What's new

Mabye some good news for Hobbits!! (1 Viewer)

Andy Sheets

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2000
Messages
2,377

Nope. Aragorn is a pure-blooded Numenorian, which means he's human but of a very high bloodline whose members are very long-lived. IIRC, The Silmarillion explains how humans originally had lifespans of hundreds of years but over time their lives shortened and became harder. By the time of LOTR, everyone's pretty much a regular human but there are still some scattered descendants of Numenor, like Aragorn, that still have those long lifespans.
 

Brett_M

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
1,397
Location
Mos Eisley Spaceport
Real Name
Brett Meyer

I couldn't disagree more. There's nothing lighthearted about being nearly eaten by Giants or huge spiders, captured by Goblins, chased by warg-riding orcs who want nothing more than to eat your blackened bones, the destruction of a city by a fire-breathing dragon, or fighting in a battle of five armies, losing many of your friends along the way. The Rankin-Bass cartoon was a lighthearted adventure. I doubt that if a new adaptation came to fruition, the cast would break into song every few minutes. There is danger, tragedy, chills, thrills and excitement to be found in The Hobbit.

The Hobbit has all of the dramatic, epic moments of LOTR and more to spare. A perfect prequel for the trilogy would be light at first and dark from there. There is a fine, though -- many of the themes are repeated throughout the series. Hobbits of the Shire venturing out into a dangerous world, and so forth. The adaptation shouldn't tread where LOTR did. It's a set-up for the trilogy... and what a set-up it could be.
 

Ricardo C

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2002
Messages
5,068
Real Name
Ricardo C

A prequel is created after the fact. The Hobbit wasn't written as a forerunner to anything. Tolkien didn't even set out to make hobbits a part of his growing Middle-earth mythology, he basically let Bilbo's adventures "borrow" from his other works. Reading Tolkien's letters, it seems pretty apparent that he didn't set out to make The Hobbit an integral part of his then-unpublished legendarium.
 

Chuck Mayer

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
8,515
Location
Northern Virginia
Real Name
Chuck Mayer
As a note, I agree with everything Ricardo has said about The Hobbit in this thread. It is tonally different, and I'd like the film to reflect the story, not the public desire for a LOTR prequel using that trilogy's tone.

It would be a challenge for Jackson to re-enter that world with those characters, adjust them to fit (and reflect) the existing LOTR films, AND encompass the more childlike aspects of The Hobbit. That's a real balancing act.
 

Richard Kim

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2001
Messages
4,385

This is also explained in the EE of The Two Towers, in which Eowyn asks Aragorn about his age (I believe she asks if he fought in a battle with her grandfather to which he says yes).
 

Jake Yenor

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 13, 2005
Messages
188
Peter Jackson is on a producing kick lately attaching his name as producer to a good deal of films. At the very least if he is indeed busy directing other things MGM and New Line will get him on board as producer or exec. producer even if only to be able to attach his name to the project.
 

JediFonger

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
4,241
Real Name
YiFeng You
ya'll should read up on letters of JRRT as the man himself has commented on many of the topics here covered.... erm... covered here ;).
 

MikeRS

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Messages
1,326

THE HOBBIT was written as children's book (for his own kids, to be exact. :) ) You definitely can't say that about LOTR - although Tolkien did begin writing it that way. However, once he "discovered" the hook to his hobbit sequel (BILBO'S RING IS THE ONE RING TO RULE THEM ALL!), he would spend the next decade creating nothing less than an epic climax to his life's work (Elvish 'history'). This was a children's book no longer.

In a nutshell...

LOTR started out as a sequel to THE HOBBIT.....but became the final "chapter" of THE SILMARILLION.




BTW, There was a time (before TTT came out) when Peter Jackson had no interest doing THE HOBBIT. His perspective was that there wasn't enough meat to the tale - especially in comparison to LOTR. That after the high dramatics of LOTR, it would be a 'backwards' move in his career.
 

MikeRS

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 17, 2002
Messages
1,326
About THE HOBBIT.....

One of things that makes the lighter tone of the novel quite effective is that it all ends up playing as a striking contrast with the strong emotionality of the final chapters. The BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES and it's aftermath are written in an epic, melancholic, even somber voice. Definitely closer to the prose of LOTR than the rest of the HOBBIT. It's obviously meant to reflect Bilbo experiencing a more mature/adult perspective of the world by the end of the tale. After all, the book's events are always being seen through his perspective (a key point to remember when making the film).

It's his journey...
 

Brett_M

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
1,397
Location
Mos Eisley Spaceport
Real Name
Brett Meyer

I agree with you. Tonally, it is different than LOTR. It sets up LOTR, though. Just because it was a children's tale doesn't mean it has to play like one. I know that's not what you mean but I'm just making a point: it is part of LOTR, even if is borrowing. The whole reason there is a LOTR is because of Bilbo's adventure. I doesn't matter to me whether Tolkien meant it that way or not. It's out there and it sets up the trilogy.

I think it would be awesome to portray that lightheartedness at first, and then shift toward the darkness of Tolkien's later world by the end. I also hope that the White Council's attack on the Necromancer in Mirkwood is filled in, as Aragorn and Arwen's relationship, using the appendices as a source. Hell, they could even show the battles between the dwarves and the orcs as a prologue to the retaking of Moria and later, the Lonely Mountain. In AOTC, we got to see why Yoda was a master. I want to see how Thorin Oakenshield got that nickname.

Above all, the adventure needs to be big because for a hobbit, it was. The darkness was not there yet... but it's coming. I want to be blown away and I think The Hobbit can do that. I have read it once a year for the last six years. I always read it before I read LOTR. If it comes to the screen, the story will be complete.
 

Ricardo C

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2002
Messages
5,068
Real Name
Ricardo C

Nope. The Hobbit was intended as a standalone tale. The Lord of the Rings wasn't even in the planning stages at the time. If it had been consciously created as a prelude to LOTR, Tolkien wouldn't have needed to retcon parts of The Hobbit to fit the later story.

In fact, in LOTR, Tolkien took care to subtly account for the shift in tone, like when he wrote about how the trolls had grown more vicious under Sauron's control, accounting for the difference between the intelligent (if wicked) trolls of The Hobbit and the mindless beasts of LOTR. Why not keep that sort of distinction between the two works?

I'd rather they stick to the source and not do any literary gymnastics to make everything fit. No "Anakin Skywalker created Threepio and Yoda used to kick it with Chewie" kinda moments, please ;)

I DO want the Ring-theme to play during Bilbo and Gollum's scene, though :D
 

Stephen Brooks

Second Unit
Joined
Nov 19, 2003
Messages
477
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Real Name
Stephen Brooks
I wonder if they'll remember to make Glamdring the Foe-Hammer actually glow when Orcs are around this time. That's a MAJOR mistake that I couldn't believe they made in LOTR, with all the research they did.
 

Michael:M

Supporting Actor
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
530

Was it a mistake, or a deliberate choice? I don't believe that PJ & Co. "forgot" about Glamdring - it's more believable and consistent that they made an artistic choice not to have Glamdring glow as well. Not one I necessarily agree with, mind you ;) , but a choice rather than an accidental omission.
 

Brett_M

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
1,397
Location
Mos Eisley Spaceport
Real Name
Brett Meyer

Point taken. I know and agree with everything you wrote. My point was that Bilbo finds the Ring in The Hobbit and that sets up LOTR. His adventures with the dwarves and all that follow don't set it up. I also agree that this distinction should be made and The Hobbit should stand alone as a film. It could be viewed as such, rather than the first in a quadrilogy.
 

BrettGallman

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 11, 2002
Messages
1,392
Real Name
Brett
Yeah, I definately wouldn't consider The Hobbit to be Lord of the Rings: Episode I. It's more of a prelude, if anything. It's not like the entire story is focused around the One Ring because it's all about Bilbo's first adventure. And that's all a film adaptation should be. The only thing the ring should do in the film is allow audiences to realize how Bilbo got the thing in the first place. (If anybody's more familar with The Hobbit than me, feel free to jump in and correct me, but that's how I remember it playing out the one time I read it).

But I digress.

Since it looks like PJ won't have a chance to do this, and you know the studios will go ahead with it (too much $ involved, no doubt), how do you see this playing out? I could see PJ serving as a producer and using Ian McKellan and the other necessary holdovers from the trilogy. Despite what I said about this not being LOTR Episode I, it'd be silly not go set in the same film universe established by Jackson. So, as long as they do that and put the film in the hands of a capable director, it can still be good without Jackson directing.
 

Tim Glover

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 12, 1999
Messages
8,220
Location
Monroe, LA
Real Name
Tim Glover
Surely they'll find a way to get PJ as director, right? I think it should be him. And Howard Shore for the score. And WETA for everything else...:D
 

BrettGallman

Screenwriter
Joined
Nov 11, 2002
Messages
1,392
Real Name
Brett
Well, word is, after PJ's done with "The Lovely Bones," he wants to focus on another fantasy series (Temeraire) that would keep him busy for a while. He's not even going to be done with "Lovely Bones" until after next year at the earliest, and if the Temeraire rumors are true, then who knows?

Obviously, the best-case scenario is to have PJ directing but it's looking less possible now with all he has on his plate. The next best thing, in my opinion, would be for PJ to put "The Hobbit" in capable directing hands while holding everything else from LOTR over (actors, WETA, Shore, etc.). Because I don't think the studios are going to wait around for PJ if they're already talking about this being one of their big tentpole releases in the near future. Then again, PJ could tackle this in between "Lovely Bones" and "Temeraire," so things might work out for the best.
 

Adam_S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2001
Messages
6,316
Real Name
Adam_S
Jackson could very well hand off The Hobbit to his Second Unit (or third or fourth or fifth) Unit Director from Lord of the Rings and we'd probably get a fantastic result.
 

clayton b

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Feb 12, 2003
Messages
156

Well for the record Jackson stated on the FOTR commentary that Glamdring not glowing was in fact an error. Considering the release of all three films was a race against the clock I think it's very believable that someone forgot to mention to the cgi people that both Glamdring and Sting glow when the enemy is near.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,810
Messages
5,123,549
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top