Official The Hobbit thread

[Figs]

Haven't been keeping up with this movie lately. Did they ever announce who would be playing young Bilbo?

 

[green]

Haven't been keeping up with this movie lately. Did they ever announce who would be playing young Bilbo?

Not yet. I thought after they settled the lawsuit we'd get casting announcements, guess now they have to work through this.

 

[kedrell]

i think WB will be happy if they get 100& of the profit.

Ditto. The guys at WB are probably giving themselves high-fives right now. They'd love for this to solely be theirs.

 

[matrix_ghost]

If MGM do lose the ability to help finance The Hobbit movies, I think WB will fully finance them. They are guaranteed to make loads at the box office and in DVD/Blu-Ray sales and are likely to be among (if not the) highest grossing movies of 2011 and 2012.

Thing is that even one major projects , WB never was the one funding a movie 100%. WIth recent projects such as TDK and SUperman Returns , they split the cost with Legendary .
THe matrix movies were funded by WB , Joel Silver and Village Roadshow pictures.

While the BO sales coupled with the revenue from dvd sales will be massive , i dunno if WB is going to fund this fully. I'm sure they'll try to go to their usual partners ( lik Legendary)

 

[Doctor Jones]

Why God, WHYYYY???

 

[Joker'sHenchman]

According to the Comic-con interview for D-9, Peter Jackson said that the script should be done about now. Which means it's out there somewhere. A budget is being calculated (MGM financial problems aside) and casting can begin.

 

[Rage]

I WANT NEWS!!! I've been dying for these movies since LOTR trilogy ended!!

 

[mclay18]

Thing is that even one major projects , WB never was the one funding a movie 100%. WIth recent projects such as TDK and SUperman Returns , they split the cost with Legendary .
THe matrix movies were funded by WB , Joel Silver and Village Roadshow pictures.

Movie studios almost never ever finance a big-budget blockbuster entirely by themselves, even if they do have a partner helping fund the movie. They'll pay for a portion of the production budget, but they'll make promotional deals with companies like Verizon, Burger King, Kelloggs and others to shore up the rest of the money. That's been the case with the Spider-Man trilogy, Star Trek, Indy 4, etc..

 

[The Lizard]

I'm really not too happy about the idea of the story of The Hobbit being split up between two films.

Originally I had thought that The Hobbit was going to be one stand-alone film, and then there was going to be a "linking film" using other Tolkien material to make the second movie. Now apparently the "background linking story" is actually going to be incorporated into The Hobbit, and both storylines will be divided into two movies.

The Hobbit is a great story by itself that could easily fit into a single 2 or 2 1/2 hour movie. I'm not too keen on seeing it padded with extra stuff and divided into two movies.

 

[Marx]

I WANT NEWS!!! I've been dying for these movies since LOTR trilogy ended!!

Same here Rage.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I'm really not too happy about the idea of the story of The Hobbit being split up between two films.

Originally I had thought that The Hobbit was going to be one stand-alone film, and then there was going to be a "linking film" using other Tolkien material to make the second movie. Now apparently the "background linking story" is actually going to be incorporated into The Hobbit, and both storylines will be divided into two movies.

The Hobbit is a great story by itself that could easily fit into a single 2 or 2 1/2 hour movie. I'm not too keen on seeing it padded with extra stuff and divided into two movies.

Yes, becaus even if they did fit it in one, you would still pick at what they took out.

And they have much more to explain. They will explain Gandalf's journey as to why he was gone in the books which should be great.

And who knows what other Tolkien goodies we might have in it.

 

[regwec]

I just hope it doesn't get too "Jacksonised". I really like the LOTR movies, but there are a lot of occasions where I think tension, atmosphere and good storytelling were comprimised in order to deliver pay-off. For instance-

- The ring putting itself on Frodo's finger in The Prancing Pony diminished the understanding that it was generally tempting to use the ring when in awkward circumstances (originally Frodo was fiddling with it in his pocket while making a speech).

- Strider throwing Frodo into a room and threatening Sam with a sword undermines his fairness and diplomacy in winning the hobbits trust.

- Viggo was too handsome for the role. Tolkien wrote Strider as someone who looked grim and dangerous, not pretty.

- The fact Aragorn carries a spare sword, and leaves the shards of Narsil at Rivendell, undermines the importance of that sword in the mythos; and how seriously Aragorn takes his family legacy.

- The Black Rider's attack on Weathertop was far too physical. They should have been spectral beings made physical by their robes, but were made to be noisy, clanking suits of empty armour. The fact that Strider fought them with swords drawn removed much of their menace- they were easily overcome with convenrional weapons.

- A dying Frodo being sat on a horse and sped away with the Riders in fast persuit is much more exciting that him hitching a ride with a sexy Elf babe.

- In Moria, Pippin originally dropped a stone in to the guard's well because he was bored when on watch. The Fellowship's journey through the mines then became more and more tense as they wondered whether anything had heard them or not. When the Orcs finally ambush them- and this is the first encounter with Orcs in the book- you really feel the threat. It is much more effective than the visual joke of Pippin dropping a string of heavier objects down the well, followed by an immediate skirmish.

I think del Toro should let events unfold at their own natural pace, rather than rushing through them with bombastic orchesteral music in the background. We'll see.

 

[The Lizard]

Yes, because even if they did fit it in one, you would still pick at what they took out.

You are wrong, good sir. Anyway, the 1977 Hobbit cartoon, which was 78 minutes long, only had one meaningful part from the book removed -- Beorn the bear-man.

So yeah, a hypothetical 150-minute long film is plenty of time to tell the full story of The Hobbit, complete with extended battle sequences and lavish special effects.

 

[Thundarr]

You are wrong, good sir. Anyway, the 1977 Hobbit cartoon, which was 78 minutes long, only had one meaningful part from the book removed -- Beorn the bear-man.

So yeah, a hypothetical 150-minute long film is plenty of time to tell the full story of The Hobbit, complete with extended battle sequences and lavish special effects.

Actually, most of the scene between Bilbo and Gollum was cut as well. Their competition was reduced to two riddles I believe. Beorn was not essential to the plot and could be cut in much the same way Tom Bombadil was in LOTR, without really losing anything (though adding him back in doesn't take anything away from the story either). But I agree that The Hobbit could, and quite possibly should, be translated directly from book to film and could be done in a single 2 and a half hour movie with ease. Hell, it only takes me about 6 hours to read The Hobbit cover to cover. Takes me even less time to read Harvard Lampoon's Bored Of The Rings from cover to cover.

 

[The Lizard]

^ Actually, there were four Bilbo vs Gollum riddles featured in The Hobbit cartoon, as opposed to the eight riddles in the book (not including "What have I got in my pocket?", that is). This is including the song "Gollum's Riddle", which itself was a riddle taken from the book.
The riddles used in the cartoon were "the wind", "eggs", "the dark", and "time".

However, the overall tone and flow of the Gollum chapter remained intact in the cartoon. It's pretty amazing when one goes back and watches that 1977 cartoon how much of the book was actually preserved. There were several parts from the book that were slightly changed and compressed to flow more quickly of course, like the dwarves being held prisoners for weeks by the wood elves, and Smaug leaving his mountain after Bilbo stole the cup before coming back and having his first conversation with Bilbo afterwards.

But really, the Beorn chapter is the only part that got completely removed from the cartoon. A 2 1/2 hour movie could keep everything in to keep the fans happy, no doubt.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I just hope it doesn't get too "Jacksonised". I really like the LOTR movies, but there are a lot of occasions where I think tension, atmosphere and good storytelling were comprimised in order to deliver pay-off. For instance-

- The ring putting itself on Frodo's finger in The Prancing Pony diminished the understanding that it was generally tempting to use the ring when in awkward circumstances (originally Frodo was fiddling with it in his pocket while making a speech).

- Strider throwing Frodo into a room and threatening Sam with a sword undermines his fairness and diplomacy in winning the hobbits trust.

- Viggo was too handsome for the role. Tolkien wrote Strider as someone who looked grim and dangerous, not pretty.

- The fact Aragorn carries a spare sword, and leaves the shards of Narsil at Rivendell, undermines the importance of that sword in the mythos; and how seriously Aragorn takes his family legacy.

- The Black Rider's attack on Weathertop was far too physical. They should have been spectral beings made physical by their robes, but were made to be noisy, clanking suits of empty armour. The fact that Strider fought them with swords drawn removed much of their menace- they were easily overcome with convenrional weapons.

- A dying Frodo being sat on a horse and sped away with the Riders in fast persuit is much more exciting that him hitching a ride with a sexy Elf babe.

- In Moria, Pippin originally dropped a stone in to the guard's well because he was bored when on watch. The Fellowship's journey through the mines then became more and more tense as they wondered whether anything had heard them or not. When the Orcs finally ambush them- and this is the first encounter with Orcs in the book- you really feel the threat. It is much more effective than the visual joke of Pippin dropping a string of heavier objects down the well, followed by an immediate skirmish.

I think del Toro should let events unfold at their own natural pace, rather than rushing through them with bombastic orchesteral music in the background. We'll see.

Oh, God here we go.

1. Frodo accidently fiddling with it in his pocket. Oh, yes so dramatic to put on film. It needs to be effective and the story needed some tension.

2. This is simple. He took out ihs sword because he is a ranger and is alert. And knows that the Nazgul are hunting him. It was just being cautious simple as that. Noticed how he put it away when he learned it was a hobbit.

3. Good God, do you know how laughable it would of been if Strider pulled out a broken sword? It would of been comical. Here comes this ranger with his hood up and is frightening Frodo, takes out his sword and it's broken. Oh, yes.

Elaborate further with the physicality of the black riders. Do you mean nothing should of been under it?

I seem to remember a random elf from Rivendell picks up Frodo in the book. In a film, you can't do this. He just appeard and then goes away. And you also have to introduce Aowen properly. It gives her somethign mroe to do which in the books is minimal and brings the romance between her and Aragorn further.

Pacing dude. You can't just drop a rock down after Aragorn just told them not to throw rocks in the water. And look what happened. Just a fool of a Took. ou can't drop a rock through Moria, and travel through. There has to be urgancy to it. There is a tense moment when they are waiting if anythign will happen.

If you've actually listened to the commentary by Jackson and writers you would probably know why. They could tell them better than me. You're too focused on what should be in the book and not thinking of something cinematic.

 

[AndThePickles]

I'm really not too happy about the idea of the story of The Hobbit being split up between two films.

The Hobbit is a great story by itself that could easily fit into a single 2 or 2 1/2 hour movie. I'm not too keen on seeing it padded with extra stuff and divided into two movies.

I very much agree.

 

[regwec]

1) The story has more tension if the ring is established as a malicious temptation. Jackson does this by having it shout "Aragorn" at Aragorn. Whoo. Was that too subtle for the poor ******s at the back? Make it shout louder.

2) I know perfectly well why Jackson made him do it, but it was Jackson contolling that scene rather than the fictional character of Aragorn. It was Jackson who decided to make Aragorn seem like the moron/bully archetype to which teen audiences respond rather than the chivalrous character that Tolkien intended him to be.

3) Why did Strider need to "pull out" anything? He knew his sword was broken, so fended off the Nazgul's advance with brands of fire. He didn't carry a useable sword, because he would carry no sword but Narsil, and Narsil was broken.

4) More or less. The silver armour and grey wrappings that Frodo sees the Riders wearing appear only once he has put on the ring; they exist int he spiritual rather than the physical realm. Remember how The Witch King appears as a floating crown above his shoulders when he confronts Gandalf as Minas Tirith.

5) Frodo and company meet Glorfindel, an Elf hero. But that isn't my point; the important thing is that Frodo escapes the Riders alone, while at death's door. It isn't cheapened by a girl-power moment.

6) You clearly haven't read the book. The movie copied the scene with the kraken-like beast directly; it was the scene in the guard room of Moria that was changed. And I don't accept the objection concerning pacing; only the very very stupid find "Alien" to be too slow or to lack action.

7) I've listened to it. It explains why they made the decisions they made. The movie itself makes that obvious enough. I applaud their work, but feel that they could have achieved more had they not catered specifically for their least intelligent audiences.

 

[Doctor Jones]

1) The story has more tension if the ring is established as a malicious temptation. Jackson does this by having it shout "Aragorn" at Aragorn. Whoo. Was that too subtle for the poor ******s at the back? Make it shout louder.

2) I know perfectly well why Jackson made him do it, but it was Jackson contolling that scene rather than the fictional character of Aragorn. It was Jackson who decided to make Aragorn seem like the moron/bully archetype to which teen audiences respond rather than the chivalrous character that Tolkien intended him to be.

3) Why did Strider need to "pull out" anything? He knew his sword was broken, so fended off the Nazgul's advance with brands of fire. He didn't carry a useable sword, because he would carry no sword but Narsil, and Narsil was broken.

4) More or less. The silver armour and grey wrappings that Frodo sees the Riders wearing appear only once he has put on the ring; they exist int he spiritual rather than the physical realm. Remember how The Witch King appears as a floating crown above his shoulders when he confronts Gandalf as Minas Tirith.

5) Frodo and company meet Glorfindel, an Elf hero. But that isn't my point; the important thing is that Frodo escapes the Riders alone, while at death's door. It isn't cheapened by a girl-power moment.

6) You clearly haven't read the book. The movie copied the scene with the kraken-like beast directly; it was the scene in the guard room of Moria that was changed. And I don't accept the objection concerning pacing; only the very very stupid find "Alien" to be too slow or to lack action.

7) I've listened to it. It explains why they made the decisions they made. The movie itself makes that obvious enough. I applaud their work, but feel that they could have achieved more had they not catered specifically for their least intelligent audiences.

Are you talking about the first film or the third film?

Dude, Aragorn can't control himself because uh, he's not real, fictional like you mentioned. And what the hell dude? Catering to the teenagers? You're overthinking it. I think that's the first time I ever heard someone say that.

You needed to establish the Narsil is in fact broken but he has a sword in its stead. You can't have a ranger without a sword. Why would he have a broken sword with him. In fact it helps Aragorn's story of not wanting to accept his destiny. Him distancing himself form the sword makes it better.

Hmm, budget maybe? I think they had more important things to spend the money on rather than make them floating. And it's not that terrifying when you see a floating head with no physical presence in the film. And the only time you can see their physical presence is in the ring world.

Like I said, it helps introduce Aowen and their relationship easier and faster. Instead of mashing everything up to get introductions in. The Rivendell sequence was hard enough for them to write. When Frodo is struck by the sword, he is getting progressivley weaker. And all of a sudden he's riding a horse and outrunning more skilled riders? It wasn't a girl powered moment. And it actually gives Awoen something to do other than just sit there and questioning her father about what she should do. You've established that they trust eachother already, and are in love, while getting to everything else you need to tell later. It's a good starting point.

Yes, I have read the book, although not for a while. But that doesn't matter, I'm talking what makes it cinematic. What won't work for film. And don't leave out that they probably did discuss it but agreed it would seem foolish.

You don't understand. It IS about pacing. Findign the right tension until it becomes redundant. Moria is forboding as it is. You can't spend too long in it when they've already spent alot of time in it. This is one of the liberties you have to take when making a film. Things have to be moved and tightened. And no I'm not "Stupid" I loved Alien and especially its pacing. That is gradual. Moria is only one sequence. And they've already journeyed through the mines with Gandalf warning them about the evils that lurk.

No, you're just thinking what they took out and not what they left in as a whole. These fillms have to most expository detail anyone can ask for. More than what they could of gotten. And please, stop thinking to people as the so called "stupid" audiences. It's about appealing to everyone and not just to the hardcore fans who will pick it apart anyway. They've done it to the best of their abilities.

 

[AndThePickles]

You needed to establish the Narsil is in fact broken but he has a sword in its stead. You can't have a ranger without a sword. Why would he have a broken sword with him. In fact it helps Aragorn's story of not wanting to accept his destiny. Him distancing himself form the sword makes it better.

Actually, Aragorn carrying the broken sword has a lot to do with his character. He has the broken sword with him because until the sword is made whole, he will not be whole. He wouldn't settle for any replacement sword, if I recall correctly, although I'd have to check the book.

 

[Thundarr]

^ Actually, there were four Bilbo vs Gollum riddles featured in The Hobbit cartoon, as opposed to the eight riddles in the book (not including "What have I got in my pocket?", that is). This is including the song "Gollum's Riddle", which itself was a riddle taken from the book.
The riddles used in the cartoon were "the wind", "eggs", "the dark", and "time".

However, the overall tone and flow of the Gollum chapter remained intact in the cartoon. It's pretty amazing when one goes back and watches that 1977 cartoon how much of the book was actually preserved. There were several parts from the book that were slightly changed and compressed to flow more quickly of course, like the dwarves being held prisoners for weeks by the wood elves, and Smaug leaving his mountain after Bilbo stole the cup before coming back and having his first conversation with Bilbo afterwards.

But really, the Beorn chapter is the only part that got completely removed from the cartoon. A 2 1/2 hour movie could keep everything in to keep the fans happy, no doubt.

I totally agree with the bold print part. The loss of the character in the cartoon didn't take anything away from the story imo, but it could deffinately be put back in to make a single 150 minute movie, no problem.

As for the rest, it's been a while since I'd seen the cartoon, so my memory's a little fuzzy, but yeah it did stick pretty close to the core material. I can see why they did the minor changes, like having the dwarves all show up at once and what you've listed above. I was just pointing out how Beorg wasn't the only thing omitted from the cartoon.

 

[FVD]

Speaking of Smaug, GDT has mentioned before that he's doing what he can to make Smaug look as grand as possible. He looked at Vermithrax from the Dragonslayer movie as an example and looked to go a step further...

 

[thewhyteman]

I cant wait to see Smaug.
I wonder if they will take any elements from the animated version.

 

[matrix_ghost]

Movie studios almost never ever finance a big-budget blockbuster entirely by themselves, even if they do have a partner helping fund the movie. They'll pay for a portion of the production budget, but they'll make promotional deals with companies like Verizon, Burger King, Kelloggs and others to shore up the rest of the money. That's been the case with the Spider-Man trilogy, Star Trek, Indy 4, etc..

*shudders at the thought of Bilbo promoting a whopper *
Bilbo : Look at this. A most peculiar piece of bread with meat
GOLLUM : LOOOOOSSSSTTTT !!!!!!! MY PRECIOUS IS LOSSSTTTTT !!!!!!

ANyway yeah i agree with you. At leats to my knowledge , the big franchises have always been co-productions.
Hence why i said that i don't think WB will fund this movies by themselves , even with the massive revenue

 

[Octoberist]

I think WB will team up with Sony on The Hobbit.

Speaking of which, I'm almost done with the book and I agree with the most of you guys: the book could be done in one movie.