|
The stars of Lord Of The Rings have given director Peter Jackson a promise they'll return for The Hobbit if he is prepared to make it.
Jackson has hinted that he would be interested in adapting the pre-Lord of The Rings story into a movie, and now his Hobbit stars are pushing him to go for it.
Billy Boyd, who played Pippin in the Lord of The Rings films, said: "People want it so much. There was talk of us playing our characters' relatives. I'm sure we'd all make ourselves free for that."
And Jackson would be able to cut down on the on-set costs if his Hobbits returned - they're considering buying a communal property in New Zealand.
Elijah Wood said: "A lot of us are actually thinking about going in on property in New Zealand."
Source: http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_1205441.html?menu=entertainment.celebrities
|
Bilbo... the actor is too old 
|
would be nice, after jackson finishes up king kong. i liked the story of the hobbit more than the lord of the rings trilogy.
|
people want it, the actors want to do it, the director says he will do it, it's gonna happen
hopefully it won't suck
|
Norway28667 Posts
they could easily use a new bilbo 
and god I hope they make it
smaug would be sooooooooooooooooo awesome.
|
The Hobbit, how sweet a tale. Hopefully it will be good :-)
|
I've already seen a trailer for it a long time ago.
If he makes the Hobbit I won't make the mistake of seeing it like I did with the lord of the rings. I really liked the books but he did a horrible job. It makes me sick to hear his fellow writers say how they improved Tolkien's writing. Atleast one of them did anyway. I didn't think he would do lotr justice (injustice as I now think), but I thought I'll go see the movie and I might be surprised, and if it is bad it is no big deal. But it is a big deal to me because now when I am picturing something from the books all I can see is Peter Jackson's mass marketed movie.
|
omfg ~~!~!
i was watching fellowship the other day and was hoping HOPING so much that jackson would work on Hobbit after King Kong
omfg PLEASE PETER ~!@~#@~!SDFASFASD =]
|
Yeah, that would be great because the Hobbit + LotR + King Kong would forever be known in history as the Jackson Five.
|
|
|
On December 13 2004 05:26 Servolisk wrote:
I've already seen a trailer for it a long time ago.
If he makes the Hobbit I won't make the mistake of seeing it like I did with the lord of the rings. I really liked the books but he did a horrible job. It makes me sick to hear his fellow writers say how they improved Tolkien's writing. Atleast one of them did anyway. I didn't think he would do lotr justice (injustice as I now think), but I thought I'll go see the movie and I might be surprised, and if it is bad it is no big deal. But it is a big deal to me because now when I am picturing something from the books all I can see is Peter Jackson's mass marketed movie.
Please explain your opinion because you just sound like you're trying to be negative or disagree with everyone for some reason.
For me I'm able to distinguish in my mind the memories from watching the movie and my creative imagery from reading the book(only read fellowship so far).
|
I understand perfectly well what he is talking about. I feel pretty much the same way, except I can still enjoy the movies when I don't compare them to the books.
|
On December 13 2004 09:30 HowitZer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2004 05:26 Servolisk wrote:
I've already seen a trailer for it a long time ago.
If he makes the Hobbit I won't make the mistake of seeing it like I did with the lord of the rings. I really liked the books but he did a horrible job. It makes me sick to hear his fellow writers say how they improved Tolkien's writing. Atleast one of them did anyway. I didn't think he would do lotr justice (injustice as I now think), but I thought I'll go see the movie and I might be surprised, and if it is bad it is no big deal. But it is a big deal to me because now when I am picturing something from the books all I can see is Peter Jackson's mass marketed movie. Please explain your opinion because you just sound like you're trying to be negative or disagree with everyone for some reason. For me I'm able to distinguish in my mind the memories from watching the movie and my creative imagery from reading the book(only read fellowship so far).
wtf? Trying to disagree with everyone? It doesn't take long to find people who didn't like the movies.
Hm if you want me to further explain why I didn't like it, the acting was full of generic drama. Their performance was to movies is like what "A dark and stormy night" is to books.
Things were changed for no reason, not just things edited out for time constraints. Such as making Arwen a big character when she had 2 paragraphs written about her in the books, at the expense of a more interesting character. That shows they don't care about the integrity of the books and were just pandering. And if they were going to do that, I don't see why they didn't get a hotter elf. There are tons of stupid changes, and Jackson and his writers say they improved on Tolkien.
You might be able to seperate book and images well, but I am pretty sure 90% or so will not, especially the people who didn't read the books. I will too if I ever read the books again. This wasn't a real complaint of mine but I do worry it might corrupt the books in this way, but I'm not sure.
|
I have 2 very serious beefs with the movies. 2 scenes MAKE that trilogy the best thing that has ever been written. The first is the confrontation between Gandalf and Gothmog at the gates of Gondor after grond smashes them in. The second is the confrontation between Eowyn and Gothmog after Gothmog slays Theoden. Those 2 scenes are the best things in the history of literature. Jackson scrapped the first and pissed all over the second. Every other decision they made in the movies was understandable/justifiable/forgivable, but those 2 scenes were begging to have a movie made about them. They were the entire justification for making those movies in the first place. And they got shit on. I can't understand it.
|
On December 13 2004 10:02 Hautamaki wrote:
I have 2 very serious beefs with the movies. 2 scenes MAKE that trilogy the best thing that has ever been written. The first is the confrontation between Gandalf and Gothmog at the gates of Gondor after grond smashes them in. The second is the confrontation between Eowyn and Gothmog after Gothmog slays Theoden. Those 2 scenes are the best things in the history of literature. Jackson scrapped the first and pissed all over the second. Every other decision they made in the movies was understandable/justifiable/forgivable, but those 2 scenes were begging to have a movie made about them. They were the entire justification for making those movies in the first place. And they got shit on. I can't understand it.
That and the invincible ghost army that kills everything within 2 seconds
|
well that was retarded but for time reasons I can see why they did it. There was no reason, not even from a time standpoint, to not get the aforementioned scenes right though.
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
the witchking - gandalf confrontation is definitely the strongest scene in the book, by far. i agree....
i missed it sooo much
i bought the SEE last weekend and the added wiki-gandalf scene sucked
|
I hated how they took out like the MAJOR encounter with Tom Bombadil in the 1st book -_- And I agree with making the female elf big was stupid. The Elf Lord guy who really helped them owned. The movies where good however. And if one of the writers said they improved on his writing he is a fucking moron.
|
I'd like to see every part of Arda by Tolkien made into movies!
|
oooooooooh, really want to see this shit, altho i dont think it'll be as good as The Lotr trilogy. It is more action packed, but the story is rather shallow imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
