Comments on: Wow… Peter Jackson IS Directing The Hobbit – In 3D!

By: Hallahan

Hallahan — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:37:10 +0000

Of course it will be real actors. i would think it’ll be like LOTR with live action and a little mo-cap on creatures like Gollum. Why does everyone think 3D means cheesy animation? the U2 movie is awesome (and I hate the band)

By: rsk_taker

rsk_taker — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 20:23:00 +0000

Why not get real actors and do it properly?

That’s what ppl want…the LOTR trilogy was perfect, why screw that up with this gimmick.

By: Vic

Vic — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:28:31 +0000

T. Maybe I’m mellowing in my old age. After further communication, I still think everything above is pretty solid.

I appreciate your feedback.

Best,

Vic

By: Turannon

Turannon — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 04:40:55 +0000

You guys claim to give TV and movie news without the sugar coating, but this article is all sugar and no substance! Your title is “Wow… Peter Jackson IS Directing The Hobbit – In 3D!” but you admit that none of it is substantiated. At the moment this rumour has one unsubstantiated source – Marketsaw. It would be great if it is true – but lets not jump the gun.

By: Jim Dorey

Jim Dorey — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:51:24 +0000

Peter Jackson directly? That’s inventive. If it was Jackson directly, AICN would have done up the nice black and white portrait shot of the man like they did for Cameron.

Speaking of Jim, Cameron said that the image does not match what is currently being developed – so be it. As much as we thought it might have been Ney’tiri it turns out is isn’t. There are other points of view of what he said as well that I won’t go into here.

The bottom line is Fox demanded retraction and we complied. We will continue to bring breaking news to our readers. And I’m just getting started!

By: David

David — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 22:51:49 +0000

Wrong on both counts. Their source of the Avitar image got debunked by AICN with a direct call to Cameron. The Hobbit rumor was debunked by Peter himself yesterday.

Fair to say that source is zero for 2

By: Surma

Surma — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 04:39:16 +0000

You people don’t know the difference here and are certaintly not paying attention to what you read. The movie is going to be 3d as in Spy kids 3d as in *cheesy, in your face, disney world* 3d. But it can be used cleverly like in Beowulf. Never does Vic say it will be cgi. Sure that was a rumor some time ago, but if its cgi i wont go see it, and I’ll shun peter jackson for doing the same thing George Lucas did. The problem with cgi is that it’s cheap and it can look good but that requires more money, when you’re already trying to be cheap. I could do without entirely cgi characters, or movies. but Lotr would be 3d doable, they just have to go back to the original film and original cgi and resplice everything to be 3d.

By: Jim Dorey

Jim Dorey — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 04:39:22 +0000

I hear ya, but there is no way New Line is going to be pre-empted with this announcement – it’s their baby all the way. The announcement is not going to be made through a back door confirmation from online movie sites! We ALL know that. I agree. Lets wait and see and may the best source win I suppose.

By: Karyyk

Karyyk — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:49:49 +0000

On a second read-through, it may well not be CGI (or “3D”) at all, but it may just mean he’ll be filming it in such a way as to make 3D formats (such as IMAX). That makes sense when you consider the statement that the LotR films would be converted to 3D, as that would be a much easier endeavor than have to render those movies in CGI (which truly makes no sense at all). In fact, since it’s been shown that LotR *CAN* be done effectively in live-action, it makes no sense to do The Hobbit in CGI at all.

By: Karyyk

Karyyk — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:46:33 +0000

Is “3D” really the right terminology? I hate to nitpick, but what’s really being talked about is CGI. 3D implies some kind of 3D effect to the viewer, and such isn’t necessarily the case with CGI (whether it be hand-animated or motion-captured). Also, to nitpick further, you can’t get much more “3D” than reality…

I’m sure some will basically say I’m making a mountain out of a molehill, and while I apologize for making such a big deal of it, referring to it merely as “3D” is vague and somewhat inacurrate.

By: Heath

Heath — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:43:52 +0000

MarketSaw isn’t AICN–AICN has quite the relationship with Peter Jackson (Quint had a cameo in King Kong), so I’m gonna wait and see.

heath

By: Jim Dorey

Jim Dorey — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:34:38 +0000

Yeah, of course they said that – the only people that are going to confirm or break a major announcement like that is going to be Peter Jackson and/or Bob Shaye. My source can be considered in Jackson’s camp too. I have updated my original post with my view on this on MarketSaw. Nice to try to confirm however – Don’t know what they were expecting though!

By: Heath

Heath — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 03:24:48 +0000

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34942

Quint from AICN contacted Peter Jackson (and/or his people) and got a “not true.”

DANG!

heath

By: Surma

Surma — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:36:45 +0000

Gosh, two movies, talk about milking it. I don’t want to have to wait 2 years in the middle of a movie that’s unacceptable it will be worse than between the fellowship and two towers.

By: steve adams

steve adams — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 22:57:02 +0000

Won’t be seeing this one.:Won’t be seeing this one.:<

By: Thomas

Thomas — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 05:25:44 +0000

But the Hobbit isn’t anything like the Lord of the Rings. Jackson will turn it into an epic and it’s just a different beast than the trilogy.

It doesn’t make sense to have Jackson direct it. The Hobbit will be bankable regardless because people will connect it to the Lord of the Rings movies without Jackson’s name. And you can bring in an equally respected director who will have add the more whimsical touch the film needs.

There’s no way to make the Hobbit more exciting than the Lord of the Rings (unless the plot is drastically changed). So you might as well go the other route and emphasize the more lighthearted tone of it.

Sigh. I don’t understand why the opinion is that Jackson is the only person who understands Tolkein.

By: Jim Dorey

Jim Dorey — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 01:01:23 +0000

Bang on Vic! Live action is where Cameron and hopefully Jackson will shine. While I love Zemeckis’ work, I am a bigger fan of Live Action (with PerfCap and CGI thrown in of course!)

-jim
MarketSaw

By: adrian

adrian — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 00:49:08 +0000

Sounds like great news to me!
Thanks Vic.

By: Vic

Vic — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:10:22 +0000

Listen up: You are confusing MOTION CAPTURE CGI with 3D. “Beowulf” had BOTH of these but a 3D movie can be shot in live action with real actors. No on is saying that “The Hobbit” will contain virtual actors only.

I hope this makes you feel better.

Vic

By: noooooo!!!!!!!

noooooo!!!!!!! — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 23:04:06 +0000

No!!! 3-D? You must be joking. Beowulf looked like wax figurines being moved around with stop motion animation. 3-D movie making sucks! Maybe for something like The Polar Express and Final Fantasy, it’s relevant, but The Hobbit? This is going to be an abomination of Tolkien’s work. The LOTR trilogy was perfect the way that it was. It gave a strong realism to a fantastical story. Like the Star Wars prequels, even if everything else is CG, having real actors is a must if you’re going to have a movie you want taken seriously. Only ACTORS can ACT. This is going to be sad if this is true.