The problem with The Hobbit is that it's not that exciting. Small Hobbit meets wizard, sets off, finds ring that makes you invisible, kills spider, gets someone else to shoot a dragon, goes home. As a book in its own right it is perfectly fine. It could be made into a perfectly good film, but compared to Lord of the Rings I think it would seem somehow lacking in grandeur.
The suggestions that it could be made into two films are frankly laughable, and the suggestion of making a third to fill in the gap between The Hobbit and LotR just shows how desperate New Line are to milk this cash cow for all they can whilst they still own the rights.
The purists will complain that Miyazaki strays from Tolkien's intention.
Compared to other visualisations, there will be more black icky goo.
But future generations will be comfortable with the view that the environmental toll of Dwarven mines, dragonish flaming and the other evils of the elder races would set the scene for cleansing and a new age.
You've got to bear in mind that the last film he made was King Kong. Which, from the point of view of the studio, 1) Underperformed 2) Went way over budget.
It made $550million, on a budget of $218million - and that's before DVDs and suchlike. While it may not have been the biggest moneymaker ever, I'm sure it made a few pounds for the studio.
The Hobbit.. meh. It's very much a young reader's book in tone & scope, lacking the gravitas of LOTR. I mean, come on, the Rivendell elves singing "tra la la"?!!
Sure it'll be nice, but I never held high hopes for it happening. Even back then the situation looked messy.
I suggested that Uwe Boll should direct the Watchmen film. No, wait - listen! Y'see although Lord of the Rings managed to keep fanboys and obsessives happy, I think that was a minor blip. Most adaptations of cult properties end up with massive threads on sweaty girlfriend-less internet fora decrying how the director "didn't get it" and didn't even pander to the geeky fanbase. I think it's safe to say that's going to happen with Watchmen. So my idea is to just go all out. Avoid -any- chance of pleasing any of the fans and just give it to Uwe Boll - that way EVERYONE can agree how it is a total abomination with no redeeming features ;-)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
The suggestions that it could be made into two films are frankly laughable, and the suggestion of making a third to fill in the gap between The Hobbit and LotR just shows how desperate New Line are to milk this cash cow for all they can whilst they still own the rights.
no subject
Making another trilogy does seem a tad silly though :->
no subject
The animation will be beautiful beyond belief.
The purists will complain that Miyazaki strays from Tolkien's intention.
Compared to other visualisations, there will be more black icky goo.
But future generations will be comfortable with the view that the environmental toll of Dwarven mines, dragonish flaming and the other evils of the elder races would set the scene for cleansing and a new age.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
The Hobbit.. meh. It's very much a young reader's book in tone & scope, lacking the gravitas of LOTR. I mean, come on, the Rivendell elves singing "tra la la"?!!
Sure it'll be nice, but I never held high hopes for it happening. Even back then the situation looked messy.
no subject
no subject