Peter Jackson is the New George Lucas… and I Can’t Stand it!

So the other day I’m walking through the store, and I see, right there, in the movie section, the extended edition of “The Hobbit: an Unexpected journey” and I pretty much lost my mind…

but let me back up…. I’m a huge Lord of the Rings fan. I loved the movies. The first time I saw “The Fellowship of the Ring” I was blown away. It was easily the fastest 3 hours of my life. I went to see all the movies multiple times in theaters, and while none of my experiences watching the LOTR movies ever matched that first time in theaters, I still loved the way they were made. I made sure to read the books before “The Two Towers” was released, so I could join all the super-nerds in assessing the differences between the books and the movies and act like I knew about this stuff before the movies came out. Needless to say I was swept up in the LOTR craze. And I loved it!

yes... Just like this!

yes… Just like this!

I loved not only that Peter Jackson managed to stay very true to the books, but the way he made the movies was fantastic and brilliant! from the sets they built on location, to the incredible CG battle effects, to creating remarkably lifelike characters like Gollum, the adventure was a thrill to behold.

So naturally, I couldn’t wait for Peter Jackson to do “The Hobbit.” But I should’ve known…

When I saw Jackson’s rendition of “King Kong”, I should’ve seen what would be coming if he were allowed to direct “The Hobbit.” To this day, I can’t figure out why Kong received such excellent movie reviews. an hour and a half into Jackson’s CG horror-fest I realized how much I couldn’t wait for it to end. To me it felt more like that awful Jurassic Park sequel than  the cinematic spectacle everyone touted it to be…

And then word came out that Jackson was doing The Hobbit. And even though I was bored out of my mind in Kong, I held on to my nostalgia for LOTR and said “THIS WILL BE FANTASTIC!”

… But it wasn’t… on so many levels…

I haven’t seen either of the Hobbit movies in theaters. I was instantly turned off when I found out that Jackson would be splitting a book a third the size of LOTR into 3 movies. Then I saw it was only getting average reviews, so I said “well… It’s just going to be a letdown…

And so far, at least in my all-important book. Jackson has failed... or at least... failed to make it interesting.

And so far, at least in my all-important book. Jackson has failed… or at least… failed to make it interesting.

Long story short, I have attempted to watch both of the Hobbit movies, but I’ve been unable to finish them. they just don’t have the same interest as their predecessors…

But that’s not the real reason I’m here today. If all I were here to blog about were my disappointment in “The Hobbit” movies, then today’s post wouldn’t be that big a deal…




now stop rolling your eyes at me! It’s true!

“But if he were George Lucas he would’ve reedited and changed his movies and upset the fans years later. I doubt Jackson will do that!”

No no no… I’m not talking about that. You’re probably right. But Peter Jackson IS the new George Lucas in the way he has changed movies and the way movies are made.

Think about it! before LOTR would people have shot one movie/book and split it up into three?

But Jackson convinced a movie studio to let him do it with LOTR. And for a huge story like that it worked, and saved audiences from 3 year waits for each sequel. But the fallout has been terrible…

If it weren’t for Peter Jackson, I wouldn’t have had to sit through “Harry Potter 7: Part one.” I mean seriously… two thirds of that movie were completely unnecessary.

If It weren’t for Peter Jackson, I wouldn’t be waiting for “Mockingjay: Part one” knowing full well that, like “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” “Mockingjay” is the book in the series least in need of two movies.

If it weren’t for Peter Jackson, I could’ve dealt with weirdos screaming about those stupid “Twilight” movies for… at least one less movie!

“Wait, how can you blame that on Peter Jackson? He didn’t split movies up before those came out!”

Cool! The girl from lost is going to be in the movie! And we made up a character so she could be in it!?!?!? even AWESOMERRRRR!!!!

Cool! The girl from lost is going to be in the movie! And we made up a character so she could be in it!?!?!? even AWESOMERRRRR!!!!

You’re right… but much like George Lucas gave everyone a new love for sequels and an obsession with cashing in on the brand in every way possible, the way Jackson directed LOTR showed filmmakers how the money-making machine could be more effectively manipulated: He mastered the “extended cut” and the “Special edition DVD/Blu Ray”

“I think you’re making a stretch here, slick”


name one book series where they took one book and made it two! There a few movie versions of “Les Miserables” None of them took more than one movie, even though the absurd length of the book would completely justify it!

Nobody split Frankenstein into multiple movies!

I suppose circumstances were always headed in the direction that has put us where we are today… The last two movies in “the Matrix” trilogy were shot and released in similar fashion. So were the awful “Pirates of the Caribbean” sequels. so I’m sure, given our money grabbing ways, we would’ve reached the point where we stretch the plots of movies thinner than butter scraped over too much bread. but it certainly has come full circle with Jackson stretching out the book so far he had to invent characters and bring back LOTR characters that don’t even belong in the story just to justify the run time… and that is the point.

I blame Peter Jackson…

I don't know how. I just know that this would've made a better movie!

I don’t know how. I just know that this would’ve made a better movie!

… And that’s why he is the new George Lucas.


4 thoughts on “Peter Jackson is the New George Lucas… and I Can’t Stand it!

  1. Lorra B.

    I’m sure glad you didn’t put too much thought into that! HAHAHA! I couldn’t agree more. It becomes Painful to sit thru the crap when a movie had made their point in 20 mins… UGH. It’s all about the almighty dollar that cuts a perfectly good book and cuts it into 3 movie opportunities. Rediculous…

  2. Pingback: Contemplating Readers | The Catchy Blog

  3. bilal

    lord of the rings stayed true to the book. now i know you are not even seen the hobbit movies and never was a fan of lotr. you just want to jump into the bandwagon of hobbit haters. even the complaints you mentioned about hobbit are just the same as those circulating in the web in which half are not even true and are written by peopple who have little knowledge or saww the mmovie superficially.

    1. elmerfgantry Post author

      Your comment is ironic, because you clearly only superficially read my post. You can defend the Hobbit movies all you want. If you liked them, good for you. Since I wrote this post, I tried to sit down to each of the Hobbit movies again. I still just can’t get into them. They just don’t have the same magic as the original LOTR movies. that’s sad to me, because I think the Hobbit book is the most interesting and fun of the whole series.

      I’ll accept your argument that I’m an armchair fan. I tried a couple times to read the Silmarillion. But, much like the Hobbit movies, it’s just too dry, and I couldn’t make myself finish it. But that’s not the point of this post. My point is LOTR, even though it was true to the books, started the trend of making 2 or 3 movies when you can just make one, and so we have the overstuffed Harry Potter Movies, Hunger Games, Twilight, Divergent, etc. sequelitis has gone to an absurd extreme


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s