https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hunt_for_Gollum#:~:text=The film is set in,a quest to find Gollum.
How to pull off a no budget CGI Gollum, stick him in a sack
IMO both Denethor - who to me comes off loony as compared to the book depiction (powerful, but mad...) and the handling of Faramir
- who in the book was subtle, intelligent and a favorite of mine (and didn't take *&^% from his father) and for that matter Aragorn at times, who seemed to need the woman behind the man....
I'd add there were some brutal conditions in the prosthetics - think it's in the Chronicles books or appendices. Like the Goblin King scene where people got so overheated in the prosthetics they were throwing up into buckets.The short time constraints they gave him and therefore the crew to produce these massive movies. The ultimatum/threat that if he didn't direct, they would get someone else AND they wouldn't film in New Zealand, but instead a studio backlot.
He initially signed on for just 1 movie, then they expanded it to 2 and then right before the first one released, the studio decided to make it into a trilogy to get more money. The studio had to share profits for the first movie with all the other studios/production companies that had a hand in the rights to The Hobbit, but they were for only one movie. So WB wanted to get their share and then some, therefore expanded first to two movies so they would get all the profits from the second, but then wanted more money and expanded to 3 movies. So, the first movie had to be re-edited right before release to end differently than originally intended.
No one was ever ready when the cast arrived to shoot their scenes b/c things were constantly changing whether that was from Peter or the studio. Sometimes the cast would show up and they would just decide not to shoot them that day and instead do something else. From what I remember, they said the main Hobbits had no stunt doubles (only body doubles for certain scenes) which was challenging for some of the older cast members when it came to doing stunts.
After the success of the Hunger Games, the studio wanted their own bow and arrow beauty which is why Tauriel was created. Had nothing to do with Peter apparently.
Lots of other stuff that I'm not remembering. It's a great little documentary though if you can catch it. It was on the channel Vice. They have other ones in the series as well for Batman, Star Wars, James Bond and even The Fast and the Furious
I don't care; nobody seems to have the sense of aesthetic that Jackson has. I'm still reeling from Rings of Power.
. It's not that one day, no-one else in the world will ever be able to do a great version of Middle Earth. Just not protegees of J. Abrams and his magic boxes.
Agreed on those points, certainly. Including the "magnificence" comment. there truly was.IMO both Denethor - who to me comes off loony as compared to the book depiction (powerful, but mad...) and the handling of Faramir
I get why Jackson did what he did; I just don't agree with it. But there's so much magnificence.
IMO the Hobbit was much harder to pull off - not that much material to work with, really; having to move from whimsical to dramatic and horrible and then whimsical again. I appreciate what was done with all 6 films in spite of - well, things I wouldn't have done. Maybe it's a cultural difference too; things that are funny in New Zealand to me aren't.
); the joy of seeing Ian McKellen doing the opening Bag End lines was priceless; Lee Pace stunning as Thranduil; Dain, etc. along with some spectacular landscapes like the High Fells.
Still, there are scenes like the lighting of the beacons and Helm's Deep.... TBH it's probably a sure fire hit. Serkus is ridiculously talented; Jackson will be on hand; and while not everyone was unhappy with ROP to me it felt - well, like a typical Abrams film. Superficial, not even costumes to get excited about; or landscapes - or much of anything really. Elves that looked more like they should be coffee barristas. . Again, Peter Jackson probably isn't the only director who can do epic fantasy well (I wouldn't mind having Ridley Scott taking a crack at Middle Earth). And Jackson's team can actually write dialogue that doesn't put me to sleep or is just cringe.
So long as they recast Gandalf as a wise and stunning african trans woman, and Aragorn a fierce lesbian warrior, it should be fine.
So long as they recast Gandalf as a wise and stunning african trans woman, and Aragorn a fierce lesbian warrior, it should be fine.
Though Gollum can stay the same as the "new" Gandalf and Aragorn will no doubt remind him, he always represented the toxic colonialist decrepitude of straight white maleness.
? Gollum will receive succor from a kindly woman of the Harad as he journeys towards Mordor, whose kindness and beauty and forgiveness nearly succeeds in bringing curing Gollum of his desire for the Precious (and there's more than a hint that this is one of the mysterious blue wizards as she seems all-powerful). This successfully undermines Frodo's emotional arc and nobility with Gollum as a bonus!
Probably.
I hate recasting. Just make this a different continuity. I can't think of a single recast that's ever successfully made it feel like the same character.
