Blogs Home
Hound News
Awards Watch
Features
Movie Reviews
DVD Reviews
Lists
Interviews
Trailer Watch
100 Greatest Movies
Recent Blog Posts
Videohound Blog Archives
Print
Email
Del.icio.us
Digg it
Lists 
June 2, 2010
Seven Filmmakers Who Should NOT Direct The Hobbit
Millions of movie fans shed a tear during their Memorial Day barbecue when they heard that the great Guillermo del Toro had left The Hobbit due to too many issues regarding the constant delays of filming. While a few film journalists correctly noted that it’s ridiculous that this film couldn’t get off the ground fast enough to satisfy del Toro (WTF is the hold-up on a project that is a license to print money), more wannabe movie bloggers spent time speculating on who would take his place, suggesting names as diverse as Sam Mendes, Neil Marshall, and, of course, Peter Jackson himself.
Rather than look at who SHOULD direct The Hobbit, it got our twisted minds thinking about the other scenario. What if the production falls into the wrong hands? We all hope that a director as talented as del Toro will fill his over-sized shoes, but how many times has an A-list director left a film only to be replaced by the wrong one? Isn’t it possible that the people we really want to take over The Hobbit will consider del Toro’s departure a stain on the film and not want to sign on? So, we wanted to offer some advice to the producers as to who NOT to hire when considering a new director for The Hobbit.
Here are seven filmmakers that might possibly be considered. We don’t need to go into why obviously bad choices like Uwe Boll or Paul W.S. Anderson shouldn’t even be allowed to see The Hobbit much less direct it as, we assume, those kind of names are not being discussed – anywhere. Although Uwe Boll’s The Hobbit might be better than some alternatives in the same way drunk people on Cops sometimes fit the entertainment bill.
For the record, if we were doing a who SHOULD direct the film piece, Alfonso Cuaron would be at the top of our short list. He’s close friends with del Toro and has probably discussed the film with Guillermo, clearly has the directorial chops, and has made quality fantasy/sci-fi in the past. There’s no better choice, although Sam Raimi ain’t a bad consolation prize.
by Brian Tallerico
**********
Director Neill Blomkamp (right) and David James on the set of District 9.
Who Suggested It: Playlist
Why They Might Ask Him: It seems like an obvious choice, doesn’t it? Blomkamp’s directorial debut, District 9 was the very, very rare sci-fi/fantasy film that connected with both critics and audiences, taking the phenomenon all the way to a Best Picture nomination. His encore is going to be a tough one, so why not attach him to something that already has the goodwill of The Hobbit? He also clearly has a tight, accomplished working relationship with Peter Jackson.
Why They Shouldn’t: Because it could eat him alive. The fact is that Blomkamp is still an untested commodity and a project of this size could really use someone a little more battle-tested. If the great del Toro couldn’t handle the red tape and delays, why would Blomkamp be able to cope with the pressure? And wouldn’t it suck for someone who has shown as much insane career potential as Blomkamp to get crushed by a machine as big as The Hobbit is going to be? One of the charms of District 9 was that it was a “small,” low budget film that became a big one. Considering how good the film looked on a low budget, it could actually end up being one of the more influential of the last few years. Why leave behind a career that could revolutionize the genre of science fiction by proving that low budgets can produce action films that look as good as the big boys?
**********
Ridley Scott on the set of American Gangster.
Who Suggested It: Cinema Blend
Why They Might Ask Him: He has an incredible resume, has handled fantasy and period films before, and can clearly handle the scope and size of a massive production like this one. For some reason, his name keeps coming up with Peter Weir’s (who we’ll get to later) as people who have the experience some deem necessary for this kind of project.
Why They Shouldn’t: Let me count the ways. One, Robin Hood. Two, Body of Lies. Three, American Gangster. Need we continue? The fact is that Sir Ridley Scott is no longer the same director who made Alien and Blade Runner and, even then, he’s not the right fit for this project. Scott certainly has the technical expertise for a project like The Hobbit and arguably more so than whoever gets the job, but he’s missing the human element that distinguished the Lord of the Rings films. He doesn’t have the heart for it any more. Ridley Scott’s The Hobbit would be a beautiful film that would probably win several technical Academy Awards, but, like most of his recent output, it wouldn’t connect with audiences on the emotional level needed to really work.
**********
J.J. Abrams on the set of Star Trek.
Who Suggested It: Mostly talkbacks and message board posts, but it’s a name that’s come up often.
Why They Might Ask Him: Because everybody seems to love the man and he’s taken over a franchise before and turned it into critical and commercial gold (Star Trek). He’s a man with a love for genre entertainment and would certainly bring a creative spark to The Hobbit.
Why They Shouldn’t: It’s far from the worst choice on this list and could certainly end being a better one than is actually made but Abrams just doesn’t seem like the right fit. He’s such a modern director, making films or TV shows set in present day or the future, that it seems difficult to picture him working with swords, sandals, and CGI. It’s hard to get snarky dialogue into a hobbit’s mouth. One of the most successful elements of Star Trek was that the film brought humanity back to the deck of the Enterprise by largely removing many of the sci-fi elements and making it more accessible for a wider demographic. The Hobbit needs someone just as concerned with creatures as with humans. Also, no one in J.R.R. Tolkien’s world has the daddy issues so prevalent in Abrams’ work.
**********
Baz Luhrmann on location filming Australia.
Who Suggested It: Television Without Pity
Why They Might Ask Him: He’s in the right area geographically being an Australian director and has a love for romantic, over-the-top, old-fashioned cinema.
Why They Shouldn’t: Australia. As much as I love Moulin Rouge! and even admire Luhrman’s Romeo + Juliet, he proved with Australia that he can easily let a project get out of control and very few projects in any phase of production have the possibility of getting out of control as much as The Hobbit. Australia was seven movies in one that never formed a cohesive sum and it’s too easy to see The Hobbit ending up with the same disjointed, disconnected structure and feel as Luhrman’s failed epic. No, Baz needs to go the other way. Make a small picture like Strictly Ballroom and remind viewers why your romanticism is still relevant to the film world of the 1910s.
**********
Peter Weir on the set of Master and Commander:
The Far Side of the World. © and TM 2003 Twentieth
Century Fox Film Corporation and Universal Studios
and Miramax Film Corp. All rights reserved.
Who Suggested It: IndieWire among others.
Why They Might Ask Him: His ability with costumes, massive design, and huge action set pieces was proven with the excellent Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World and he’s also been a chameleon when it comes to genre as proven by works as diverse as The Truman Show and Witness.
Why They Shouldn’t: He’s one of the best directors alive and while that would make him seem like an obvious choice, The Hobbit doesn’t need a name THAT big. Just as Martin Scorsese, Terrence Malick, or James Cameron would be bad choices for the same reason. All of these men would make technically accomplished films for sure but they bring the baggage of reputation that The Hobbit just doesn’t need. With the specific case of Weir, he took off most of the last decade and has never been much of a director for hire. Some filmmakers need to find their own material and just never seem like the right fit to plug in when someone else leaves. Weir is such a director. Sometimes even a great director isn’t the RIGHT director.
**********
Brett Ratner on the set of Rush Hour 2.
© 2001 - New Line Productions, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.
Who Suggested It: Nobody, but we’re still scared.
Why They Might Ask Him: Well, he did take over when Matthew Vaughn notoriously ditched on X-Men: The Last Stand and someone might get the bright idea that he could do it again. He’d also probably pay THEM to do it, he would be so excited.
Why They Shouldn’t: Avoid anyone who’s ever taken over a franchise before – Ratner, Joel Schumacher, even David Fincher. As for Ratner specifically, he’s an interesting personality but doesn’t have the directorial chops to handle a project as enormous as The Hobbit and he proved it with The Last Stand. As that film became cluttered with too many characters, Ratner confirmed that he’s of the Michael Bay school of “more is better.” The worst thing that could possibly happen to The Hobbit would be to hire a director from the Bay school. The amazing thing about the LOTR films was that they always valued quality over quantity. Sure, they had massive, epic scope, and Ratner could probably get that element of the franchise, but he’d miss the emotional, individual character arcs. Sometimes it’s about the soldier more than the army.
**********
Peter Jackson on the set of The Lovely Bones.
Who Suggested It: Um, everybody.
Why They Might Ask Him: Um, duh.
Why They Shouldn’t: Stick with me here. This is a bad idea. Nearly every review of The Hobbit is going to start with a comparison to LOTR. Why make it so easy for critics who are ready to declare Jackson’s return to Middle Earth a shadow of the last trilogy? The Hobbit needs its own distinct personality to work and that would be harder to pull off with Jackson in the director’s chair. Heck, it felt like most people viewed The Lovely Bones in light of Jackson’s infamous trilogy. And the fact is that The Lovely Bones didn’t work for a number of reasons and put Jackson in a position where he really needs a hit outside of Tolkien to cement the remaining decades of his career. If he can’t step outside of the shadow of the franchise and find artistic success without characters named Baggins, people are going to start wondering if he’ll ever be able to do so. Would Jackson’s The Hobbit be great? Probably, but I’m thinking about the next era of Jackson’s career and he needs to prove he can find the same kind of Oscar success without the help of wizards and orcs.
**********
Why isn't Uwe Boll number one on this list.
Oh yeah no doubt dude, you picked some good ones!
Tell a Friend about MovieRetriever.com
Email your friends, Invite them to join the MovieRetriever.com community to create and share movie lists and review them. 
MovieRetriever.com members can:
- Rate movies
- Write your own reviews
- Create your movie watch lists
- Share lists with the community
Community Favorites
