Jump to content

The Hobbit Trilogy

Goose

By Goose,
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

Goose

Goose

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Officially the budget for the LOTR Trilogy was $281M but you'll probably find behind the scenes it was actually closer to $400M. That $500M may also include total marketing budget but I doubt it as that's generally a Hollywood mystery (and an eye opening one at that).

$250M per film probably isn't too bad for on location, effects heavy work, in this day and age. Given that LOTR is now a known quantity, The Hobbit stands every chance of being even bigger than the the trilogy was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Hopefully the budget doesn't mean we are looking at more of a ROTK and less of a FOTR.

We're not looking at either, this is The Hobbit.

I don't really get your point. It's not as though Jackson could have scrapped the action set-pieces in The Return Of The King as that's where all the plot strands end and the ultimate fate of Middle Earth is governed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CandyBob

CandyBob

Posted
Posted

Its a question of tone rather than any action that occured.

In comparison to Fellowship, and even to some extent Two Towers, the tone of the film was jazzed up in an alarming manner. It seemed as though CG, which wasn't especially effective even for the time, took presidence over tone. Things that immediately spring to mind are the handling of the Men of Dunharrow and Legolas' exploits with the Oliphants.

The Battle of Helms Deep had the dwarf tossing humour to it, which I didn't like, but could see that the siege of Helms Deep needed some light relief for anyone not familiar with it.

I think Fellowship was almost spot on, after getting over the Arwen at the Ford change and the exclusion of Bombadil. The Lorien section was probably the only weak point. TTT is regarding as the most slow paced of the books but again, it was kept pretty much in tone with the book. Seeing ROTK after the first two was almost Disneyesque.

We're not looking at either, this is The Hobbit.

I don't really get your point. It's not as though Jackson could have scrapped the action set-pieces in The Return Of The King as that's where all the plot strands end and the ultimate fate of Middle Earth is governed.

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Ah, I get what you're saying. Fellowship was easily my favourite as it kept more closely to the structure of the book than the other two, whereas The Two Towers and Return Of The King mixed things up to allow for more conventional movie climaxes to the action.

I guess they had to hammer the CG once the battles were kicking off all around te place and Frodo and Sam were closing in on Sauron's gaff.

I can't really see any other way they can do the hobbit either though, as it moves around at a pretty fast pace to some fantastical locations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Well yeah, it's not just the battle of the five armies which will require heavy CG. what about Beorn, or the trolls, or the wood elves, or Lake Town, or Smaug, etc.

If anything I think The Hobbit is packed with more fantasy scenarios than the whole of Lord Of The Rings, although it's been a while since I've read it, but that was my original point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CandyBob

CandyBob

Posted
Posted

The CG was very good when used well. It's difficult to criticise Gollum for example for the time. Although you can see the seams a bit in Moria it was still very well done. I have nothing against CG, as long as it used correctly.

I was fit to bursting before seeing Fellowship and it won't be any different here regardless of how I felt about ROTK. Martin Freeman has the potential to be a fantastic bit of casting.

What do we think will be cut? Seeing as it is two films I hope we get mostly everything. Spiders and Trolls obviously and hopefully Beorn and Bard to. I'd like to see a slow build up at the start to get to know all of the dwarves and it will be good to see McKellan back as Gandalf the Grey. Didn't like his Gandalf the White although I guess GTW was always supposed to be more distant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

That's exactly what I'm hoping. Seeing as it's two films and I can imagine they'll have running times similar to Lord Of The Rings, I don't see why they'd have to cut anything.

So if this is starting filming early next year, when is it due for release? Christmas 2012?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chosty

Chosty

Posted
Posted

If anything I think The Hobbit is packed with more fantasy scenarios than the whole of Lord Of The Rings, although it's been a while since I've read it, but that was my original point.

Hmm, not sure about that. LOTR has more epic set pieces, but perhaps there are more smaller skirmishes in the Hobbit: the Mirkwood spiders, the trolls, the wargs, the goblins in the (Misty Mountain?) cave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goose

Goose

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That's exactly what I'm hoping. Seeing as it's two films and I can imagine they'll have running times similar to Lord Of The Rings, I don't see why they'd have to cut anything.

So if this is starting filming early next year, when is it due for release? Christmas 2012?

Christmas 2012 and Christmas 2013.

Don't forget, there's still talking a bridging section between Hobbit 2 and Fellowship. Whether that's all still in place I don't know but at one point it was -

Film 1 - The Hobbit

Film 2 - Bridging Film

Then it became

Film 1 - The Hobbit Pt1

Film 2 - The Hobbit Pt2

Then there was talk of the second film being partly Hobbit, partly bridging film. No idea where it's at now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Hmm, not sure about that. LOTR has more epic set pieces, but perhaps there are more smaller skirmishes in the Hobbit: the Mirkwood spiders, the trolls, the wargs, the goblins in the (Misty Mountain?) cave.

Yeah, that's what I meant. Lord Of The Rings does have far bigger battles, but The Hobbit has a lot of things that couldn't be pulled off without plenty of CG, probably moreso than LOTR.

Anyway, the budget seems like he'll be able to do it proper justice. So fingers crossed they keep as close to the book as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A Hen

A Hen

Posted
Posted

Yeah, that's what I meant. Lord Of The Rings does have far bigger battles, but The Hobbit has a lot of things that couldn't be pulled off without plenty of CG, probably moreso than LOTR.

Anyway, the budget seems like he'll be able to do it proper justice. So fingers crossed they keep as close to the book as possible.

To be honest, I thought the battles in the LOTR films were rubbish. Not the CGI, which was fine, but the actual way the battles played out. Knowing a bit but about military strategy/tactics just made me think the forces of good were suicidal idiots (whose only "strategy" was to yell "charge!") who only won due to pure luck and/or the Orcs being rubbish at fighting; I'm not sure this was the intention. Hopefully a film with largely smaller fights will be more convincing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
c-cat114

c-cat114

Posted
Posted

To be honest, I thought the battles in the LOTR films were rubbish. Not the CGI, which was fine, but the actual way the battles played out. Knowing a bit but about military strategy/tactics just made me think the forces of good were suicidal idiots (whose only "strategy" was to yell "charge!") who only won due to pure luck and/or the Orcs being rubbish at fighting; I'm not sure this was the intention. Hopefully a film with largely smaller fights will be more convincing.

Holy Cats you must have a stomach lining balloon elephant when watching RTD era Dr Who or Torchwood. Audience: I wonder what the plan is to get out of this one. Doctor: actually I'm going to grab a gun, jump out of a plane, fall to the ground on shard of razor sharp glass, black out and then think of something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
A Hen

A Hen

Posted
Posted

Holy Cats you must have a stomach lining balloon elephant when watching RTD era Dr Who or Torchwood. Audience: I wonder what the plan is to get out of this one. Doctor: actually I'm going to grab a gun, jump out of a plane, fall to the ground on shard of razor sharp glass, black out and then think of something...

Well, sure, but plenty of people diss RTD's Who for that reason. Whereas no-one seems to complain about the LOTR films, when it contains such gems as calvalry charging directly into blocks of pikemen with presented pikes (who are several, if not dozens of, ranks deep), and then not only surviving, but decimating the pikemen. I can kind of understand them getting away with that, because the audience probably aren't au fair with historical military tactics... but then surely some of them ride horses?

But the real classic that I can't believe anyone took seriously was at the gates of Mordor - the gates open, and our heroes, instead of charging the enemy (for once, this would be a good time to rush the enemy, as they file through the relatively narrow gateway), on this occasion choose to stand and watch for several minutes looking worried while the vastly more numerous enemy army walks out of the gates, and surrounds them. Once the enemy army has taken up its massively advantageous position, there's a pause, before Aragorn puts his brilliant plan into action: "chaaaaaarrrrrge!". :facepalm:

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CandyBob

CandyBob

Posted
Posted

Well, sure, but plenty of people diss RTD's Who for that reason. Whereas no-one seems to complain about the LOTR films, when it contains such gems as calvalry charging directly into blocks of pikemen with presented pikes (who are several, if not dozens of, ranks deep), and then not only surviving, but decimating the pikemen. I can kind of understand them getting away with that, because the audience probably aren't au fair with historical military tactics... but then surely some of them ride horses?

But the real classic that I can't believe anyone took seriously was at the gates of Mordor - the gates open, and our heroes, instead of charging the enemy (for once, this would be a good time to rush the enemy, as they file through the relatively narrow gateway), on this occasion choose to stand and watch for several minutes looking worried while the vastly more numerous enemy army walks out of the gates, and surrounds them. Once the enemy army has taken up its massively advantageous position, there's a pause, before Aragorn puts his brilliant plan into action: "chaaaaaarrrrrge!". :facepalm:

Didn't the Sun rise behind Gandalf which momentarily blinded the Orcs, causing them to raise their spears? Even so I see your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pete

Pete

Posted
Posted

Yeah the sun blinds the pikeman. And horses jumping into pikeman looks cool, which is more what pete jackson is concerned about.

As for cuts I don't really see what they can loose if they are dragging it out over two films. Maybe tom bombadil will get a nod?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redbloodcell

redbloodcell

Posted
Posted

Didn't the Sun rise behind Gandalf which momentarily blinded the Orcs, causing them to raise their spears? Even so I see your point.

Yes

And horses jumping into pikeman looks cool, which is more what pete jackson is concerned about.

Yes

As for the other bit, its not about beating the enemy army as they know they don't stand a snowball's chance in Mount Doom (lol), its about getting the entire army out of Mordor so that Sam and Frodo have a clear path so they can destroy the Ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CandyBob

CandyBob

Posted
Posted

I've not seen him in anything that suggests he has the capability to play anything other than himself, he's incredibly one-note. I want to see someone I can believe is Bilbo, not Martin Freeman Pretending To Be A Hobbit. Still, I have some faith Jackson can get what's needed out of him, if anyone can.

I used to think much the same but things like Micro Men and Nightwatching suggest there may be something. Primarily though it is just the look I am going for at the moment. He looks like he would make a good Hobbit visually, hopefully there will be more to him.

Actually I think if he was an unknown Martin Freeman, being Martin Freeman playing Bilbo, he would be great. He has that about him. It's just that now he is so ingrained as being Tim, and doing some pretty dodgy stuff since the Office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept