Sam Raimi admits the obvious

[Phoenix Dark]

On the eve of what is expected to be the biggest Spider-Man yet, Entertainment Weekly learns that director Sam Raimi is seriously considering directing The Hobbit—a choice that could potentially leave Spidey 4 without a director and, says Kirsten Dunst, a leading lady.

Raimi’s name has been floated in connection with The Hobbit ever since a very public dustup between Peter Jackson and New Line chairman Bob Shaye left the Lord of the Rings prequel without a director. Raimi went on the record for the first time about his potential involvement in the project during an exclusive interview with EW’s Steve Daly for the magazine’s Summer Preview issue, on stands Friday: “Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now. But, um, I don’t know what’s going to happen next for me right now. First and foremost, those are Peter Jackson and Bob Shaye’s films. If Peter didn’t want to do it, and Bob wanted me to do it—and they were both ok with me picking up the reigns—that would be great. I love the book. It’s maybe a more kid-friendly story than the others.”

Dunst says she hadn’t heard any rumors about Raimi and The Hobbit until EW raised the subject in an interview. She says she can’t imagine returning for Part 4 without both her director and her costar: “It’s disrespectful to the whole team, I think, to do that. And audiences aren’t stupid. It’d be a big flop without me, Tobey, or Sam. That would really not be the smartest move. But they know that already. [Sony chief] Amy Pascal would never do that.” Maguire has already expressed his ambivalence about returning for another sequel.

Sony’s President of Production Matt Tolmach tells EW that the studio is cautiously optimistic about retaining the team that launched the Spidey franchise so spectacularly: “Listen, we’re making Spider-Man 4. Our hope, dream and intention is to do it with Sam. But I don’t have a crystal ball.”

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/32312

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

Peter Jackson might be the best filmmaker on the planet right now.

[close]

[Cheebs]

My gut tells me he is doing it. But will Peter be ok with Raimi doing it? They both had the same origin's in indie horror.

[brawndolicious]

hobbit will probably be as shitty as lotr (that's the OBVIOUS), peter jackson is not the best film maker right now.

[Human Snorenado]

"Peter who?"

[Phoenix Dark]

My gut tells me he is doing it. But will Peter be ok with Raimi doing it? They both had the same origin's in indie horror.

My gut feeling tells me it's going to be a trainwreck. Lets see if he can get people like Alan Lee to contribute, or if he can get McKellen back as Gandalf.

[Cheebs]

Mckellen is willing, he has said he is very sad he won't be able to do it with Jackson again and it won't be the same but he has said he will reprise Gandalf in the hobbit eitherway due to his love of playing him.


Peter Jackson is this generations George Lucas, take that as you will. Very important director and a technical marvel but can get lost in his own power and special effects.

[Phoenix Dark]

Mckellen is willing, he has said he is very sad he won't be able to do it with Jackson again and it won't be the same but he has said he will reprise Gandalf in the hobbit eitherway due to his love of playing him

That's good to hear.

What Jackson was able to put together was quite impressive, on more than one level. He was able to get a team of dedicated (and talented) Tolkien enthusiants together and create the perfect atmosphere and look for the movies. Raimi is definitely a great director but I don't think he can fill Jackson's shoes here.

All three LOTR movies were praised by critics and fans alike (despite the revisionist attempts of a few disgruntled message board regulars). In short, Jackson nailed it - unlike another trilogy that was around at the same time. I would prefer Raimi pass on the product but who knows.

[Cheebs]

The LOTR trilogy is going through the same thing star wars did on the internet.

[Phoenix Dark]

The LOTR trilogy is going through the same thing star wars did on the internet.

Well if there was an internet in 1983 I'm sure there'd be a group of fanboys complaining about the movie 24/7. Their whining doesn't change the fact that the original trilogy is universally praised, and for good reason. LOTR is the same.

When the movies were in the theater I don't remember barely anyone complaining. It wasn't until a couple years after that I started hearing "you know, ROTK was pretty sucky..." WTF?

[Cheebs]

The LOTR trilogy is going through the same thing star wars did on the internet.

Well if there was an internet in 1983 I'm sure there'd be a group of fanboys complaining about the movie 24/7.

Read those archived things on google groups. Star Wars fans bitching about Empire Strikes back nonstop in comparison to ANH back in 80-82ish.

[Phoenix Dark]

The LOTR trilogy is going through the same thing star wars did on the internet.

Well if there was an internet in 1983 I'm sure there'd be a group of fanboys complaining about the movie 24/7.

Read those archived things on google groups. Star Wars fans bitching about Empire Strikes back nonstop in comparison to ANH back in 80-82ish.

Freaking distinguished mentally-challenged fellows. ESB is so superior to ANH it's not funny

[Eduardo24]

When the movies were in the theater I don't remember barely anyone complaining. It wasn't until a couple years after that I started hearing "you know, ROTK was pretty sucky..." WTF?

I don´t leave in US, but as far as I know, even though the movies were a huge commercial success, ESB and ROTJ had, at best, mixed reviews by the critics (when they were launched). 

[Phoenix Dark]

When the movies were in the theater I don't remember barely anyone complaining. It wasn't until a couple years after that I started hearing "you know, ROTK was pretty sucky..." WTF?

I don´t leave in US, but as far as I know, even though the movies were a huge commercial success, ESB and ROTJ had, at best, mixed reviews by the critics (when they were launched). 

Well you're wrong about ESB
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/empire_strikes_back/

[Cheebs]

When the movies were in the theater I don't remember barely anyone complaining. It wasn't until a couple years after that I started hearing "you know, ROTK was pretty sucky..." WTF?

I don´t leave in US, but as far as I know, even though the movies were a huge commercial success, ESB and ROTJ had, at best, mixed reviews by the critics (when they were launched). 

Yes they both did. ESB was not a critical darling at all, its RT score and the like have been boosted due to SE reviews. Someone did a RT score only counting original scores and ESB got something like a 50%.


 Many felt it was too dark compared to ANH. Remember no one had any idea of this broader "saga" and were just expecting another fun adventure ala ANH.

[TakingBackSunday]

Difference between Star Wars and Lord of the Rings Trilogies:

Lord of the Rings is actually great.

[Phoenix Dark]

Difference between Star Wars and Lord of the Rings Trilogies:

Lord of the Rings is actually great.

LOTR had amazing writing, good acting, and beautiful music. Star Wars had 1 out that 3. Even still it seems almost blaphemous to say LOTR is a better trilogy. Empire Strikes Back may be better than any of the LOTR movies, although if we're looking at total quality...LOTR>Star Wars

[Cheebs]

A New Hope: 10/10
The Empire Strikes Back: 10/10
Return of the Jedi: 8/10

Fellowship of the Ring: 10/10
The Two Towers: 9/10
Return of the King: 9.5/10

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The Phantom Menace: 7.5/10
Attack of the Clones: 6.5/10
Revenge of the Sith: 8.5/10

[close]

[Phoenix Dark]

A New Hope: 10/10
Empire Strikes Back: 10/10
Return of the Jedi: 9.5/10

Fellowship of the Ring: 10/10
Two Towers: 10/10
Return of the King: 10/10

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The Phantom Menace: 5/10
Attack of the Clones: 4/10
Revenge of the Sith: 7.5/10

[close]

[CajoleJuice]

I just threw up in my mouth.

[Phoenix Dark]

I just threw up in my mouth.

Die Hard: 9.5
Die Harder: 6.5/10
With A Vengence: 8.5/10

[CajoleJuice]

Now those are accurate.

[Flannel Boy]

A New Hope: 5/10
Empire Strikes Back: 6/10
Return of the Jedi: 4/10

Fellowship of the Ring: 9/10
Two Towers: 8/10
Return of the King: 8/10


The Phantom Menace: 2/10
Attack of the Clones: 2/10
Revenge of the Sith: 3/10

[Human Snorenado]

New Hope: 7.5
Empire: 9.0
Jedi: 7.0

Fellowship: 8.0
Two Towers: 8.5
RotK: 8.5

Phantom Menace: 6.0
AotC: 5.0
RotS: 3.5

Pee Dee's IQ: 7.5

[Cheebs]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The Phantom Menace: 5/10
Attack of the Clones: 4/10
Revenge of the Sith: 7.5/10

[close]

I have a higher threshold I guess. I see 7=C, 6=D and so on. TPM is C worthy. Competent but with bad acting and story telling but some damn nice action.

4 and 5 is more worth of like Lost in Space and Chronciles of Riddick to me.


Fuck it Star Trek ratings:

The Motion Picture: 6.5/10
The Wrath of Khan: 10/10
The Search for Spock: 8/10
The Voyage Home: 8.5/10
The Final Frontier: 7/10
The Undiscovered Country: 9.5/10
Generations: 7.5/10
First Contact: 9.5/10
Insurrection: 5/10
Nemesis: 6.5/10

[CajoleJuice]

New Hope: 7.5
Empire: 9.0
Jedi: 7.0

Fellowship: 8.0
Two Towers: 8.5
RotK: 8.5

Phantom Menace: 6.0
AotC: 5.0
RotS: 3.5

Pee Dee's IQ: 7.5

I could easily roll with this.

[Mupepe]

fellowship >>>> Two Towers

[Phoenix Dark]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The Phantom Menace: 5/10
Attack of the Clones: 4/10
Revenge of the Sith: 7.5/10

[close]

I have a higher threshold I guess. I see 7=C, 6=D and so on. TPM is C worthy. Competent but with bad acting and story telling but some damn nice action.

4 and 5 is more worth of like Lost in Space and Chronciles of Riddick to me.

I suppose I could give Phantom Menace a 6 and that would be more fair.

For me

8=solid
7=ok
6=passable
5=bad
4=shit

[Cheebs]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The Phantom Menace: 5/10
Attack of the Clones: 4/10
Revenge of the Sith: 7.5/10

[close]

I have a higher threshold I guess. I see 7=C, 6=D and so on. TPM is C worthy. Competent but with bad acting and story telling but some damn nice action.

4 and 5 is more worth of like Lost in Space and Chronciles of Riddick to me.

I suppose I could give Phantom Menace a 6 and that would be more fair.

For me

8=solid
7=ok
6=passable
5=bad
4=shit

10=Amazing
9=Great
8=Good
7=Average
6=Bad
5=Horrible
4=Worst Thing Ever

I don't think I ever gone below a 4.

[Flannel Boy]

You guys are worse than the old IGN Xbox review crew.

[Cheebs]

You guys are worse than the old IGN Xbox review crew.

I rate IGN style but I don't call myself a journalist.

[Flannel Boy]

You guys are worse than the old IGN Xbox review crew.

I rate IGN style but I don't call myself a journalist.

Nobody calls them journalists either. 

[Phoenix Dark]

spoiler (click to show/hide)

The Phantom Menace: 5/10
Attack of the Clones: 4/10
Revenge of the Sith: 7.5/10

[close]

I have a higher threshold I guess. I see 7=C, 6=D and so on. TPM is C worthy. Competent but with bad acting and story telling but some damn nice action.

4 and 5 is more worth of like Lost in Space and Chronciles of Riddick to me.

I suppose I could give Phantom Menace a 6 and that would be more fair.

For me

8=solid
7=ok
6=passable
5=bad
4=shit

10=Amazing
9=Great
8=Good
7=Average
6=Bad
5=Horrible
4=Worst Thing Ever

I don't think I ever gone below a 4.

Sounds good. I tend to rate in a way that many schools do as well. A 6 (D) is actually "passable" to a certain degree. 7 is ok, as in average. Like say Blade Runner.

9 is great. I tend to give many movies either a high score or a rather low one. Like Babel...the beginning was rather slow, but by the end of the movie I had been pulled in so much. I'd give it a 9, although one could make the argument that it's an 8-8.5

[Solo]

Ill play:

ANH: 7/10
ESB: 9/10
ROTJ: 5/10

TPM: 5/10
AOTC: 1/10
ROTS: 4/10

FOTR: 10/10
TTT: 7/10
ROTK: 8/10

[Cheebs]

Rate uh uh the INDIANA JONES MOVIES

Raiders of the Lost Ark: 10/10
Temple of Doom: 8/10
The Last Crusade: 9.5/10

[Robo]

Sure, why not?

ANH: 6/10
ESB: 9/10
ROTJ: 5/10

TPM: 3/10
AOTC: 2/10
ROTS: 4/10

--

FOTR: 8/10
TTT: 5/10
ROTK: 6/10

--

Raiders: 10/10
Temple: 8/10
Crusade: 9/10

[Cheebs]

Raiders: 10/10
Temple: 8/10
Crusade: 9/10

Pretty much perfect.

[Solo]

ROTLA: 9.5/10
TOD: 6/10
TLC: 8/10
INDYIV: -8 million and counting

[Flannel Boy]

Raiders of the Lost Ark: 9/10
Temple of Doom: 5/10
The Last Crusade: 8/10

[Phoenix Dark]

Raiders: 10/10
Temple: 5.5/10
Crusade: 10/10

[Bloodwake]

I'm not going to play this rating game (maybe later), but Peter Jackson is not the best filmmaker on the planet IMO.

[Van Cruncheon]

jesus fuck, how do you nostalgia-addled turds enjoy temple of doom? i watched it and robin hood: prince of thieves back to back, and i was hard pressed to tell which movie has worse pacing and acting.

Raiders is easily a 10/10, Last Crusade is a 7/10, and Temple is a fucking -2/10.

[MrAngryFace]

<3 Christopher Nolan

[Solo]

Peter Jackson wouldnt make a top 10.

[G The Resurrected]

<3 Christopher Nolan

Except for a few films i totaly agree. Momento was so awesome

[MrAngryFace]

So was the Prestige, and Batman Begins, and didnt he do Insomnia too?

[Van Cruncheon]

yup. the only weak point in insomnia was the casting of robin williams. some critics liked his performance, but i found that he just can't pull off "psychopath" that well -- he's just a tubby, hairy ball of random emoting and goofball mugging.

[G The Resurrected]

yup. the only weak point in insomnia was the casting of robin williams. some critics liked his performance, but i found that he just can't pull off "psychopath" that well -- he's just a tubby, hairy ball of unsubtle emoting.

Yeah thats the only one i just hate, and i dont think it was nolan's fault really. He had created the atmosphere and everything else, but the casting was just off.

[Cheebs]

<3 Christopher Nolan

Except for a few films i totaly agree. Momento was so awesome

what "few"? And its Memento. Not Momento.

All of his films:
Following (1998): 8.5/10
Memento (2000): 10/10
Insomina  (2002): 8/10
Batman Begins (2005): 10/10
The Prestige (2006): 9.5/10

[MrAngryFace]

Nolan's style is just incredibly engaging even without big budget. Whereas with Jackson, I need him and his special effects group to engage me with expensive visuals. Granted The Frighteners is a great movie, but its really not as engaging as say Prestige or Memento. Jackson got lucky with LotR because while the screenplay adaptation was excellent, he really just needed to bring OMG special effects to the table.

I mean if you take away the LEGACY of LOTR you end up with King Kong. Which sucked.

[G The Resurrected]

God king kong was horrible. how was the directors cut?

And i guess i only dislike one nolan film.

[Cheebs]

God king kong was horrible. how was the directors cut?

It isn't a new cut really. Just thrown in deleted scenes. It's the same movie, but like 20 min longer.

[Van Cruncheon]

i'd definitely put chris nolan in my top 5. i tend to separate auteurs from my favorite directors, because while i enjoy auteur films for their technical innovation and prowess, most of the time i want something that specifically doesn't feature eyeball slicing, violent rape scenes, or jarring narrative transitions. some directors bridge the auteur-mainstream gap well, like many of the italian genre directors of the 70s/80s -- leone, fulci, argento et al -- although they seem to be in declining numbers these days, with modern genre directors taking far less risks (or failing to capitalize on an initial success). i suppose i blame the studios. nolan's one of the few that bridges the auteur style and the more mainstream style well. spielberg and jackson CAN, but the former insists on picking bad scripts and working with the same cadre of shitty actors (someone please take tom cruise out of theatres), and jackson post-fellowship turned into what he'd previously hated -- two towers through king kong are the worst type of over-the-top soulless hollywood digital bombast.

[MrAngryFace]

20 MINUTES MORE OF KING KONG?

[G The Resurrected]

20 MINUTES MORE OF KING KONG?

I know its probably worse than it sounds.

[MrAngryFace]

I dunno I thought Two Towers was pretty good, Return of the King was pretty awful at the end tho.

I actually dont even own the extended versions cause god damn theyre long and the added stuff is really more for the super tolkien fans

[Solo]

Off the top of my head, Id put Michael Mann, Chanwook Park, Terry Gilliam, Paul Greengrass, Martin Scorsese, Jean Pierre Jeunet, Michael Gondry, Fernando Mereilles, Alfonso Cuaron, Chris Nolan, Steven Spielberg, Quentin Tarantino, David Fincher, Sam Mendes, Oliver Hirshbeigel, Ridley Scott, Wong Kar Wai, Richard Linklater, and even Bryan Singer over Jackson, in terms of currently active directors.

[MrAngryFace]

Ooh yes, Ridley Scott is good too. I lub me some Kingdom of Heaven Extended

[Solo]

And David Lynch, and David Cronenberg, and the list goes on...

[Van Cruncheon]

Two Towers was okay, but the script changes and the CG choices started the downslide towards gross mainstream appeal. Dwarf tossing jokes, ARAGORN DIES OR DOES HE?!??!, goofy CG wolves, and the haphazard cuts of the Treebeard bits moved him towards the Lucas end of the spectrum. Helm's Deep largely alleviated most of that by being FUCK AWESOME.

Return of the King is just fucking silly. I have a very hard time rewatching it. Oddly, I feel some of the best scenes are the ones he initially cut -- the death of Saruman and the dialog with The Mouth of Sauron. The goofy CG ghosts, THE HOBBIT BED SCENE, the four hundred different endings each shot with more vaseline than a night in G's bungalow, Rudy channeling Heston: wtf!

[MrAngryFace]

ok ok, you win with the treebeard comments. I HATED the treebeard sequence. Im just glad they didnt have that Tom bomboaididil guy