Why Did Peter Jackson's Health Delay The Hobbit Production?

  • Thread starter Thread starter arildno
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Delay
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the delays in the production of "The Hobbit," specifically attributing some of the delays to Peter Jackson's health issues, including a stomach ulcer. Participants express their anticipation for the film while also referencing the timeline of "The Lord of the Rings" films and making humorous comparisons to other delayed projects.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses frustration over the delays, citing Peter Jackson's stomach ulcer as a reason for the production hold-up.
  • Another participant shares their excitement for the upcoming movie, indicating a positive reception to "The Hobbit."
  • Several participants discuss the timeline of "The Lord of the Rings" films, questioning the length of time since their release and comparing it to the delays of "The Hobbit."
  • A humorous exchange occurs regarding the historical context of the timeline, with one participant jokingly suggesting that "The Hobbit" should have been released in 1943 due to its narrative timeline.
  • Another participant adds a comedic note about the impact of historical events on film production, referencing World War II in a light-hearted manner.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a mix of anticipation and frustration regarding the delays, with some humorously debating the timeline of the films. There is no consensus on the appropriateness of the delays or the implications of Jackson's health issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various cultural touchpoints and timelines, but there is no resolution on the significance of these delays or their impact on the film's production.

Who May Find This Useful

Fans of "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Hobbit," as well as those interested in film production timelines and the impact of external factors on creative projects.

Physics news on Phys.org


I'm looking forward to the movie, I loved the Hobbit.
 


Please - TLOTR was only like 5 years ago right? It ain't Duke Nukem Forever.
 


russ_watters said:
Please - TLOTR was only like 5 years ago right? It ain't Duke Nukem Forever.
That's roughly a 60% error margin in the time estimate, Russ. (The last movie came in 2003)
 


I don't get it. If LOTR came out in 2003, Hobbit should came out in 1943. After all, LOTR starts 60 years after The Hobbit story.
 


Borek said:
I don't get it. If LOTR came out in 2003, Hobbit should came out in 1943. After all, LOTR starts 60 years after The Hobbit story.
Simple. There was a war going on.
 


russ_watters said:
Please - TLOTR was only like 5 years ago right? It ain't Duke Nukem Forever.

I'm almost positive that you know, but if you can believe it... that game is actually being RELEASED (usual DNF caveats). Now if only they could go back in time and release it when I still wanted to play it!

Seriously, every year that Jackson spends out there is just another blu-ray full of 8-12 hours of "extra footage" of hobbits cleaning their furry toes in the midst of the rolling hills and shires of NZ. :biggrin: Fans should be THRILLED!... I mean, in the commentary when you hear people yelling to be allowed to go home, always going in the background? Hell YES I'll pay 1.5 million for that *audio track in a special edition!

*Note: comes with 'life sized' resin-model hobbit foot, with REAL hair on the top! Ooooohhhh... toe hair... plush.
 


arildno said:
Simple. There was a war going on.

:smile:

...And here I thought I'd kept track of all the reasons to hate Hitler! You know, I bet if one of his 'obersturmbaunbunnyloverfunnypantsenziet' had told him that he'd delay this film by 60 years... well... maybe that would have been a "teachable moment". :wink:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
9K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
766
  • · Replies 222 ·
8
Replies
222
Views
36K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K