NOT GOOD: New Line's Bob Shaye on PJ

[FrodoEyes]

If New Line make a bad Hobbit movie with no PJ, Weta etc....

"I wish this film had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened."

"So do all who live to see such films but that is not for us to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the film that is given to us. There are other films in this world besides ones made with evil studios. Peter Jackson was MEANT to make this film, which means we also were MEANT to see it. And that is an encouraging thought."

 

[goliath]

 

[carbo-fation]

That's hilarious!! Well done FrodoEyes!

 

[FlyAndFight]

If New Line make a bad Hobbit movie with no PJ, Weta etc....

"I wish this film had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened."

"So do all who live to see such films but that is not for us to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the film that is given to us. There are other films in this world besides ones made with evil studios. Peter Jackson was MEANT to make this film, which means we also were MEANT to see it. And that is an encouraging thought."

That was classic!

 

[Bodie The Cursed]

Just make the movie.. Its based on an epic tale by Tolkien.. If they stick to that it will be just fine.. PJ is overrated..

 

[Wor-Gar]

I have to say I wouldn't mind seeing one of these films with faster pacing and less dramatic 'milking'.

 

[pjam]

Well, PJ may have lost some of his edge, I mean he blew Kong (certainly in the Studios eyes) and anyone who can blow Kong loses points with me, it was a huge disappointment for me.

 

[The Josh]

I don't think PJ is overrated. That's kind of funny to read actually. I'd list him as one of the better directors out there bar none.

I also thought Kong was pretty good. Not great but pretty good. It was a different twist which is fine with me since I didn't want a direct retelling of the 1933 version.

 

[pixletwin]

I just hope PJ doens't get locked into the mentality that all of his projects deserve to be 3+ hours.

 

[abake]

I also believe Jackson is overrated.
He's a great director, no denying that, one of the best indeed, but not that good.
He tends to be overly melodramatic.

 

[Protozaius]

PJ has been overrated in the past... only by over-zealous LOTR fans that think that their "leader" can do no wrong. That line of thinking lead many a Lucas boot licker to slaughter when The Phantom Menace came out. :maul

But in the end, you have two talented directors that have had their great films and not so great films. That is all. The success (or lack there of) of King Kong just grounded PJ... humanized him if you will. His love for the Kong project blinded him from seeing the movie more clearly.

It is said that a director should NEVER be given the opportunity to direct their pet project. I tend to agree.

 

[WrathofSauron]

I agree with Proto here but I do think that the feel and style of direction that PJ brought to LOTR will be hard to beat and at this point we almost expect the Hobbit to be filmed with that same style and feel, otherwise instead of it being an extension or continuation of LOTR it will come across as a completely separate entity. I hope I'm wrong and that it actually betters LOTR but I really don't see it happening that way! Anyway its PF not PJ time this weekend at Toyfair woo hoo!!!!

 

[tomandshell]

PJ is a talented and visionary director--but with LOTR, so much of what made the films so powerful was right there on the page courtesy of Tolkien. If you combine his cinematic sensibilities with such fantastic source material, you get a classic like the Lord of the Rings trilogy. But combine that same sweeping cinematic scale and epic pacing with a lesser story and you run the risk of creating an overwrought and pretentious misfire. In my opinion, King Kong was not a failure--but it was not a classic on the same level of LOTR. PJ needs to reign himself in and get past the idea that every story he tells needs to be a three hour long "epic movie feast" extravaganza.

If every meal was an epic feast, you would end up a bloated corpse. Sometimes it's nice to just have a great meal that leaves you hungry for dessert. We were all dying to see the extended versions of the LOTR films. Not too many people cared about an extended King Kong--we felt it was long enough to begin with.

Let's see what he does with Lovely Bones...

 

[RoboDad]

I agree with Proto here but I do think that the feel and style of direction that PJ brought to LOTR will be hard to beat and at this point we almost expect the Hobbit to be filmed with that same style and feel, otherwise instead of it being an extension or continuation of LOTR it will come across as a completely separate entity. I hope I'm wrong and that it actually betters LOTR but I really don't see it happening that way! Anyway its PF not PJ time this weekend at Toyfair woo hoo!!!!

Yes and no. One of the things that is commonly overlooked is just how much of a collaborative effort film making is. Certainly Jackson has a distinctive style to his direction, but other factors, such as cinematography, costuming, effects, and such could all be very similar, assuming that those same people (e.g., Weta) could be involved.

 

[Darklord Dave]

Remember that Tolkien has been translated into film in a spectacularly bad way and again a ho-hum kiddie TV way. It took PJ and Weta to really make it sing on screen.

 

[PosterBoyKelly]

PJ has been overrated in the past... only by over-zealous LOTR fans that think that their "leader" can do no wrong. That line of thinking lead many a Lucas boot licker to slaughter when The Phantom Menace came out. :maul

But in the end, you have two talented directors that have had their great films and not so great films. That is all. The success (or lack there of) of King Kong just grounded PJ... humanized him if you will. His love for the Kong project blinded him from seeing the movie more clearly.

It is said that a director should NEVER be given the opportunity to direct their pet project. I tend to agree.

I agree with most of that, except I think PJ went UNDERRATED for WAAAAYYYY too long. I was a huge Feebles and Bad Taste fan for years before the very different Heavenly Creatures and LOTR.

I think King Kong was ok, but got sour after all the action. I just don't get emotion from a giant computer effect, just me.

I also think directors should be able to do their pet projects, it MIGHT be ok, but who cares if it sucks, it's not like I spent my time and money on making it.

But overall, he needed to be grounded, hopefully he gets back in gear and gives us some more goods soon.

 

[Darth Waller]

If every meal was an epic feast, you would end up a bloated corpse.

Or you'd end up like this guy:

 

[Protozaius]

PJ is a talented and visionary director--but with LOTR, so much of what made the films so powerful was right there on the page courtesy of Tolkien. If you combine his cinematic sensibilities with such fantastic source material, you get a classic like the Lord of the Rings trilogy. But combine that same sweeping cinematic scale and epic pacing with a lesser story and you run the risk of creating an overwrought and pretentious misfire. In my opinion, King Kong was not a failure--but it was not a classic on the same level of LOTR. PJ needs to reign himself in and get past the idea that every story he tells needs to be a three hour long "epic movie feast" extravaganza.

If every meal was an epic feast, you would end up a bloated corpse. Sometimes it's nice to just have a great meal that leaves you hungry for dessert. We were all dying to see the extended versions of the LOTR films. Not too many people cared about an extended King Kong--we felt it was long enough to begin with.

Let's see what he does with Lovely Bones...

Elequently stated... gee... I wish I said that.

 

[gideon]

For the last fifty years I have been an observer of film. I enjoy all type of films and have made an effort to learn about film history, film economics and the nature of the business. It only enlarges your appreciation of what happens on the screen if you also have some appreciation of what goes on before it gets there.

I wonder if people really know what a long shot it is to have a hit film. A hit film meaning a film that makes a great profit for its studio..... or perhaps we should define it as a hit film that is nearly universally praised by professional critics .... or perhaps we should define a hit as a film that gets the adulation of its peers through the annual awards given out for such things. Usually one cancels out the other. While most films do indeed lose money lots of films have made money for their owners. Some films get great reviews. A few lucky films are blessed with major awards like Best FIlm of the Year from the Motion Picture Academy. How many of the same films get all three in a trifecta?

Consider what Peter Jackson accomplished with the three LOTR films. All three cracked the Top Ten grossing films as measured by international dollars according to the stats on boxofficemojo.com. One of them, ROTK is only the second film to pass the billion dollar level and is still #2 on the list. TTT is in the Top Five and FOTR only recently was pushed out of the top TEN. That is success like no other three films by any director in the history of film.

The three films recieved nearly totally positive reviews by the people who are paid to do that for a living. We are just not talking about rabid fanboys who think that watching a bloody slasher film is even better than sex - these are the opinions of professionals. Funny that their "elite" opinion was shared by the ticket buying public.

And then the films get dozens of Academy Award nominations, and win some 17 including Best Film. ROTK swept all eleven categories it was nominated for. No other film has done that in history. Other awards like the BAFTA's and Golden Globes and others are also on the shelf of Jackson and company.

Such a trifecta - the same three films having such great success by three different measurements - by one director has never been accomplished in the 100 year history of film.

So before we write off Mr. Jackson in favor of the current flavor of the month or dismiss his contribution to the success of the LOTR films, perhaps a little sobering reflection on the actual record is in order.

 

[goliath]

Very well said, Gideon!

And to the board!