What is Digg?49 Comments
- iman79, on 10/12/2007, -24/+54dugg for hilarious title
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Yeah, I'm sure Zaentz will have a really tough time finding a studio willing to finance The Hobbit under Peter Jackson. Such a risk!
- lazydrumhead, on 10/12/2007, -6/+17okay, you go ahead and add some bumps. obviously gollum needs to be more bumpy.
you are obviously better than the highest grossing trilogy of all time's special effects team who won best visual effects for a 210 minute film.
and there was even consideration for giving andy serkis a nomination for best actor/supporting actor. I don't think that could have happened if Gollum didn't look real.
how many characters weren't actually in the book anyhow? did you make a count? - mrnukem, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19I will not be happy until Tom Bombadil is returned to his rightful place in the story. What did old Tom do to ever be dropped from the story line? If JRR Tolkien thought he was important enough to have in the books why did the Studio decide he wasn't?
Restore Bombadil!
This message brought to you by the Bombadil Restoration Association.
I am Tom Bombadil and I approved this message - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15Yes, more hobbits please. Just stop him from direction any CG Apes again.
- Owange, on 10/12/2007, -10/+20He can say he "Took" him down with "Brandybuckshot." HAHAHAA... ah... is this thing on?
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11An elegant solution. If New Line is getting in the way, simply cut New Line out of the deal. Buh-bye, suits. It looks like the rights holders will not be requiring *your* services on The Hobbit.
- fantasticFlan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Tom's not in The Hobbit, Beorn is the guy they'll leave out of this one to piss off hardcore fans.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8"What did old Tom do to ever be dropped from the story line?"
What did he do, well for starters he was an annoying irrelevance who stopped the story flow utterly dead because Tolkien wanted to show off his stupid rhyming ***** and how clever he thought he was. Hell, even I sjip that whole section when I read the books because its just so unlike the rest of the story and should never have been included.
Bombadil was an irrelevance, that screwed up the narrative flow, wasted millions of trees (for he pulp needed to produce the chapters x million of books sold), and was an abrupt and jaring way to do a '***** you' to the reader. - cphuntington97, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9You can't just have characters popping in and out of films. You need to give them an introduction, and then follow up the action with a proper conclusion.
There is a moment in Fangorn Forest in the movies where Merry and Pippin are trapped up by a tree and rescued by none other than Treebeard himself. That was an homage to Tom Bombadil.
The essence and spirit of Tolkien are all there (in the movies). Watch the Director/Writers commentary and Jackson, Boyens, and Walsh will explain every detour from the novels and exactly why they did what they did. - YourTechSupport, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I'd use a shotgun filled with Seasoned Shot ( http://www.seasonshot.com/ )
That way the flavor will soak into the hobbit meat while you roast it.
.... what? - crcurran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I hope New Line doesn't make it, the rights revert back and Jackson gets a crack at it.
Suck it down New Line or pay what's owed!! - crcurran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Tom Bombadil? Umm NO!
Dragon at Misty Mountains? umm NO!
all-portable-instrument Playing dwarves? umm NO!
Read it again. I let people slide on a lot of details but that description was way out of touch - Annon, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Awesome news!!!
- pantuky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2OH NO! Not Peter Jackson again! I am sure the output from this project will be 3 hours and 20 minutes long. Peter will surely do at least two or three 28 second shots of a single arrow fired by one goblin at Bilbo. Those shots will be in super-slow motion and take far to long to reach the target, just like everything in Peter Jackson's movies.
- J6stik, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10Tweakers:
"Yes, but at least we know the caliber of the shot will be big, the shooting will be of high quality and results will be mind-blowing."
Yes, the caliber will be big, the shooting will be high and the results will be cockblowing, we all know. The one thing that ruins it is that it'll be a huge presentation of "Peter Jackson's: The Hobbit," not "J.R.R. Tolkien's: The Hobbit." - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Newline doesn't have to START production within a year, they have th have the whole thing made and released within a year.
Unless they hire someone like Ulwe Boll that is very unlikely to happen. - ramaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1On balance, it's good news to me!
I'm right there with Tweakers - there were some serious disappointments in LOTR, not only in the plot:
(e.g. Frodo holding the ring up in front of the Nazgul at Osgiliath - if the Nazgul had learned the actual location of the ring, all nine of them would have descended on Frodo pronto - end of story),
and in lame, over-the-top treatment of dramatic events here and there:
(e.g., Sam almost drowning and then emerging out of the water to deliver a speech)
but also in the general dumbing-down of characters:
(e.g., Gandalf rediculously assaulting Denethor; Gandalf full of self-doubt about sending Frodo to Mordor).
BUT, all things considered, I just want to see Weta Workshop involved in production of The Hobbit, and I doubt anyone else would actually do a better job than PJ. LOTR was a huge undertaking and I tip my hat to him. - juzzyp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As someone who used to work with NewLine on this property, TinkerToy is pretty accurate. This is no surprise fort any of the movie and recording industry corporations, who believe that the distributor should hold all copyright and title to an artists work, and be paid constantly for all re viewings, then bury that money in a form the artist cant touch.
Reminds me of all the hoopla about google buying youtube, and the $500M offered to RIAA/recording studios to not sue youtube for X months while google got the rights-management in order. The recording studios fell over themselves to take the money, and then asked if they could get it in stocks/shares, so then they didn't have to declare it as income, because then the artists would be entitled to a share.
And they expect sympathy when they march around proclaiming to all the worlds governments and copyright bodies that file-sharers are 'stealing from the artists'. True, but that magnitude would never approach the robbery of the studios themselves. - Recluse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Bless you Saul!
- tinkertoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1New Line, like any other movie studio, is just a souless movie distribution machine. Through creative accounting, they can hide profits and can even show how a $500M "blockbuster" actually lost money. Besides, who can feel "warm and fuzzy" about a damn movie studio?? It's the directors, actors and movies themselves that people remember. I hope that Jackson and Zaentz can release the movie with minimal studio interference and keep the money themselves. Screw the studios.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Stop being a whiny bitch.
- Chicken2nite, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1My understanding is that the plan was to split it into two films, working Gandalf into a B-Plot involving the Necromancer guy or whatever it was that he was dealing with while Bilbo and the dwarves made their trek. Maybe that was MGM's idea, to split it into two movies for a bigger box office (they've got the distribution rights and I'm sure they'd love to pull a Kill Bill in that regard)
- mustbepatient, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Realistically, this is just a negotiating ploy because if either New Line tries to cut Peter out or Peter/Zaentz try to cut New Line out, the film will get stuck in legal battles and nobody would be able to make it.
- diversionmary, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1no, it isn't
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Same here, although no 'rings' movie will seem complete without the New Line logo at the beginning. A bit like the Fox logo at the start of each Star Wars flick.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I'd use a catapult. After all, don't we all want to see Elijah Wood shot out of a catapult (no one said the hobbit would be the target instead of the ammunition)
- rushpage, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3GET A LIFE YOU FREAKS!!!
- Eldalie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0me and more than 400 of my users in Arda.ir mailed the Newline company to have Peter for the movie, coz they want to gave the program to another director ... so bad
- bobcorrigan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3There's a lot going on in the Hobbit other than Tom Bombadil - the escape from the elven fortress, the dragon at the Misty Mountains, the final battle where Thorin falls, the Stone Trolls, and the fall-down fun of the all-singing, all-portable-instrument playing dwarves. Not to mention Gollum and the riddle game. I'm curious if they'll go "dark" or "light" with The Hobbit in terms of the visual tone of the thing.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Jackson is one of few directors 'talented' enough to shoot something with a camera and kill it.
- bobcorrigan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OK, you got me - the dragon is at the lonely mountain - that stand-alone mountain, not the misty mountains. Tom Bombadil isn't in it. But the dwarves play instruments at the party in Bag End. Thorin even brought a harp!
- saska, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2It's even less likely that a studio will finance a Hobbit movie the year after a (probably) crappy Hobbit movie is made by New Line and audiences are soured on the whole thing. They'd have to have funding for Jackson's version, including advertising funding, before New Line's came out in order to convince some audiences to wait for Jackson's, and even then, whatever they do to advertise the Jackson version will amount to word of mouth for the New Line one.
Then again, I've seen Hollywood do far stupider things. - crumbelievable, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3New Line is rushing to make the film with another director because the rights will fall back to Zaentz in a year, so how does this change anything unless New Line doesn't start production within a year? And, if they don't, I didn't realize Zaentz had a company to fund a film of this magnitude, which is why they need to partner with a studio to make it happen. If that's the case, how can he promise in advance what kind of deal will be made?
- Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4This is the same Saul Zaentz who John Fogerty of Creedence Clearwater got so incensed at when he was CCR's boss at Fantasy Records? Who sued Fogerty when he came out with the solo "Centerfield," in a number called "Zanz Kant Danz," which described him as a greedy pig? Which Zaentz sued about? Just asking, and now accepting my tropy as old fogey. Thank you, thank you.
- nightowl313, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1Dugg to death... mirror anyone?
- alecpriester, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3yeah, the identical story I submitted four hours before him.
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30806 - tuxchick, on 10/12/2007, -10/+3Oh good, now the Hobbit can be ruined too. Thanks folks. Maybe Jackson can work in a dwarf toss, a completely pointless love story, a mumbling greasy hero, and an obnoxiously intrusive overblown sound track. Yep, something to look forward to.
If he would simply trust the story and not try to tart it up with a bunch of computer game effects and retard plot elements, it would be worthwhile. Reckon I'll pass and stick to the books. - maverick1972, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScigBWCx0mc
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -19/+7I wonder what kind of gun PJ is going to use to shoot Hobbit, If I were to shoot at close range I would go with a shotgun, maybe some buckshot. If I were to shoot at long range I would use a M82 Barret sniper rifle. Those things are frickin bad and would so totally pwn that Hobbit!
- Dunadan, on 10/12/2007, -13/+1I'd keep things more appropriate to the settings. If I were to shoot at close range I'd go with a shortbow. If I were to shoot at long range I would use a longbow from Lothlorien. Those things are so fickin bad and would so totally pwn that Hobbit!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+1Inaccurate. This is an older quote made before Peter said on his website that he was out of the Hobbit job. It could still happen, but Peter is moving on.
- koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -20/+5There are no guns in Middle Earth.
- Roedran, on 10/12/2007, -23/+7Hey look, it's another Digg-addicted, out-of-work English major. Woot. Not.
- lazydrumhead, on 10/12/2007, -24/+5You so punny.
- elitexero, on 10/12/2007, -31/+4Yay, now we can watch all the monsters that weren't in the book, in ***** too-smooth CGI!
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is