…and where are we on the Ian McKellen situation?

I think I know the actors, but I can't put their names with things they've done. That might be a great thing. IF Jackson is involved it will be a high-quality piece. I want to see the parts with the goblins. And I want to see them film the songs, especially at Bilbo's.

From the point of view of the general public, is there any name in this article at all that's worth getting excited about? While there's more to come on the casting front, it looks horribly uninteresting so far for anyone that doesn't watch BBC or pay attention to the supporting casts in British romantic comedies. Not that the LOTR films were loaded with superstars, but much of the main cast was at least recognizable and consisted of some pretty well known character actors. Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins and can we get a "Why should we be giving a holy shit?" because I don't know why I'd be giving a holy shit for believing or not believing that. Or are we just giving a holy shit for there being SOME sort of concrete casting information? Here's hoping that this all results in something that moviegoers will give ANY sort of shit about. By the time this hits theaters, it will have been a decade since the last LOTR flick, and while there's still a lot of goodwill towards the series, Peter Jackson has proven in the meantime that his name alone isn't necessarily a license to print money.

Aww man, they gotta shoot this thing in New Zealand. Fuckin' unions, man. We're not even talking about key actors here, it's the fucking EXTRAS pulling all this leverage?

"Not that the LOTR films were loaded with superstars, but much of the main cast was at least recognizable and consisted of some pretty well known character actors"

Actually, the leads in LOTR were largely unknown. Mckellan was largely known as a stage actor, Viggo was a career supporting actor, Eljah Woods was a child actor, Orlando Bloom a nobody, Sean Bean a BBC documdrama staple and supporting actor, and the rest no-names. Oh… and Rudy as Samwise. It was 2001.

Those movies defined every one of their careers (just ask Stuart Townsend). I expect the two planned Hobbit movies will do the same for this cast.

Ugh, fucking gay.

For a second there I thought it said MORGAN Freeman, and I freaked. Well not really but you know.

Comment #5—Viggo had been in quite a few big 90's flicks, but was more or less still a "that guy" that people at least recognized. McKellan was coming off of "X-Men" the year before, Astin had been around a while (fuckin' Goonies!), and so had Wood (co-star of MacCauley Culkin'sfinest film ever), while Bean had been a Bond villain, was in "Ronin", and had just appeared in "Don't Say a Word". While none of them were really headliners (McKellan was probably the closest at that point, while Wood and Astin were pretty much career mid-carders), these guys were still light years ahead of where the Hobbit cast is, at least in terms of awareness, even pre-LOTR. Again, they weren't huge movie stars, but people knew who they were, you could slap 'em on a poster, and people might be interested. The same can't be said of current Hobbit line-up, at least on this side of the pond.

Was there a single name attached to the Lord of the Rings when it first started production that excited people? Freeman is as big of a name now as Bean, Wood, Astin,or Mortensen were when Fellowship started. Live Tyler and Cate Blanchet were the biggest names attached. Who gives a fuck who is in this as long as they are proper for their roles. From this point, Freeman IS an great choice.

Gee, I dunno, maybe Jackson thought they were good actors and fit the roles well? This sudden obsession with FAME FAME FAME is pretty weird.

Well, at this time, Hobbit seems more like an act of desperation on the part of the studio than a serious attempt to do things correctly. It doesn't seem like there's the excitement surrounding it that may have been there 5 years ago, closer to the LOTR films, when the timing may have actually been right. If the rights weren't in limbo for so long, Hobbit may have been more highly-anticipated by the casual moviegoers that helped make LOTR a big mainstream hit, and you could have thrown ANYONE in it and asses would have been in the seats. Everything surrounding this film's troubled production before it even got to BE a production (and it still isn't quite there) is so well documented, so the film could use some positive buzz to get people caring again. The announcement of the casting of a bunch of unknowns that are way more unknown than the last bunch of unknowns isn't something the general public is going to get too psyched about. Doesn't mean it won't be good, doesn't mean these unknowns (again, to most everyone on this continent) won't put on a good show, but it's a serious risk by a studio that can't afford to take risks, and like it or not, MGM should care more about this thing's chances at commercial success than anything else, and getting some really strong names in the rest of the supporting cast wouldn't hurt. Does anyone know if the two-film thing is a done deal, or is the second film's fate reliant on the performance of the first? Can MGM even afford to give Jackson the same deal and control?

Yeah, Petey boy will milk that cow for at least two movies. After all, adaptations is all he could ever get done – even when he tries a similar concept, a remake, he screws up horribly. Let me guess what's next in his lineup – Silmarillion, in 15 parts.

Steven Merchant as Gandalf would be brilliant.

Meh. This has taken too long and it's not like they can make it BIGGER than LOTR. The Hobbit is a short kids' book. And as for the actors playing the dwarves, well they'll be mostly background and hidden behind layers of make-up, so it doesn't matter at all who plays them. This will be a shock to people in NZ though, where the news is all about Jackson fighting to keep the production there.

Shit, Peter Jackson's ego has gotten too big for these films. He's going to start inserting all his goofy humour into this like he did in Return of the king and its going to stray from the book heavily. And then there's the fact fact that him and his writing team have made 1 ok film and one absolute stinker since the LOTR trilogy. I'm not sure what you guys are getting excited about.

Just don't watch the fucking film ok? whiner.

I think PlanB was just confused because the headline reads "Martin Freeman is Bilbo Baggins, and the world rejoices." and I'm kinda confused too. Are we suppose to rejoice because Martin Freeman is cast as Bilbo Baggins or is it just because Someone was cast as Bilbo Baggins? Quick, somebody search him on imdb and pick some random movie he was in and make some shit up about how awesome he was in it, no one will know the difference, but then we could and atleast pretend to be excited and say "Oh yeah, Martin Freeman, He was awesome in that one movie. What? you haven't seen it? You should check it out so you can say that you knew how awesome he was before he was Bilbo."

Well, Adam, Martin Freeman was great in the BBC version of the Office. He was also great in BBC's Sherlock as Watson. He was also quite convincing as Arthur Dent in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Dent's character arc is very similar to Bilbo's. Obscure enough for ya?

My interest for this movie just jumped from 0% to 25%. Good job!

cool, he was great it H2G2.

This news make big smiles 😀

Freeman is the only person I could think of that should play Bilbo. I can't wait to see Tim from the Office battling giant spiders. How cool is that gonna be?