http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,2003...142132,00.html
Nothing definite yet, but I, for one, am VERY excited at the mere possibility that Jackson might be directing The Hobbit. And, if he has his way, a film telling the events that took place in the 60 years between The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.now the legal battle that's kept The Lord of the Rings' prequel, The Hobbit, hung up for years — a bitter feud between Rings director Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema co-chairman Robert Shaye — may finally be nearing resolution. For once, there's reason to be cautiously optimistic. At this writing, no agreements have been announced and details of the negotiations are sketchy (neither New Line nor Jackson's camp would comment to EW on any aspect of this story), but sources close to the talks tell us that they're detecting a lot less frost in the air, and that a deal may be reached that could help usher J.R.R. Tolkien's maiden Middle-earth masterpiece to screens before the end of the decade.
Bad. Ass. Let's all hope it works out!
I can't get excited about that. The Hobbit is very childish (and yes...I know that's intentional) compared to the trilogy. I'd rather see them pick a good story from the Silmarillion (how about Glorfindel...or whoever the badass elf dude was?). The dwarf fight for Moria might be interesting too...the original, obviously...not the one they lost to the goblins.
Give me Smaug, and the spiders in the forest, and I'm happy.
You really have no desire to see Weta make a dragon?
Blasphemer.
Jackson was always going to do it, it was just a fight over salary.
All the fighting was just posturing. There was too much money out there for it to end any other way.
After the Vaudeville dancing in front of the gorilla in King Kong I have no faith in PJ.
My biggest fear has always been that one of the Ians might die before they got around to making a movie, though I guess it's possible they'd go with someone else for Bilbo anyway, I don't know.
My second biggest fear is that they catch the John Rhys-Davies fever again, and cast him as like 7 of the dwarves.
As all of the dwarves. Including the entire army in the climactic battle. That's the next step forward in digital magic.Originally Posted by Wholly Schmidt
And probably the voice of the goblin king.
Tim Burton beat him to that one. And used an actor with 1/10 of Rhys-Davies fame...genius.
I'd like to see Jackson do it if it gets done, but I don't understand how they will pull it off. Most of the book is Bilbo with the dwarves, and I don't know how they will differentiate the dwarves enough to make it interesting. Rhys-Davies was buried in that makeup in LOTR; imagine 12 of those.
That's what different helmets are for.
And why did JRD voice Treebeard anyway?
I hope they get a huge homo to play Bombadill
I think the Hobbit will be great, but I'd also love to see something from the Silmarillion era, like Children of Hurin.
It'll be fun to see the reactions of people who watched Gandalf face down a Balrog when he's stuck up a tree, lighting pine cones on fire and throwing them at wolves.
I'd love to see him do it. I still have a soft spot for The Hobbit, and could see it translating to film very well. Could probably argue that it would translate to film better than the trilogy.
That's way funnier than it should be.
Yeah, I definately laughed way too hard at that.
Also: I'd rather see the Battle of Dale and the surrounding things, or Smaug, or hell, anything but the Hobbit.
Also, the new book in Movie form would be pretty cool too.
Eh? Were there major events that I'm forgetting which took place in this time period? Not sure how one would make a movie out of that...I'd think the previously suggested Silmarillion would be a better source. A host of Balrogs and a bad guy who dwarfed Sauron's power could be pretty neat to watch.
Tom Bombadil is in The Hobbit? Cool. What does he do?
I don't really remember the book much, and it's possible I never even read it but just heard about it enough as a kid that I feel like I've read it. But I can't imagine it being anything but disappointing after the trilogy. Isn't The Hobbit a sort of inconsequential aperitif to The Lord of the Rings?
-Tom
He dances around on his tippy toes and speaks only in rhyme. Sort of like me when I'm drinking.
He actually only appears in the Fellowship, but Jackson cut him out of the movie, so I feel Bombadil deserves a place in the Hobbit.
It doesn't have the weight of the trilogy, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's inconsequential. The problem is that it's a self-contained set-up for LOTR, introducing you to the concepts of Middle Earth and the Ring. But since readers and non-readers alike are now well-versed with both after nine hours of movies, a lot of the wonder and discovery is gone. Plus, the Ring is supposed to be the coolest accessory ever and is used several times throughout the book to pull Bilbo out of the fire. Of course, now everybody will be cringing any time he slips it on his finger.
From a non-reader standpoint, The Hobbit will undoubtedly be seen as a letdown IF their expectations are not properly adjusted. For fans like me, though, the trilogy seems incomplete without its prequel, even if it's showing up at the wrong end.
If they did something from The Silmarillion (which they wouldn't), I vote for Beren and Luthien
It's a tender love story where Beren embarks on a quest to Angband to recover some stolen elvish jewels inserted in the Dark Lord Morgoth's crown to win Luthien as a bride.
I mean Sauron, the Dark Lord in LOTR, gets his ass kicked by a freakin' mutt!
As great and epic as the Lord of the Rings is, it has serious pacing issues. The Hobbit is a better straight up story, even if it's less consequential.
Hey, I can't give you any forest spiders, but here's Smaug...
You think Weta will let me use him? He's very trainable, and he loves large piles of gold. I could probably stick a pair of plastic wings on his back... if I'm quick.
That's obviously an imposter-Smaug. He's not red.
What you need to do is get in close and paint him scarlet. Then your false-Smaug might pass muster.
He only turns red when he's sitting on a large pile of gold. Please send lots, and I'll show you.
No, THIS was a little too funny.He dances around on his tippy toes and speaks only in rhyme. Sort of like me when I'm drinking.
I can see Jackson pulling it off. I didn't think he'd be able to make the trilogy remotely well, and he did it. There are a lot of scenes in The Hobbit that I think would translate nicely to film, and some that I think could kick ass (the battle of four armies) if done by Jackson's hand. Plus, the story is a good one to put on the big screen. I'd like to see the explanation that it was the use of the ring in the Hobbit that awakened Sauron in the first place, and the riddles, and so forth. Plus, like I said, the spiders and Smaug (the real Smaug, not his little cousin up there in that picture from krayzkrok.)
With the exception of Thorin Oakenshield and The Fat Dwarf, they weren't differentiated in the book. Why would they need to be differentiated in the movie?
"Thorin sits down and starts singing about gold"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote