Hobbit delayed by a year?

[Sauron the White]

from davem

I seem to recall some exec at Disney saying much the same re Prince Caspian.....& at New Line re Golden Compass.

Of course executives are always going to trumpet their next releases in that fashion. The big difference however is that both the Narnia series and Compass had no cinematic track record to base anything on like the LOTR films give us in speculating about HOBBIT.

To this day I think one of the reasons CASPIAN had lesser monies than the first in the series is that the first NARNIA movie cashed in on positive LOTR fever. A portion of those people who bought tickets left the theater unsatisfied and did not go back for CASPIAN - even though many said it was a better and more adult film.

Obviously, anything can still happen. But if I could buy stock in the two Middle-earth films, I would gladly do so. Its as close to a sure thing as there is in the business of expensive film making.

[davem]

The TH movie (& sequel) will be as successful as it is close to the LotR movies - which will mean being quite far from the original book - & that's what I've been arguing for a good while. Almost no-one seems to want to see Tolkien's original story on screen - what they want is 'another LotR movie' & would thus prefer to see the proposed second movie,which will include many of the LotR characters, than Tolkien's story, which will not.

To this day I think one of the reasons CASPIAN had lesser monies than the first in the series is that the first NARNIA movie cashed in on positive LOTR fever. A portion of those people who bought tickets left the theater unsatisfied and did not go back for CASPIAN - even though many said it was a better and more adult film.

My feeling is that LWW was successful because it created (or recreated from the book) a fairytale world, & that the sequel (leaving aside its dubious morality - children killing without qualm or adverse psychological effect) was standard fantasy fare with little connection to the original story. A TH movie will suffer far more from that problem than the proposed sequel will.

EDIT http://www.startribune.com/entertain...D3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

Moviegoers have become accustomed to the "no animals were harmed" disclaimer at the end of movies. Now comes one for a new age: "The depictions of tobacco smoking contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote tobacco consumption." Warner Bros. also adds, at the end of "Gran Torino," among other films, that no tobacco companies paid for product placement*.

I think Bilbo's pipe will probably just go...

(*What next - "The depictions of killing contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote shooting people. No gun manufacturers paid for product placement"?

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by davem

I think Bilbo's pipe will probably just go...

(*What next - "The depictions of killing contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote shooting people. No gun manufacturers paid for product placement"?

I think you are forgetting just how influential the tobacco industry was in getting Hollywood movies--and Ronald Regan--to promote cigarettes. And as a European, you are probably also overlooking American views of art, drama, tv, movies and the imagination. They are mired in a realism--and a legal industry--that for Europeans would be laughable.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I think you are forgetting just how influential the tobacco industry was in getting Hollywood movies--and Ronald Regan--to promote cigarettes.

Meh...I just watched 'The Big Sleep' with Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. It seemed to me the various characters smoked more in that one movie (made in 1946) than in all movies made since 1980. Okay, I'm exaggerating, but as a smoker, even I was appalled at the amount of times Bogie and Bacall lit up -- a far cry from any movie in the past several decades. Honestly, I can't recall smoking so pronounced in any film within recent memory (save perhaps Lord of the Rings).

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And as a European, you are probably also overlooking American views of art, drama, tv, movies and the imagination. They are mired in a realism--and a legal industry--that for Europeans would be laughable.

Just what is the American views of art, drama, tv, movies and the imagination? Being an American, I am curious as to just what my opinions are. I am sure a European can explain myself to me.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Just what is the American views of art, drama, tv, movies and the imagination? Being an American, I am curious as to just what my opinions are. I am sure a European can explain myself to me.

I should point out that Bethberry is actually from North North America - & very proud of it.

[davem]

Another site reports TH release as 2012 http://sacurrent.com/film/story.asp?id=69745 - this from yesterday:

In Hollywood, a land where the sequel to a film not yet released (The Hobbit) already has a release date (December 2012), there’s no such thing as looking too far ahead.

If they can afford to make it at all, that is....http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...profit-warning

The sprawling media company, which owns businesses including CNN television, Time magazine and Warner Bros film studios, said its underlying growth in operating income would be closer to 1% than the previously forecast level of 5%.

The update dismayed Wall Street, sending Time Warner's shares down by 6.2% to $10.29 during early trading on the New York Stock Exchange. A loss will be a stark reversal for the group, which delivered a net profit of $4.3bn in 2007.

[Sauron the White]

davem
thanks for that link to upcoming films. Several look very good to me including SHERLOCK HOLMES, PUBLIC ENEMIES and WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE. It should be an interesting year in film.

As far as Warners in money difficulties, that is undeniable. But I think HOBBIT is pretty much a sure bet and they will not pass it up.... or if they had to there would be no lack of interest elsewhere with its huge potential of revenue.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Meh...I just watched 'The Big Sleep' with Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. It seemed to me the various characters smoked more in that one movie (made in 1946) than in all movies made since 1980. Okay, I'm exaggerating, but as a smoker, even I was appalled at the amount of times Bogie and Bacall lit up -- a far cry from any movie in the past several decades. Honestly, I can't recall smoking so pronounced in any film within recent memory (save perhaps Lord of the Rings).

Never seen it but given it's Bogey and Bacall, you've got me predicting just what activities preceded the smoking. Which has nothing to do with smoking in LotR of course.

:

Just what is the American views of art, drama, tv, movies and the imagination? Being an American, I am curious as to just what my opinions are. I am sure a European can explain myself to me.

davem has of course stepped into the breech and freed me of any need to reply, so I won't. Except to say . . .

You've got me there. I could hardly explain just what the American views of etc would be, a One Ring America so to speak. I was referring merely to American views without the definite article, of which there can be several--a sort of Three Ring circus if you will--some of which obviously can be your own, which I would not endeavour to explain to yourself as I have not explained them to myself, being as yet unaware of them, never having yet discussed American films with you.

I do recall, however, a litigitious American court case in which a manufacturer of ladders was found negligent for having, despite umpteen signs and stickers on its products relating to the safe use of said products, failed to post a sticker advising new owners not to place said product in a pile of animal manure and then climb upon it, as under the heat of the sun the footing could be warmed, causing the ladder to become unstable, leading the Litigator, who had fallen into the pile under just such a warming influence, to initiate and win said court case against the Litigatee. The business end of Hollywood is undoubtedly very aware of such a victory and is, I would suggest, covering itself with such disclaimers. From my perspective, European movies are not produced in such a barnyard.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

You've got me there. I could hardly explain just what the American views of etc would be, a One Ring America so to speak. I was referring merely to American views without the definite article, of which there can be several--a sort of Three Ring circus if you will--some of which obviously can be your own, which I would not endeavour to explain to yourself as I have not explained them to myself, being as yet unaware of them, never having yet discussed American films with you.

As I'm not quite sure what you just said, I'll just pretend I am holding the TV remote and nod my head like I understand. It often works at home.

*Nods and smiles*

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by Bb

Never seen it but given it's Bogey and Bacall, you've got me predicting just what activities preceded the smoking. Which has nothing to do with smoking in LotR of course.

Never seen The Big Sleep? I'm shocked that a movie aficionado such as yourself never caught it. Ah well, the main attractions are Bogie being Bogie and the sparks he strikes with Bacall onscreen. It works much better as a novel. Take out most of Chandler's lively prose and strip it down to bare plot and I'm afraid it's a bit difficult to make sense of.

Anyway, what made me post is to say that in a lot of those old forties movies there didn't have to be any particular "activities" as you so delicately put it to prompt smoking; everybody smoked like chimneys all the time. They'd wake up in the morning and reach for a smoke.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

As I'm not quite sure what you just said, I'll just pretend I am holding the TV remote and nod my head like I understand. It often works at home.

*Nods and smiles*

I'll have to remember this, as an example of a handy extricatory rhetorical device if ever it appears you are getting the best of me in a discussion.

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

Never seen The Big Sleep? I'm shocked that a movie aficionado such as yourself never caught it. Ah well, the main attractions are Bogie being Bogie and the sparks he strikes with Bacall onscreen. It works much better as a novel. Take out most of Chandler's lively prose and strip it down to bare plot and I'm afraid it's a bit difficult to make sense of.

Anyway, what made me post is to say that in a lot of those old forties movies there didn't have to be any particular "activities" as you so delicately put it to prompt smoking; everybody smoked like chimneys all the time. They'd wake up in the morning and reach for a smoke.

Well, I say never miss an opportunity for innuendo, whether it fits fully or not, Mister Underhill. But, yes, sad to say, I do have these gaps. It comes from having not been born in the generation that watched these movies when they first were released.

Although I have seen the absolutely wonderful A Matter of Life and Death, 1946 version, which I believe in the US was released as Stairway to Heaven and revived by Martin Scorsese. My parents spoke endlessly of it, admiringly, to much laughter. There's a coke machine in heaven for the Yankee flyers; I cannot recall if there is much smoking in it, but as a film, it's

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Personally I think it has been delayed while all the British actors auditioned for the role of the next Doctor - now the 11th has just been announced they can start casting for The Hobbit

Does this mean that David Tennant is now available to play a younger Bilbo?