Hobbit movie announcement

"John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne.DeleteThis@attglobal.net> writes:
> That's tagged "is said to be about". The actual press releases do not
> say any such thing, but seem rather to suggest that it will simply be
> a two-film production. If "The Hobbit" were to be filmed with the same
> tempo and degree of detail as "The Lord of the Rings", but with no
> cuts, I think it would come to about that.

The halfway-point of the book (in terms of pages) is somewhere in
_Flies and Spiders_. Seems like a natural point to end a first movie
(big battle with spiders, capture by Elves, magical door closing behind
Thorin & Co., "To Be Continued"...)
--
mailto:jjk@acm.org As the air to a bird, or the sea to a fish,
http://www.bawue.de/~jjk/ so is contempt to the contemptible. [Blake]
http://del.icio.us/jjk
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

[Cross-posted to AFT.]

Regarding the second of the two recently announced films related to
/The Hobbit/:

In message <<87zlw6zgbq.fsf.TakeThisOut@earrame.de>>, Jens Kilian <jjk.TakeThisOut@acm.org> wrote:
> "John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne.TakeThisOut@attglobal.net> writes:
>> The actual press releases... seem rather to suggest that it will
>> simply be a two-film production. If "The Hobbit" were to be filmed
>> with the same tempo and degree of detail as "The Lord of the
>> Rings", but with no cuts, I think it would come to about that.

Really? I think of /The Hobbit/ as being comparable to or a bit
shorter than any one volume of LotR as a trilogy, so two films for
/The Hobbit/ would seem to scale up to at least six for LotR. Not
that I would have minded if they'd managed that (particularly as it
would have allowed a greater fidelity to the book in some important
places, at least in principle), but it does make it seem like these
/Hobbit/ movies will be shorter and less dense, if nothing else.

(Perhaps, with /The Hobbit/ being a kids' book and all, Jackson wants
to make the movies more kid-friendly by not making them three hours
long this time.)

> The halfway-point of the book (in terms of pages) is somewhere in
> _Flies and Spiders_. Seems like a natural point to end a first movie
> (big battle with spiders, capture by Elves, magical door closing behind
> Thorin & Co., "To Be Continued"...)

Interesting observation. Is that enough of a climax for a film,
though? "Yay! We weren't eaten!" isn't precisely a major moment of
fulfillment, just a fortunate escape. On the other hand, that may be
the first time that Bilbo takes a truly heroic role rather than being
the one who needs saving. If they play the scene up as Bilbo finally
coming into his own, maybe it wouldn't be a bad place to take a break
after all. Film #1 would be all about Bilbo finding his courage and
becoming a leader in the group rather than a glorified piece of
baggage, and then Film #2 is where the plot reaches its peak (and
shows Bilbo moving beyond mere courage and self-assurance to moral
leadership as well).

You know, I'm actually a bit less worried now that I've thought
through this. Two shorter films, each with its own "Bilbo's personal
growth" arc. The first one would end with a cliffhanger just like
Jackson's FotR did; there's no need to come to some neat point of
resolution in the broader story. Could be pretty spiffy.

(There's always the risk of totally missing Tolkien's main themes,
though; some of that happened in the LotR movies, too. If the
anti-war message at the end gets left out I'll be quite disappointed.)

Steuard Jensen
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

Steuard Jensen wrote:

If the
> anti-war message at the end gets left out I'll be quite disappointed.)

Good point. Now that the political climate, at least in the US, is
finally changing (for the better I might add), movie makers may no
longer feel constrained to display anti-war sentiments in their
projects. Had the movie been made a few years before, assuming PJ would
have included the anti-war theme, I could just hear the hawks screaming
about a hidden left-wing agenda in the movie!

--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The wise will remove "se" to reach me. The foolish will not!)
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

Bill O'Meally wrote:
> Steuard Jensen wrote:
>
> If the
>
>>anti-war message at the end gets left out I'll be quite disappointed.)
>
>
> Good point. Now that the political climate, at least in the US, is
> finally changing (for the better I might add), movie makers may no
> longer feel constrained to display anti-war sentiments in their
> projects. Had the movie been made a few years before, assuming PJ would
> have included the anti-war theme, I could just hear the hawks screaming
> about a hidden left-wing agenda in the movie!

There will be no hidden or open left-wing agenda in this movie. We will
stay loyal to Tolkien's original message, that the only way to assure
Peace is the Total Annihilation of the Enemy. Mr. Jensen is, as usual,
completely off the mark with his arguments of an "anti-war message" in
the Hobbit. The long peace which followed, was NOT a result of some
liberal wishy-washy peace talks or goody-goody social programs - it was
a result of the near total extermination of the enemy population! That
is how it was in the book, and that is how it will be in the movie,
regardless of how the winds might be blowing in Washington, or what some
liberal fift-column peacenicks or hippie-tripping faqqists might hope.

Morambar
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

Steuard Jensen wrote:
> [Cross-posted to AFT.]
>
> Regarding the second of the two recently announced films related to
> /The Hobbit/:
>
> In message <<87zlw6zgbq.fsf DeleteThis @earrame.de>>, Jens Kilian <jjk DeleteThis @acm.org> wrote:
>> "John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne DeleteThis @attglobal.net> writes:
>>> The actual press releases... seem rather to suggest that it will
>>> simply be a two-film production. If "The Hobbit" were to be filmed
>>> with the same tempo and degree of detail as "The Lord of the
>>> Rings", but with no cuts, I think it would come to about that.
>
> Really? I think of /The Hobbit/ as being comparable to or a bit
> shorter than any one volume of LotR as a trilogy, so two films for
> /The Hobbit/ would seem to scale up to at least six for LotR.

That's why I said "but with no cuts".

On the other hand, I now know that New Line's /license/ allows a
Hobbit-tLotR-transition movie, with "The Hobbit" only a single movie.
This could indeed be evil. But I don't quite see how it could be done.
To do it without hobbits would be a fatal error. But we already -- even
if we have only seen the movie -- that nothing much happened involving
hobbits in the intervening years. I suppose "The Young Aragorn
Chronicles" could be pieced together, or "The Breaking of Dol Guldur",
but either of those, no matter how well made, would be almost certain to
be failures -- or at least perceived failures. It really doesn't seem
worth the effort.


--
John W. Kennedy
Read the remains of Shakespeare's lost play, now annotated!
http://pws.prserv.net/jwkennedy/Double%20Falshood/index.html
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

"John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne.TakeThisOut@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:476c85f7$0$31158$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> Steuard Jensen wrote:
>> [Cross-posted to AFT.]
>>
>> Regarding the second of the two recently announced films related to
>> /The Hobbit/:
>>
>> In message <<87zlw6zgbq.fsf.TakeThisOut@earrame.de>>, Jens Kilian <jjk.TakeThisOut@acm.org>
>> wrote:
>>> "John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne.TakeThisOut@attglobal.net> writes:
>>>> The actual press releases... seem rather to suggest that it will
>>>> simply be a two-film production. If "The Hobbit" were to be filmed
>>>> with the same tempo and degree of detail as "The Lord of the
>>>> Rings", but with no cuts, I think it would come to about that.
>>
>> Really? I think of /The Hobbit/ as being comparable to or a bit
>> shorter than any one volume of LotR as a trilogy, so two films for
>> /The Hobbit/ would seem to scale up to at least six for LotR.
>
> That's why I said "but with no cuts".
>
> On the other hand, I now know that New Line's /license/ allows a
> Hobbit-tLotR-transition movie, with "The Hobbit" only a single movie. This
> could indeed be evil. But I don't quite see how it could be done. To do it
> without hobbits would be a fatal error. But we already -- even if we have
> only seen the movie -- that nothing much happened involving hobbits in the
> intervening years. I suppose "The Young Aragorn Chronicles" could be
> pieced together, or "The Breaking of Dol Guldur", but either of those, no
> matter how well made, would be almost certain to be failures -- or at
> least perceived failures. It really doesn't seem worth the effort.
>
>
> --
> John W. Kennedy
> Read the remains of Shakespeare's lost play, now annotated!
> http://pws.prserv.net/jwkennedy/Double%20Falshood/index.html

A "Hobbit" movie, of course, makes perfect sense, and I look forward to it.
But I am very worried that they are trying to start some sort of franchose,
which will ultimately end up with The Hobbit 4, with Bilbo rescuing POW's
from an insane Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp (ala Rambo), or The Hobbit
X - Bilbo in Space (ala Friday the 13th).

Then again, there is a very perverse side of me that would want to see those
movies....hmmm.....let me think about this further.
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

John W. Kennedy wrote:
> Glenn Holliday wrote:
>> The second, possibly our worst fear,
>> is about "the 60-year gap between the end of
>> J. R. R. Tolkien’s "Hobbit" and the beginning of the "Rings" trilogy."
>
> That's tagged "is said to be about". The actual press releases do not
> say any such thing, but seem rather to suggest that it will simply be a
> two-film production.

You're right, and I should have added another cautionary adjective.
I haven't seen the original press releases.

--
Glenn Holliday holliday.TakeThisOut@acm.org
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

John W. Kennedy wrote:
> On the other hand, I now know that New Line's /license/ allows a
> Hobbit-tLotR-transition movie, with "The Hobbit" only a single movie.
> This could indeed be evil. But I don't quite see how it could be done.
> To do it without hobbits would be a fatal error. But we already -- even
> if we have only seen the movie -- that nothing much happened involving
> hobbits in the intervening years.

How about Farmer Maggot and Bombadil? There's another Bombadil poem,
though without hobbits.

If Tolkien left notes about the Old Took, Brandybucks in the Old Forest,
or the relationships between Hobbits and Men at Bree, I could see
developing a new story. I would hate to see a new script that had no
grounding in Tolkien's words.

--
Glenn Holliday holliday DeleteThis @acm.org
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

BaJoRi wrote:


>
> A "Hobbit" movie, of course, makes perfect sense, and I look forward to
> it. But I am very worried that they are trying to start some sort of
> franchose, which will ultimately end up with The Hobbit 4, with Bilbo
> rescuing POW's from an insane Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp (ala
> Rambo), or The Hobbit X - Bilbo in Space (ala Friday the 13th).

It will be a P.O.W. lager run by Orcs.

Bob Kolker
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

Robert J. Kolker wrote:
> BaJoRi wrote:
>
>> A "Hobbit" movie, of course, makes perfect sense, and I look forward
>> to it. But I am very worried that they are trying to start some sort
>> of franchose, which will ultimately end up with The Hobbit 4, with
>> Bilbo rescuing POW's from an insane Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp
>> (ala Rambo), or The Hobbit X - Bilbo in Space (ala Friday the 13th).
>
> It will be a P.O.W. lager run by Orcs.
>
Where Colonel Bilbo humorously runs a secret operation under the
nose of the bumbling Colonel Sauron.

--
Glenn Holliday holliday.DeleteThis@acm.org
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:17:09 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker" <bobkolker DeleteThis @comcast.net>
wrote:

>BaJoRi wrote:
>
>
>>
>> A "Hobbit" movie, of course, makes perfect sense, and I look forward to
>> it. But I am very worried that they are trying to start some sort of
>> franchose, which will ultimately end up with The Hobbit 4, with Bilbo
>> rescuing POW's from an insane Vietnamese prisoner-of-war camp (ala
>> Rambo), or The Hobbit X - Bilbo in Space (ala Friday the 13th).
>
>It will be a P.O.W. lager run by Orcs.

I am the man, the very fat man, who waters the POWs' beer.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/litmain.htm
http://www.librarything.com/catalog/hayesstw
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/Methodius
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

Glenn Holliday wrote:
> If Tolkien left notes about the Old Took, Brandybucks in the Old
> Forest, or the relationships between Hobbits and Men at Bree, I could
> see developing a new story. I would hate to see a new script that
> had no grounding in Tolkien's words.

I can't see the Tolkien Estate allowing it.
--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The wise will remove "se" to reach me. The foolish will not!)
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement 

John W. Kennedy wrote:

> Bill O'Meally wrote:
>> Glenn Holliday wrote:
>>> If Tolkien left notes about the Old Took, Brandybucks in the Old
>>> Forest, or the relationships between Hobbits and Men at Bree, I could
>>> see developing a new story. I would hate to see a new script that
>>> had no grounding in Tolkien's words.
>>
>> I can't see the Tolkien Estate allowing it.
>
> Unfortunately, the Tolkien Estate has no control. Tolkien sold the movie
> rights to "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" many years ago, in
> the belief that it would be impossible actually to make the film.

But they sold the rights to /The Hobbit/. If that gives the rights-holder
permission to make a film about anything _other_ than /The Hobbit/, someone
had pretty poor lawyers...
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: Hobbit movie announcement