For "Lord of the Rings" fans...

[DeepIron]

You might keep an eye on this site: http://www.theonering.net/ they usually have the scoop on LOTR news and such.

I haven't run across anything yet about the location. I too hope it'll be NZ!

[DeepIron]

Oh wow! I just caught something I overlooked in the news release, TWO Hobbit films are to be done. The Hobbit and a sequel to the Hobbit.

Dudes! Are we going to see The Simarillion as the sequel? I hope so! The Simarillion is the history of Middle Earth BEFORE the Hobbit!

</rubs hands in glee>

[mrbeast]

Sweeeeeeeeeeet

[mr chris]

It will be very hard to live up to the mark that the LOTR set.
Though with Jackson at on board things are heading in the right direction.

[DeepIron]

It will be very hard to live up to the mark that the LOTR set.
Though with Jackson at on board things are heading in the right direction.

Right on... Jackson's vision of Middle Earth was so cool in the Trilogy that it was practically inconceivable that anyone else could "work the magic" in his place. There were a lot of LOTR fans who were really upset about MGMs intention to film the Hobbit without Jackson's directorial vision.

[stabiz]

I for one would like someone else to do it. The first LOTR was pretty good, the second not so good, and the third was a big let down.

I frowned everytime Legolas stared at the horizon and whispered "they are coming ..." in the long face shots that reminded me alot about day time soaps.

Not trying to troll here, I just dont like the way my all time favourite growing-up books were converted to the big screen.

[joea]

Originally Posted by stabiz

I for one would like someone else to do it. The first LOTR was pretty good, the second not so good, and the third was a big let down.

I frowned everytime Legolas stared at the horizon and whispered "they are coming ..." in the long face shots that reminded me alot about day time soaps.

Not trying to troll here, I just dont like the way my all time favourite growing-up books were converted to the big screen.

Well I disagree, if anything the last was the best...but at least all 3 were filmes at the same time. Fact is it is hard if not impossible to create a film exactly like a book...

[STEED]

Four hour epic.

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Right on... Jackson's vision of Middle Earth was so cool in the Trilogy that it was practically inconceivable that anyone else could "work the magic" in his place. There were a lot of LOTR fans who were really upset about MGMs intention to film the Hobbit without Jackson's directorial vision.

Yes I think Jackson's interpretation of Tolkein's world was spot on IMO I think the author would have approved if he had seen it.

LOTR could so easily have been a corny flop. But Peter Jackson made a triumph out of it!

A shame George Lucas couldn't have done the same with the new Star Wars trilogy

[DeepIron]

@Stabiz... It's understandable given the immense amount of detail the Trilogy contains. Frankly, I think it was easier to do The Fellowship of the Ring because it's storyline was mostly self-contained in the first book. The second and third books held much more detail and subplot than the first, IMO. I have the extended DVD versions and it's amazing how much was cut from the films to bring the running time down. In a way, if they left in the deleted scenes, the continuity in the story could have been improved a bit...

A shame George Lucas couldn't have done the same with the new Star Wars trilogy.

I'm right there with you on that one MB. The newer episodes were very disappointing to me as well. I always though that if George would have relied more on storyline and plot rather than eye candy, the newer films would have been much better.

I recently read a Top 10 list of the worse "cinema love relationships". Anakin Skywalker and Pricess Amadalla were right up at the top. No chemistry, no involvement, no fire... boring...

[Reaves]

Originally Posted by DeepIron

The Simarillion is the history of Middle Earth BEFORE the Hobbit!

And one very hard to read book!

[Rose]

Originally Posted by DeepIron

Oh wow! I just caught something I overlooked in the news release, TWO Hobbit films are to be done. The Hobbit and a sequel to the Hobbit.

Dudes! Are we going to see The Simarillion as the sequel? I hope so! The Simarillion is the history of Middle Earth BEFORE the Hobbit!

</rubs hands in glee>

I doubt they would make the Silmarillion into a movie. It would probably be 7 hours long... I'm pretty sure they're just breaking The Hobbit into two different parts, which is great because it means more details and less things cut out .

[Reaves]

I don't know if it will need breaking up. It's a small book, probably half of one of the LOTR's books.

-That's about half as long as the fellowship of the ring... Maybe a bit longer, but I think a 3 hour movie would be enough. Maybe they want 2 'normal' length films instead of the long epics/bad for cinema style that LOTR were.

I only saw one in the cinema because I couldn't sit that long without a toilet or smoke break. I do have the extended versions of all of them though.


-I have hairy feet like a hobbit.

[DeepIron]

The Simarillion would indeed be difficult to translate to film... and as Reaves points out, difficult enough now just to read. Still, as a die hard Tolkien reader, I find the notion interesting.

[Peto]

Originally Posted by DeepIron

You might keep an eye on this site: http://www.theonering.net/ they usually have the scoop on LOTR news and such.

I haven't run across anything yet about the location. I too hope it'll be NZ!

I'm hoping for Wisconsin .