Guillermo Del Toro departs “The Hobbit”

[devilof76]

Josh...

...what is it that makes me want to keep disagreeing with you, even after CAhobbit nearly had me won over?

 

[pixletwin]

Thats why we call him THE Josh.

 

[Sachiel]

I agree. I don't get it.

Yeah.

They're both fantasy, but... they're completely different from each other.

Comparing them this much is just...

 

[Blu Falcon]

LOTR FTW.

 

[Fritz]

With all this talk of Del Toro and Pan's Labyrinth, I've just realized I don't have it on bluray. I'm going to have to resolve that.

Hey Guillermo, if we keep buying your stuff, will you change your mind and stay with the Hobbit? Please! That is of course unless PJ ends up doing it then thanks for all your help!

Also to Sir Ian McKellen, will you please stop getting older so you're able to play Gandalf when MGM is ready in 15 years?

 

[FrodoEyes]

I like LOTR..... but then i also like PL...... but which is best?


There's only one way to find out!!




FIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHHTTTTTT!!!!!!!

 

[Anubis]

 

[The Josh]

Josh...

...what is it that makes me want to keep disagreeing with you, even after CAhobbit nearly had me won over?

I don't know. Can't help ya with that.

Thats why we call him THE Josh.

 

[theguru1]

Right... that had nothing to with the fact that Gollum isn't even in FotR and yet is a main player in the remaining two books. If you are going to comment at least please think about what you are saying.

hmmm, and when was the last time you watched Fellowship of the Ring?
You see him at least twice, a side on view with him sitting on a rock over water with the ring and again in Moria, when he pops his head up after Frodo and Gandalf talk about being followed, Frodo saying he wished Bilbo had killed him and Gandalf saying not to be so quick to dish out death. That Gollum still had some part to play in the whole fate of Middle Earth.

They were very short shot's, based on very early models, etc and he was totally re-made for TTT. The difference is night and day. Can't remember if he was there in the original cinema version, since I've only ever watched the extended version since, but he sure as hell is there.
So please, think three times before you comment on a comment

 

[creature4000]

I fully agree with you there, Josh. I could watch LOTR over and over and never tire of it. Each times it moves me as much as the first.

Pan's, I greatly enjoyed....but it just didn't have the same impact on me emotionally as LOTR. Could be because I was already familiar with the LOTR material and it was great seeing how my vision after reading the books, was so similar to what PJ gave us. It was a project of such enormous scale and PJ delivered.

I agree... I don't own PL because I won't be watching it over and over.
LOTR FTW!

 

[OSCORP]

Are people actually defending LOTR in here? LOL! The movies are epic masterpieces, no need!!

 

[pixletwin]

Are people actually defending LOTR in here? LOL! The movies are epic masterpieces, no need!!

Agreed. I think it's just strait thinking members laughing at the people crying sacrilege.

Us -->

Them -->

 

[OSCORP]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zx9guuQQaeI&feature=related

 

[The Josh]

Agreed. I think it's just strait thinking members laughing at the people crying sacrilege.

Us -->

Them -->

I'm not crying thats for sure and I very much consider myself a strait thinking member (whatever that is supposed to mean). Just simply stating a point that I disagreed with the thought PL was better than LOTR. Figured a little discussion on a discussion board was a good thing.

 

[YoNoSe]

GDT is pretty much my favorite filmmaker but I have watched Fellowship many more times than I will probably ever watch PL. I consider PL a better film but just not as repeatable.

My only gripe in this thread was the implication that GDT isn't up to snuff to direct a LOTR movie. I would argue that his current filmography is far more impressive than Jackson's pre-LOTR work, and a much clearer indicator that he could direct big-budget fantasy.

At this point they're both A-list. I'd prefer they both be directing original material and pass the Hobbit on to someone hungry to prove themself.

 

[theosboob]

PJ

 

[hairlesswookiee]

My only gripe in this thread was the implication that GDT isn't up to snuff to direct a LOTR movie. I would argue that his current filmography is far more impressive than Jackson's pre-LOTR work, and a much clearer indicator that he could direct big-budget fantasy.

YES. Agree with this statement do I. Before LOTR, I had never heard of anything Jackson worked on besides the Frighteners and Bad Taste (That's not saying he didn't do anything, but I just never heard of anything he did before that was particularly spectacular).

 

[Maglor]

Pan's Labyrinth didn't hit you emotionally? I don't understand.

Made me cry. LOTR did not.

Heh, I pretty much cry through all of LOTR.

All that stuck with me from PL is the wine bottle bludgeoning scene.

(For some reason I can't stand that kind of violence... even though I'm a horror movie buff.)

It isn't a matter of personal preference. It's a matter of recognizing potency in cinematic expression...

It's both.

You're probably right.

I respond very strongly to tragedies based in the history of the early 20th century. I hold the late 19th century as one of the highest points in all of human culture; even higher than Golden Age Greece in many regards. There was a hope and optimism blooming that had never before been possible, or believed possible. It was like all of the most beautiful fairy tales were coming to life in the industrialized world (regardless of the way it is depicted today). Then it all changed, and it changed so hard and fast that no one understood (don't understand to this day) why or how it could all go to hell so completely and so brutally. It was Mahler's 9th in real time. One moment Einstein was expounding relativity, the next moment, swastikas were covering Europe. It's the emotional palette that Tolkien worked from, but he separated his story from the history so that it could stand on its own. Pan's Labyrinth is set fully in that history, so it hits me much harder. The emotional impact is more acute because it's that much more real to me, being as heavily invested in that time period as I am.

^^^^^

This post says a lot. We are all moved by art that we can relate to. You have strong feelings about that time in history.

I personally couldn't relate to that.

The subtexts of LOTR resonate with me very deeply. Especially the ideas about loyalty and sacrifice.

 

[Sachiel]

https://newboards.theonering.net/fo...ew_threaded;post=261703;sb=post_time;so=DESC;

 

[OSCORP]

IMO he doesn't have the commitment fine, his prerogative.([FONT=verdana,helevetica]My commitment to the project demanded enormous sacrifices both in personal and professional terms. The consequences of which will ripple for years. [/FONT]") But then i don't want him, i want someone that does, and is willing to sacrifice it all)