Posted on 12/08/2003 1:59:41 PM PST by KantianBurke
BERLIN (Reuters) - New Zealand film director Peter Jackson (news), tipped to win an Oscar for his "The Lord of the Rings" epic, said Monday he would like to make "The Hobbit" prequel to the trilogy and work with some of the same actors again.
Speaking to journalists in Berlin ahead of the European premiere of the last part of the "Rings" trilogy -- "The Return of the King" -- Jackson said he was sad but also relieved that the mammoth project he has worked on for seven years was over.
"I'm glad there's not a fourth Lord of the Rings film next year," he said. "I feel very tired and exhausted."
"I've been working very hard this year. It was the hardest year of the whole seven really," he said, adding that the last part had twice as many computer-generated shots as the second, "The Two Towers," which won an Oscar for digital effects.
"It's my favorite because it has a stronger emotional depth than the other two films, it has a sense of closure," he said.
Despite his exhaustion, Jackson is not resting on his laurels and said if complex rights issues can be resolved he would like to direct "The Hobbit," J.R.R. Tolkien's prequel to the "Rings" trilogy set some 50 years earlier.
"I'd be interested in doing it because I think it would give continuity to the overall chapter," he said.
While many of the lead "Rings" characters do not appear in "The Hobbit" story, the wizard Gandalf, played by Ian McKellen (news), and Gollum, the cave dweller corrupted by the powerful ring, do and should make a comeback. Arwen, the elf princess played by Liv Tyler (news), could also feature again, Jackson said. (UGH! WTF?)
STAND TEST OF TIME
Jackson made movie history by filming all three parts of the "Rings" trilogy simultaneously. The first two films have earned a combined $1.8 billion and won a total of six Oscars (news - web sites).
Barrie Osborne, the producer of the trilogy, and Philippa Boyens, the writer, both said they hoped for more Oscars for the third installment, especially one for Jackson's directing.
"The film is a memorable film that will stand the test of time and be around forever and ever. However winning depends on what's happening in the world, what other films are out there that you're competing with," Osborne said.
Boyens added: "Peter didn't make these films to win an Oscar...It's always been really hard for fantasy films or films perceived as fantasy to get that kind of acknowledgement."
Jackson, 42, has certainly not let fame go to his head. He met journalists in an upmarket Berlin hotel barefoot and wearing a faded shirt and threadbare shorts. While he said "Rings" was the hardest thing he would ever do, more challenges await.
"I just love making movies. I have done since I was seven years old," he said.
Jackson will take a few weeks off over Christmas and then start writing the script for his next project, a remake of the classic "King Kong" which, like the "Rings," he will also film in New Zealand, using the same team of special effects experts.
Richard Taylor, whose special effects workshop made 48,000 props for the trilogy and whose work earned two Oscars, says "King Kong" will be even better than Lord of the Rings.
"I have every aspiration to make King Kong much cooler," he said. "It's going to be a very beautiful film."
Yes! That's the series I'd really like to see. However, unlike LOTR it's very much an allegory and overtly Christian...I seriously doubt anyone would be able to get much funding or support from any of the bigger companies in order to make them. It's a shame...they really would work well as films.
I agree. Because the"postmodernist" view is one of cynicism and nihilism, anyone with a whole heart and noble aspirations is is suspect. The truly heroic only make "them" feel and look small and wormlike, so "they" whittle them down.
I suspect it's part of a the world view that no absolute goodness exists, that everyone is all screwed up because of their parents, and there is no perfection to which to aspire. And people who don't value or acknowledge perfection or the necessity of striving for perfection have to belittle such aspirations in others.
I'm going to re-read them, after this discussion I want to check them out again. I first read them as an atheist teenager with absolutely no religious or spiritual knowledge, and didn't know they were a Christian allegory. I read them for the great story.
If I had money and knew how to make movies (and therefore was a totally different person!) I'd like to try.
Hey! Lurkers who have money and know how to make movies! Over here!
The way I interpret the ending is as a struggle between man's fallen nature (Gollum) and human nature resurrected by faith (Frodo). The message is that if people of faith struggle honestly and courageously, God will bridge the gap when mere human will falters. Also, this ending neatly avoids protraying Frodo (and thus humankind in general) as being TOO competent (and thus not in need of Divine assistance).
Do I agree that LOTR is essentially a Christian allegory? You bet I do!
In the interviews he doesn't come across as very bright, which might explain his searching for meaning at an ANSWER rally.
I liked Eowyn in the theater version. She seemed as she should be cold, hard, and determined. The comic relief scene in the EE version changed my impression of her. She seems younger, flightier, less certain of herself. She seems like some love struck teen.
I liked Boromir in the movie FOTR way more than I liked him in the book, but the EE version, with that Denethor/Boromir/Faramir scene, gave me a completely new vision of Boromir. His father sent him to steal the ring from the start?! What a family of ring grabbers! The ring didn’t corrupt Boromir, his father did. I had always thought that Boromir was a good man who had merely fallen victim to the power of the ring. Who knew!
It seems the entire house of Denethor is a brood of vipers and unfortunately for Tolkien’s vision of Faramir, cruel and obtuse, he seems the ‘lesser man’ of the two viper sons. The Extended Edition may make Faramir more sympathetic, but in a pathetic sort of way. His father is mean and cruel to him, so he is mean and cruel to others (particularly Gollum). He seems someone without the power of mind and spirit to over come an unfortunate beginning. Needless to say, he is nothing like the virtuous Faramir of Tolkien’s book. I did not like Jackson’s treatment of Faramir in any of his versions of the story.
I’ve resigned myself to the fact that although they are barely mentioned by Tolkien in ROTK, Aragorn and Arwen, are the ones Jackson chose to focus on as the main romantic couple. Eowyn and Faramir, Tolkien’s major romance, could not be allowed to compete, so their characters were expendable.
It would have been better for me if they had just left them both out like they did Bombadil. Seeing them treated so poorly makes any version of The Two Towers difficult to watch.
I do think that Jackson will be able to do a good job with the Hobbit. It is a much more conventional type of story. The characterizations do not require as much depth. There are grand battles and special effects requirements that PJ should be able to handle easily. I look forward to seeing it someday.
My theory about Faramir, widely scorned (but still right! < g >) is that modern filmmaking shrinks from portraying genuine nobility
I agree with you, Dan and little jeremiah.
What he said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.