comment #1

Ian Sinclair says ...

Well, Jeff, fair play to you in advance if if you do, but in any event, thanks for that last paragraph, which made me laugh out loud.

comment #2

Ian Sinclair says ...

Jeff, in return for that laugh, here's something that you might laugh at yourself, especially as you have told us an amusing anecdote about yourself and Winstone, who seems a very good sport.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6893453577186558751&q=ray+winstone&total=252&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

comment #3

Jay T. says ...

Man... Raimi did A Simple Plan - a brilliant, highly underrated film that didn't get the attention it deserved, and since then he's turned into a classic example of someone wasting their talent. I understand the comic book thing for a few big paychecks, but I really wish he'd get back to some truly good material.

comment #4

Ray says ...

NOTE TO SAM RAIMI: Please do not become the next Tim Burton or George Lucas.

comment #5

York "Budd" Durden says ...

NOTE TO NEW LINE: Recut the LOTR movies into a reasonable length and re-release instead.

comment #6

lazarus says ...

Note to Peter Jackson: Please do not let Sam Raimi anywhere near The Hobbit.

And Ray, while I hate Tim Burton, with the exception of Planet of the Apes there's still soul in his films. Lucas is also following his own vision, not watering it down to please the Sony suits.

Raimi made A Simple Plan quite a while ago. It was great, but now he's a hack of the greatest magnitude.

comment #7

christian says ...

Raimi has a big heart as anyone who saw SPIDERMAN 1 and 2 can attest. He's as good as his material.

comment #8

Josh Massey says ...

I have no faith in Raimi after Spiderman 3, the worst movie I've seen in a couple of years.

That said, I'm not sure anybody can make "The Hobbit" into an interesting film - it's not even close to the story that "Lord of the Rings" is. Hell, its main hero spends the climax hiding behind a rock while his friends are killed, then has the audacity to whine about it.

Bilbo is a bitch.

comment #9

D.Z. says ...

Even if Jackson wins his case for LOTR, he might not end up getting The Hobbit, because, unlike the former trilogy, anyone can direct that.

lazarus: Um, Lucas still waters down his films; he just doesn't want a middle-man to get in the way of the profits. And Spider Man 3 was still a helluva lot better than Transformers.

comment #10

lazarus says ...

Are we still having this debate about Lucas being all about money? Come on. If that was the case, the prequels would have come out 10 years earlier, followed by sequels. The OT would have come out on DVD at the dawn of the format, instead of just 3 years ago, and rereleased several times over. When he releases only the Special Editions, he criticized as stubborn. When he finally capitulates and releases the Original Theatrical versions, he's a greedy bastard.

You want to criticize his imagination and/or its realization, fine. You want to bemoan the reality of the merchandising the movie with every product under the sun, even though its what allowed him to finance these films himself, fine. But don't make the tired, weak attack that he's trying to bleed the coffers of the public, because above all else Lucas has since the late 70's been about delivering State of the Art, often at the expense of things like good taste or screenwriting. At least his obsession has been in the service of something to do with goodwill and enhancing the filmgoing experience.

comment #11

Gnome de Guerre says ...

The charm, insular mood, and otherworldly strangeness in The Hobbit -- captured well in the Rankin-Bass animation (to my 8 y.o mind at the time) -- could be done by: George Miller (Babe2 Pig in the City mode), Julie Taymor (Titus mode), David Lynch (The Straight Story mode), or Peter Weir. Jackson and Raimi should fight to keep each other away.

comment #12

Ray says ...

lazarus, you must be out of your fucking mind.

Lucas has been bleeding the public of its money through his Star Wars franchise. The only reason he didn't do the prequels sooner was because he (mistakenly) thought he could launch other successful franchises and products - WILLOW, YOUNG INDY. This was, of course, when his mind wasn't completely composed of Star Wars gibberish.

Then, when it was apparent that his engine had run out of steam, he went back to the well three more times. The prequels were huge hits, although lackluster and perceived by many to be inferior to the originals.

After finishing the last one, he expressed his overwhelming desire to take his billions and return to "art films." This has manifested itself in creating two unwanted STAR WARS television shows, and an unending stream of STAR WARS DVD's. He is apparently doing this so that Jett Lucas can sit around, eat designer Ding Dongs and make up lobotomized names like JAR JAR and GUNGUN and POODOO and NABOO and ... ugh ... I can't go on. Who wants to bet Jett has a featured role in the show??

I loved Lucas in the seventies for the breathtaking imagination he showed in the first two STAR WARS films (Return of the Jedi, not so much). But it's time to stop apologizing, and call Lucas what he is today: a greedy, imperialistic, burned out hack.

comment #13

lazarus says ...

Sorry, Ray. Your bitterness isn't enough to prove your points. Lucas served as exec producer on those 80's endeavors, and had he only wanted to make money, he could have multitasked and let other people drive the Star Wars wagon. And explain to me how Willow was an attempt at building another francise? It's a fucking movie. How cynical are you? Would he have made a sequel had it been successful? Who the fuck knows?

Young Indiana Jones was the most expensive television show ever filmed, and may still be unless Lost has surpassed it. He poured an ASSLOAD of the profits from Star Wars into making the thing. The point of the show was to combine the thrills of the Indy films with stories based more around historical events, an entertainment/educational hybrid. Do you know why those Young Indy DVDs haven't come out yet? Because for the last 5 years or so workers at the Skywalker Ranch have been putting historical documentaries to accompany each of the episodes. Yeah, what a greedy hack (a term you obviously don't know the definition of).

And an "unending stream of Star Wars DVDs"? You mean, the release of the prequels as they came out, the Special Editions, and the Original Theatrical Versions, of which the latter two, as I said before, could have been released several times over by now? Making fun of the lame prequel jokes and characters means nothing when it comes to the main point here--that Lucas has passed up more moneymaking opportunities than he cashed in on. Of course, you probably think he turned down Darabont's Indy 4 script because it didn't have enough toy marketing possibilities.

comment #14

Ray says ...

lazarus, if that's how you see it, then fine. But all I see are Star Wars online fan clubs payable to Lucas, as well as Taco Bell commemorative cups, ridiculous parades, and a billion streams of merchandizing all flowing into Lucas' coffers.

And before you start to defend the guy, let's not forget his constant revisionism (i.e. lying) that he uses to continue to justify the funding of his limping, barely-alive saga.

In the 80's: STAR WARS is supposed to be nine films. Then, it's not going to be made at all ... and then the prequels come along, and he says that he always meant for it to be six films.

On releasing the original films: He said they were damaged beyond repair, then ILM repaired them for the Special Editions, and then Lucas changed them. He declared he would never, ever release the originals because they "no longer represented his vision." So, STAR WARS fans snapped up all of the DVD's with the changes. THEN, Lucas decides to release the originals AFTER the fans had bought the revised ones.

After Revenge of the Sith, Lucas claims he wants to leave STAR WARS behind and make art films. He follows this promise up with another Indiana Jones film (and while we're looking forward to it, the franchise is a little long in the tooth) and two more STAR WARS shows that he wants to take to 100 episodes - which just happens to be the number needed for a successful run in syndication.

Do we see a pattern here?

I am glad that you find Lucas' philanthropic endeavors in sound and image quality to be equal to Mother Theresa, but everything he has been doing since 1981, either creatively or technically, have been in service of his fat fucking pocketbook.

comment #15

D.Z. says ...

lazarus: "Are we still having this debate about Lucas being all about money? Come on. If that was the case, the prequels would have come out 10 years earlier, followed by sequels."

He had to fight his ex-wife for the rights during their separation. Plus, I imagine that Howard the Duck shamed him from doing anything new after Willow.

"The OT would have come out on DVD at the dawn of the format, instead of just 3 years ago,"

He probably was planning to double-dip the entire time.

"When he releases only the Special Editions, he criticized as stubborn. When he finally capitulates and releases the Original Theatrical versions, he's a greedy bastard."

He's both, actually.

"You want to bemoan the reality of the merchandising the movie with every product under the sun, even though its what allowed him to finance these films himself, fine."

Howard the Duck is state of the art?

"Lucas served as exec producer on those 80's endeavors, and had he only wanted to make money, he could have multitasked and let other people drive the Star Wars wagon."

See my comment about his divorce...

"The point of the show was to combine the thrills of the Indy films with stories based more around historical events, an entertainment/educational hybrid. Do you know why those Young Indy DVDs haven't come out yet? Because for the last 5 years or so workers at the Skywalker Ranch have been putting historical documentaries to accompany each of the episodes. Yeah, what a greedy hack (a term you obviously don't know the definition of)."

I'd imagine it's more like when part 4 comes out, he plans to force you to buy the movies again so you can see the show.

"You mean, the release of the prequels as they came out, the Special Editions, and the Original Theatrical Versions, of which the latter two, as I said before, could have been released several times over by now?"

He's waiting for the format war to end.

comment #16

lazarus says ...

Ray, I'm only going to respond to you, because as usual D.Z.'s cut and paste style manages to say nothing of merit:

It seems that your main problem with Lucas lies in his dishonesty more than his greed. I mean, him going back and forth about how many films he's going to make, whether or not he's going to continue operating in the Star Wars universe...who cares? Where's the harm there? Is the little boy who was hoping for 9 films still upset that it's not going to happen, or is it the grown up who hated the prequels so much he doesn't want Lucas tarnishing the brand any further?

Ultimately, the big difference here is that you think his DVD releases of the OT were totally calculated from the beginnning to screw the Special Edition haters, and I don't. I consider myself pretty cynical, but I just don't think that's the case. I think in his heart of hearts Lucas really wanted the Special Editions to become the standard, and stubbornly tried to hold out and make that happen. And eventually, he saw that there was enough of an outcry that he capitulated, and released them with no frills, which may seem like a dick move but I think was right on the money. You want the primitive version? Here, have it in all its primitiveness.

I just wish you would acknowledge the fact that Lucas could have released the OT DVDs a long time ago and made about 10 more years worth of money on it, and the educational purposes of Young Indy. By disregarding this stuff in order to make your position seem mor solid you come off completely biased and unobjective, and bitter that you have poured much of your own money into his "fat fucking wallet".

comment #17

D.Z. says ...

Oh, please! If he cared that much about his vision, he could have released both versions like Spielberg did with E.T. Lucas clearly was in it for the cash.

comment #18

BurmaShave says ...

I don't understand how something as bad as SPIDER-MAN 3 could be directed by a man in a suit. A suit! With a tie!

comment #19

Spacesheik says ...

After the shitfest that SPIDERMAN III was I don't ever want to watch another Sam Raimi film ever again.

He should not be let close to this HOBBIT property. I think he's lost his mojo, SPIDERMAN III was really a horrendous film, a terrible script, a waste of talent, too campy for its own good, action set-pieces that were lacking, a love triangle that was tedious and infuriating to sit through, and a more-of-the-same Danny Elfmanesque score that was irritating.

Sam Raimi needs to go on an extended hiatus and stay away from big screen properties. Let him go direct a small murder mystery in cape cod.

Giving THE HOBBIT to Raimi will be the death knell of the film.

They might as well offer the film to Brett Fucking Ratner if they are offering Raimi the flick.

comment #20

D.Z. says ...

The Spider-Man movies weren't that great to begin with, but the third one was probably closer to the essence of the comics than the previous two; so I'm guessing what people really preferred were villains who hammed it up for a good two-thirds of the film, and Maguire's character acting nerdy for the remainder of the time. Anyway, I honestly don't get why the same people who jerked off to the campiness in Army of Darkness for the better part of a decade now hold it against Raimi for using the same approach to Spider-Man.

comment #21

the king says ...

I think I would BOYCOTT it if Jackson isn't in total control of the project.

comment #22

Craig Kennedy says ...

Gnome speaks the truth. The Hobbit has a totally different feel than Lord of the Rings and would probably be better served by someone besides Raimi or Jackson. It's an adventure, not an epic.

And yeah, my perception is probably colored by the Rankin-Bass thing I watched when I was a kid too.

comment #23

christian says ...

You peeps is funny. One of Jackson's biggest influences is Sam Raimi, altho I'd argue that Raimi is better at kick-ass action while Jackson is better with emotion. After Jackson, Raimi would be my top pick.

comment #24

christian says ...

And CJ, you must recall that Otto Preminger did the voice of Elvenking in the Rankin-Bass HOBBIT, right? "You vill find and battle Smaug, Bilbo, yes? Mach Schnell!"

comment #25

Spacesheik says ...

"You peeps is funny. One of Jackson's biggest influences is Sam Raimi, altho I'd argue that Raimi is better at kick-ass action while Jackson is better with emotion. After Jackson, Raimi would be my top pick."

The climax of SPIDEY 3 was ruined by:

1. Cut aways to an obnoxious TV reporter.
2. JJ Jameson and the kid with the camera
3. A Godzilla-sized Sandman
4. Bad CGI (i.e. the falling taxi through cobweb sequence, among others)
5. A sentimental, "lets all hug and make up" sequence, totally deflating the minimal drama prior to it

No, my friend. I think Raimi is good at Evil-dead type hysterical action scenes (i.e. Dr. Octopus hospital sequence in SPIDEY 2) but he aint very good at formulating and executing an interesting action scene.

Even an 80s action like hack Russell Mulcahy handles action better than Raimi.

comment #26

Ian Sinclair says ...

Bob Shaye knows that if he can't get a deal in place for Peter Jackson to direct THE HOBBIT he can kiss his job at New Line goodbye.

comment #27

christian says ...

"but he aint very good at formulating and executing an interesting action scene."

You are factually incorrect sir. Go back and watch the action set pieces in SPIDERMAN 2 -- they are unarguably the best superhero battles ever committed to film, especially the train battle, which has a mini-narrative and emotional peak.

Raimi not an action director? Have you seen EVIL DEAD, EVIL DEAD 2, and ARMY OF DARKNESS? Few directors could pull off what Raimi does in those low budget wonders.

comment #28

RMBurnett says ...

Ray and D.Z.,

Eh. THX 1138, AMERICAN GRAFITTI, STAR WARS then as a producer EMPIRE and RAIDERS...and those three little letters...I...L...M...and you have a man who changed motion pictures forever.

That's a life and legacy.

And if you've ever watched the prequels with a six year old, you'd know they weren't entirely unsuccessful. And that's not a bad thing.

Everything else is gravy. Lots and lots and lots of gravy.

And I'm sure we'd all love a taste of that bird...

comment #29

Rich S. says ...

Entertainment Weekly did a cover story last week about Jackson doing The Hobbit. If nothing else, EW is a total mouthpiece for all Warners' properties, including New Line. The EW piece is the clearest indication that Jackson doing The Hobbit is no longer an "if" but a "when."

Plus, that Rankin/Bass version also had Orson Bean, Hans Conried, Richard Boone, Paul Frees and John Huston.

comment #30

D.Z. says ...

RM: "Eh. THX 1138, AMERICAN GRAFITTI, STAR WARS then as a producer EMPIRE and RAIDERS...and those three little letters...I...L...M...and you have a man who changed motion pictures forever."

THX was a 1984 knock-off; American Graffiti had a crappy sequel; Star Wars was a remake of a Kurosawa film done Flash Gordon-style; and ILM is responsible for ruining Transformers.

comment #31

D.Z. says ...

Raiders was good, but it was a collaboration.

comment #32

christian says ...

"American Graffiti had a crappy sequel"

Which instantly disqualifies the film?

comment #33

D.Z. says ...

christian: It was a sign of things to come for George.

comment #34

Ray says ...

@ Burnett - There's no doubt that Lucas created a massive legacy, and changed movies forever ... in the space of around 10 years (we can barely accept THX-1138, since it came and went without much influence, unfortunately). Since then, Lucas has spent over 25 years systematically selling out everything in his past in order to cash in completely.

The question is: Do the creative first ten years negate or overshadow the following 25 years of cinematic whoring?

In my mind, not anymore. Lucas crossed an invisible line somewhere around the time when he announced that he was making the television shows, or maybe when he decided to release the original trilogy on DVD. At that point, it became obvious that his "creative vision" was more about creative ways to siphon cash from hopeful wallets.

comment #35

Craig Kennedy says ...

In my mind Ray, nothing changes the 10 years of cinematic crispedy-crunchedy-chocolately goodness that Lucas provided. I'm not defending the ensuing 25, but they simply don't exist. You can use them to argue that Lucas is a douche I guess, that's fine, but that doesn't make me retroactively change my opinion of the first 10. They are what they are and not even Lucas himself can take them away from me.