THE HOBBIT IS A TEASE AROUND THE HOLIDAYS

Kinda down on this whole HOBBIT project. I want to feel some of that old magic return, but with the way Del Torro got dumped, and the fact that a simple children's story is being divided in two, rather than make one HOBBIT movie and one bridge film.. well this whole thing seems like a bad idea

I don't really care for Jackson either, truth be told, and have no faith he won't muck this up. I'm sure I'll turn around and my inner high school student will get the best of me once we have some trailers, but mark my words now: these films will disappoint

Well I suppose that depends on what you thought of the LOTR films - personally, I'm looking forward to these films. Am hoping they handle the 'bridge' material elegantly and it doesn't feel shoehorned in, but am optimistic about it. A trailer would be good, so we can finally get to see some actual footage of this bugger.

As for Del Toro, didn't he back out because of how long the production was taking to get started? I'd hardly call that 'dumped'; in fact, that kind of thing happens pretty commonly with films that have had the kind of development hell that The Hobbit's gone through.

Don't know, Kate: Jackson and Tolkien seem to go together pretty well. I'm keeping fingers crossed. Plus, if The Hobbit is a hit, we will get the Silmarillian!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby 

Don't know, Kate: Jackson and Tolkien seem to go together pretty well. I'm keeping fingers crossed. Plus, if The Hobbit is a hit, we will get the Silmarillian!

Yes, I generally agree and I quite liked the other films. I've just been down on his career since the LOTR and I've long been concerned about his approach to the HOBBIT project vs that of Del Torro. I feel that there is the potential for way too much bloat, which has been his greatest problem as a film maker

With that said, I'd love to be wrong. Fingers crossed!

- Del Toro backed out, he didn't get dumped.

- They abandoned the "bridge" film (for now) because they (GDT & Peter) couldn't come up with a tale they liked enough to pursue.

Also, no one should be holding their breath for adaptations of The Silmarillion or The Children of Hurin.  The film rights for both still lie with the Tolkien Estate who STILL refuse to name Jackson's films as the official adaptation of the material and will likely never give him the rights to oversee projects of those two pieces.  Hell, they still trash his LOTR films from time to time.  WB/New Line owns the rights to The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, the LOTR appendices, and also the rights to craft any original sequel/prequel/midquel they want as long as it doesn't draw from Tolkien material that they don't own.

So what will happen if The Hobbit rakes in the dough?  We'll probably get that bridge film anyway.   What would it entail?  I'd say Aragorn: The Early Years would make the most sense.  It was rumored the most and it would allow us to visit favorite characters (Gandalf, Gollum, Elrond, Arwen, Legolas, Haldir, etc.) and lands (Rohan, Rivendell, Gondor, Mirkwood, Lorien, Mordor, Moria, etc.).................as well as places we haven't/won't venture yet (the Northern kingdoms, Harad, etc.).  Given his age and experience, there are plenty of battles and adventures that one could cover that span throughout Aragorn's life.......................almost all of which is detailed in the LOTR appendices.

I don't see the point in pessimism and negativity at this point. If the movies aren't good then we'll have forever to dissect them. It's a shame about Del Toro but in just about every other respect this is close to a best case scenario - the movies made it out of legal hell and are being made uncompromised in NZ with the original creative team and with the returning cast still young enough to convincingly play their roles.

As for it being two films, part of what makes the LOTR movies great is that they give the characters time to breathe instead of just plowing through the story beats. It'll probably take an hour just to leave Hobbiton. Also they've got 13 new main characters and if they want to make them more than glorified extras, having the freedom to take their time is going to help a lot.

I love Del Toro but I'm glad Jackson's in the driver's seat. He seems at home in Middle Earth and I think the films have a better shot at consistency if they share the same director.

We're getting an LOTR film with some Del Toro influence plus Pacific Rim. All good things in my estimation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluelouboyle 

A bride film wouldn't happen for at least 3 or 4 years after the second Hobbit movie, so 5 years from now. Surely Viggo and Mckellen would be too old by then? Using CG to de-age them for the entire movie would very expensive. And Mckellen might be too old to physically cope with the role.
Still, I would trust Jackson with it.

I'm operating under the assumption that someone younger would be playing Aragorn and we'd be getting Viggo wrap-arounds.................similar to what is happening with The Hobbit.  As for McKellan?  He wouldn't have a main role, so it likely wouldn't be a problem.  Besides, the man seems to be in pretty damn good health.

BTW, it was never official that they were looking to Aragorn's life to comprise the bridge film.  It's just that, among the appendices, it is really the only thing that would make much sense to do if one is ever made.

I can't imagine them recasting Aragorn just for the sake of some dumb bridge movie. A tv series on the other hand...

Oh I don't think they will hesitate a second to do it if they think they can milk the franchise some more.  Also, I don't think they actually own TV rights to the books..........though I could be wrong about that.

Kate....shut the fuck up.