DOS theatrical on DVD, Blu-ray, streaming

He's in both TT and RotK as well

Only in the EE of ROTK.

Why is he a Klingon?

That is an insult!

Hey, I didn't say he was a good Klingon

That was the best cameo! He got shot!!!!!!

The "accidentally shot by a warning shot" gag.   

At least he had to face the consequenses himself that time.

bungobaggins wrote:Only in the EE of ROTK.

Technically he's in the theatrical ROTK as well, but it's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cutaway shot during Gandalf and Pippin's "deep breath before the plunge" conversation.

http://framecaplib.com/lotrlib/html/episodes/images/rotk/rotk0506.htm

Bluebottle wrote:The "accidentally shot by a warning shot" gag.   

At least he had to face the consequenses himself that time.

Gimli might disagree with that description.

Eldorion wrote:

bungobaggins wrote:Only in the EE of ROTK.

Technically he's in the theatrical ROTK as well, but it's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cutaway shot during Gandalf and Pippin's "deep breath before the plunge" conversation.

http://framecaplib.com/lotrlib/html/episodes/images/rotk/rotk0506.htm

Oh I completely forgot about that one.

It's very easy to. Took me ages to remember where it was in the film (I ended up having to ctrl+f through the script).

Eldorion wrote:

Bluebottle wrote:The "accidentally shot by a warning shot" gag.   

At least he had to face the consequenses himself that time.

Gimli might disagree with that description.

Yeah, maybe ""accidentally" shot by a warning shot" would have been better.  

Though I was more aiming at the fact that at least he was the butt of his own joke on that occasion.

Eldorion wrote:

bungobaggins wrote:Only in the EE of ROTK.

Technically he's in the theatrical ROTK as well, but it's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it cutaway shot during Gandalf and Pippin's "deep breath before the plunge" conversation.

http://framecaplib.com/lotrlib/html/episodes/images/rotk/rotk0506.htm

Nonsense! I saw that rounded plumpousity from miles away!

LOL: "plumpousity". He is indeed very plumpous

I vaguely remember reading PJ was eating a carrot because he tried smoking a pipe but felt very ill afterwards.

I've been watching the AUJ appedices (it was cheap on itunes and I had a giftcard!) and I wasn't too pissed off until Phillipa Boyens said something so.... ugh.

On Oin's character being a sort of apothecary, she awkwardly giggles before saying "you're not going to believe this, but Fran and I came up with the idea from a joke. Oin needs more OINtment."        
Also they only had six months of planning as opposed to the year and a half they had for LOTR, which explains much more to me.

Tinuviel wrote:Also they only had six months of planning as opposed to the year and a half they had for LOTR, which explains much more to me.

Shouldn't they have had a lot of time to plan while the film was languishing in pre-production? They'd already started working on the scripts unless I'm very much mistaken. {{{Or I misunderstood you, which is very possible. }}}

Apparently they tossed out a lot of Guillermo del Toro's work after he left. So they basically had to start from the ground up with designs and what not.

I hope some of the GDT concept artwork has survived.  I remember he specifically did NOT want a CGI Smaug, and was planning on using animatronics. It would be interesting to see that script.....

And he said Ian Mcshane would have made a perfect Dwarve (As everyone knows by now he was who I wanted for Thorin).

Alot of GDT supposed designs were really just ideas he mentioned in interviews (he seems to have done alot more of these than Jackson and co) so I'm not sure whether the animatronic Smaug was really feasbilbe.

I do know however he wanted to make first and foremost a HOBBIT film keeping Bilbo front and center with as much of the fairytale vibe as possible (he wanted talking animals for instance I believe), he was also interested in using a different colour palette and digital sky replacement to show the passage of seasons.

All of which sounds great IMO.

Sure it might have been a mess like Jackson's versions, but at least it would be something different.

I honestly feel that with an outsider's perspective GDT 'got' the Hobbit more than the 'fans' that took over from him.

Agreed. GDT stays true to his inner Faerie. He portrays fairy tales as they were originally, dark, creepy, scarey. full of hints & morals, a smattering of pixie dust, a bit of fantasy magic & he leaves you with a thoughtful feeling, whereas Peejeers are dim, corny,shitty, full of 'huh' & 'mmmm', a smattering of powdered drug (abuse) a bit of fooking madness & he leaves you with a 'thankgod thats all over' feeling !

Tinuviel wrote:On Oin's character being a sort of apothecary, she awkwardly giggles before saying "you're not going to believe this, but Fran and I came up with the idea from a joke. Oin needs more OINtment."       

Ah, yes. The spirit of Tolkien.   

At least they didn't claim it was in the appendices..

One thing I found Ironic is she mentions in the dvd appendices that as Bofur first sings 'The Man in the Moon Song' it must have been him who taught the song to Bilbo.

But I'm pretty sure in TAOTB or The Road Goes Ever On it notes it was the Elves who taught the song to the Hobbits.

And the prologue in Bree completely rewrites the reasoning behind 'The Quest Of Erebor'.

Maybe I'm wrong but I'm getting more and more annoyed with Boyens 'expertise'...

I don't think we'll ever see any of the concept art or script from the GDT era.

I do think it's funny that people on torn usually blame GDT when there's stuff they didn't like in the movies. It's also infuriating when they see Pacific Rim and say, "Oh, his hobbit movie would have been awful." Or they'll make fun of the designs in Pan's Labyrinth and say that his hobbit movie would have looked like that. I really dislike that ignorance/arrogance.

I didn't think Pan's Labyrinth was all it was made out to be, but that's not really the film's fault.  More of a problem with an overly evangelistic fanbase.  (Also, I was bracing myself for a hyper-violent film after all the warnings about how "this is NOT a movie for kids" and "the Captain is one of the scariest villains ever".  Not quite, though I do agree it's not for kids.)  I loved Pacific Rim, as I've made clear in several other threads, despite its flaws, which I am sure GDT was fully aware of.  So he's 2/2 in my book.

I'm not entirely sure he would have been the best fit for Middle-earth, though.  I think a creative mind like his might have run roughshod over the books.  Not in the way PJ does, where he tells what is superficially the same story but misses the point because he's distracted by shiny toys, but in a more fundamental way where he just ends up telling a story that takes some cues from the book but is really entirely different.  A lot of his design ideas that we heard about (never saw) were reminiscent of the Boorman attempt, though to a lesser degree.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/07/110207fa_fact_zalewski?currentPage=all

Whether or not that would have been preferable to PJ's version is a matter of personal taste, I suppose.