I can’t decide whether I want to see this or not.
It looks pretty, but is it better suited for a trilogy? Or miniseries? Haven’t read the book, so I don’t know. Was Cloud Atlas the book any good?
Moe, the way the book is structured, it CANNOT be made any other way. There are 6 stories, each taking place further along in the future. Each story is in turn read or watched by the next protagonist. So the actuator in the south sea journey, has a journal with 1/2 missing that’s read by an Englishman in Belgium, who wrote in his letter to his lover about that and his current situation. Those letters are in turn read by an investigating journalist in 1975, whose story shows up as a mystery manuscript for an early 21th century vanity publisher, whose story is viewed as a movie by a biological constructed serf-server, and her story is view by the primitive in the very far future. Each story is cut off abruptively, and only the 6th story is one contiguous piece. At the end of each of the story, the missing piece of the previous story is found, and that story continues until you get the end of the first story.
As you see in this format, making it into a series is problematic.
*reads BigFire’s wall of text* I’m already bored.
Read the amazon blurb, also bored.
More importantly: The Hobbit is now a trilogy?
I did watch the trailer, haven’t read the book. I admire them for taking on the challenge of trying to film what sounds like an inherently hard-to-film narrative structure. And gosh, it does look purty.
However…from the trailer, the main point seems to be warmed-over stoned surfer philosophy.
“Dude, like, everything is interconnected, man!” Yeah, John and Yoko, we heard you the first 34,520 times.
Watching the trailer, I could feel myself aging, my office plants withering. I began to think of my toenails and whether I should clip them. Then I looked at the counter and saw that I was only 1:10 in to it.
I guess the Tolkein heirs are hurting currently?
looks cool. I’m downloading the book into my kindle as i write. I think the Hobbit is just going to be 2 movies not a trilogy.
Looks pretty, also looks 100% not my thing. I like the idea of two people being soulmates, reborn over and over again (and sometimes missing each other due to circumstances), but I’ve read enough Moorcock to be satisfied with that and don’t feel the urge to see the trope done on the Big Screen with lots of SFX.
Sidebar: There’s a lot of Hobbit to be packed into one movie; I think Jackson knows he could make 2 or even 3 and still get his viewership. Hope the actors didn’t trust him on their contracts as far as points go, though…
Tom Hanks, Susan Sarandon…I’ll pass.
Back to The Hobbit: I read Jackson’s interview, and maybe I’m missing it but I’m not seeing him say “Three!” flat-out. How’s this for an idea… instead of three movies, his idea is to film an extra hour for the two movies he’s already doing, to be included in the DVD’s. That would fit his concept of putting The Hobbit into context and also answer the fans who’ve been complaining that he cut this-that-or-the-other from the Trilogy.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Site by Neil Stevens
| Theme by TheBuckmaker.com