Though I would be interested to see a version of The Hobbit by Wes Anderson, I might have to go for Ang Lee. The guy knows how to do action aswell as drama.
Question of the Day, June 3, 2010
- Thread starter The Escapist Staff
- Start date
Just keep it away from Spielberg, Cameron and Burton, the first two make pretty movies, but no character or depth though, at least in recent releases, just a lesson in what we've learned in production for the masses these days, and Burton is a bit too flamboyant for a Tolkien movie. Don't know about the others, i'd just go the safe bet and pick Jackson.
I honestly can't choose any of those, I don't think any of them would fit the bill for what The Hobbit is.
I can't think of a director who would fit the bill off the top of my head, but I do think the best person to fit the bill would still be Peter Jackson. I know he's not an option, but still, he is the one with the artistic vision and directive skills that are clearly suited to Tolkien's epic world. And my second choice would be.. Guillermo del Toro.
I can't think of a director who would fit the bill off the top of my head, but I do think the best person to fit the bill would still be Peter Jackson. I know he's not an option, but still, he is the one with the artistic vision and directive skills that are clearly suited to Tolkien's epic world. And my second choice would be.. Guillermo del Toro.
Just keep it with Jackson, if its not broken, don't fix it! Not to mention that Burton would put his damn emo/goth/whatever the fuck people call it stamp all on it
Dear God in Heaven, anybody but Tim Burton!
...
Actually, I'd like to see what he would have Alan Rickman do in that movie...and it would also be interesting to see Johnny Deep play a rebooted Gandalf!
...
Actually, I'd like to see what he would have Alan Rickman do in that movie...and it would also be interesting to see Johnny Deep play a rebooted Gandalf!
Hm. See, you could go in two directions with 'The Hobbit': you could go with a subtle retelling, highlighting character development and interaction, focusing on the Thorin's story et cetera, only bringing out the loud bangs and the heavy-duty special effects for the finales. In that case, I would suggest Shane Carruth, writer/actor/director of 'Primer'.
Or you could go with a very effects heavy, action-oriented telling of the story, in which case, I'd... hm... I dunno, Blomkamp? Abrams? Somebody who does action well, without completely overriding the dialog with the bangs and the flashes.
Ultimately, I'd have to say that you should get somebody who has a developed sense of style, a flair for action when necessary, and yet at the same time is capable of those subtle touches that really make a film stand out... say Christopher Nolan.
As for the poll suggestions:
Lynch? No. The Hobbit is a fairly straight-forward adventure story, and wouldn't handle the psychological loading that he would try to force into it.
Burton? GOD no, unless you were really wanting to see Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter jammed into some bizzaro, super-surrealistic Middle Earth.
Spielberg? No. There was a time where I would've trusted him to handle just a straight-up adventure story, but nowadays, it seems like he feels compelled to cram some kind of message into everything he does.
Anderson? I suppose that could work, but I was never as impressed with Bottle Rocket as everyone else seemed to be.
Cameron? I don't think this would work, if only because he's gotten so successful, he wouldn't accept being 'merely' the director. He would want to imprint his 'vision' on every part of the film(s), and I doubt very seriously that Peter Jackson would allow that, considering how unpredictable the outcome would be.
Or you could go with a very effects heavy, action-oriented telling of the story, in which case, I'd... hm... I dunno, Blomkamp? Abrams? Somebody who does action well, without completely overriding the dialog with the bangs and the flashes.
Ultimately, I'd have to say that you should get somebody who has a developed sense of style, a flair for action when necessary, and yet at the same time is capable of those subtle touches that really make a film stand out... say Christopher Nolan.
As for the poll suggestions:
Lynch? No. The Hobbit is a fairly straight-forward adventure story, and wouldn't handle the psychological loading that he would try to force into it.
Burton? GOD no, unless you were really wanting to see Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter jammed into some bizzaro, super-surrealistic Middle Earth.
Spielberg? No. There was a time where I would've trusted him to handle just a straight-up adventure story, but nowadays, it seems like he feels compelled to cram some kind of message into everything he does.
Anderson? I suppose that could work, but I was never as impressed with Bottle Rocket as everyone else seemed to be.
Cameron? I don't think this would work, if only because he's gotten so successful, he wouldn't accept being 'merely' the director. He would want to imprint his 'vision' on every part of the film(s), and I doubt very seriously that Peter Jackson would allow that, considering how unpredictable the outcome would be.
Cameron. Spielberg hasn't directed a good movie since Saving Private Ryan (don't you dare say Catch Me if you Can), although he's certainly had some awful attempts. Cameron's gone about as long with a good movie, but pretty much every attempt he's ever had has been good (say what you will about Avatar, there was nothing wrong with his direction of the film).
Didn't think of him! That'd be cool.Njaard said:
I voted Spielberg, but it's not really an obvious choice. I like how so many people in this thread have proven their ignorance by ripping it out of the question for not involving Peter Jackson.
Would also be somewhat fitting for Neill Blomkamp to do it.