After months — nay, years — of rumors, false starts, and much woe, The Hobbit finally has its green light. Peter Jackson is officially set to direct.
The news comes from the LA Times, but even they caution that while Warner Bros and MGM hit go, it still isn’t, because of the ongoing labor dispute. Jackson, the SAG, and the other assorted labor unions still haven’t resolved their conflict. Everyone’s hopeful they will shake hands, hug, and be friends soon though. What union can resist a big production like this, really?
But for now, it looks like the movie has finally got the money and a director (the one we always knew would be worn down to tackle it), and plans to go into production in February. There are still plans to make two films, with the first being released in December 2012 in 3D. (Let’s hope that’s changed. I don’t need The Hobbit in 3D. I just want the damn movie already.)
So, there’s that. Real news this time, and a tangible step forward instead of more doom and gloom. Now, say it with me: Martin Freeman for Bilbo Baggins!
15 comments
Fucking finally!!!
Screw Martin Freeman.
YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OH MY fucking GAAHHD!!! HELL yes. I'm so glad all that fucking bullshit happened, just so we could get Pete back in the director's chair. This is going to be so fucking ill. YES. I just geekasmed all over this place. I love you, chud. I love the world. I feel like I'm in high school all over again.
MARTIN FREEMAN!!!!!!
PADDY CONSIDINE
Isn't he a little old? Tall? Black? OH, MARTIN Freeman! And number 3 I feel so sad for you that you think being back in high school is a good thing.
i think you'll find that Martin Freeman is English, not American.
1: Please NO 3d! 2: Martin Freeman (though hes not getting any younger) and 3: I'd prefer it being 1 movie but you can split it up to 2 for the length of it.
THIS POST HAS BEEN REMOVED
3D… hmmm… I have a feeling we'll all be over the 3D gimmick by December 2012, but whatever, I can see it enhancing The Hobbit if it's done right.
What I still don't get is the two-film structure. If they follow the book, there is no way it's going to work. Its just a money-grab.
Too right Gershwin. To make two movies out of the book, the story either needs to end before they kill Smuag, in which case the first movie is going to disappoint audiences and the second movie will begin at the climax and then be boring for the remaining 2 hours. Or they kill Smaug in the first movie, and the second movie stretches out the big battle for an eternity, which would be totally forgettable and unnecessary. The Hobbit is a single 3-4 hour movie unless they heavily embellish the story.
Where the first film ends is going to be the biggest difficulty. Smaug and the Battle of Five Armies HAS to be the second film. So the first film ends with Bilbo meeting Gollum? Too early. The Company being captured by the Mirkwood elves? Too anti-climatic. There is just nowhere decent to end the first film which could doom the second film.
NOOO Martin Freeman. can´t stand that guy. He hasn´t the warmth of Ian Holm or the looks of Elijah Woods. Why cast such a bore.
At fucking last, although it's a shame we didn't get to see del Toro's vision of the tale of Bilbo.
They should end the first film after the Eagles rescue Bilbo, Gandalf and the dwarves from the burning trees surrounded by goblins and wolves. The final scene should be the eagles flying the company across the River at dawn with Mirkwood looking dark and foreboding in the distance.
Start the second film with Beorn outfitting them for Mirkwood where Gandalf separates from the group.
The first film is about Gandalf leading the quest and Bilbo, the useless baggage, finding the ring. The second film is about Bilbo becoming the defacto leader without Gandalf to help.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.