Winter is coming...
... to HBO. GRRM posted on his blog (http://grrm.livejournal.com/) and a link to an announcement by a Northern Ireland government site:
http://www.northernireland.gov.uk/news/news-ofmdfm/news-ofmdfm-210409-hbo-to-film.htm
announcing the production starting in October. I'm very interested in seeing how this plays out over the next few years. Hopefully, the result will be strong enough for all seven books to be adapted... assuming GRRM gets them done before they're needed for the adaptations.
If you're not staying spoiler-free for the "Star Trek" movie, here's links to Variety and the Hollywood Reporter's reviews of the flick.
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940096.html?categoryid=31&cs=1
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film-reviews/film-review-star-trek-1003964428.story
Oh, and what the heck, here's Harry Knowles' review from AICN:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40683
And a last bit about Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro deciding not to do a second bridge film between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings but instead to split Hobbit into two films, using the material from the appendices (White Council, battling the Necromancer, etc.) to fill both out. Ian Holm feels he's too old and won't be reprising the role of Bilbo. Similarly, while interested, Christopher Lee doesn't want to fly halfway around the world and relocate to NZ for the length of time the filming would require, almost exactly Holm's sentiments.
http://www.empireonline.com/news/feed.asp?NID=24610
In my opinion, this is the best way to go. Stitching an entire film from the appendices was going to require a lot of invention on the part of Jackson and del Toro. This is the cleanest approach, but where to split the film? With the escape from the Mirkwood elves, perhaps? That leaves a lot of action—Smaug, the Battle of Five Armies—in the second half. After the death of Smaug, or perhaps a cliffhanger with his attack on Laketown? Now, too much action may be shifted into the first film. I guess, a lot of the balance will depend on how the additional material is distributed.
If you're not staying spoiler-free for the "Star Trek" movie, here's links to Variety and the Hollywood Reporter's reviews of the flick.
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117940096.html?categoryid=31&cs=1
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film-reviews/film-review-star-trek-1003964428.story
Oh, and what the heck, here's Harry Knowles' review from AICN:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40683
And a last bit about Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro deciding not to do a second bridge film between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings but instead to split Hobbit into two films, using the material from the appendices (White Council, battling the Necromancer, etc.) to fill both out. Ian Holm feels he's too old and won't be reprising the role of Bilbo. Similarly, while interested, Christopher Lee doesn't want to fly halfway around the world and relocate to NZ for the length of time the filming would require, almost exactly Holm's sentiments.
http://www.empireonline.com/news/feed.asp?NID=24610
In my opinion, this is the best way to go. Stitching an entire film from the appendices was going to require a lot of invention on the part of Jackson and del Toro. This is the cleanest approach, but where to split the film? With the escape from the Mirkwood elves, perhaps? That leaves a lot of action—Smaug, the Battle of Five Armies—in the second half. After the death of Smaug, or perhaps a cliffhanger with his attack on Laketown? Now, too much action may be shifted into the first film. I guess, a lot of the balance will depend on how the additional material is distributed.
GRRM has updated his blog to announce a couple of bits about the A Game of Thrones series, no doubt of most interest to this group that Peter Dinklage will be playing Tyrion. [url]http://grrm.livejournal.com/86651.html[/url]
Reply to this
He has been my choice since "Death at a Funeral."
Reply to this
http://grrm.livejournal.com/86651.html
Stupid link.
Reply to this