Hobbit Movie

[oldBPLstackden…]

Good Afternoon, loien...

I guess some of what attacted me to those scenes filmed in the Highlands of Scotland ( in those "Monarch of The Glen" episodes ) especially the forest scenes - was the presence of all that dark green and blue - and the mist coming through the trees ...The Shire always reminded  me more of all those other places I mentioned, on account of all those clouds that always seem to passing overhead, creating those long, dark shadows on the hillsides, and all that interplay between the sunlight and the shadows ( we even get that around here, sometimes - mainly during the winter or the spring, when the rolling hills are still very green )...

The Shire in the movie seemed just a wee bit more dry and dusty looking than the way I pictured it -

( but not to say I don't appreciate all the time and trouble the movie-makers went through in constructing it! )

---I believe, however, that there are still places in the UK ( and in Ireland ) where there are hundreds of acres of unused land that might be available someday for a similar project --- but like I said, I'm not complaining!

 I still appreciate all the effort that was put into that huge undertaking that was making the LOTR movies... 

Ardo

[lorien]

OneRing interview with Guillermo del Toro

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2008/04/25/28747-guillermo-del-toro-chats-with-torn-about-the-hobbit...

[TiggerBear]

oldBPLstackden…
Peter Jackson's homeland is New Zealand. On his part a bit of spending money where his heart is. But on the same line Cold Mountain filmed in Transylvania in place of the American south. They film movies where ever they get the sites cheep.

[oldBPLstackden…]

TiggerBear ---

Yes, and considering Middle-earth is really just a "state of mind" - it is concievable that almost any locale

( well, almost any locale ) could be "converted" into a Middle-earthian landscape. --- Canada springs to mind as another good possibility...We watched some more of those "Monarch" episodes last night, and there was something else that reminded me of the way I always pictured the Shire or perhaps other areas in

 Middle-earth - all that gray stone lying around  ( most of it all that glacial debris left behind by the receding glaciers, I suppose ) - and those small grassy glades, it all has a real "Celtic" ambience to it ( to my mind, at any rate ) - I mentioned all that "blue" before - but I think all that gray ( or as they say "across the pond" - all that "grey" ) makes it something special too ...the grey of the water and the grey of the sky - the grey of the rock - But then,  considering the vagaries of Continental Drift - perhaps at one point in time,

New Zealand was connected to what Scotland is today - so it could all be one and the same - who knows?

Ardo

[TiggerBear]

oldBPLstackden…
(chuckle) you tempt me to send you maps of geologic plate shifts. New Zealand fractured off of Australia when it broke away from Chili. That lower plate pulled away and spun in place. Interesting stuff.

[JesseBC]

See, where I disagree with you is that Tolkien vs. New Line is about publisher control. It's not; it's a contract dispute.

Now, the terms of that contract may have favored big-money producers. Or they may not have. But it doesn't matter. Both parties entered into a contract and now they're saying the other has violated its terms.

The dispute isn't over whether those terms were fair -- it's over whether those terms were broken.

That's the only reason I brought up Rowling vs. Vander Ark. That's the decision which rests on an artist's control over their material versus fair use and adaptation.

The Tolkien case is purely about whether or not both sides have lived up to the agreement they made in the first place -- a question that certainly relies on far more legal detail than any of us are privy to. The contract was drawn up by a team of attorneys in the first place.

---

lorien wrote:
You are absolutely right Jesse. The Rowling/Vander Ark case is very significant and I wondered why they do not seem interested in the Harry Potter group. Probably because it has little directly to do with Harry Potter but does have deep significance as far what an other writer can write about a book. And this along with the Tolkien suit has more to do with the power and control of publishers and other big money interests. The "little" people are irrelevant. Interestingly enough this case also centers around Warner Bros.

http://www.harvardindependent.com/node/244

If some people were interested, we could set up an OT thread.

---

JesseBC wrote:
The Tolkien vs. New Line case really doesn't lend itself well to anything more than pub chat.

Opinions as to who's right or wrong in that situation are largely irrelevant. It's just a contract dispute and that's likely how the courts will settle it (if the parties don't settle out of court on their own).

While it's not as on-topic to this forum, if people really want to discuss higher principles, the Rowling vs. Vander Ark case is much more well-suited to that.

The parties don't have a contractual relationship and the dispute is based much more on principle.

Neither side is showing any sign of backing down and the original court's decision will probably be appealed no matter who it favors.

But the decision could have an enormous impact on what's considered fair use and what writers will be allowed to do in critical or scholarly interpretations, let alone adaptations, of original material.

(The irony in that case being how much of Harry Potter was stitched together from references to other original material in the first place.)

---

---

[macross]

Well New Zeland is consider to look alot like what the english countryside looked liked during the middle-ages. So it was a natural choice I guess. The vision that Jackson had, to me was as close as ill ever get to see middle-earth. But for the Hobbit movie It might just change. Different  director, different vision. This happend with the Harry Potter Films, same "universe" yet they all look somewhat different.

---

oldBPLstackdenizen wrote:

TiggerBear ---

Yes, and considering Middle-earth is really just a "state of mind" - it is concievable that almost any locale

( well, almost any locale ) could be "converted" into a Middle-earthian landscape. --- Canada springs to mind as another good possibility...We watched some more of those "Monarch" episodes last night, and there was something else that reminded me of the way I always pictured the Shire or perhaps other areas in

 Middle-earth - all that gray stone lying around  ( most of it all that glacial debris left behind by the receding glaciers, I suppose ) - and those small grassy glades, it all has a real "Celtic" ambience to it ( to my mind, at any rate ) - I mentioned all that "blue" before - but I think all that gray ( or as they say "across the pond" - all that "grey" ) makes it something special too ...the grey of the water and the grey of the sky - the grey of the rock - But then,  considering the vagaries of Continental Drift - perhaps at one point in time,

New Zealand was connected to what Scotland is today - so it could all be one and the same - who knows?

Ardo

---

[TiggerBear]

Well now we know the director can't be helped. Any word on the cast? I read Mr. McKellen said he'd be delighted to reprise Gandolf if Jackson had anything at all to do with the project. If they wanted him. But I've found no follow up since 2 weeks ago. Any more word on him or who would play Bilbo?

[macross]

So far the director has been in talks with a few actors, Sir Ian was reported to be in talks with Guillermo del Torro. I think he will do an excellent job on The Hobbit. I recommend you see "Pan's Laberenth" he directed that one. 

[TiggerBear]

"Pan's Laberenth" yeah AVOID that one, never has there been a more falsely advertised movie. Can we say an extreamly violent graphic presentation of the Spanish civil war wrapped in a children's fairy tale. YUCK!

[macross]

I found it very enjoyable. And since when war not violent?

[TiggerBear]

And since when war not violent?
------------------------------------------------------
My biggest problem with the movie is it was advertised as a fairy tale and a children's movie nationally. YOU DIDN'T have to cover a child's ears and eyes and rush them out, I DID! Bad thing is I even researched the movie, and not a single web site gave any heads up that a man's head would be repeatedly smashed in with a bottle.

My problem with the director is the man can not make a single movie with out changing the subject matter and injecting the Spanish civil war. Especially the ones he didn't write. It lessens his work.

[oldBPLstackden…]

Good Afternoon, macross ( and everybody ) ---

Well, there is going to be a different director and a different outlook - but it seems certain that the production team is going to be "recycling" both "Hobbiton" and "Rivendell" for use in the "Hobbit" movies.

New Zealand is going to be it - and that is fine.---

My speculations revolved around what LOTR movie versions that will be produced in the future

(  probably past my time of life, most likely, even ) might look like  - as I am certain there will be other versions to come - even if Mr. Jackson's version is considered to be the "definitive" version for now -

And the reasons I looked to other regions in the world ( and to the British Isles, specifically )- has more to do with my own personal preferences - on account of my own personal "vision" of how the Shire and other parts of Middle-earth looked to me in my mind, when I was reading the stories themselves...

( as I mentioned before, in another "Thread" - I think it really felt much more like Middle-earth to me when the movie got far away from the Shire - and down to the South - around Rohan, Gondor and Mordor )...---

I was doing quite a bit of wandering around on the "Net" late into this morning - so I can't remember the exact site where I saw this - and this is probably just old news, anyway - but it sounds like Ian Holm is not going to be playing Bilbo, after all, on account of infirmity and ill-health --- I didn't see any probable replacements mentioned ---

Which brings me back to my question I had floated earlier - as to which actor others might see

as being "perfect" ( or near perfect )  for the role of Bilbo...I'd like to see some kind of "Opinion Poll"

( strictly for own own amusement, naturally ) on this, here ...---

This site also mentioned the rumor that David Bowie ( ?!?! ) [ Actually - probably not such a bad choice, after all ] - was being considered for the role of Elrond - unless the actor who played Elrond in LOTR was to reprise his role. ---

Good Afternoon, All ---

Ardo Whortleberry

[TiggerBear]

David Bowie would be interesting.

[oldBPLstackden…]

Good Evening, TiggerBear (  & Everybody ) ---

First off, I have to admit until just recently, I knew absolutely nothing about Mr. Del Toro and his movies.

( well - I think I might have read or seen a review of "Hellboy" when it first came out- and I may have seen some reviews of his other movies - such as "Pan" - but I wasn't paying that much attention, because I didn't remember anything about it ) ---

My wife and I are living in the Stone Age, somewhat, it would seem --- the last time we actually went to a commercial theatre to see a new movie was way back when "Toy Story I" came out!

Over the last year or so - we have been doing a lot of "catching up" on Hollywood's bounty of goodies - by checking out VHS tapes and DVDs from the library.

But our choices have mostly included "old stuff" - Movie Classics, BBC programs, etcetera - but a certain amount of fairly recent Hollywood fare, as well - but nothing in the way of any trash/slash crap.

( I realize there are people who get enjoyment from watching these bloodfest-o-ramas, suspense/horror thrillers, etcetera, { some of which are filled with a kind of kitschy humor } and I have to confess there have been times when I have been drawn to that peculiar fascination with violence )  ...And there are movies where violence certianly has its place ( for instance, "Private Ryan" or"Schindler's List" ) ---

( there is, of course, even a level of violence and disturbing images in the LOTR movies -

probably not all that appropriate for younger eyes to behold [ talk about nightmares! ] )

But, anyway, I have just got done doing a little research on Del Toro and his movies -

And it really does seem like all of his movies have a dark, disturbing tone to them.

They are mostly rated "R" ( except for just a couple of "PG-13"s ) - not that the "R" rating by itself means that

it has to follow that his movies themselves are "bad" - but it does appear  that there is a high level of violence

in them ( and in some cases, language, nudity, adult themes )   ---

And, one might say - well there IS a lot of violence in "The Hobbit" already...

Well, yes - that is true to a certain extent - especially for a "Children's Book" - it certainly has a lot more violence than in many other Children's Books...

But, I too, am afraid that Mr. Del Toro will mainly EMPHASIZE ( and "draw out" ) any violent, gruesome and bloody aspects of the story that he can find to do so with...

And it does seem like the tone of his other movies always tends to be very dark, perhaps morbid -

whatever his qualifications for making "Great Cinema" might be -

I personally don't want the "tone" of "The Hobbit" movies to be so "Dark" - I would much prefer to see a "tone" of more light and air in "The Hobbit" -

Especially as we know how many kids are going to be so anxious to see these movies.

Unfortunately, this Del Toro contract seems like a "Done Deal" ....---

Good Night,

Ardo Whortleberry

[oldBPLstackden…]

Just wanted to add a few thoughts to my last letter...

When I was a kid ( Once Upon A Time, many years ago ) - I would get very excited whenever I cuaght a glimpse of those "cast of thousands" epics - with the great big battle scenes - men on horses ( like "El Cid" ) or those Medieval warriors slugging it out ( in their chain-mail and helmets ) with their swords and maces - and with the clouds of arrows flying - etcetera ---

But there was a peculiarity about these movies ( well, what we would could consider a "peculiarity" nowadays - not in those days ) - you never actually saw these warriors getting their arms and legs cut off, or their heads bashed in, or too much blood and gore in general - except for the occaisonal arrow sticking out of somebody, as they clutched at their chest ( or threw out their arms ) and keeled over ( but no blood ) - only the "ambience" of the ferocity of the battle -

people might get a little dirty, maybe. Head were chopped off "Off-Camera". ----

Very similar to the way Westerns used to be presented - whenever there was a gunfight, the gunshot victims would simply keel over, with no visible wounds, and collapse on the ground. Apparently, getting shot with a gun was not a messy business, at all, at all...

And, I fully realize there has been a total "Sea Change" in the way violence is depicted in movies nowadays

since those days, and that we are now living in a "different world".---

But, even in "The Hobbit" and LOTR, sometimes the violence and gruesomeness in the books themselves

 happens Off-Stage" or "Off-Camera". ---The Narrator does not actually descibe in great detail Gimli chopping off the heads of all those orcs ( at the Battle of Helm's Deep ) as he is doing it - instead, it is alluded to in conversations Legolas and Gimli are having as they meet up at times on the ramparts, during the battle. ( and actually, this was the way it was presented in the movie version, as well, I think )

Much of the Battle of Five Armies is described "after the fact" - and is all presented in such an idealized and romanticized manner, that, in my my mind, it is almost like you are viewing one of those bloodless and body-part-less movie battles I described before.

 ( I realize, too, that at one point, the storyteller does relate that the rocks on the mountainside became "stained black with goblin-blood" - a detail that a director like Del Toro will want to seize upon and exploit for all that it is worth, in all probability ) ---

And then, after the battle, Tolkien always goes to great lengths to mention just how sad and destructive the whole business was, and lists the figures in the story who have died during the battle...

But, it does seem to me, that there are instances in the story where certain acts of violence could be alluded to "Off-Camera" - ( not all of them - there are some violent happenings that are built right into the story ) - or at least, not over-emphasized, in the way I'm afraid they are likely to be by Mr. Del Toro.

For instance, instesd of just alluding to the fact that Smaug enjoys eating a tasty, tender young maiden every now and again - are we going to have to witness the very act itself - for the shock and horror value of it?

Even if there are no such gratuitous scenes added, there will be plently of opportunities for gushing blood, or other dark gruesomeness, that Del Toro may desire to exploit in the creation of the movies...

I Apologize for going over-long about all this ... Ardo   

[TiggerBear]

Ardo
No need to apologize, I dread the same things. Not to mention I pray no one lets him do any treaking of the monsters. They allowed him to do that for Hellboy 2 and although it hasn't come out yet, series fans are screaming to the heavens about him ruining it.

Most of us remember the almost non bloody fight scenes. Unfortunately this became exceedingly tritght with TV shows such as the A Team where thousands of bullets were fired and no one ever got shot. Realism in movies is good but there are limits. And using a primary horror director I think is a bad move.
Yes I've seen Mr. Jackson's "meet the pebbles" more funny than gory. Del Toro's done lots and lots of horror films, not just one cheesy one.

[oldBPLstackden…]

Hi, TiggerBear ---

Actually, it wasn't my sentiments or my opinions that I was apologizing for - just the fact that it takes me so

incredibly long to make my points - with so much excess verbiage attached. --- Like my using ten thousand words where one thousand ( or less ) would do the trick. --- I have a tendency, once I get ahold of a subject, to beat it to death. Also, I get a little nervous riding around on my high horse, as, inevitably, someone might come along, and knock me right off, landing me flat on my aspirations...

Ardo 

[macross]

---

TiggerBear wrote:
And since when war not violent?
------------------------------------------------------
My biggest problem with the movie is it was advertised as a fairy tale and a children's movie nationally. YOU DIDN'T have to cover a child's ears and eyes and rush them out, I DID! Bad thing is I even researched the movie, and not a single web site gave any heads up that a man's head would be repeatedly smashed in with a bottle.

My problem with the director is the man can not make a single movie with out changing the subject matter and injecting the Spanish civil war. Especially the ones he didn't write. It lessens his work.

---

And you very right about that TiggerBear, The marketing for the film was very misleading but I do not think it is the directors fault in that way, marketing is handle by the studios. As for Del Toro's changing subject matter, yeah it is a bad habit of his, I only pray that Jackson keeps him on a leash.

[TiggerBear]

I swipped this off the HP thread.
----------------------------------------------------
HPSeeker post
I know there are a lot of Lord of the Rings fans on this board (I certainly am) and thought I'd post this in case anyone's interested:

Chat about THE HOBBIT with Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro live on May 24 (May 25 in Australia/NZ).

With the beginning of pre-production on The Hobbit in sight, Executive Producer Peter Jackson and Director Guillermo del Toro will answer fan questions during a one hour live web chat.

Fans with an interest in The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings should visit http://www.wetanz.com/party/ to submit questions in advance. Peter and Guillermo will select and answer the 20 most common questions.

To register for the live chat, visit http://www.wetanz.com/party/register/.
: Donna