3 ms·

> And not to involve Jackson seems off Personally, the more I reflect on the Jackson series, the less I'm a fan. He borrowed heavily from the pacing, framing,

by titzer 4y ago

> And not to involve Jackson seems off Personally, the more I reflect on the Jackson series, the less I'm a fan. He borrowed heavily from the pacing, framing, and selectiveness of Bakshi's animated film, which didn't finish the trilogy. But worse, though inevitable when you have billions of $$ in your eyeballs, Jackson over-printed a lot of kids' imaginations with his depictions. I can't remember what I thought things looked like before I saw his films--and I probably read LOTR for the first time in 1993... And I'm not just "new stuff bad". But seriously, the source material looked way different in my head--and felt different, too. Especially the Hobbit. "Consult Jackson". Jackson had his say. He has no authority over new depictions; he didn't write a word of it.

schnitzelstoat 4y ago
I had read LOTR just before the movies came out and I think Jackson did a pretty good job, although the books have a different feel with all the walking bits and the songs etc. I agree 100% about The Hobbit though, the movie was pretty decent, but really feels very different to the book. I think this is expected though as they extended a pretty small book to an entire trilogy of films and adapted what is essentially a children's story for a far wider audience.
- arethuza 4y ago
  As lots of people have noted... "thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread"
mikkergp 4y ago
I still love the original animated hobbit. The pacing was a mess, but there was something about the creativity in the animated films of the 70’s that we’ve lost I think. Wouldn’t translate to a modern audience, but I love that, i dunno I’ve been calling it “leather bound fantasy” feeling.
ajmurmann 4y ago
To me The Hobbit book was interesting in that it clearly was a link between fairy tales and what we now call the fantasy genre. Even in terms of writing style. It makes sense that that would have to be adjusted for the movie, especially since you'd want continuity in tone with the LOTR movies.
smsm42 4y ago
I think Jackson did a fine job. That doesn't mean, however, everybody past him should copy what he did forever or ask him for his permission or opinion. One great production of Hamlet doesn't mean Hamlet has now look like that from now on forever and whoever did it owns the story. One of the things that makes the story great is that there are many angles possible and many creative approaches available. So no Jackson involvement is no problem for me.

by titzer 4y ago

schnitzelstoat 4y ago

I had read LOTR just before the movies came out and I think Jackson did a pretty good job, although the books have a different feel with all the walking bits and the songs etc. I agree 100% about The Hobbit though, the movie was pretty decent, but really feels very different to the book. I think this is expected though as they extended a pretty small book to an entire trilogy of films and adapted what is essentially a children's story for a far wider audience.

arethuza 4y ago
As lots of people have noted... "thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread"

mikkergp 4y ago

I still love the original animated hobbit. The pacing was a mess, but there was something about the creativity in the animated films of the 70’s that we’ve lost I think. Wouldn’t translate to a modern audience, but I love that, i dunno I’ve been calling it “leather bound fantasy” feeling.

ajmurmann 4y ago

To me The Hobbit book was interesting in that it clearly was a link between fairy tales and what we now call the fantasy genre. Even in terms of writing style. It makes sense that that would have to be adjusted for the movie, especially since you'd want continuity in tone with the LOTR movies.

smsm42 4y ago

I think Jackson did a fine job. That doesn't mean, however, everybody past him should copy what he did forever or ask him for his permission or opinion. One great production of Hamlet doesn't mean Hamlet has now look like that from now on forever and whoever did it owns the story. One of the things that makes the story great is that there are many angles possible and many creative approaches available. So no Jackson involvement is no problem for me.