seems Peter Jackson didn't get all his money for the LOTR trilogy, sued the studio, and is refusing to work for them... so as a big 'f*** you' they rang him and told him they'll find someone else to make a Hobbit movie...

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=164381

Boo... they'd better not get Lucas in!!!

ah s***, fpot is gonna be in tears

s*** news was hoping he would direct it. bet they will royally f*** the book up now.

What dips***s.

He did a beyond awesome job with LOTR, why would you change even just to spite him?

Because making movies is about making money, and if they have to pay someone more money, that means less money for the studios.

Oh, sorry... too obvious?

Yeah, studios are greedy bitces.

Sadly this does not surprise me, it was pretty well documented the horrible problems they (the creative people and actors) had with NewLine entertainment most of the time LOTR trilogy was being done. At one time the movies (from memory it was the second film) was stalled and might not have even been finished because New Line were refusing to pay the actors a raise. Jackson held fast with them apparntly and they won a little battle in the end. Of course at the Oscars on the night everyone was on their best behaviour thanking Newline for their support blah,blah...when in fact they hated each other vehemently.

Typical f***ing moron studio execs to drop a guy who directs the only other movie in history to win as many Oscars (11) as Ben Hur...what a f***ing gimp. I bet they get Speilberg to make it and it will blow worse than if Lucas dipped his dick into it. fairies and trolls that look lik ET and ewoks. pffft

:(

Err... Spielberg would make a kick-arse flick, cept it would be too emo.

Chris Nolan smashs this f***wit

I bet they get Speilberg to make it and it will blow worse than if Lucas dipped his dick into it. fairies and trolls that look lik ET and ewoks. pffft

I'd put my money on the guy who directed X-Men 3.

"Hey Peter good news and bad news, bad news we aren't paying you for the next Hobbit movie.. good news though we won't have you direct it either"

Excellent, we've been spare of another nerdy movie.

you can read the full story here. I personally rekon it'll suck without Peter Jackson at the helm because i read a while back that a lot of the cast and crew would only go back to do the hobbit if Jackson was directing. If having a different director means having a different cast and crew in this instance, it would be better if that just dropped the idea all together.... but of course there's too much money to be had.

It is interesting about the idea of splitting the hobbit into a 2 parter though.

i doubt anyone would want to direct it, considering the shoes they'll need to fill. seriously, whoever gets the job would have failed before they even started.

this makes me wish uwe boll gets the job, he's the only director who knows how to deal with pages of crying internet nerds.



last edited by Strange Rash at 23:55:06 21/Nov/06

Jews typically prefer accruing money to dispersing it

Jews typically prefer accruing money to dispersing it

And you don't?

it doesn't really bother me even though i liked lotr. coz lotr & the hobbit are way different stories... lotr is epic fantasy & thats the way jackson made it & it was a huge success. the hobbit is a kid's fairy tale & was never meant to be a serious epic like lotr.

it's hardly a problem if they don't use the same cast... there are only 2 or 3 characters that are in both stories.

LOTR should never have been a movie to start with, nothing on screen can ever come close to Tolkien's masterpiece. I can only imagine how badly they will f*** the hobbit, with or without jackson.

Not really a fan, found the whole thing quite boring to be honest, but can still appreciate the awesome work that was put into the films. Seems like it would be a mistake to automatically discount his input just because of a current greivance.

I've still got the Hobbit comic book and it is awesome. Also, gollum was in the Prestige:D

The lotr movies were the only book to movie conversion that is better than the book.

The books were gay. The Tom Bombabil (or whatever) bit for example was one of the most boring and out of place chapters in a story I have ever read. The only thing the movies didn't get 100% right was that they didn't have the re-taking of the shire chapter, which was my favourite part of the book. However, due to time constraints I can see how it would be impossible to add that chapter.

They could have done the shire bit if Jackson didn't add all those half endings to ROTK. About to get up and leave but no, there's more. Finally it's over...ah f***!

That's a shame he did a great job on LOTR.

Yeh no s***, couda totally squeezed a couple of scourings of the shire into those longarse endings.

The characters had been established differently in the movie compared to the book also. In the book they had grown and become warriors but in the movie they were still slightly retarded hobbits.

it's quite obvious that you prefer supermarket trash to real literature fpot

That's impossible because I don't enjoy reading your posts.

What it really boils down to is that I don't really enjoy the fantasy genre in books.

Looks like Jackson is back on board for The Hobbit. Hears hoping things stay on track this time.

Jackson originally given the boot due to legal disputes over royalties now has the thumbs up thanks to film producer Saul Zaentz (One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest).

Zaentz, who owns the screen rights to Tolkien Enterprises, said: "(The Hobbit) will definitely be shot by Peter Jackson.

"Next year, The Hobbit rights will fall back to my company. I suppose that Peter will wait because he knows that he will make the best deal with us. And he is fed up with the studios," he added.

good news

*Edit*
The return of Peter Jackson beat me like a stepchild. Below is just a lot of off-topic crying and a moot point. Enjoy.

I read a s***load, and Fpot hit the nail on the head. I've read many epics, and love the fantasy genre, but I stopped reading at Tom Bombadil. Worst, f***ing, character in the history of anything, ever. If, 2 pages later, he split middle earth in two and rained hell-fire directly onto his own testicles, I would still not regret putting that f***ing thing down. I have the books in a box somewhere and hate them with a passion. They embody everything that I thought would be so good... and turned out so very, very poorly. For me.

On topic I can't see the actors walking off set if they have Spielberg, or some other top-notch director working on it. But what top-notch director would take a job where the previous director is sueing for money he has not received?

last edited by Two&Eight at 22:04:27 29/Nov/06

imo lotr is the kind of book where its only possible to read 1 chapter a week. it took me a year to read it. the hobbit was so much easier to read, i just couldnt put it down. i had to read it for year 7 english and i would read it for about 3 hrs every night before i went to bed. it was actually the book that got me into the fantasy genre.

last edited by ravn0s at 22:45:37 29/Nov/06

Whereas for me highschool completely destroyed any interest or enjoyment i ever got out of reading books. I finished highscool 9yrs ago and haven't read a book since, no story related ones anyway... only cisco (and related) books. Also comes down to just not having the time either.

We never got to read anything like The Hobbit though.

I liked the lord of the rings books. Just skip the first half of the first book and you're on your way.

If you can somehow survive the s***fest that is anything to do with Tom Bombadil then you can complete the rest of the story.

The only part I didn't like about the LotR movies was that they totally missed the sundering of the shire, which for me was a major point of the book; evil changes the world, no matter where in the world you are.

scouring

I don't see what the big drama is about the tom bombadil part

I didn't like the part where they walked for 10hrs and dropped a ring into the lava.

Walk walk walk walk walk walk.. drop.. OK ALL DONE!

whether you like the lotr books or not... world wide sales say they are a good read. :D personally i think they are great although pitched at a young demographic... which makes tom bombadil relevant imo. i read lotr when i was a teenager though which maybe why i liked it so much.

it's been ages since i read the books but didn't the hobbits need to go through tom bombadil's forest & more importantly, the barrow wights to escape the nazgul rider? in the movie they just sorta ran away... hobbits with the one ring... running away from a ringwraith... doesn't make any sense! :|

the best thing to come from the tom bombadil story though was in national lampoon's parody book 'bored of the rings' where he is the drug addled hippy 'tim bezendrino'... that is some funny s***. :D

the sales show there's just a lack of anything better to read ... harry potter is an awesome, flawless story by your standard

both lotr & harry potter books are what i would call 'a good read' & the sales verify this. that doesn't make them great works of literature or 'an awesome flawless story'... it makes them easy to read, visualise & enjoy by the masses. if they weren't they wouldn't sell like they do.

dice how do you get "awesome, flawless story" from "a good read" ?

*boggle*

Dice doesn't read anything written by anyone without 'PHD' after their name. He also is an avid collector of games by Derek Smart.

It doesn't have to be a masterpiece of literature to be a good read. In fact, many masterpieces of literature are a s***ty, boring read.

It doesn't have to be a masterpiece of literature to be a good read. In fact, many masterpieces of literature are a s***ty, boring read.

QFT

i don't know jim, how did you get "awesome, flawless story" from "a good read"?

try reading the post again, maybe you'll get a clue as to what i was actually saying

last edited by dice at 18:04:04 30/Nov/06

dice isn't it about time you started another quake 2 ctf revival?

dice, I re-read your post and you still look as clueless as before

nf: probably

jim: k

dice, I re-read your post and you still look as clueless as before

does the fact you re-read it make it a good read?

does the fact you re-read it make it a good read?

only if a lot of people read it

Dice is anti-boobs. Case closed.