Peter Jackson returns to the fantasy genre

He has only optioned the books. Jacksons next film is still going to be The Lovely Bones.
 
Jackson proved himself and awesome director with LOTR and even though I know good directors can have duds, and the premise of this seems a bit dumb to me, I have confidence he can pull it off.
 
ultimatefan said:
I dunno, this kinda feels like Jackson is playing safe, going for the territory he´s familiar with.
Agreed. Kinda like the directors who take on two big superhero franchises IMHO.
 
Erm...there wasn't actualy a great deal of directorial skill in LOTR, the films were acting, SFX and story based, not really directorially challenging or intriguing.
 
Cyrusbales said:
Erm...there wasn't actualy a great deal of directorial skill in LOTR, the films were acting, SFX and story based, not really directorially challenging or intriguing.
You keep telling yourself that. :whatever:
 
I SEE SPIDEY said:
You keep telling yourself that. :whatever:


Please tell me the innovative and wonderous techniques, shots and directorial genius? He did more adventurous stuff in Braindead and bad taste, pretty much anyone could have directed LOTR.
 
Directing is about great shots but mostly it is about getting great performances and crafting great scenes ,knowing when to hold and when to move,how to let a scene breathe.where to edit and so on,PJ showed how to do this on a grand scale in the LOTR trilogy
 
hunter rider said:
Directing is about great shots but mostly it is about getting great performances and crafting great scenes ,knowing when to hold and when to move,how to let a scene breathe.where to edit and so on,PJ showed how to do this on a grand scale in the LOTR trilogy

Agreed.

I doubt there could be any another director for making so massive trilogy.
 
hunter rider said:
Directing is about great shots but mostly it is about getting great performances and crafting great scenes ,knowing when to hold and when to move,how to let a scene breathe.where to edit and so on,PJ showed how to do this on a grand scale in the LOTR trilogy

Directing is about getting performances, but it's showing these performances, and it showing the story, PJ relied on the actors to convey it, not using fillmic terms etc. It's not just about the acting or story, directing is far more sophisticated than that! And PJ just does simple and plain things, with his 'style'.
 
Cyrusbales said:
Directing is about getting performances, but it's showing these performances, and it showing the story, PJ relied on the actors to convey it, not using fillmic terms etc. It's not just about the acting or story, directing is far more sophisticated than that! And PJ just does simple and plain things, with his 'style'.

Directing is to put the story over combining the visual with the narrative,not everything has to have symbolism in it to be good and exciting direction
PJ put stunning visuals onscreen and coaxed and crafted great performaces out of his cast,i'll take that over a bunch of fancy fades and edits and some "this shot represents religious whatyamacallit" symbolism
 
hunter rider said:
Directing is to put the story over combining the visual with the narrative,not everything has to have symbolism in it to be good and exciting direction
PJ put stunning visuals onscreen and coaxed and crafted great performaces out of his cast,i'll take that over a bunch of fancy fades and edits and some "this shot represents religious whatyamacallit" symbolism

A lot of the stunning visuals, were effects, that the shots had to filmed around. He was filming so he could use effects, so he was being directed by the technical staff! Most directors could have done the same work with his budget. A lot would have done better too!
 
Cyrusbales said:
A lot of the stunning visuals, were effects, that the shots had to filmed around. He was filming so he could use effects, so he was being directed by the technical staff! Most directors could have done the same work with his budget. A lot would have done better too!

You have a right to your view i guess but you are very wrong IMO
 
hunter rider said:
You have a right to your view i guess but you are very wrong IMO

His early work was more directorially skilled, even though it was very kitsch. King king , WHY??? LOTR, was good, but could have been so much better. He's an average director and is nothing special!
 
Cyrusbales said:
His early work was more directorially skilled, even though it was very kitsch. King king , WHY??? LOTR, was good, but could have been so much better. He's an average director and is nothing special!

Like i said you can have your opnion but like a lot of them i think your wrong ;)
 
hunter rider said:
Like i said you can have your opnion but like a lot of them i think your wrong ;)

Well i like to think I have a keener insight into what directors do, so if you can stand to watch LOTR all through again, try to look out for any inventive use of any techniques or anything out of the ordinary. Just a thought...
 
Cyrusbales said:
Well i like to think I have a keener insight into what directors do, so if you can stand to watch LOTR all through again, try to look out for any inventive use of any techniques or anything out of the ordinary. Just a thought...

LOL sure...
 
suresportng2.jpg
 
WETA working on dragons and historical battles? I'm signed up already. I wish Jackson would do more original work though, just to pad out his portfolio. I love his work, I just want to see more variety from him.
 
My only gripe is that he better do the Hobbit first. I want a WETA based Smaug Dragon before he takes on another.

Other than that I'm sold :up:
 
Erzengel said:
So this would have been my fate, if I never realized Star Wars is just a movie and what a girl felt like.

Frightening, isn't it?
 
I really can't wait if this happens so far I havn't been disappointed with a PJ movie yet.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"