"The Hobbit" offered to.....SAM RAIMI!

[OtepApe]

Hmm, sounds interesting.

I have always enjoyed Raimi's work. He has that experience with Horror and and elements of Fantasy, which are just right for The Hobbit.

I would love to see Jackson return, would love it. No one can deny the brilliance of the LOTR trilogy, so to see him do this would be just right.

Personally, I want Alfonso Cuaron to do it. He is fast becoming one of my top directors.

 

[aaron]

Wow... interesting... could see it working.

 

[JayKay]

You're just one bitter comic book fanboy. Over a billion dollars in revenue and critical acclaim shows it's not the worst big budget blockbusters.



Last time I checked the majority of hardcore Spider-Man fans enjoy both 1 and 2 equally, and are just as pumped for the third and final film.

People are allowed different opinions you know. No need to have a hissy fit.

 

[CrypticOne]

from the onering.net

The New Director of 'The Hobbit' is.....?
11/22/06, 5:47 pm EST - <A href="mailto:[email protected]">Xoanon
Word from a reliable source indicates that Sam Raimi has been approached to direct THE HOBBIT. Since Peter Jackson's (Middle-)earth shattering news that he is off the project, it seems the Spider-Man director may step into his place. Raimi was born on October 23rd, 1959 in Royal Oak, Michigan. His first big hit was 'The Evil Dead' but he really gained cult status with 'Evil Dead II'. It is his amazing work on the Spider-Man series that has propelled Raimi to the mainstream. His latest film 'Spider-Man 3' is due out this May. While there is no word on Raimi accepting the invitation, it remains to be seen who, if anyone, will be replacing Peter Jackson!


I personally think that sam raimi is a perfect match for the material....may I say even more so than Mr Jackson. Before I get flamed....the reason I think this isnt just because of how great a job raimi did of the spider-man movies, or because he knows his way around fx, or how he can hit cutesy beats, comedy...drama.

Ok, the guys an all-rounder. but nevertheless, why I would PREFER raimi over Jackson is because Ijust never agreed with the comments Jackson has made in the past about how he was going to "LOTR-up" The Hobbit and stretch it into 2 movies....it sounded like a horrible idea. The whole joy of the hobbit is that it is a kids book....it IS a fairy-tale,but it's one that's well written and....well y'know! by one of the most notorious authors ever lived.

Sam Raimi's "The Hobbit." Has a nice ring to it
*sorry..couldnt help the pun.*

What do you guys think?

Interesting.

 

[nocomics]

/shrug lets worry about a director when the rights get sorted out and all this corporate bickerig/jocking gets done.. It does'nt matter as long as they hold true to the book(as much as they can).
Jeeze,its been long time since Ive read the Hobbit dont remember much of it...

Heh, someone mentioned Tim burton,that would mean they would have to cast johnny Depp as it seems those two are inseperable(ie spielberg/tom cruise).

Johnny Depp as Smeagle/golem
Bruce Cambell as Gandolf

 

[jimmylace]

tim burton...just isnt a match for this book. a gothy hobbit sounds like a bad idea.

Its an interesting situation though...mgm are looking to have full rights next year when NL's expires, and theyre going for Jackson. On the other hand if New Line get the movie up and running pretty sharpish, well get another director,and a different feeling movie.

as Ive said I think raimi would do a wonderful job of this, and I'm sure the original cast would be glad to work with him. But I doubt if raimi will actually accept.....hes a pretty diplomatic guy and probably wouldnt want to step on jacksons toes.....

 

[LadyVader]

I'm not against another vision, I just don't think Raimi is the man for the job.

 

[PowersOfMind]

Because he's alredy proven himself with the material.

That he has. I guess Raimi should get his shot...but most die-hard fans of the Hobbit are gonna want someone they know can really do the material justice. Peter Jackson has proven that with the LOTR. True Raimi did a great job with Spiderman but still I like Jackson better for the Hobbit.

 

[Catman]

tim burton...just isnt a match for this book. a gothy hobbit sounds like a bad idea.

I said that as a joke. I don't know why that guy took it seriously.

But I doubt if raimi will actually accept.....hes a pretty diplomatic guy and probably wouldnt want to step on jacksons toes.....

He could always get Jackson's blessing.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Remember, Jackson had to start somewhere with LOTR also. If Raimi did the movie, I think he would do a great job.

 

[black_dust]

Im a big Raimi fan but.... hmmm just cant see it working but hey i wont judge until i see the movie carless of who directs it

 

[DACrowe]

Well I can believe he was offered it. But I dunno know if he'll take it. He will have spent 6 years of his life in SFX land with Peter Parker when SM3 comes out, another 3 to make this may be a turn off.

As for him replacing Jackson. I love Jackson's LOTR and think they will be the movies to stand the test of time as the SW of our generation. But none ofh is movies before LOTR were that good and after hitting them out of the park literally with LOTR I think he has grown quite an ego. King Kong was incredibly too long and he doesn't seem to undersetand that. He then lost his Halo and Hobbit projects over money issues.

I think Jackson is great but fans who compare him to Speilberg need to realize Speilberg was versatile and can gets moneys made for cheap and expensive without fighting over dollars with studios all the time in one genre.


With that said Raimi would be an interesting choice for The Hobbit. I'd guess he is a fan and The Hobbit could let him go a tad bit darker than Spider-Man but not as dark as LOTR, because The Hobbit was and is a children's fairy tale. LOTR may be meant for adults but the Hobbit didn't need to be 2 3 hour movie epics with 45 minute battles as Jackson wanted to do (again going back to ego having grown very large). I htink Raimi could do it in a well rounded 2 1/2 hour movie and do it well.

Raimi is a well-rounded director and shows a great deal of versatility. Sure he came from Evil Dead and Darkman but before spider-Man he had made such movies as A Simple Plan and The Gift. The guy has a talent and can do more than SFX blockbusters, which is why he may turn down The Hobbit. But with that siad I'd be pretty excited about Raimi doing the Hobbit, moreso than Verbinski who seemed to lose sight of what makes these movies good in the Pirates sequels.


So, I doubt it will happen but Sam Raimi's Hobbit sounds very interesting to me. Be nice to see him sequeeze his brother, Campbell and Tobey into it too.

 

[Catman]

Im a big Raimi fan but.... hmmm just cant see it working but hey i wont judge until i see the movie carless of who directs it

Like I said before, Raimi is very verstile. Moreso than Peter Jackson. Just compare filmography.

 

[DACrowe]

P.S. To those who say that Jackson is more suitable because he has proven himself with the source material:

well keep in mind that before LOTR Jackson gave us the average Dead Alive movies (below Evil Dead), the awful Frighteners and what was mediocre in Lawnmower Man (I think that was him, though don't quote me).

Raimi has shown more versatility before SM and his ego hasn't ballooned from the Spider-Man movies, while Jackson's since LOTR obviously has.

 

[aaron]

I think alot of people loved The Frighteners! I'm probably wrong but isn't it a cult classic?

And I don't think Jackson did Lawnmower Man.

 

[Spider-Fan]

P.S. To those who say that Jackson is more suitable because he has proven himself with the source material:

well keep in mind that before LOTR Jackson gave us the average Dead Alive movies (below Evil Dead), the awful Frighteners and what was mediocre in Lawnmower Man (I think that was him, though don't quote me).

Raimi has shown more versatility before SM and his ego hasn't ballooned from the Spider-Man movies, while Jackson's since LOTR obviously has.

He didn't do Lawnmower Man. I think that was Brett Leonard.

 

[DACrowe]

Okay, thank you. I still think Dead Alive wasn't anything special and htought The Frighteners was a terrible movie.

 

[Matt]

Could be interesting. Could be very interesting.

 

[aaron]

Well... I'm afraid you're wrong...

No, everyone's entitled to their own opinion. (Even if it's a stupid one.)

 

[DACrowe]

? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But please explain to me why The Frightners was so good that I am stupid to think otherwise then.

 

[Matt]

The Frighteners:

Good: Had Michael J. Fox

Bad: Erm...everything else.

 

[aaron]

God, buddy... chill.

Because the majority of reviews I've ever read praised it, and I'm not saying you're stupid... some peoples ideas in general.

 

[aaron]

The Frighteners:

Good: Had Michael J. Fox

Bad: Erm...everything else.

F**k you too!

 

[DACrowe]

Well okay. I was not under the impression it was well reviewed, but the thing is, the movie is just not very good. The tone is off, it is uneven and not very funny or sscary. It had Michael J. Fox but I never thought it was considered a cult classic like say Evil Dead was though.

 

[aaron]

Okay, I'll admit defeat.