The Hobbit (merged thread) - Page 33

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Tolkien did try to rewrite the Hobbit to be more like the LOTR. It didn't work, it wasn't The Hobbit anymore, and he promptly stopped.

I have concerns for the film. It will be padded, and it'll no longer be focused on Bilbo, that is disappointing to hear. I will see it, and try to just accept it for what it is. I really like Del Toro, so I hope he nails it.

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Matthew, Tolkien stopped because some of the people who offered feedback didn't like it because it wasn't The Hobbit that they knew. I wouldn't say that it didn't work. We don't have the finished result in order to make that judgment. If the portions of The Unfinished Tales related to the evens The Hobbit are any indication, I would say that they do work.

Do you think that the re-writes to the "Riddles in the Dark" chapter don't work, and that only the version from the first edition of the book should be included in the film?

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Are you in on the writing process and pre-production meetings? How can you make these assertions?

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

I think you need to go back and reread some of Edwin's comments.

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Well, the statement didn't specify Edwin so it's easy to assume it was directed towards all of us who are expressing concerns. If it's directed only towards him then perhaps the statement fits.

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Bilbo Baggins casting will be announced soon! | Filmonic

let the speculation begin

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Channing Tatum (just kidding)
Hugh Bonneville
Martin Freeman
James McAvoy
Someone unknown

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

Will Ferrell

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

I'll show antipathy to anyone who decides to make changes to the original work in order to create two movies -mostly for financial reasons- or one movie that is padded and bloated in order to make it fit better as a prequel to LOTR. In both cases the movie(s) is(are) being made for the wrong reasons.

The Hobbit was about Bilbo Baggins's discovery of a side of himself that he wasn't even aware he had. It wasn't about The Ring or the politics of Middle Earth or the rise of Sauron or Gandalf the Grey or what made Mirkwood dark. It was a story about a homebody who finds out that he has talents and resources hidden deep within himself. Hell, even the very title of the book indicates who or what the story is going to be about.

Mr. Forbes, you said there is no pleasing me. What would please me is if they made one movie that told Tolkien's story which was clearly focussed on Bilbo's development through his experiences. They can call it a day after making that film. What would especially please me is if people like Jackson and Del Toro would stop thinking that they can "improve" the story of The Hobbit and tell it better than the original author did.

Some of the worst parts of the LOTR trilogy were where Jackson and his crew made changes to the story; one of the most egregious being the rewriting of Gimli as a comic relief oaf, whose "humour" derived mostly from belching, farting, and gluttonous behavior. Can I expect the same kind of ignorant changes to The Hobbit?

As for Del Toro, I remain unconvinced that he was the best choice to direct THE HOBBIT. Del Toro revels in the nightmarish....at least I get that sense from the stuff that I have seen. I'm not saying he can't pull off The Hobbit. I'm just concerned that his bent for the bizarre and nightmarish is going to invade and wreck the story.

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

And how do you know this isn't what they will be focusing on? Oh, that's right. You don't. Because the script(s) aren't completed yet.

Whether you like it or not, the LORD OF THE RINGS movies are out there, and were wildly successful, both commercially and artistically. I agree with you that some of the changes PJ & Co. made were to the detriment of the story (I wasn't a fan of some of the changes to Frodo's character, and I agree with you about Gimli), but I also think they made changes for the better. Arwen was much better incorporated into the story as a character rather than a "prize" to Aragorn who appeared at the end out of left field. I like the way some of the material from the appendices were added as well.

That said, a HOBBIT movie is going to have to "blend" with the LOTR movies for them to succeed. That's merely a fact of life. I'm am hoping for a faithful accounting of the novel with added material from the LOTR appendices that fleshes out things like the White Council, the realization that Sauron is the Necromancer of Dol Guldur, things like that. Which are things Tolkien himself wrote.

But we shall see. The difference is I am going in with a positive attitude, giving the makers a very large benefit of the doubt based on their earlier work, while your attitude so far has been uniformly negative.

David

Re: The Hobbit (merged thread)

We will agree to disagree here. I think Del Toro is capable of astounding depths of beauty both in composition and character. Besides, look at Jackson's work prior to the LOTR. BRAIN DEAD? MEET THE FEEBLES? Fun, schlocky, grade-Z gross-out horror flicks. And he produced some truly sublime beauty with the LOTR.

I am absolutely confident del Toro will do just as well.

David

Lawsuits erupt as the family wants production stopped until they get paid residuals they feel weren't dished out on the trilogy:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/jul/16/tolkien-family-sues-new-line

This has been going on for a while now. Apparently the Tolkien estate has not seen any money from the LOTR movies, victims of Hollywood's creative accounting -- showing somehow on paper that the films didn't make any money.

Hi ya

Lots of interesting develoments

http://www.kristinthompson.net/blog/?p=828 MGM's Harry Sloane is out

http://www.kristinthompson.net/blog/?p=833 Warner may not relay on MGM for Hobbit Funding

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118007435.html?categoryid=13&cs=1 Hollywood's reaction

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/cruise-jets-into-nz-for-jackson-meeting-20090827-f0bl.html

Very interesting

I'd say Tom Cruise has about as much (or maybe a slightly better) chance as being cast in The Hobbit as Megan Fox does in Chris Nolan's next Batman.

Damn, hasn't Christopher Tolkien succeeded in killing this project yet?

 If the tolkien estate has not received any royalties or meager royalies then I agree with them forcing production to shut down.

Agreed. Studios like Warner Bros sit and whine about people ripping off their properties without paying but turn around and think it is an acceptable business practice to stiff the original creators (or their families) of the properties that their movies are based on. It's sick that Tolkien's family has to actually go to court to get a slice of the cash that has been generated from the filming of their relative's creative output. I hope Tolkien succeeds in putting a knife into any filming of THE HOBBIT if Warner doesn't cough up a proper settlement. 

I'm pretty sure they will gets LOTS of money at some point. PJ had to fight, too, and it all worked out for him.

I wish the production would get shut down because I don't like the sound of the direction that Jackson and company are taking this project.  I'm a huge LOTR fan and would love to see The Hobbit made into a film but, this expanding it into 2 or 3 movies just sounds like too much filler will have to added by PJ.  I'm just not too interested in that.

The Tolkiens should get there royalties no matter what and, I agree with Edwin that it is just so hypocritical of Studios to go so hard after pirates yet try and escape paying royalties to the original authors and creators.

You want production shut down because you don't want to see a certain take the material?  Will its existence bother you so much that simply not seeing it won't be good enough?  Are you just as ardent in hoping that paintings, songs, video games, etc. that "expand on" Tolkien's creation don't get made?  I've yet to see any paintings inspired by Tolkien's works that aren't full of details not even described by Tolkien.  Do those really trouble you?

New Line's dubious claim that the Lord of the Rings films had not made any profits, and that they therefore could not pay the estate of JRR Tolkein a single cent, has ended:

"The heirs of J.R.R. Tolkien and a movie studio that produced the blockbuster "Lord of the Rings" trilogy have settled a lawsuit over the film's profits. ...the agreement's terms are confidential."
abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory

So it's probably safe to assume the settlement will allow filming to proceed on "The Hobbit"? I cannot see the studio agreeing to any settlement that would prevent them from making more movies.

 Wow is Warner Bros. ever shady, that's pretty shameful that they had to be taken to court. 

They probably would've dragged it on for years too if they didn't have the cash cow carrot of two more LOTR (err ... Hobbit) movies to cash in on. 

It's not behavior exclusive to Warner Bros. Other studios have done the same thing with very successful movies (check out Paramount and Eric Roth's fight over Forrest Gump). Nevertheless, it is good that they settled and that work can continue in earnest on The Hobbit.

According to the Hollywood Reporter:

Looks like The hobbit has been pushed back:

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b164103_hobbit_pulls_spider-man.html?utm_source=eonline&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=imdb_tv-movies

Wouldn't Mckellan have to be cast for this? Gandalf does make an appearance in the beginning of the book.