12, 2007 7:57 pm

All this talk about other directors is just that - talk. No director with any kind of a track record is going to commit to a project in which the U.S. distribution rights are not clearly locked up. And there has been no talk at all of New Line and MGM reaching an agreement on that all-important issue since Shay and Jackson's public 'break-up'. It's so easy to forget the facts in the face of gossip and rumours.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Sat May 12, 2007 8:05 pm

Good point, Voronwë.

This is also giving a lot of time for fan opinion to solidify, and I would really be surprised if there wasn't a strong majority favoring PJ. Those who don't want him to direct the Hobbit probably didn't like the LotR films, either—they're not in the fanbase the studio is pursuing.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Tue May 15, 2007 7:51 pm

So PJ and Steven Spielberg are teaming up to direct and produce a trilogy of 3D animated films based on the Tintin books:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR111796 ... id=10&cs=1

Each will direct one of the first two; no word on who will direct the third. They're going to be filmed back-to-back; Weta Digital will be involved.

PJ's also going to be directing The Lovely Bones sometime soon, perhaps while Spielberg is busy with Indiana Jones IV.

Doesn't look good for a PJ Hobbit anytime soon.

Post by **Frelga** » Tue May 15, 2007 9:41 pm

Primula Baggins wrote:Good point, Voronwë.

This is also giving a lot of time for fan opinion to solidify, and I would really be surprised if there wasn't a strong majority favoring PJ. Those who don't want him to direct the Hobbit probably didn't like the LotR films, either—they're not in the fanbase the studio is pursuing.

I liked the LotR films, and I think PJ would do a good job on the Hobbit. But honestly, if he does not direct, I would not be too flustered.

I think that PJ was getting sloppy toward the end. ROTK is full of little gratuitous moments like the skull avalanche and the dismal Corsairs that add nothing to the experience but do seem like pure PJ.

A Hobbit movie would be a guaranteed success for Jackson, and it doesn't have the thematic weight of LotR. I'm concerned that he would go to town with the PJness, which is my least favorite part of the movies, while another director would have to work full out to earn favorable comparison to LotR. On the other hand, there are fewer deep moral elements and complex characters for PJ to (IMO) mess up. Meh. Color me neutral.

Is anybody going to skip The Hobbit if it's not directed by PJ? Honest question.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Tue May 15, 2007 9:45 pm

It would depend on who did direct. Peter Weir would probably do a marvelous job. On the other hand, I would far rather deal with PJness than Michael Bay–ness.

For me the bar has been set pretty high. I would stay away only if I heard the film was dreadful and did not respect Tolkien at all. But I would feel something had been lost if it was merely a competently made fantasy film when we could have had more.

Post by **yovargas** » Tue May 15, 2007 9:49 pm

I think that PJ was getting sloppy toward the end. ROTK is full of little gratuitous moments like the skull avalanche and the dismal Corsairs that add nothing to the experience but do seem like pure PJ.

A Hobbit movie would be a guaranteed success for Jackson, and it doesn't have the thematic weight of LotR. I'm concerned that he would go to town with the PJness, which is my least favorite part of the movies

[pet-peeve]Why are those moments considered "PJness" and not moments like the Beacons or the Ride of Rohirrim or Pippin's song???
[/pet-peeve]

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Tue May 15, 2007 9:54 pm

Because we know that some of them at least were things that PJ wanted and got over the objections of Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens and even the eyerolling of the production staff (the skull avalanche, the Witch King's preposterous mace). Of course he's responsible for the wonderful bits as well, but they are generally not "pure PJ." "Pure PJ" comes across in the extras as a mischievous kid sometimes, playing up the monsters and zombies because he can.

Post by **WampusCat** » Tue May 15, 2007 10:36 pm

yovargas wrote:[pet-peeve]Why are those moments considered "PJness" and not moments like the Beacons or the Ride of Rohirrim or Pippin's song???
[/pet-peeve]

Three of my four favorite moments! (The other was Frodo on the eagle.)

I feel sure I'll see "The Hobbit" no matter who directs. The amount of fretting beforehand and cursing afterwards would vary, however.

Post by **yovargas** » Tue May 15, 2007 10:43 pm

I was thiiiiiis close to putting Frodo on the eagle instead!!

Post by **Frelga** » Wed May 16, 2007 12:04 am

yovargas wrote:[pet-peeve]Why are those moments considered "PJness" and not moments like the Beacons or the Ride of Rohirrim or Pippin's song???
[/pet-peeve]

[tangent]
That reminded of me of when a religious person (can't remember who

) complained that insurance companies consider rainbows and flowers natural phenomena but hurricanes and earthquakes Acts of God.
[/tangent]

I'll grant you the Ride of the Rohirrim, though.

Post by **TORN** » Wed May 16, 2007 1:54 am

I think that PJ was getting sloppy toward the end. ROTK is full of little gratuitous moments like the skull avalanche and the dismal Corsairs that add nothing to the experience but do seem like pure PJ.

[This comment isn't direct solely at the quoted comment but applies to many (but certainly not all) arguments about the quality of the films based on the extended edition --]

Of course, it might be a little unfair to judge him on scenes that weren't actually in the movie as released but only made it back because there was an appetite to see as much as possible of the story. I wonder how many makers of great movies left on the cutting room floors scenes that, had they been included in the movies that were seen by the public, would also have evoked belly-aches.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Wed May 16, 2007 2:02 am

Excellent point, TORN.

Post by **TORN** » Tue May 22, 2007 2:22 am

Leggy says . . . http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles ... tory.jhtml

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Tue May 22, 2007 3:16 am

<waves delightedly at TORN—twice in a week!>

I have to say it wouldn't break my heart if they didn't try to shoehorn Legolas in. I suppose a cameo sort of appearance, in the background, wouldn't be a big deal—or perhaps he could be singing "Tra-la-la-lally. . . ."

But that sort of appearance they could get him for, if and when and if he wanted to do it.

If Jackson's idea ever got carried out, I suppose we would have to expect to see many of the LotR characters at least toward the end of the "bridge" film. It could work.

Post by **Inanna** » Tue May 22, 2007 5:41 am

I am curious about the bridge film? Is it mainly stuff from The Lost tales?? Is there any definite plan?

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Tue May 22, 2007 6:41 am

I don't think there has been any elaborated plan, Mahima—though I remember reading that it would be stuff from the LotR appendices. I don't think the studio has rights to anything but what's contained in the Hobbit and LotR, because that's all Tolkien sold and Christopher is not selling any further rights.

Post by **Alatar** » Tue May 22, 2007 10:12 am

Most of what I've read talked about expanding the Hobbit storyline over two films and filling it out with White Council material, so it wouldn't be a "bridge" movie as such.

Post by **TORN** » Fri May 25, 2007 12:34 am

Just saw Spiderman 3 -- YIKES!!! Don't let that director/writer anywhere near The Hobbit -- I really pretty much hated this film, although I pretty much enjoyed the first film and found the second mildly interesting.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Fri May 25, 2007 12:53 am

Sheesh, TORN, not much of a fanboy, are you? Over at Ain't It Cool News they are drooling over Raimi directing the Hobbit.

Post by **WampusCat** » Fri May 25, 2007 1:21 am

From a TV Guide interview with Dominic Monaghan (found on a "Lost" message board):

TVGuide.com: What's next for you?
Monaghan: I'm doing a film in New York, I Sell the Dead. I play Arthur Blake, an 18th-century grave robber on death row who is confessing his sins to a priest hours before his death. ... And from there, I'm going to go to New Zealand to see [Lord of the Rings director] Pete Jackson and his family. He's got a couple of projects that are gonna be happening in 2008 that I'm really keen to find out about.

TVGuide.com: So you two may be collaborating again?
Monaghan: I hope so. It's all gonna be dependent on if there's a part in those projects for me. But he said there's some great opportunities, so that's gonna be a nice little gold mine to tap.

So what projects is he talking about? Any possibility there are hairy feet reappearing in Dominic's future?