this year's Xmas movie?


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

this year's Xmas movie?

Postby gh » Fri Sep 07, 2012 8:47 am

gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Conor Dary » Fri Sep 07, 2012 8:53 am

Looking forward to that. And coming out on the 101st anniversary of Amundsen getting to the South Pole, December 14.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby DrJay » Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:15 am

Kinda pisses me off...he takes TWO movies to tell a simple children's tale but only three to cover the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy. The latter could have taken two films per book.
DrJay
 
Posts: 5485
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Marlow » Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:44 am

Peter Jackson will make a very good movie, but The Hobbit, compared to the LotR trilogy, was a mediocre book.

I can't wait for November's Bond flick, Skyfall.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21130
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby gh » Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:19 pm

DrJay wrote:Kinda pisses me off...he takes TWO movies to tell a simple children's tale but only three to cover the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy. The latter could have taken two films per book.


You make it sound like it's Jackson's fault. He deserves nothing but praise for somehow finding the funding to make the trilogy into the expanded 3-movie epic it is. We're lucky we didn't end up with the whole thing condensed into one 2-hour schlockfest.

So now we can revel in the fact that he's got the juice to take a shorter piece and cover it at leisure.

Although I can't say I'm too thrilled to see that the cast of characters includes Frodo, Saruman, Galadriel and Legolas, among others who never existed in the book. I can understand a bit of artistic license, but c'mon!



(favorite stat about the making of LOTR: a year before they had shot the first cel of film there were already 5000 people on the payroll!)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Cooter Brown » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:06 am

It's actually including a lot of material that's in other sources other than The Hobbit but that occur during the same timeline so that's why it has expanded to 3 movies. Sorry, not a Tolkien geek, so I can't remember what the name of those short stories are.
Cooter Brown
 
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Austin

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Conor Dary » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:15 am

gh wrote:
DrJay wrote:Kinda pisses me off...he takes TWO movies to tell a simple children's tale but only three to cover the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy. The latter could have taken two films per book.


You make it sound like it's Jackson's fault. He deserves nothing but praise for somehow finding the funding to make the trilogy into the expanded 3-movie epic it is. We're lucky we didn't end up with the whole thing condensed into one 2-hour schlockfest.


I had the same thought too. It wasn't like Jackson was that big of a kingpin then.

I thought the 3 movies were fine. Having read all 3 books a few times, Jackson got the main plots of the books.

If you want a more fuller dramatization, I can highly recommend the 13 disc BBC audio version from 1985. Great stuff.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Lord-Rings-BB ... +audiobook
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Halfmiler2 » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:14 pm

I just heard that the Hobbit will be three movies instead of two. Two points:

Have they indicated how long each movie will be? Three hours year like the RIngs trilogy or the more common movie length of 1.5 to 2 hours?

Are they really going to make us wait three Decembers to see the whole thing ? I'd much rather they go with a December-July-December timeline.
Halfmiler2
 
Posts: 1641
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby gh » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:17 pm

Halfmiler2 wrote:...
Are they really going to make us wait three Decembers to see the whole thing ? I'd much rather they go with a December-July-December timeline.


Why would any studio be silly enough to blow the econmics of it by having its own movie competing against each other (not only in the theaters, but also for DVD/TV considerations). To say nothing of marketing merchandise and fighting for post-season honors.

This is a tightly integrated business venture, not an attempt to please hardcore movie viewers.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Halfmiler2 » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:25 pm

I am not sure the economics would work that way in this instance. On the screen, even if it is a hit (such as the Avengers this year), it is not getting much box office by 5 or 6 months. But if you release the DVD a month before the next episode, it will encourage some people to buy it immediately to see the movie again before the next episode comes out.

As for awards, The Hobbit will probably only get them at the end of the trilogy.
Halfmiler2
 
Posts: 1641
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby DrJay » Mon Sep 10, 2012 3:33 pm

Overly strong post I made came in the middle of a busy, slightly surly day at work. I'd love to have seen each of the LOTR books made into five hours or more of film, not leaving out any scenes, like Fog on the Barrow-downs, the Scouring of the Shire, etc. My favorite movie/mini series is Lonesome Dove, because it's so true to the book, practically down to every sniffle and fart. I know that's not realistic for an epic-epic like LOTR, plus, the Lonesome Dove characters and scenes were smaller in scope and number, just a bunch of cowboys, cattle, horses, Indians, sage, and tumbleweeds, so production costs much less.
DrJay
 
Posts: 5485
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby lonewolf » Mon Sep 10, 2012 3:42 pm

I loved Lonesome Dove too. My paternal grandfather would have blended into that movie without benefit of makeup or wardrobe.
And, my maternal grandfather could have been one of them pesky Injins.. :)
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8816
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby gh » Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:19 pm

DrJay wrote:Overly strong post I made came in the middle of a busy, slightly surly day at work. I'd love to have seen each of the LOTR books made into five hours or more of film, not leaving out any scenes, like Fog on the Barrow-downs, the Scouring of the Shire,....


Good call! Those close to my two favorite chapters in the whole she-bang... horridly disappointing that neither made it into the movie. Although I do buy Jackson's assertion that as wondrous as the whole Tom Bombadil aspect of things is, it's not really germane to the development of the movie as a whole.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Halfmiler2 » Mon Sep 10, 2012 6:42 pm

gh wrote:
DrJay wrote:Overly strong post I made came in the middle of a busy, slightly surly day at work. I'd love to have seen each of the LOTR books made into five hours or more of film, not leaving out any scenes, like Fog on the Barrow-downs, the Scouring of the Shire,....


Good call! Those close to my two favorite chapters in the whole she-bang... horridly disappointing that neither made it into the movie. Although I do buy Jackson's assertion that as wondrous as the whole Tom Bombadil aspect of things is, it's not really germane to the development of the movie as a whole.


While I understand that they could not do a whole scene with Tom Bombadil, I think they could have made a passing reference to him in the first movie instead of ignoring him completely.
Halfmiler2
 
Posts: 1641
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby Halfmiler2 » Mon Sep 10, 2012 6:46 pm

Halfmiler2 wrote:I am not sure the economics would work that way in this instance. On the screen, even if it is a hit (such as the Avengers this year), it is not getting much box office by 5 or 6 months. But if you release the DVD a month before the next episode, it will encourage some people to buy it immediately to see the movie again before the next episode comes out.

As for awards, The Hobbit will probably only get them at the end of the trilogy.


According to one report, the three movies will be released December-December-July. Not a bad compromise. It keeps them in three different calendar years but makes for a shorter total wait.
Halfmiler2
 
Posts: 1641
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby gh » Tue Sep 11, 2012 6:42 am

Release date(s)
14 December 2012 (An Unexpected Journey)
13 December 2013 (The Desolation of Smaug)
18 July 2014 (There and Back Again)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: this year's Xmas movie?

Postby gh » Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:50 pm

2:20 (that's minutes and seconds) video teaser

http://blog.sfgate.com/culture/2012/09/ ... t-trailer/
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests