Peter Jackson's Revealing New Hobbit Video Blog Features Great Behind The Scenes Action

SCORE!

all the lord of the rings are great and so will the hobbit

This is gonna be epic

I love TLOTR as a trilogy but I agree that Two Towers was the weakest. I don;t mind the liberties, just found it to be the least emotionally engaging and despite awesome action sequences, not that much actually happened! I'm also not a huge fan of The Ents, never was not even when I was reading the book.

@monkeyballs: The 2nd one will still be the Hobbit, just the rest of the book. I think you are going on some very early story discussion. Both films will expand the book not that the 1st will be standard and the 2nd expansion. They will cover the white council and the hunt for the Necromancer I believe. As well as Radagast who is only mentioned. I see your point that he is covering stuff not in the prose proper however it will still be the work of Tolkien and if the entity of the Three Ages was put into a single book the films would still draw on a lot of that to be honest. As far as creative decisions like the cliff go you do have to change things for film. You just do. And its not a bad thing, its just a new medium and story-telling needs to be different when told in 4 hours rather than spanning however long it takes an individual reader. So you need to place moments of tension differently and use new tools to position characters throughout the narrative (such as pushing him off a cliff, for relocation and tension purposes). It also helps draw in fans not familiar with the material because if you paced it how Tolkien did you end up with more of a long exploratory history which (while it could be an interesting and artistic piece) would not carry the same narrative pace and filmatic sensibilities and would feel alien and uncomfortable to an audience not familiar with the material. The primary point of a film like this is to expand people's awareness. For people who prefer the books they are always there but some people will not like his writing style etc and so a film tells us about all that rich history and story and doesn't detract in any way from the books but gives a reworked story that helps grip and drew in a new audience. I for one love them all . And think PJ does a fantastic job.

Also its not as simple as GDT left cos PJ didn't like his plans. There were many, many draw backs to the film and GDT felt like his life and other projects were on hold simply waiting for this to get off the ground. PJ has said before that even though he wouldn't have made some choices, they did discuss them and at the end of the day GDT was given the respect to have the final say. But when it came back to PJ it made sense for him to go back to his own drawing board and give the film a consistency with the previous trilogy and his own vision so that it felt like one Earth. To me it would have been weird if GDT introduced new wargs and spiders (which he wanted to do). And while I could see his logic, and you can always say they were different subspecies from another region, it would have taken me out of the films momentarily which is not a good thing.

Also there is a lot of material in Unfinished Tales

Peter is King.

"We didn't want 3D to restrict or change our shooting style"

Most directors should take this advice.

BTW, the images shown can really be seen in 3d, the first cross-eye 3D and the second with anaglyph glasses.

monkeyballs3 - yea, Saruman wants you to have the Palantír. :P

@ monkeyballs3
I never said you said terrible i said horrible and you said i said terrible but thats not what i said. Theres a difference :)

1. I dont give a [frick] about 3D
2. Are there any examples of stuff shot on 48 FPS so I know what the hell they are talking about?
3. Thorin still looks like a Klingon

2012 epic my top 3

1) the dark knight rises
2) the hobbit part 1
3) avengers

:)

Oh, and there are these asshole directors who clearly take out of their butts those shots of stuff coming at your face just to justify the 3D.

Those make me feel ashamed to be watching a movie. Serious. Like that 2008' journey to the center of the earth.

omg.

3-D is for kids movies and 70's disaster movies.
Phuque 3-D!

he shouldnt do this in 3D,There is nothing worse than wearing those [frick]ing glasses in the cinema and them falling down your nose

There are people who's eye's don't coordinate together and thus can't watch 3-D. It's a shame Jackson didn't just stick with traditional 2-D.

@Godzillafart...I've always found that scene visually stunning, actually.