← Home ← Back to /tv/

Thread 214337420

33 posts 6 images /tv/
Anonymous No.214337420 >>214337474 >>214337513 >>214337598 >>214338783 >>214340023 >>214340324 >>214340903
Why didn't Peter Jackson make more movies?
Anonymous No.214337433 >>214339890
His movies suck
Anonymous No.214337449
The lotr prequels were so bad he quit making films. He cashed out
Anonymous No.214337474 >>214337550
>>214337420 (OP)
He was molested by The Hobbit producers. Look it up. Jackson has PTSD.
Anonymous No.214337513
>>214337420 (OP)
The Hobbit films left him exhausted. He's been working on documentaries and restorations ever since.
Anonymous No.214337550
>>214337474
summer of 92 was an unrelenting son of a bitch
Anonymous No.214337598 >>214337685
>>214337420 (OP)
he made more than enough money off LOTR and permanently cemented himself as a legendary director. he doesn't need to do anything else
Anonymous No.214337685
>>214337598
One hit wonder doesn't count. It was all filmed at once so yes technically still one hit.
Anonymous No.214337703
Too busy being a typical Wellington cunt.
Anonymous No.214337719
He made that WW1 plane documentary, and it's literally the best thing he made in his whole career unironically.
Also that puppet movie that used live ammunition on set was pretty kino too. That's about it though, the rest of his movies fucking suck ass.
Anonymous No.214337731 >>214338233
I liked his wwi documentary.
Anonymous No.214337765 >>214337805 >>214337818 >>214337842 >>214337910 >>214338874 >>214340665 >>214340721
Anonymous No.214337805
>>214337765
40% of his movies are middle earth
Anonymous No.214337818
>>214337765
Yeah nearly half his movies were LOTR. Wish he made more studio films.
Anonymous No.214337842
>>214337765
Mostly shit movies, save for about 4 ot 5 og them.
Anonymous No.214337910 >>214337972 >>214340460
>>214337765
First 3 are kino.
Heavenly Creatures is okay at times, shit in others.
Frighteners fucking sucked ass
Lotr movies range from good to mediocre
King Kong movie was way too fucking long (double the length of the original)
Lovely Bones was genuinely one of the worst movies of the decade
Hobbit movies are all terrible
WW1 documentary was the best thing he did
Beatles documentary was pretty okay

I think he's an alright director who sometimes knocks it out of the park, especially early in his career. But he's incredibly uneven and no matter how big his budgets are, there is something unshakably amateurish about them. He very much will knock individual scenes out of the park, but they will be sandwiched between scenes that feel like... well, like they were directed by a guy who mostly makes schlocky dogshit. He's nowhere near consistent enough to be rated highly among the greatest directors.
Anonymous No.214337972 >>214338000 >>214338206
>>214337910
>Lotr movies range from good to mediocre
How is anyone suppose to take you seriously if you call the LOTR filmks mediocre. By what astronimcally high standard were they mediocre
Anonymous No.214337979
He is working on a lotr gollum spinoff and another tintin film right now
Anonymous No.214338000
>>214337972
they insist upon themselves
Anonymous No.214338206 >>214338335
>>214337972
He doesn’t have the same artistry as the directors like Kubrick or Scorsese and doesn’t invest as much in character or the emotional landscape of a story. I would compare him more to directors that attempt to capture a story with a lot of weight and visual grandeur, but end up sacrificing some artistry and emotional depth.
You can absolutely feel that sort of emptiness, especially in those blockbusters like the Lotr or King Kong. Jackson is much more of a low budget horror sort of guy, at least until he made that WW1 documentary, which is still the best thing he ever did.
Anonymous No.214338233
>>214337731
I quite liked it too
Anonymous No.214338335
>>214338206
LMAO, it’s a 9-hour trilogy and you’re hanging on one questionable point to justify calling one of the most universally acclaimed series mediocre.

There’s plenty of character depth in the trilogy. Aragorn questions his role as king, Gandalf struggles to lead through dark times, and Frodo wrestles with the Ring’s corrupting power. Even if these arcs don’t land perfectly for you, it’s absurd to claim the films don’t invest in the emotional landscape of the story. There are countless other movies that neglect this far more egregiously. Just watch the latest slop films.
Anonymous No.214338783
>>214337420 (OP)
Because all the movie money is in post production etc. The main reason he did LOTR was to scale up WETA, and bailed out the hobbit series to ensure its finances and cash flow . He saw the writing on the kino wall. At least half of a quarter billion dollar tentpole capeshit’s budget goes to CGI. Why be a director and get paid a few million, with the hope of a couple more o the back end if it successful … or all that cash upfront no matter what no risk.
Anonymous No.214338874 >>214339406
>>214337765
Man that was a hell of a trajectory pre lovely bones. He really was seen as one of the potential all timers back then with alot more to come and ideas. Oh well guess its an illuminati thing or something because him and Raimi are very similar and both stalled. I was always hoping for jackson to make his own drag me to hell return to roots kind of thing
Anonymous No.214339406
>>214338874
Surprisingly, Peter Jackson is 2 years younger than Sam Raimi. He seems to have grown out of horror, but I'm sure he'll be able to get any movie made that he wants to.
Anonymous No.214339890
>>214337433
I've come to the same conclusion over the years.
Anonymous No.214340023
>>214337420 (OP)
Probably because his movies are all like five hours long and probably take a ridiculous amount of work to make. I can't imagine taking on another project like that after finishing the last
Anonymous No.214340324
>>214337420 (OP)
I imagine he didn't like the way the hobbit movies turned out. If they were bad due to his own fault, or if company/board of directors/producers were to blame. If the former, he may have wanted to quit with some dignity, and if the latter, he probably doesn't want to repeat the same experience, with a bunch of dumbfucks telling him what to do.
Anonymous No.214340460
>>214337910
>Frighteners fucking sucked ass
I remember going into it thinking, hell yeah, Michael J fox! It was a good concept and setup, but it just got dour by the end. From what I remember anyways.
Anonymous No.214340640 >>214340721
He did and except TSNGO, they were all shit. That's why he gave up. I think the Hobbit movies especially mentally broke him for how much time and effort and stress they caused him and how shit the product was in the end.
Anonymous No.214340665
>>214337765
>made nothing after the Hobbit except editing and restoring old documentary footage

Yup, mindbroken.
Anonymous No.214340721
>>214337765
>>214340640
even then, TSNGO is REALLY rough. I appreciate the care given to restore old footage, but the editing and pacing is such dogshit. It feels like a highschool supercut of war footage with really out-of-place foley sounds added in post.
Anonymous No.214340903
>>214337420 (OP)
if he stopped making another film after LotR, he'd go down as one of the best directors of all time. he could have stopped right here, never made another film, and been rich and comfy for the rest of his life
every single thing he does after just hurts his legacy, not strengthen