don't believe anything you see on IMDB. 90% of it is fake.
Its not in pre-production. Peter Jackson is not on board to direct...yet. and if he's not they are maybe looking at Sam Raimi...but its not sure yet.
here are a few articles:
and
http://www.film.com/movies/story/iss...97472/17031343
Well, Sam Raimi keeps getting the question and last week he answered it. Would he direct The Hobbit if Peter Jackson bowed out (over the long running dispute with New Line). His answer was a very polite, very political and I am very much paraphrasing here: Of course I would, are you nuts? I just won't do it if they're still screwing Jackson over. He has to sign off on me, first. Of course, the real question is: Should Raimi be the one to replace Jackson if he doesn't come back? In a word, hell yes!
Here's why:
It's fitting.
First of all, Jackson borrowed a lot of inspiration from Raimi over the years. Hell, one need only look at Jackson's cribbing of Raimi's Evil Dead with his own equally brilliant Dead Alive (aka Brain Dead). As brilliant as Jackson's work is, trying to separate it from its predecessor is an exercise in futility. And if you want to see Raimi's influence on Lord of the Rings then take a gander at the initial scene in Fellowship of the Rings when the Hobbits first encounter the Ringwraiths. Whether meant as an intentional homage or an unintentional assimilation of Raimi's style into Jackson's DNA, that scene is so Sam Raimi it hurts.
Raimi's proven track record.
Raimi showed to us with the first two Spider-Man movies that he could take material with a huge fan base, alter and modify it for the big screen, but stay true enough to the characters and concept to actually make movies that pretty much made everyone happy. Say what you will about Spider-Man 3, but that was proof of what happens when a studio messes with a genius. Raimi wanted to make a movie about the Sandman and the Vulture escaping from prison. The studio forced him to make a Venom movie because they thought that would somehow make them more money than a regular Spider-Man movie. The result was a movie that started brilliantly then went to hell the minute the Black Suit/Venom stuff kicked in. Raimi always said he never wanted to make a Venom movie. This is why you shut the hell up and let the guy who made two $800 million movies do whatever he wants to do.
Raimi's lack of ego in his work.
The one thing I admire about Raimi is that his last few films (but most notably his Spider-Man films) all seem to be more about doing the story justice than they are about telling Sam Raimi's version of the story. Some directors feel they need to put all their own flourishes and touches on a film to make sure it stands out as their vision. Raimi puts just enough in for his fans, but makes sure that the film is about the material, not about how great a director he is. And that's why he's always comes across as a great director. It's the same approach Jackson took on Lord of the Rings.
Raimi's one of the only guys playing on the same level.
Really, there aren't a lot of guys who wouldn't be intimidated by the vast scope of following in someone else's footsteps like Jackson. Raimi's walked down the road of that level of success. They share spots in the top ten together. Raimi won't be caught up in the meta-thinking of the whole thing. He'll do a job. And I'm convinced he'd do a good one.
C. Robert Cargill
Its not in pre-production. Peter Jackson is not on board to direct...yet. and if he's not they are maybe looking at Sam Raimi...but its not sure yet.
here are a few articles:
http://breakingnews.iol.ie/entertain...86&p=z35y5589z
McKellen eyes Hobbit role
21/10/2007 - 17:35:03
Ian McKellen would be "disappointed" if he could not reprise his role as wizard Gandalf in the movie adaptation of JRR Tolkien's novel 'The Hobbit'.
McKellen, who has appeared in the role in each of the three films from the Lord of the Rings trilogy, is eager to land the part - even though Peter Jackson will not be directing.
He says: "If I am still functioning and working well, it is very likely I would be asked to do it.
"I am glad to read that it is looking more and more likely.
"I would be disappointed if they didn't want to have the original Gandalf."
And the Lord of the Rings' original director Peter Jackson, who pulled out of the planned production due to a legal dispute with film studio New Line, has given his support if McKellen chose to appear in the prequel.
McKellen adds: "When Peter announced he had withdrawn from The Hobbit, he sent me an email saying: 'Because I am not going to do it, it doesn't mean you have to do the same. Of course, you must play Gandalf whether I direct or not'."
McKellen eyes Hobbit role
21/10/2007 - 17:35:03
Ian McKellen would be "disappointed" if he could not reprise his role as wizard Gandalf in the movie adaptation of JRR Tolkien's novel 'The Hobbit'.
McKellen, who has appeared in the role in each of the three films from the Lord of the Rings trilogy, is eager to land the part - even though Peter Jackson will not be directing.
He says: "If I am still functioning and working well, it is very likely I would be asked to do it.
"I am glad to read that it is looking more and more likely.
"I would be disappointed if they didn't want to have the original Gandalf."
And the Lord of the Rings' original director Peter Jackson, who pulled out of the planned production due to a legal dispute with film studio New Line, has given his support if McKellen chose to appear in the prequel.
McKellen adds: "When Peter announced he had withdrawn from The Hobbit, he sent me an email saying: 'Because I am not going to do it, it doesn't mean you have to do the same. Of course, you must play Gandalf whether I direct or not'."
http://www.film.com/movies/story/iss...97472/17031343
Well, Sam Raimi keeps getting the question and last week he answered it. Would he direct The Hobbit if Peter Jackson bowed out (over the long running dispute with New Line). His answer was a very polite, very political and I am very much paraphrasing here: Of course I would, are you nuts? I just won't do it if they're still screwing Jackson over. He has to sign off on me, first. Of course, the real question is: Should Raimi be the one to replace Jackson if he doesn't come back? In a word, hell yes!
Here's why:
It's fitting.
First of all, Jackson borrowed a lot of inspiration from Raimi over the years. Hell, one need only look at Jackson's cribbing of Raimi's Evil Dead with his own equally brilliant Dead Alive (aka Brain Dead). As brilliant as Jackson's work is, trying to separate it from its predecessor is an exercise in futility. And if you want to see Raimi's influence on Lord of the Rings then take a gander at the initial scene in Fellowship of the Rings when the Hobbits first encounter the Ringwraiths. Whether meant as an intentional homage or an unintentional assimilation of Raimi's style into Jackson's DNA, that scene is so Sam Raimi it hurts.
Raimi's proven track record.
Raimi showed to us with the first two Spider-Man movies that he could take material with a huge fan base, alter and modify it for the big screen, but stay true enough to the characters and concept to actually make movies that pretty much made everyone happy. Say what you will about Spider-Man 3, but that was proof of what happens when a studio messes with a genius. Raimi wanted to make a movie about the Sandman and the Vulture escaping from prison. The studio forced him to make a Venom movie because they thought that would somehow make them more money than a regular Spider-Man movie. The result was a movie that started brilliantly then went to hell the minute the Black Suit/Venom stuff kicked in. Raimi always said he never wanted to make a Venom movie. This is why you shut the hell up and let the guy who made two $800 million movies do whatever he wants to do.
Raimi's lack of ego in his work.
The one thing I admire about Raimi is that his last few films (but most notably his Spider-Man films) all seem to be more about doing the story justice than they are about telling Sam Raimi's version of the story. Some directors feel they need to put all their own flourishes and touches on a film to make sure it stands out as their vision. Raimi puts just enough in for his fans, but makes sure that the film is about the material, not about how great a director he is. And that's why he's always comes across as a great director. It's the same approach Jackson took on Lord of the Rings.
Raimi's one of the only guys playing on the same level.
Really, there aren't a lot of guys who wouldn't be intimidated by the vast scope of following in someone else's footsteps like Jackson. Raimi's walked down the road of that level of success. They share spots in the top ten together. Raimi won't be caught up in the meta-thinking of the whole thing. He'll do a job. And I'm convinced he'd do a good one.
C. Robert Cargill
. oh well i'm over it now. still it would be awesome if it gets off the ground
Comment