Hobbit delayed by a year?

[Bêthberry]

This dirge for the fantasy film genre overlooks the success of Pan's Laybrinth.

[davem]

Yes, but....Pan's Labyrinth cost $19m & has grossed $83,258,226 to date.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...slabyrinth.htm

Good return, but not on the LotR scale, or what would be expected of TH. If TH could be done on the same scale, with the same budget & if the same profit was acceptable to the studios it would be a different matter. However, I suspect that Warner would like to see something along the lines of RotK http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...noftheking.htm

a $94m budget producing a $1,119,110,941 gross ...

[Morthoron]

Hmmm...I have a gut feeling that The Hobbit will do just as well as LotR, whatever the domestic concern for the fantasy movie genre. Perhaps the wisest thing that was done was keeping Peter Jackson on as producer, but getting Del Toro as director. This brings in the Hellboy/Pan's Labyrinth coterie of DT devotees, as well as maintain the Frodo freaks and Lego-lusters from PJ's movies. There's a whole legion of fans of the movies who never even read the books (or are incapable of reading at all, for that matter), and then there are bitter old curmudgeons like me who had real issues with the LotR movies, but will go and see TH anyway, and then bitch about it later.

It'll do fine.

[Sauron the White]

I suspect that in the end, HOBBIT will be a bit more serious than some here would like.... it will be a bit more action oriented than some here would like ... it will have far less of the peculiar JRRT humor than some here would like ... and it will be devoid of the many songs that so many here would like.

And I suspect that it will look far too much like a LOTR film - Middle-Earth Part IV (or I) than many here will like.

And it will make scads of money, be very well recieved by the general public and set up the other move quite nicely thank you.

Trends - be they fantasy films or any other - do not apply here. What does apply is that the LOTR films were a huge success by almost any scale of measurement and most of that public is still around ready to purchase yet again. In fact, it is well that no other big fantasy film has stolen the spotlight from Middle-earth making the hunger for it only sharper over the intervening years.

We will get Ian McKellan as Gandalf again. We will get Gollum again. We get hobbits and dwarves and elves and all will be right with the world as long as that world contains the Shire and Rivendell and a few other spots. If it has enough to be familiar and make people feel confortable, then that is all that is needed.

Jackson as producer will give it enough continuinity to make it acceptable to the film fans who identify him with the franchise. And franchise it is. Del Toro brings his own street cred and abilities and it will give the film enough of a new look to avoid sequelitis.

Have faith.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

And it will make scads of money, be very well recieved by the general public and set up the other move quite nicely thank you.

I seem to recall some exec at Disney saying much the same re Prince Caspian.....& at New Line re Golden Compass.

Personally, I'm gonna wait & see....

[Sauron the White]

from davem

I seem to recall some exec at Disney saying much the same re Prince Caspian.....& at New Line re Golden Compass.

Of course executives are always going to trumpet their next releases in that fashion. The big difference however is that both the Narnia series and Compass had no cinematic track record to base anything on like the LOTR films give us in speculating about HOBBIT.

To this day I think one of the reasons CASPIAN had lesser monies than the first in the series is that the first NARNIA movie cashed in on positive LOTR fever. A portion of those people who bought tickets left the theater unsatisfied and did not go back for CASPIAN - even though many said it was a better and more adult film.

Obviously, anything can still happen. But if I could buy stock in the two Middle-earth films, I would gladly do so. Its as close to a sure thing as there is in the business of expensive film making.

[davem]

The TH movie (& sequel) will be as successful as it is close to the LotR movies - which will mean being quite far from the original book - & that's what I've been arguing for a good while. Almost no-one seems to want to see Tolkien's original story on screen - what they want is 'another LotR movie' & would thus prefer to see the proposed second movie,which will include many of the LotR characters, than Tolkien's story, which will not.

To this day I think one of the reasons CASPIAN had lesser monies than the first in the series is that the first NARNIA movie cashed in on positive LOTR fever. A portion of those people who bought tickets left the theater unsatisfied and did not go back for CASPIAN - even though many said it was a better and more adult film.

My feeling is that LWW was successful because it created (or recreated from the book) a fairytale world, & that the sequel (leaving aside its dubious morality - children killing without qualm or adverse psychological effect) was standard fantasy fare with little connection to the original story. A TH movie will suffer far more from that problem than the proposed sequel will.

EDIT http://www.startribune.com/entertain...D3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

Moviegoers have become accustomed to the "no animals were harmed" disclaimer at the end of movies. Now comes one for a new age: "The depictions of tobacco smoking contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote tobacco consumption." Warner Bros. also adds, at the end of "Gran Torino," among other films, that no tobacco companies paid for product placement*.

I think Bilbo's pipe will probably just go...

(*What next - "The depictions of killing contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote shooting people. No gun manufacturers paid for product placement"?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Have faith.

Wasn't it Bertrand Russell who suggested that people resort to faith only when logic or evidence fails?

Frankly, I'll reserve my faith for a more reliable object, as I'm not sure what recompense PJ can offer me or what awakening would be possible from his works.