Hobbit Video Diary links and discussion

[kzer_za]

Yep. The LotR movies are really long partly because of the length and complexity of the story, but also because PJ likes to have a lot of both quiet character moments and big flashy (often good, but sometimes stupid) action scenes. I haven't seen Donkey Kong, but I've heard it's similar in that regard.

The Two Towers, for example, gets grief sometimes for all the action, and I'm not that big a fan of the warg battle myself (I don't mind him putting an action scene there and the Fellowship book had a warg battle anyway, but the execution is lacking and it just feels perfunctory). But there actually isn't that much action up until that point after the Gandalf fight, then another fairly long break between the wargs and Helms Deep. And plenty of quiet character moments even in the theatrical cut.

At the end of the day, PJ was the one excited enough about LotR to actively seek out directing it. Maybe someone like David Lean or 70s-quality FF Coppola would have made more consistent movies, but would they even have wanted to direct it? And if they had accepted the task, would they have been passionate enough about the material to seek out people like John Howe and Alan Lee? Who knows.

[Primula Baggins]

I think it's likely that some very fine directors would have felt nothing for the material, or even curled their lip a bit. Many people who've never read LotR know just one thing about it: they're far too hip to bother with it.

For all PJ's shortcomings (disclosure: they aren't enough to keep me from loving those films), we would have been much worse off with a more tasteful and conventionally gifted director who had no respect for the book or the people who care about it.

[Alatar]

At the end of the day, PJ was the one excited enough about LotR to actively seek out directing it. Maybe someone like David Lean or 70s-quality FF Coppola would have made more consistent movies, but would they even have wanted to direct it? And if they had accepted the task, would they have been passionate enough about the material to seek out people like John Howe and Alan Lee? Who knows.

Indeed. See Boorman's treatment for an example of how badly wrong it could have gone!

[yovargas]

The Two Towers, for example, gets grief sometimes for all the action, and I'm not that big a fan of the warg battle myself (I don't mind him putting an action scene there and the Fellowship book had a warg battle anyway, but the execution is lacking and it just feels perfunctory). But there actually isn't that much action up until that point after the Gandalf fight, then another fairly long break between the wargs and Helms Deep. And plenty of quiet character moments even in the theatrical cut.

One possible reason I'm in the minority in thinking TTT is the best of the 3. It spends the most time on its characters and nails most of those character moments.

[Passdagas the Brown]

The Two Towers, for example, gets grief sometimes for all the action, and I'm not that big a fan of the warg battle myself (I don't mind him putting an action scene there and the Fellowship book had a warg battle anyway, but the execution is lacking and it just feels perfunctory). But there actually isn't that much action up until that point after the Gandalf fight, then another fairly long break between the wargs and Helms Deep. And plenty of quiet character moments even in the theatrical cut.

One possible reason I'm in the minority in thinking TTT is the best of the 3. It spends the most time on its characters and nails most of those character moments.

Agreed. IMO, the first half of TTT is the best film in the series. It slowly goes downhill during Helm's Deep, but overall, I think it was the best of the three.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Screen Caps from Production Video No. 11, from the one and only Dark Jackal:

http://thorinoakenshield.net/the-hobbit ... creencaps/

[Passdagas the Brown]

I think it's likely that some very fine directors would have felt nothing for the material, or even curled their lip a bit. Many people who've never read LotR know just one thing about it: they're far too hip to bother with it.

For all PJ's shortcomings (disclosure: they aren't enough to keep me from loving those films), we would have been much worse off with a more tasteful and conventionally gifted director who had no respect for the book or the people who care about it.

Not so sure about that. An accomplished director, Alfonso Cuaron, who is very well-respected in the film world as an auteur, took it upon himself to direct one of the Harry Potter films (Prisoners) which most critics, and many fans, found to be the best of the series. He certainly didn't sneer at it, and his other films have a mythic elegance to them, and what seems to be a love of the genre.

Watching his various films (esp. Children of Men) and listening to his commentaries, I am led to believe that he understands film, as well as myth and fantasy, on a far deeper level than PJ.

And that's not necessarily an insult. PJ admits, while paraphrasing Alfred Hitchcock, that his films are slices of cake, not slices of life.

It is hard to think of a film-making philosophy less suited to the adaptation of Tolkien.

[Primula Baggins]

Well, I didn't say that all very fine directors would dismiss the material. Azkaban is my favorite of the HP series—in book and film, which is interesting. But it's certainly a risk that an accomplished director might not bend as far as accepting and engaging with material that has an element of the fantastic. That isn't at all the fashion now, after all.

I haven't read the "slices of cake" remark. But there are things in the LotR films that to me, at least, indicate that PJ is perfectly able to understand and respect Tolkien's LotR.

Just not consistently.

But . . . I still am not sure that we would have gotten the quality we (IMO) did, and the many (IMO) parts of the films that worked as Tolkien and as film, with many other directors living.

Peter Weir, maybe.

GdT, I am not at all sure. His esthetic trumps so much in some of his films, including plot and drama and comprehensibility. GdT's a genius and he knows it. Tolkien is dead. Would Tolkien stand a chance?

I think he stood more of a chance with PJ.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Prim, well said (except that PoA is my least favorite Potter film, though that is a conversation for a different place and time).

[Dave_LF]

I'm a pushover, I guess. I am certainly aware of many ways the films could have been better and have been known to gripe from time to time , but when it comes down to it I'm just so happy to have the films at all that I can't help but like them. According to my wife, I was grinning like an idiot through most of AUJ; even Goblintown.

I'm also not sure how fair it is to blame/credit Jackson personally for all of the creative decisions in such a massive, collaborative undertaking, especially since he seems to be the least involved of the 3 (4?) writers (though during LotR he was clearly able to override the other two's objections when he wanted to, judging from the commentaries).

[Lusitano]

Agreed. Though I find this to be a problem in both AUJ and the LOTR trilogy. Through a combination of both set design, lighting and cinematography, the studio sets often look like studio sets! Location shooting (ahem, Rohan?) yields much more beautiful results.

I didnt find it to be much of a problem in the lotr trilogy. Though not all they could be, the different places in ME felt real and organic enough for me. Rivendell might be a little overlight with a golden atmosphere and two or three background paintings might not be as well accomplished as they possibly could, but nothing like AUJ's rivendell, which looks to me like an overlight studio set with digital backgrounds added afterwards.

Its interetsing to wonder what has happened to that brave, almost indie like unconformist, daring filmmaker, jackson , in my opinion, was, as far as location shootings.
Taking advantage of the organic and irreplaceable quality of nature and locations from NZ, was jacksons's motto for bringing Middle Earth to life in Lotr, wasnt it?

He seems to have lost that approach and learned to just settle with a lot more studio and green screen work. A very Lucasesque- if that's even a word- change.


For me, either of those three directors would be more interesting choices for MEarth, Alfonso, Weir or DelToro. I like many of their films, unlike jackson's own filmography and regard them as superior filmmakers.

Both Pan's Labyrinth and POA are great fantasy films, with more artistic merits and clear visions behind them than auj, imo.

Another interesting chocie could be Neil Jordan, who directed the gothic fairytale The Company of Wolves.

[Passdagas the Brown]

Agreed. Though I find this to be a problem in both AUJ and the LOTR trilogy. Through a combination of both set design, lighting and cinematography, the studio sets often look like studio sets! Location shooting (ahem, Rohan?) yields much more beautiful results.

I didnt find it to be much of a problem in the lotr trilogy. Though not all they could be, the different places in ME felt real and organic enough for me. Rivendell might be a little overlight with a golden atmosphere and two or three background paintings might not be as well accomplished as they possibly could, but nothing like AUJ's rivendell, which looks to me like an overlight studio set with digital backgrounds added afterwards.

Its interetsing to wonder what has happened to that brave, almost indie like unconformist, daring filmmaker, jackson , in my opinion, was, as far as location shootings.
Taking advantage of the organic and irreplaceable quality of nature and locations from NZ, was jacksons's motto for bringing Middle Earth to life in Lotr, wasnt it?

He seems to have lost that approach and learned to just settle with a lot more studio and green screen work. A very Lucasesque- if that's even a word- change.


For me, either of those three directors would be more interesting choices for MEarth, Alfonso, Weir or DelToro. I like many of their films, unlike jackson's own filmography and regard them as superior filmmakers.

Both Pan's Labyrinth and POA are great fantasy films, with more artistic merits and clear visions behind them than auj, imo.

Another interesting chocie could be Neil Jordan, who directed the gothic fairytale The Company of Wolves.

As you say, I think PJ's indie ethic went out the window with LOTR's success.

But I think it is not because hechanged. He's very much the same person, with the same taste. It is because he is simply more free to put exactly what he wants on screen, which exacerbates his worst tendencies.

I am a big believer in the idea that resource constraints in the arts breeds both inspiration and innovation. A genius director is great with $100 or $1 billion, but most directors, like PJ, are not disciplined enough to know when they are over-painting a canvas.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I moved the discussion about the similarity of the Goblintown scene to videogames to the already existing thread on the subject. The moved posts begin here.

[Elentári]

Latest vlog is up on PJ's Facebook page

Enjoy!

[Passdagas the Brown]

Nice vlog. Lilly is funny, but her acting worries me...

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Based on what you have seen in trailers, or based on her past performances.

If I judged Martin Freeman on what I saw of him in the AUJ trailers, I would have been sure that they made a terrible mistake in casting him as Bilbo.

[Passdagas the Brown]

Really? Freeman was just as good in the trailers as he was in the film. IMO.

Lilly, in the trailers, vlogs and in Lost, is IMO an actress with very limited range.

It's unfortunate Saiorse Ronan had to decline the part.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I have never seen an episode of Lost, nor anything else that Lilly has been in. Then again, the only thing that I had see Freeman in was Hitchhiker's Guide, and I disliked that quite a bit.

In any event, most of Freeman's lines came across bizarre the way they are cut in the trailers. For instance, the pauses that he puts in the lines about not minding visitors sound very strange, out of context. I've seen some things in the trailers from Lilly that I like, and some that I do not, but I am quite confident that we have not seen enough to judge.

[Passdagas the Brown]

I also thought Hitchhiker's was bad, but not because of Freeman. He played the part, and did an admirable job.

I have seen enough of Lilly, in previous roles and in trailers and vlogs, to be reasonably certain that her performance will leave something to be desired.

Hope I'm wrong!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

You've expressed so much excitement about so many other aspects of this film, you have to have something to complain about (other than poor Orlando Bloom).