Peter Jackson will do the Hobbit

[AlphaWolf]

Of course it's not inconceivable, but people in this very thread commented on stuff that was left out so it obviously affects some people's opinions.

Its also reaffirmed by his very own criticism of what Jackson might do with the hobbit with regards to the story.

A movie based on a book can be good without closely following the story. An exact translation of the book isn't what I want to see when I see a movie.

 

[RussSchultz]

Uh, this is attrocious, but apropos:

 

[vazel]

yikes ragging on the batman movies now lotr and king kong suck too? some of you b3d folk sure are a picky bunch.

 

[zed]

jackson is a great director, apart from 'the frighteners' he hasnt made an average or bad film ( a very high strike rate )

another LOTR song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWf3iJjqYCM

 

[Fred]

I thought the LoTR films were wonderful. They're not the books, but of course nothing could ever compare.

Still amongst the best movies ive seen this decade.

The Hobbit unfortunately doesn't strike me as the sort of movie that will come out well in theatres. It will just be another fantasy hack/slash, and miss the wonderfully deep nostalgia, vibe and history of the book. Its too easy to miss, way to hard to get right.

As far as best movies ive seen this year. I'd say 'No country for old men' was the best i've seen this year.

 

[AzBat]

yikes ragging on the batman movies now lotr and king kong suck too? some of you b3d folk sure are a picky bunch.

LOL, I agree. There are hardly any movies I don't like.

Tommy McClain

 

[Mariner]

As somebody who was very much a fan of LOTR/Tolkien back in my youth (many hours spent mucking around with MERP), I was disappointed in many respects with Jackson's trilogy. Some parts were done well, others were missed out or changed for no apparent reason that I could see. Overall, I thought they were OK.

King Kong on the other hand was about an hour too long for me and not deserving of all the hype. The bits before and after Skull Island were the better parts but too much of it was, "We have CGI FX - use them endlessly!"

I did quite enjoy The Frighteners, however, and who can forget Bad Taste?

 

[Dresden]

I did quite enjoy The Frighteners, however, and who can forget Bad Taste?

Dead Alive? Anyone?

 

[Bludd]

This is great news! The Hobbit is one of my favourite books of all time. It is a much more linear story than LOTR but that may make it better to adapt and have most of the stuff from the book make it into the film. Smaug is lazy.

 

[ninelven]

I don't know about being to hard on the directing. If you want examples of good directing & cinematography watch something like Gattaca, Memento, The Shawshank Redemption, The Ghost and the Darkness, etc...

Jackson did do a good job of bringing the book to life - the visual style and "feel" of the movies was quite good, but the actual directing was weak in the 1st film and almost nonexistent in the 2nd & 3rd.

 

[Sxotty]

Favorite film of 2006: Brokeback Mountain
Fav of 2007 so far: 3:10 to Yuma

Didn't even see either of those.

Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid
...T2

Those I liked.

Ever seen the man who never was? I thought that was good.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049471/

I cannot say my favorite movies.
I liked Dark City a lot for some reason.

 

[Frank]

I thought the books were great and classic, and the movies just "meh".

 

[Angelcurio]

I really liked The Hobbit when i read it a couple of years ago. I really think i has enough content to make for a good movie.