Fake Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Either way.... it will be an interesting fortnight to track.4 AM in morning now...... really must go to sleep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) If you don't think WB played a hand in that decision and it was 100% Jackson, you're nuts.No, you are are jaded individual, who thinks every decision is about money. Well, yes, the studio probably didn't have a lot against making more cash due to 3 movies but it was the filmmakers approaching them.Sorry, fishnets, i don't read you posts. Reading the same crap over and over is tiresome. Edited December 23, 2012 by Elessar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) $900m are saying that. Studios have made sequels for much less reasons.Btw, it wasn't a studio attempting to rake in more cash, it was the filmmakers wanting to tell more of the story.From a 300 page book?Jaws was 300 pages, could you imagine 7.5 hour Jaws movie? The Quint Indianapolis speech would be 45 minutes on it's own. Edited December 23, 2012 by baumer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 And you haven't even seen the first film so this opinion is even shittier than Radagast's beard.Shit, my opinion must be really shitty then. No, you are are jaded individual, who thinks every decision is about money.Less about money and more about saving face that also results in making money.PJ`s career has gone to shit after LOTR and stretching TH into 3 movies was supposed to buy him 3 years of critical and fanboy adoration instead of only 2. i`m glad that at least critics sobered up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) From a 300 page book?From a 300 page book that could have been 600 pages had it been written in the same style as lotr. Edited December 23, 2012 by Elessar 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 From a 300 page book?Jaws was 300 pages, could you imagine 7.5 hour Jaws movie? The Quint Indianapolis speech would be 45 minutes on it's own.Except that Quint`s Indianopolis speech is actually awesome, though I doubt it would have been in PJ`s version. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 From a 300 page book that could have been 600 pages had it been written in the same style as lotr.Bullshit. Theer`s absolutely nothing in TH book + Appendices that justifies 3 books a la LOTR which is why TH was never 3 books to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmnerdjamie Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) No, you are are jaded individual, who thinks every decision is about money. Well, yes, the studio probably didn't have a lot against making more cash due to 3 movies but it was the filmmakers approaching them.And you're a braindead fanboy who thinks studios aren't in the business of making money and its about "the art." You also believe what BS narrative they officially put out. Believe whatever you want to believe. To those with brain-cells who understands how these stuff happens, both sides clearly wanted more and came together. Jackson wanted more footage (since he has had a history of doing this - see LOTR trilogy, King Kong, Lovely Bones) and WB wanted more "Sure thing" movies. Edited December 23, 2012 by filmnerdjamie 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Except that Quint`s Indianopolis speech is actually awesome, though I doubt it would have been in PJ`s version.PJ would have filmed the sinking of the Indianoplis and he would have given a backstory showing one of the sailors enlisting in the navy and he would also show him with his wife, making roast beef dinner one night, they would have a food fight in the kitchen and then they would have a dance scene together, to a love ballad from Frankie Valley or from Buddy Holly. All of this would add nothing to the story of a giant shark that eats people, but somehow PJ would find a way to put 45 minutes of it in the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 No, you are are jaded individual, who thinks every decision is about money. Well, yes, the studio probably didn't have a lot against making more cash due to 3 movies but it was the filmmakers approaching them.Sorry, fishnets, i don't read you posts. Reading the same crap over and over is tiresome. You don't really think studios want to make a film for the art of it, do you? You do know it's a business first and then way down the list is the craft of it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 PJ would have filmed the sinking of the Indianoplis and he would have given a backstory showing one of the sailors enlisting in the navy and he would also show him with his wife, making roast beef dinner one night, they would have a food fight in the kitchen and then they would have a dance scene together, to a love ballad from Frankie Valley or from Buddy Holly. All of this would add nothing to the story of a giant shark that eats people, but somehow PJ would find a way to put 45 minutes of it in the movie.Don`t forget the sailor deciding what to pack into his suitcase for about 10-15 minutes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Don`t forget the sailor deciding what to pack into his suitcase for about 10-15 minutes. :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) You don't really think studios want to make a film for the art of it, do you? You do know it's a business first and then way down the list is the craft of it.What's so difficult to understand here? Yes, studios are out to make money, i never denied that. But unlike jaded individuals i still believe in honesty in some people. When PJ says the incentive to make 3 movies came from the filmmaking team, i believe him. Again, the studio won't say no to additional profit. Edited December 23, 2012 by Elessar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmnerdjamie Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 You're a fool if you believe what anyone says out loud in this business. I know from experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 You are jaded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filmnerdjamie Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) "Peter Jackson wouldn't lie to meeeeee!" *Shakes head* As I said, believe whatever you want to believe, fanboy. I'll stay in reality. Moving on... Edited December 23, 2012 by filmnerdjamie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 I'm sad for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 (edited) You're a fool if you believe what anyone says out loud in this business. I know from experience.Amen. PJ is hiding behind "I`m making this for fans" bullshit because his career went down the toilet. Now I would have believed him had he never said he didn`t want to make TH so that he wouldn`t repeat himself. That was after ROTK when he felt invincible and that he could do no wrong. Well, KK was pretty wrong and TLB was a disaster no spin on that one. So suddenly repeating himself, which is what he did - TH is reportedly repetitive and derivative of LOTR as fuck, nothing inventive there - became a career-saving opportunity so much so he stretched the small book into 2 and then 3 movies. Citing fanboy-leasing preasons although everyone who`s objective and rational can see that there wouldn`t be 3 movies if his career wasn`t in the pooper. Edited December 23, 2012 by fishnets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Elessar is such a contrarian. he`s so rational and objective on TORN that he gets rotten eggs and tomatoes thrown at him by resident douchebags (don`t feel sorry because he tosses them back before they even hit him and poor douchebags end up covered in slime meant for Elessar) but here he is such a jaded PJihadist like those TORN loons that don`t aprpeciate his objectivity over there. I don`t get you. You are smart, charismatic, sexy,etc and don`t belong with the likes of Sunflower, the loonie granny who`s been blabbing about anti-PJ conspiracy by Hollywood since TLB detonated, or some less articulated loons. And yet you emulate them here. Just crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 "Peter Jackson wouldn't lie to meeeeee!" *Shakes head* As I said, believe whatever you want to believe, fanboy. I'll stay in reality. Moving on... When I see Ellesar post, I just picture Gollum saying it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
