Jump to content

Welcome to Nightly.Net
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

"The Hobbit" Thread


  • Please log in to reply
592 replies to this topic

#51
ThunderDroid

ThunderDroid

    One Louder

  • Members
  • 4,359 posts

From the Movies forum:

i wonder what they'll call the 2 parts...

"There" and "Back Again"

That just might work, TD.

Thanks. Although, I think "There / and Back Again" might be nice tag lines for the promotional posters and movie packaging and so forth, but not actual titles for the movies.

Edited by ThunderDroid, 24 December 2007 - 01:19 PM.


#52
Jacen123

Jacen123

    Woggle-Bug

  • Member
  • 36,802 posts
Yeah, I was more joking when I suggested those, but I agree that they would make for great tag lines should they split the movies like in your idea.

On another, though related note, I wonder how much of Gandalf dealing with the Neuromancer will be shown.

#53
Wessan

Wessan

    Mensroom

  • Members
  • 6,086 posts
Im going to have to go re-read this book now.

#54
ElfinYoda

ElfinYoda

    Oh my god Becky, look at her Big Book...

  • Members
  • 7,184 posts

For me, at this point, its kind of like SW when it was announced that Lucas was doing the 3 prequels... I was so hyped up for the movies, mine expectations got the better of me. Oh, I liked them well enough, just not what I expected (and lets not get into that here, aye? ;) ).

Actually, Elfie, one of my first thoughts was that if they just "make up" a movie, it'd be like if someone somehow got the rights to SW and they decided to make a movie set between Ep III and Ep IV. On the one hand, you'd be thinking, "Well, it's another SW movie, so it could be cool. On the other hand, there's just something about it that...doesn't feel right. And they are just as likely to **** it up!" :hmm:


I agree with you Lohr, if that's the plan for the fifth movie. Am hoping PJ is going to use known materials either from the Sil or Lost Tales or just somehow break-up the Hobbit into two flicks and not insinuate anything he came up with, as that could backfire and just f**k with the work of Tolkien and his world of Middle Earth. It would be interesting to see a non-Tolkien work, but I would hope it would not be touted as such and that it was VERY clear the fifth film was made up from the mind of PJ.

Obviously liberties were taken when making LotR by leaving out some key and not so key scenes, but a lot remained of the story as it was written by Tolkien and there was no way to keep faithful all three books. Though I would have not minded 4 or 5 movies to tell LotR to key scenes like Tom Bombadil in among others.

Anyhoo, I guess its but a 'time will tell' type of thing. Now that the green light was given, its sit down time to flesh this all out. Its going to be interesting and certainly welcome as something to look forward to. :)

I think its time to revisit The Hobbit... "The road goes ever on and on..." :)

#55
Darth Spoon

Darth Spoon

    Fool for a lifetime...

  • Member
  • 13,121 posts
From what I've seen and heard of Jackson, I doubt that he'd be the type of guy who would get behind a sequel for sequel's sake. Despite what people say he was VERY respectful of Tolkien's vision, despite the changes he made (many that worked, some that didn't). I don't see him trying to cash in by pulling a whole new story out of his arse. He just doesn't seem like the sort of person who would support that. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the 'new' story borrows heavily from Tolkien's appendices and other works. Perhaps it will involve Aragorn and Arwen's first meeting?

#56
Darth Dude

Darth Dude

    terminal crazy

  • Members
  • 13,972 posts
I still can't figure out how he could work Bilbo or Frodo into a new movie unless he makes it up. I may be wrong but I don't remember either of them doing anything unexpected in the appendices. And making a Mid-Earth movie without a Baggins is like making a SW movie without a Skywalker. Don't do it, Pete!

#57
ThunderDroid

ThunderDroid

    One Louder

  • Members
  • 4,359 posts

I still can't figure out how he could work Bilbo or Frodo into a new movie unless he makes it up. I may be wrong but I don't remember either of them doing anything unexpected in the appendices. And making a Mid-Earth movie without a Baggins is like making a SW movie without a Skywalker. Don't do it, Pete!

I agree completely. Now that I've thought about it some more, I can't imagine how the second film could be anything but an extended version of Bilbo's return journey from the Lonely Mountain back to the Shire, and still maintain any continuity within the franchise (and be at all consistent with the various press releases we've seen thus far). If Bilbo or Frodo have some other adventure somewhere in there that has any significance to The One Ring, then what's to be made of the table of contents of the Red Book that is shown at the end of ROTK:

There and Back Again...
A Hobbit's Tale by
Bilbo Baggins

&

The Lord of the Rings
by
Frodo Baggins



Where is the "transitional" story in there? Why isn't it included? I think it already is... it's part of "There and Back Again". In fact, if film #2 deals with somehting other than the "and Back Again" portion of Bilbo's tale -- significantly expanded upon and interwoven with the larger Ring story by Jackson, of course -- then the table of contents featured above will turn out to be woefully incomplete.

And, if film #2 doesn't really focus on hobbits at all, then it would indeed be like making one of the six episodes of the Star Wars movies without the Skywalkers, just like Darth Dude said.

Edited by ThunderDroid, 26 December 2007 - 06:11 PM.


#58
ElfinYoda

ElfinYoda

    Oh my god Becky, look at her Big Book...

  • Members
  • 7,184 posts
Damn, I can't find mine copy of the Sil, it must be in the attic. I will just have to borrow it from the library.

Anyway, I did find mine paperback copy of The Hobbit (I really need to invest in hardbacks, this copy is a gazillion years old) and it made me realize how short a story it really is! I mean, here is the table of contents if anyone needs a refresher:

1. Unexpected Party
2. Roast Mutton
3. A Short Rest
4. Over Hill and Under Hill
5. Riddles in the Dark
6. Out of the Frying-Pan into the Fire
7. Queer Lodgings
8. Flies and Spiders
9. Barrels out of Bond
10. A Warm Welcome
11. On the Doorstep
12. Inside Information
13. Not at Home
14. Fire and Water
15. The Gathering of the Clouds
16. A Thief in the Night
17. The Clouds Burst
18. The Return Journey
19. The Last Stage

I do wonder, will any of the poems or songs from The Hobbit be in the movie(s) do we think? I know most think they are silly or whatnot, just am curious for everyone else's opinions. And no, not in favor of this movie turning into a musical! :P

#59
ThunderDroid

ThunderDroid

    One Louder

  • Members
  • 4,359 posts
My prediction:

Film #1:
1. Unexpected Party
2. Roast Mutton
3. A Short Rest
4. Over Hill and Under Hill
5. Riddles in the Dark
6. Out of the Frying-Pan into the Fire
7. Queer Lodgings
8. Flies and Spiders
9. Barrels out of Bond
10. A Warm Welcome
11. On the Doorstep
12. Inside Information
13. Not at Home
14. Fire and Water
15. The Gathering of the Clouds
16. A Thief in the Night
17. The Clouds Burst

Film #2
18. The Return Journey (GREATLY EXPANDED TO BECOME AN ENTIRELY "NEW" STORY UNTO ITSELF)
19. The Last Stage

#60
Organic_Spudwalker

Organic_Spudwalker

    Head orc

  • Members
  • 5,071 posts
Your return journey film sounds entirely feasible TD. I suppose my mind was focused on the quote that stated that the sequel would be entirely new fiction and that it might be a separate work sitting between the books, but of course your idea still fits. I think PJ and co. could not risk a film completely divorced from the Prof's original work. The e-outcry at least would be immense! :P

No, I think your idea of a film spanning the return journey makes the most sense so far.

BUT, the quote just doesnt seem to fit this in my opinion...

...two movies. The first would deal with the 80-year old novel. The second, imagined entirely by Jackson and Walsh, would link the conclusion of The Hobbit to the start of the first Lord of the Rings book, The Fellowship of the Ring.

This would seem to suggest, if taken at face value, that the first movie should cover the entire scope of The Hobbit and the second would fit somewhere between the timline of TH and LOTR. Splitting the book into the adventure and the return journey, i agree, does make for a very interesting theory but that would make the two films dependant on each other: a Duology if you please. Leaving Bilbo at the Lonely mountain after the Battle of Five Armies would seem a very unsatisfying end to a first movie.

#61
King_Elessar

King_Elessar

    Avengers Assemble!

  • Members
  • 3,269 posts
I think they should start the movie out with the brief excerpt from the LOTR appendices relating the meeting b/w Gandalf and Thorin at the Green Dragon, wherein they discuss Smaug and the Lonely Mountain, etc. Also, they should include the White Council. This would offer a chance to revisit cameos of Galadriel, Sauron, Cirdan, as well as Radagast, and the Blue Wizards. They could end the movie with a meeting of the White Council, panning to a shot of Mt. Doom coming back to life.

#62
ThunderDroid

ThunderDroid

    One Louder

  • Members
  • 4,359 posts

BUT, the quote just doesnt seem to fit this in my opinion...

...two movies. The first would deal with the 80-year old novel. The second, imagined entirely by Jackson and Walsh, would link the conclusion of The Hobbit to the start of the first Lord of the Rings book, The Fellowship of the Ring.


Yeah, I know. The "Return Journey" idea I'm suggesting doesn't perfectly match up with all of the various statements made thus far about these films, and I'm taking a lot of liberties with intepreting them. The above quote is one of the most troublesome for the theory. One phrase that jumps out is "imagined entirely". My idea for what film #2 will be does not fit that description. But, to be honest, what sort of film could be "imagined entirely" by Jackson and Walsh and still be part of Middle-Earth, especially if it's a story that links two other, well-known works, which are themselves deeply woven into a massive fictional mythology? So, when it comes to phrases like "imagined entirely", I'm making what I consider a reasonable assumption that the media is just watering it down for a general reader, and not really being as rigorous as we are in our analysis of how these movies will relate to Tolkien's works.

As for the statement that film #2 will "link the conclusion of The Hobbit to the start of the first Lord of the Rings book" I once more have to assume a general vagueness on the part of the reporting. Does linking one story's end with another's beginning mean that the linking story must chronologically span the entire time frame in between? Again, I'm taking liberties here, but isn't it reasonable to speculate that the "link" being described may be more thematic than chronological? All that would be needed for film #2 to more thoroughly bridge The Hobbit with The Lord of the Rings would be to flesh out the White Council subplot, which is a mere afterthought in the original Hobbit book. The "link" would therefore be more about introducing the "Wise", wizards and elves we already know from LOTR, who are trying to deal with a growing "Shadow" in Middle-Earth, just "whispers of a nameless fear", a mystery that Gandalf finally unravels in the early part of FOTR. I believe this is the linking story between The Hobbit and LOTR that is being referenced, and I believe it will likely be more accurately described as an expansion of The Hobbit story, rather than a sequel to it.

I believe there are, in fact, some statements out there that support this:

From an EW interview with PJ, dated 9-22-06:

EW: Are your wheels turning about how you might approach adapting The Hobbit even though the prospect has only just come up?

PJ: Reading about it on the Net, what interested me is the fact that [MGM is] talking about doing two Hobbit movies, which I thought was a much smarter idea than one. Not just for obvious financial reasons for the studios, but from a storytelling point of view, because one of the drawbacks of The Hobbit is it's relatively lightweight compared to LOTR. I mean, LOTR has this epic, rather complex quality to it, and The Hobbit, which was written some 10 or 12 years earlier by Tolkien as a children's book, is much more juvenile and simplistic. If they're seriously thinking about doing two, it makes it more interesting, because it allows you to expand The Hobbit. There's a lot of sections in which a character like Gandalf disappears for a while. From memory - I mean, I haven't read it for a while now - but I think he references going off to meet with the White Council, who are actually characters like Galadriel and Saruman and people that we see in Lord of the Rings. He mysteriously vanishes for a while and then comes back, but we don't really know what goes on. There's clearly lots of interesting politics happening concurrently with [Bilbo's] story, and doing two movies would allow you to explore a lot of those dark areas. You could make it feel more epic and more politically complicated.

Now, in fairness, this interview took place over a year ago. Lots may have changed since then. But, even one of the recent EW articles cited in this thread states that "Jackson and his life/creative partner Walsh have always envisioned the big-screen adaptation of The Hobbit as two movies". Well, unless they've changed their minds about that vision in the past year, it seems that, at least as recently as September 2006, PJ had a pretty good idea about what both movies would be about, not just the first one. And, note that PJ does refer to it as "two Hobbit movies", not "The Hobbit" and "a sequel to The Hobbit".

So, this is a big reason why I think the press has been confusing and contradictory: no one knows whether film #2 is part of The Hobbit, or a sequel to it, because the movie would still technically fit into the timeline of The Hobbit, but would be so drastically expanded and altered that it is essentially a "new" story (and a "sequel" to the classic Lonely Mountain quest), meant to more smoothly bridge the thematic gaps between the world of Bilbo and the world of Frodo.

And, yes, I do actually think what we'll get here is a "Duology" set during the same time frame as "The Hobbit", even if much of the second film bears only the faintest resemblance to Tolkien's published work. As for the unsatisfying ending for film #1... well, I'm not sure. TTT climaxed with the Helm's Deep battle, but it ended on a note of foreboding and doom as the stakes were raised in the Frodo/Sam/Gollum dynamic. Is is such a stretch to imagine The film #1 climaxing with the Battle of Five Armies, but still maintaining a sense of peril going into the next movie for Bilbo as he sets off home? Maybe the return journey won't be just a leisurely stroll back to the Shire, as it's described in the book. Since we don't know anything about the details of what film #2 might be about, though, it's impossible to guess what growing threat, specifically, could be utilized to provide a "to be continued..." sort of ending to the first film. I'm sure things like that are easy enough to overcome for PJ/FW and company by this point, though. It seems like coming up with a suitable ending point for the first movie would be a small worry for them.

Edited by ThunderDroid, 27 December 2007 - 06:23 PM.


#63
Organic_Spudwalker

Organic_Spudwalker

    Head orc

  • Members
  • 5,071 posts
Good points all.

Just to throw a curve ball, how about the second movie paralleling the timeline of the Hobbit, detailing Gandalf's adventures? :D
There is plenty of scope for material with the White Council, the behind the scene machinations of Gandalf setting up Bilbo's adventure with the dwarves and the ousting of Sauron from Mirkwood.... The parallel timeline would be a nice nod towards the Two Towers - the book that is. :P
But this is obviously getting away from the Hobbit-centric arc of the movies thus far! Just a fancyful notion on my part.

#64
The Shadow

The Shadow

    Resident Kaijuologist

  • Members
  • 11,282 posts
I like your idea for the second movie OS - people will undoubtedly be curious as to what Gandalf was doing when he wasn't with Bilbo & Co. and I think its better the writers use material Tolkien himself created than try to come up with something out of the blue.

#65
Ryn

Ryn

    Moonshadow

  • Moderators
  • 28,544 posts
Maybe they'll title it Pokemon-style: Hobbit Diamond and Hobbit Pearl

#66
The Shadow

The Shadow

    Resident Kaijuologist

  • Members
  • 11,282 posts

Maybe they'll title it Pokemon-style: Hobbit Diamond and Hobbit Pearl



I'll trade you a Thorin for a Dwalin

#67
drevil

drevil

    Former mod of the Austin Powers board; around as long as God

  • Members
  • 1,427 posts
I think an expansion of Bilbo's return could be in order. Plus the whole scene of him dealing with folks trying to sell his possessions and maybe an intro of a young Frodo.

I also wouldn't mind seeing what was going on in other parts of Middle Earth, such as in Gondor, or with a young Aragorn serving as a scout in Rohan's army.

#68
ElfinYoda

ElfinYoda

    Oh my god Becky, look at her Big Book...

  • Members
  • 7,184 posts
I guess its going to be awhile before we hear any more news on this, though its grating on mine nerves, I have to say, lol.

#69
D-Ray Kenobi

D-Ray Kenobi

    Back off man, I'm a scientist.

  • Member
  • 15,253 posts
This is pretty big news. Granted, it's not 100% confirmed, but Slash Film is more than a reliable source.

Guillermo del Toro to Direct Both Hobbit Films

While nothing has been officially signed just yet, it sounds like a lock that Hellboy 2 director and all around cool guy Guillermo del Toro will take over the directorial reigns from Lord of the Rings trilogy mastermind Peter Jackson and helm the two planned Hobbit films for New Line. Today’s announcement in the trades comes after much speculation, beginning last December when Jackson and New Line finally settled their disagreements over profit participation for the prior billion-dollar grossing Tolkien adaptations. Other directors that have been tossed around for the Hobbit projects include Spiderman 3’s Sam Raimi and Children of Men’s Alfonso Cuaron.

Each film is said to have a lavish budget of $150 million, and filming is scheduled to begin simultaneously on both in 2009, with a release in 2010 for The Hobbit, and 2011 for the untitled mystery meat film that is rumored to connect The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings. Can you imagine what del Toro might pull out of his brain and realize on screen with $300 million? Sheeesh.


Given the choices, I think the right call was made. I would have liked Cuaron as well, but his success with Prisoner of Azkaban aside, I don't think his type of realism is well suited for the story. And Raimi? Please. No way. He's good in other areas, but this is not one of them.

#70
Iceheart

Iceheart

    No.

  • Moderators
  • 20,500 posts
... this isn't going to interfere with his At The Mountains of Madness, is it? Because I keep getting stiffed a pony, I don't wanna be stiffed a movie, too :P

But otherwise, this is cool news! :thumbsup:

#71
Darth Krawlie

Darth Krawlie

    privileged ****lord

  • Moderators
  • 34,578 posts
Man, del Toro is directing every other movie these days.

#72
Jedi Exuck

Jedi Exuck

    Member

  • Members
  • 417 posts
I'm wondering how they are going to do "connect The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings" stuff? Are they going to do a separate movie are add it to the Hobbit story as it goes along? I haven't seen any of Guillermo del Toro's movies to know if he is a good fit, so I'll have to take everyone elses word on it.

#73
Wally Q

Wally Q

    Sockimus

  • Members
  • 13,023 posts
I don't think I've seen a bad GDT film yet. With that in mind, after Pan's Labyrinth, I'm sold on him and The Hobbit plus the Bridge project.

#74
The Human Torch

The Human Torch

    zambingo

  • Members
  • 34,069 posts

I'm wondering how they are going to do "connect The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings" stuff? Are they going to do a separate movie are add it to the Hobbit story as it goes along? I haven't seen any of Guillermo del Toro's movies to know if he is a good fit, so I'll have to take everyone elses word on it.


ThunderDroid had a superb idea on that posted somewhere in this forum. It went something like... "There and back again." lol Seriously.

Movie 1 = There
Movie 2 = and back again.

With atypical LotR's screenplay filler in the plots to make it flesh out and flow towards the trilogy. So technically the two films are just The Hobbit, not The Hobbit and an entirely brand new plotline that never could have maybe not evar ever existed etc.

#75
Darth Spoon

Darth Spoon

    Fool for a lifetime...

  • Member
  • 13,121 posts

Man, del Toro is directing every other movie these days.


You're not wrong. Lovecraft, Potter (rumoured), Frankenstein and now Tolkien??? This guy's not going to get a chance to scratch his arse for the next five years, but if he pulls it off he'll be in Hollywood's elite.

Remember that this isn't official yet, so let's not get carried away. But if he got the job he'd bring something completely new to Middle-Earth and it'd be hard not to get excited.