Posted on 07/21/2008 8:17:12 PM PDT by Oyarsa
Del Toro refuses to copy Jackson July 19th, 2008 by xoanon | Discuss
From Maxim and World Entertainment News: Guillermo Del Toro has promised Lord Of The Rings fans his franchise prequel The Hobbit will be very different from his directing predecessor Peter Jackson. Jackson directed the three original films, but has given up his director’s chair for Del Toro. But Del Toro has refused to follow in Jackson’s footsteps, vowing to give movie fans something new. He tells Maxim magazine, “If I thought it was about following (Jackson), I wouldn’t be doing it this way. “It’s a matter of raising on it. I think The Hobbit has a peculiar sprit in relation to not only the trilogy, but also to Tolkein’s work. “It’ll have respect for what’s been done, but also its own individuality.”
Uh-oh. Two words: “Ralph Bakshi.” Different isn’t always better.
pingage
That is true, but considering how Jackson butchered the book, in the areas of
1) Changing major plot points
2) Changing characters’ motivations and personalities and
3) Changing the story’s theme
there’s not much Del Toro could do that would be worse...
The Hobbit IS different in spirit in relation to the trilogy. More focus on the individual (Bilbo), not as "dark" and militaristic--at least that's my recollection (although it's been a few years since I've read them). But of course there's a lot that they have in common.
It's probably a good idea not to stray TOO far from Jackson's vision and style, which worked very well.
I'm still hoping for James McAvoy as Bilbo.
I myself loved the books, and I also enjoyed the movies.
The Hobbit, though, was a charming little adventure story with only faint echoes of the true depths of Middle Earth. It's like splashing in the shallows and thinking you have it all in hand and then, all of a sudden, about three chapters into the Fellowship the bottom drops out and you realize that the waters are very deep indeed. And pure. And that it's a long, long way to shore.
I’m definitely cool with this. Prior to ‘King Kong’ I may have been disappointed, but not now.
That movie changed everything. Unwatchable.
And then you read the Silmarillion...
Excellent Contrast!
Indeed!
“It’s probably a good idea not to stray TOO far from Jackson’s vision and style, which worked very well.”
In terms of characters, plot and theme, Jackson showed great disregard for Tolkien’s masterpiece.
In one of his letters, Tolkien ripped apart a guy who wanted to make MINOR changes for a film; Tolkien probably would have challenged Jackson to a duel when he first saw the script.
“...and didn’t really understand the point of the whole thing in cutting the Scouring Of The Shire.”
That’s easy; the Scouring of the Shire is Tolkien’s assault on socialism. We can’t have THAT in a movie, now can we?
” didn’t really understand the point of the whole thing in cutting the Scouring Of The Shire”
Easy. We can’t have the audience realizing that Tolkien showed the hobbits removing socialists from power, can we?
I have heard that, in the two movies, they will do more to set up LOTR (ie Sauron’s return to Mordor). Most of this plot is only hinted at in LOTR Appendices and the Silmarillion. Looking forward to that part especially.
The purists will never be satisfied, and they don't seem to understand that you can't make a trilogy of films just for them--the books had to be streamlined, and some hidden socialist agenda wasn't behind that decision.
...BTW, are the pfiffltriggi and sorns and hrossa all getting along?
Cheers!
He also made delibrate changes; he didn't have to emasculate most of the male characters, for instance; he didn't have to make Theoden have similar motivations to Denethor, or Faramir and Boromir (and Merry and Pippin) duplicates of eachother.
He didn't have to have Frodo send Sam away crying. He didn't have to have the Ents refuse to march against Isengard initially.
The point being: Jackson made MANY unnecessary ideological changes in the movie; it would not surprise me in the least of the absence of the Scouring was also ideologically based.
They are indeed, but I see that there are plenty of men like Devine and Weston still in Thulcandra. May the Bent One soon be unmade! :-)
The changes you note are rather minor and, frankly, I don’t see how they “emasculate” the characters you mention. And this kind of obsessiveness to very minor details is something only the real fanatics care about. When reworking characters for the screen, short cuts are always taken; I didn’t see them as ideology-based.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.