Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I suspected this. Remember the distinct lack of McKellen when the film was all but ready to shoot? I remember worrying about it. I even saw a brief red carpet interview with him somewhere where he bemoaned the fact that he hadn't actually been officially asked by Peter yet to reprise his role, and I could sense his irritence at that, his stretched patience was visible. I suppose at that time PJ was otherwise locking horns with the unions and all that stuff, but he still had no right to take McKellen's participation for granted, as I imagine he possibly did.

But yeah, phew indeed. I'd have been absolutely gutted.

And what's all this talk of quitting? Was he referring to the unplanned extention of his commitment to the films? He almost sounds pissed off about it...

Understandable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wouldn't have worked. The thought of them replacing McKellen makes me sick. I wonder if they would have actually gone through with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember that this was reported ages ago but I never worried about him not doing the part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone calm down. They had to replace Bilbo with a younger man so there's no reason they couldn't have done the same with Gandalf based on a cock-a-mamie idea that fifty years prior, an immortal Istari would look noticeably younger......IF they could not have resolved union disputes that would have led to him not able to return.

Or if McKellen had actually died in the interim. What then? Christopher Lee's old, too, what would have happened then?

They had to replace Dumbledore after three movies. James Bond goes through the same kind of face and body regeneration that The Doctor undergoes every so many years. Actor replacement is nothing new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone calm down. They had to replace Bilbo with a younger man so there's no reason they couldn't have done the same with Gandalf based on a cock-a-mamie idea that fifty years prior, an immortal Istari would look noticeably younger......IF they could not have resolved union disputes that would have led to him not able to return.

Or if McKellen had actually died in the interim. What then? Christopher Lee's old, too, what would have happened then?

They had to replace Dumbledore after three movies. James Bond goes through the same kind of face and body regeneration that The Doctor undergoes every so many years. Actor replacement is nothing new.

Bilbo was only a secondary character in the LOTR films, same for Harris as Dumbledore.

Ian McKellen has I think always been considered the best cast and most successfully translated character from book to screen of the LOTR franchise.

He's pitch perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian McKellen has I think always been considered the best cast and most successfully translated character from book to screen of the LOTR franchise.

He's pitch perfect.

Even I can agree to that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Great Goblin looks like absolute rubbish! Only PJ can go so much overboard with the design. :pukeface:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's neck is quite repulsive. Mikko, maybe I'm hearing you wrong, but you should perhaps first and foremost bear in mind that Jackson is a gore director at heart, he's something of a repulsion and gore aficionado. Since he can't have that stuff in these PG rated movies probably accounts for his embellishments with the creature design, as well as incidental details like hatchets buried in craniums. It would help you if you could refrain from viewing his stylings from a strictly J. R. R. Tolkien point of view and be more accepting of the fact that you're going to be viewing Middle-Earth again through the imagination of a film maker who enjoys brandishing broad artistic licence. With The Hobbit, Jackson appears to be free of the outlandish design constraints he was under while making the fiscally risky LotR trilogy and is embracing the free reign he's been given (earned) to make these movies however he deems fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Great Goblin looks like absolute rubbish! Only PJ can go so much overboard with the design. :pukeface:

Could you please stop puking? It's my job to do that.

Duly noted. I will refrain from such activity on the MB from this day forward.

It's neck is quite repulsive. Mikko, maybe I'm hearing you wrong, but you should perhaps first and foremost bear in mind that Jackson is a gore director at heart, he's something of a repulsion and gore aficionado. Since he can't have that stuff in these PG rated movies probably accounts for his embellishments with the creature design, as well as incidental details like hatchets buried in craniums. It would help you if you could refrain from viewing his stylings from a strictly J. R. R. Tolkien point of view and be more accepting of the fact that you're going to be viewing Middle-Earth through the imagination of a film maker who enjoys brandishing broad artistic licence.

Oh yes I know Jackson's roots and certain aesthetics but I do not have to agree with them even though I know what are the reasons behind some of his designs. The sheer excess repulsiveness of the work is just not to my liking. I have not seen his gore and splatter movies for that very reason.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Great Goblin looks like absolute rubbish! Only PJ can go so much overboard with the design. :pukeface:

Could you please stop puking? It's my job to do that.

Duly noted. I will refrain from such activity on the MB from this day forward.

It's neck is quite repulsive. Mikko, maybe I'm hearing you wrong, but you should perhaps first and foremost bear in mind that Jackson is a gore director at heart, he's something of a repulsion and gore aficionado. Since he can't have that stuff in these PG rated movies probably accounts for his embellishments with the creature design, as well as incidental details like hatchets buried in craniums. It would help you if you could refrain from viewing his stylings from a strictly J. R. R. Tolkien point of view and be more accepting of the fact that you're going to be viewing Middle-Earth through the imagination of a film maker who enjoys brandishing broad artistic licence.

Oh yes I know Jackson's roots and certain aesthetics but I do not have to agree with them even though I know what are the reasons behind some of his designs. The sheer excess repulsiveness of the work is just not to my liking. I have not seen his gore and splatter movies for that very reason.

But at the same time, if you have yourself elected to be so hugely enthusiastic about this motion picture project, which you have, then surely you should at least afford Jackson the right to make these films his way and give up the grouchy, dissatisfied and pointless complaints every time you are shown something new from them? Because it smacks of petulance, frankly. You do not get to cherry pick your best bits out of the finished article and grumble at all the other things you don't like just because they might not align with the versions of your own imagination. That would be terribly entitled and spoilt, imo.

It's almost as if you begrudgingly accept receipt of this new, imperfect trilogy; being as it is indeed the only way you're ever going to get any working version of it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also remember the comment from one of the production diaries, the colors used in the sets and costumes are often overdone to compensate for the inherent darkening of the 3D process. To in the film this may look a bit less garish then on a still picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.