Ralph Bakshi

[dnvillalpando]

[Isaac]

[Pre-Raphaelite]

I find the James McTeigue (V For Vendetta) rumor far more intriguing!

I don't think Sam Raimi is right for The Hobbit at all!

My picks would be:

Peter Weir
Ridley Scott
Neil Burger (The Illusionist)
Dan Futterman (Capote)
Stephen Poliakoff (The Lost Prince)
Jean-Pierre Jeunet - but ONLY if he is made to follow an excellent screnplay (Tom Stoppard or someone of that calibre).

[JKS]

I advocate David Lynch directing The Hobbit.

[Isaac]

Bad news...

http://www.showbizdata.com/contacts/picknews.cfm/42817/ZAENTZ_RINGS_IN_JACKSON_FOR_PREQUELS

[Pre-Raphaelite]

Yeah, but all Newline has to do to retain their right is start production. That can be anything. The same thing happened with the `76 King Kong. De Laurentiis had to push production up by almost a year to retain the rights, or Universal would have won their case against him. But here's hoping it goes to a better man. Two lumbering three-hour Peter Jackson Hobbit movies is just too dreadful to contemplate. Especially after getting a load of his King Kong script! May Philipa Boynes never write another word of dialogue for a movie ever again!

[Mike]

I really disagree with MGMs idea of making two films. This is not two films of "The Hobbit": the first film is based on the book, and the second one bridges the two.

I see absoutely no point to making the second film, and I hope the producers realize it before they start "milking a dead cow" so to speak. Simply, Tolkien fans aren't going to see a movie that is not based on Tolkien, no matter who's directing.

As for Saul Zaentz, I think he's just trying to assuage Jackson fans. Thinks don't go back to normal after you sue a company to get profits, after all. The people who were sued so that Jackson could make even more money off the films aren't going to sit back and invite him in again, they're going to be wary of him, and I hope they succeed in stopping him.

And ah yes, who can forget King Kong? The movie that has absolutely no reason to be remade, as it is still an excellent, ground-breaking classic, but has been remade twice in any case? I enjoyed the film, but I still believe it was pointless, and dare I say a waste of a large budget, simply because it did not match the original.

And I'm getting tired at how Jackson has showed no signs of stopping his creation of long, drawn-out scenes. "The Hobbit" doesn't need three hours to be told on film. Rankin-Bass (despite horrible character design and animation) did a fairly good job adapting it into 70 minutes and not leaving that much out.

So I really hope they get another director, and a good screenwriter, and try not to make a Jackson LOTR clone but something true to the spirit of the original book, which was, after all, for children.

But by the looks of this two-film setup, they're looking for a Jackson clone.

Who knows? We'll just have to wait.

[Pre-Raphaelite]

I'm seriously thinking of mounting a "Support Newline" campaign to ounter the religious fanaticism of Peter Jackson's congregation...er, fanbase. If they have to make the movie, they should at least try to find someone more capable of making a film under 3 hrs. long with some kind of dramatic focus and basic storytelling ability.

As for Saul Zaentz, I think he's just trying to assuage Jackson fans. Thinks don't go back to normal after you sue a company to get profits, after all. The people who were sued so that Jackson could make even more money off the films aren't going to sit back and invite him in again, they're going to be wary of him, and I hope they succeed in stopping him.

Couldn't agree with you more Mike. Bakshi fans know a little more about Zaentz & his antics than PJ fans, who think Zaentz is some kind of guardian angel protecting the Tolkien legacy. This guy broke contract with Bakshi, Beagle & who knows how many other creative artists, and pocketed all the money!

And I'm getting tired at how Jackson has showed no signs of stopping his creation of long, drawn-out scenes. "The Hobbit" doesn't need three hours to be told on film. Rankin-Bass (despite horrible character design and animation) did a fairly good job adapting it into 70 minutes and not leaving that much out.

LOL! But you have to imagine Philipa Boyens on the 13 disc super-special-interminably-extended collector's box set dvd of The Hobbit Movie saying (imagine New Zealand accent) "We asked ourselves, what's Bilbo's story? What's it all about? We felt the story demanded certain scenes that just weren't in the book..." ad nauseum.

[Mike]

And now on a completely different topic...

There is only one thing which really bothers me in Bakshi's LOTR--much more than the (S)Aruman fiasco, more than anything else:

When the Fellowship is going down the great river, it is the hobbits who are paddling, while the others just sit or stand on the prow of the boat declaring things. Why would the hobbits be paddling? The other members are stronger, and out of the four hobbits, only Merry is supposed to know anything about boats.

And that brings up another point: why do they paddle by switching sides constantly? Anyone who has ever been on a canoe knows you only switch sides when you arms are tired or you have to steer. Otherwise, you trail the paddle behind to correct the push in the other direction.

Did no one in the cast know how to paddle? Why the constant switching?
_________________
"A stripper putting her clothes on ain't beautiful unless she's ugly to begin with!"-American Pop

"Farewell, friend. I was a thousand times more evil than thou!" -Stormbringer

[ekm]

I had a number of problems with the body actors...and not to get all Flying Moose or anything, but they DID have a tendency to go very "broad" with their characterizations (and I've still not forgiven Bakshi for casting a female to play Frodo, which results in some moments that are bit foppish).

Yes, Gandalf DOES have a tendency to over-emote (which is a shame, because I absolutely love the way he uses his hands when he speaks, which, toned down a bit, could be suitably mystical, as if he were conjuring with words, rather than, at times, excessive).

Still, for me, the greatest cringe-inducing moments are Frodo greeting Gandalf (holds his head, jumps in a circle, and then vomits forth an Air Hug), and Pippin, who uses his forearm and elbow (with feeling!) to hammer home the point that he's "TIRED of looking at [his] COUSINS all DAY!"

This point about the non-hobbits just sitting in the boats is a good one, though I don't think it comes close to matching the unitentional hilarity of Legolas, Gimli and Gandalf causually standing by the gates of Moria while we see Aragorn and Bormoir rushing toward the camera to save Frodo. THAT always cracked me up!

[Isaac]

I didn't find anything wrong with the rotoscope models' acting.
_________________
Watch me dance!

[Mike]

[Isaac]

[ekm]

[Mike]