The Hobbit

[Menolly]

Unless he's in big trouble, it's BAY-orn.
When I'm aggravated, it's bay-OOOOORNNNN...

I've always pictured the b'yorn pronunciation with the scandinavian spelling, like the tennis player Bjorn Borg.

[Cagliostro]

Kick ass. Okay, I'm in. I see myself going through exactly the same thing I did previously. I just wonder about the second movie, and what things will piss me off with the Hobbit.

[wayfriend]

Gee, you know, if you go in with that kind of attitude ...

[kevinswatch]

I just read that Jackson is going to make a movie in between the Hobbit and LOTR? (www.wetanz.com/holics/index.php?itemid=695&catid=2#more)

I donno, I'm not much of a LOTR fan, but that just sounds lame.-jay

[Cagliostro]

Gee, you know, if you go in with that kind of attitude ...

I'm sure I won't go in with it. I'll probably come out with it.

For the first two (FOTR and TTT), I saw them twice on opening day. I expected nothing but genius for both, and came out sniping after the first showing, and relaxing and enjoying it for the second. Except for the Faramir thing...that struck me as a bit off. For ROTK, I saw them all back to back at the theater, so there really wasn't any more endurance to watch it a second time until a week or so later. But y'know what? I loved it the first time. I was disappointed with a few things, but those were things I knew would be out on the EE. I suspect I'll come out of the Hobbit the same way. And by sniping, it's more like nitpicking about what I didn't like, but gave equal time to what I did like, which was quite a bit, and pretty much overbalanced the sniping.
I did have high expectations going in, and it was just funny little things rubbed me wrong, especially with the first movie, that I well got over by the time the next movie came out.

[wayfriend]

Oh. You can read the transcript for the Q&A with PJ & GDT here. And theOneRing.net's executive summary is here.

[Zarathustra]

The fact that Ian Holm is SO memorable means that PJ, Fran and PB did their job right.

umm . . . I think it also means Holm did his job right, too, doesn't it?

An intense PG-13...

For the Hobbit??? I like an intense movie, but it's obvious they aren't going to retain the spirit of this book: a children's tale.

I think it should be done exactly as in the book- the “talking beast” motif has to exist already to allow for that great character that is Smaug. It is far more jarring to have a linear movie and then – out of the blue – a talking Dragon.

Interesting. This will be a strange continuity between the series. Talking trolls in 2, but not the other 3. I think that would be a lot more jarring than simply having a dragon talk, since no dragon was in LOTR.

But it got me thinking . . . people complained about the British accents of orcs in LOTR. Yet, this is exactly how the Trolls of The Hobbit talked.

[Cagliostro]

Something tells me Ian Holm isn't going to be doing Bilbo, which makes me sad. But from reading the summary now, it's interesting that Ron Perlman might be Thorin. Not quite sure about that, but I think it would probably work. His voice has the cadence for it, but I dunno about his face. It's a bit rocky. I'd place him as a giant in Covenant long before a dwarf, but who knows?

[wayfriend]

This just in. Even though it's a year ahead of any official casting, James McAvoy (Narnia, Last King of Scotland) is rumoured to be getting the Bilbo nod.

Pearlman may be being considered as the voice of Smaug, too. Think on THAT! :shiver:

Oh, and I like this.

[Zarathustra]

That's hilarious!

This is a big one-- Allow me to quote form my random responses at Onering.net…

I am a big Dragon fan. I've said it before- And I was fortunate enough to be born a Dragon in the Chinese Horocope...

And although its always impossible to agree on the "greatest" of anything, I bring forth these two as the main film contenders for that title: Eyvind Earle / Disney's Maleficent dragon ( a triumph of elegance of color and design) and Vermitrax Pejorative from Dragonslayer.

In my opinion, every other design has borrowed heavily from these two. I plan to create something new and groundbreaking.

Smaug should not be "the Dragon in the Hobbit movie" as if it was just "another" creature in a Bestiary. Smaug should be "The DRAGON" for all movies past and present. The shadow he cast and the greed he comes to embody- the "need to own" casts its long shadow and creates a thematic / dramatic continuity of sorts that articulates the story throughout-

In that respect, Smaug the CHARACTER is as important, if not more important, than the design. The character will emerge form the writing- and in that the Magnificent arrogance, intelligence, sophistication and greed of Smaug shine through-

In fact, Thorin's greed is a thematic extension of this and Bilbo's "Letting go" and his noble switching of sides when the dwarves prove to be in the wrong is its conceptual counterpart (that is a hard one to get through, Bilbo's heroism is a quiet, moral one) and the thematic thread reaches its climax in the Bilbo / Thorin death bed scene.

Anyway, back to Smaug: One of the main mistakes with talking dragons is to shape the mouth like a snub Simian one in order to achieve a dubious lip-synch. .. A point which eluded me particularly in Eragon, since their link is a psychic one.

To me, Smaug is the perfect example of a great creature defined by its look and design, yes, but also, very importantly, by his movement and -One little hint- its environment - Think about it... the way he is scaled, moves and is lit, limited or enhanced by his location, weather conditions, light conditions, time of the year, etc. That's all I can say without spoilers but, if you keep this curious little summary you'll realize several years form now that those things I had in my mind ever since doodling the character as a kid had solidified waaay before starting the shoot of the film.

A big tool is also how and when he is fully revealed. I could give you specifics- beat-by-beat in fact (I'm geeking out to do it), but...

Very, very interesting! Any guesses on the look of Smaug, based on these hints? White-grey from lack of sun exposure? Weak T-Rex limbs from lying around on treasure all these years? Definitely worm-like, to get through the tunnels. I'm sure our first sight will be a jewel-encrusted black shape with glowing eyes and the dim embers of fire in its mouth. And then the full reveal will be in the sky when he's trouncing the Dwarves.

As all of you know, Gollum has a rather fascinating arch to go through and his alliance to Shelob or his period of imprisonment in Thranduil's, etc but it is early still- so early in fact that to reveal more would tie our hands and be counterproductive.

Fantastic! I knew there was a lot of story to be told in the background of Tolkien's story.

[Menolly]

But it got me thinking . . . people complained about the British accents of orcs in LOTR. Yet, this is exactly how the Trolls of The Hobbit talked.

*grin*

"Mutton yesterday..."

[jacob Raver, sinTempter]

On the plus side, according to an informan TheOneRing.net poll held earlier in the year, del Toro came in second as the best alternative director to Jackson. (Fran Walsh won. I voted for Sean Astin.)

I don't know...Blade II sucked, I liked Hellboy, thought Pan's Labrynth was beautiful, Hellboy II sucked...not so confident this is going to work.

[Rigel]

Since my wife's been out of town visiting her family, I curled up the other day with my dogs and fell asleep on the couch watching The Hobbit. It's a good comfort flick

[jacob Raver, sinTempter]

Since my wife's been out of town visiting her family, I curled up the other day with my dogs and fell asleep on the couch watching The Hobbit. It's a good comfort flick

I did the same exact thing with my seven year old about a month ago.

[finn]

Just read this thread and Malik..... I agree with just about everything you've said.... this truly concerns me!

But as to the movie(s), The Hobbit is there to be told and given the ground broken by LoTR, should be readily achievable with a few head starts (props, costumes, locations etc) already in place, plus many of the team who were involved in the shooting and pre/post production still kicking around: the actors are the ones needed, Leo McKern probably most followed by Hugo Weaving, Andy Serkis, and Ian Holm who with a bit of make up could do a younger Bilbo easily enough. For those who wondered who this "Geez-bag" is , he's the guy who played Frodo in the BBC production of LoTR, which was one of the screenplay templates for the PJ film. Are there any other characters that made the succession of books?

As for Hobbit 2 or LoTR: the Prequel, there is a bit of ground to explore mainly to flesh out the Tolkein universe and back story of Aragorn, Legolas, Moria, Minas Tirith etc. IF IT'S DONE RIGHT! It could be a disaster with PJ's team writing, elaborating and filming a psuedo-Tolkein. Of course another movie would probably need Viggo Mortensen, Orlando Bloom, Christopher Lee maybe Sean Bean and many of the other cast members of LoTR, Cate Blanchett etc. But it does present a big risk in my mind of elaborating on unwritten materials.

I also noted some criticism of the books and tho' Malik summed up my thoughts on the scale of the achievement very well, there were also aspects of the book that could not come across into the movie. I've always felt that the theme of "growth" and "birth and re-birth" failed to emerge due to the dramatically necessary omission of Bombadil and the Barrow Wights. This part of the book was the passage where the Hobbits started to grow. Having succeeded to out strip the Black Riders they were rewarded with knowledge from Bombadil and learned lessons from the Barrow encounter as well as earning their stripes in the form of the elvish weapons they captured.

This theme of "test and growth" is repeated until they finally see its true measure in the eventual return to the Shire and their handling of the Ruffians and Saruman. Each of the hobbits exhibits personal growth more so than their fellowship companions who apart from their status, do not seem to 'grow-up' in quite the same manner.

The same theme is there in the Hobbit and I read that the Hobbit was in many ways a model for the LoTR, where in the final analysis its about an immature and naive Hobbit journeying out into the world and a matured, strong Hobbit returning; the adventures even on a grand scale merely being the mechanisms for that growth.

This is a theme that I'm sure was influenced by Tolkein first pre -war and then Tolkein coming home post-war an older wiser, darker (?) character.

Anyway Malik, some excellent posting and content to which I whole heartedly subscribe!

[tho' Denethor's fiscal control over a militaristic righ wing psuedo GDP administrations was ..........

[wayfriend]

I think it's a sure bet that Ian Holm won't be reprising Bilbo in the forthcoming Hobbit Movie. While they haven't admitted to making *any* casting choices yet, the writing team has admitted that they are searching for a young Bilbo.

As far as Hobbit II - while there is a lot of material that could be mined for background, there needs to be a story which the movie tells. It can't just be acting out bits of the history. And it has to be a story connected to Hobbit I and LOTR to boot.

Given that the movie has to have a story structure, the options become limited. The search for Gollum; the mission to Dol Goldur; the seduction of Saruman.

-- now Saruman is a thorny problem!!! I can't see Lee signing up for Saruman after he got so disrespected in ROTK.

[Zarathustra]

The only way Ian Holm could do Bilbo is if they used computer graphics to make him look younger, almost a Gollum-like erasure of his physical presence, that still allowed Sirkus (sp?) to shine through. That could be done. Computer graphics surely have advanced in the 7+ (! Oh my god !) years since the release of TTT, which first showcased Gollum in all his CGI glory. Didn't they do something similar in the last X Men movie? Make Ian McKellan look younger?

Finn, thanks!

[Sunbaneglasses]

My 8 year old son can do a dead on Gollum impression, it is really quite brilliant. That is all.

[finn]

Sadly Wayfriend is probably right, I say sadly because Ian Holm has done a fantastic job as Frodo on the BBC version of LoTR and then Bilbo in the movie. He clearly knows the character of Hobbits and Bagginses in particular and if he could look like Bilbo in the FoTR, which was Bilbo (almost) unchanged since the Hobbit adventure, then the task of getting him back to spec is not so enormous!

Christopher Lee will of course be a problem as he was instrumental in the Dol Guldur adventure against the Necromancer (Sauron). But he may be willing to reprise the role as the good guy being corrupted by Sauron, which would be a key and interesting part. Otherwise we might have to see a Doctor Who type regeneration (which I suppose Gandalf the White was) with a Saruman who starts to change to eventually become the Lee character.

Anyway, I think its exciting that the thing is going to happen.

[jacob Raver, sinTempter]

I think Lee would do it, being that his character could get as much or more screen time in Hobbit 2 then in any of the previous ones.