Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Regarding this whole Peter Jackson - HOBBIT story coming out of Berlin!

Fuck The Hobbit! by HardcoreRocker	Dec 9th, 2003 02:29:17 PM
KING KONG!!!!! howl
Non-drowsy my ASS! by rev_skarekroe	Dec 9th, 2003 02:29:34 PM
That Claritin stuff just makes me want to take a nap. The Hobbit? Sure, I'd go to see thazzzzzzz.... sk
WOO! by Johnson McGregor	Dec 9th, 2003 02:30:47 PM
Let's enjoy further idiocy run rampant.
God I hate political beeshee by Dug Wells	Dec 9th, 2003 02:31:23 PM
Anything that stops another addition to the Lord of The Rings filmic universe, I am adamantly against. And Yes, the WETA Smaug would kick ass.
Second for the first time ever by Yahoo	Dec 9th, 2003 02:31:29 PM
I gladly welcome myself to the world of AICN Talkbacks!! LOTR rules.
You mean someone did not actually know this already? by Warin	Dec 9th, 2003 02:34:37 PM
You people are not geeks! Your barely even fans. Faugh.
the Hobbit by jws816@mac.com	Dec 9th, 2003 02:36:34 PM
Surely the story of the Hobbit would not rival that of the Lord of the Rings on the Big screen... for the simple fact it, presumably, be only one movie. Perhaps the delay (legal red tape) will lend itself to a better box office. It will let the public 'crave' it more by giving it a break from the LOTR characters. Overhype and overexposure doesn't work well with sequels/prequels... at least lately. BTTF 2&3, Matrix 2&3, etc.
But what about the Tolkien Estate? by DarkBastion	Dec 9th, 2003 02:40:20 PM
I coulda sworn that Chris Tolkien was being a dick about the rights to the Hobbit, but maybe that was just news about the whole museum, him being a dick about the museum, and stories of the Hobbit all congealing into one. Oh well. Here's hoping New Line realizes they will make an ass-ton of money off The Hobbit if PJ does it, and that they buy the rights, regardless of price, as soon as possible.
How stupid can they be? Split it. by mortsleam	Dec 9th, 2003 02:41:58 PM
Half of 300 billion dollars is still 150 billion dollars. Make it while you still can, McKellan and (especially) Holm ain't gettin' any younger. In fact, perhaps Jackson should just take a producer's role and give another director free reign with WETA. Because really the tone of the Hobbit isn't quite right for what he's known for, ie, the big bloody battles. Fuck, let Fran and Phillipa direct it. Just make sure you bring back Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving and Christopher Lee to show the White Council teaming up with Gandalf to force the Necromancer out of Dol Guldur. Brian Blessed for Beorn!
And another thing.... by Warin	Dec 9th, 2003 02:44:45 PM
A typo in my very first post. How embarrassing. That should be "you're", not "your" of course. I agree with the previous poster that the Hobbit would be extremely anticlimactic to say the least. Aside from the fact that there are many fewer astonishing locations to recreate (which has really been my favourite part of the films so far), there is so much less at stake in this story. Twelve dwarves and a hobbit want to get rich and maybe settle a grudge or two. They do. That's about it. Mr. Jackson would either need to completely change the emphasis of the story (perhaps by playing up the Battle of the Five Armies at the end and the dwarven colony in Moria), or he would need to completely abandon any attempt at epic-ness and make it a comedy or something. That might be the way to go, really - as I recall, the tone of the book stays very light-hearted and reassuring throughout. Of course I have not read it in 20 years or so, so my recollection may be faulty. P.S. Berlin? Jackson has been talking about this for days and days, easily since the NZ premier.
MGM??? The way they're going, pay them off with 50 dollars and g by NotchJohnson	Dec 9th, 2003 02:48:18 PM
MGM/UA is holding up a project by New Line? Please. MGM is clearly the smaller fish here. Please. They made a sequel out of "Legally Blonde" because it was only chance for extra cash this year. If they owned "Honey," we'd already see "More Honey" on their production schedule. Please, New Line, pay them off with $200 or $300. Heck, just pay them off with Burger King gift certificates, MGM would probably cave in. (Any chance for a HULK HOGAN cameo in "The Hobbit"? "I'm waiting for the Wizard, brother.")
Get HULK HOGAN into "The Hobbit" production, too by NotchJohnson	Dec 9th, 2003 02:50:42 PM
"Chip the glasses and crack the plates, BROTHER!"
What the? by DarkBastion	Dec 9th, 2003 02:50:59 PM
First? Holy shit. Thank god I didn't make an ass out of my self like normal first posters. Anyway, why not recycle my post from Fark.com topic about the very same subject? I'd almost rather see The Hobbit done as a series of short films, or a miniseries where each show is a single chapter in the book. If Jackson adapted the LotR trilogy so well to the screen, then I'm sure he could do a single "Hobbit" movie well in one shot. But he shouldn't have to, and I'd like to see some new ideas thrown around to accommodate what could be done with The Hobbit. I know this isn't likely, but what about hour-long serials that show in movie theaters for a discounted price? There'd be one episode each week, or month, or whatever, and for, say, half the price of a normal ticket, you go see the 1-hour Hobbit episode, then come back to the theater next week/month/whatever for the next one. I know those marketing big wigs would never trust the public to follow that, but I still think it would be cool, like the old serials they used to play before the main feature at movie theaters. Then release them all on one big honkin' DVD. Let's see ... we could get a brief cameo of a young Aragorn and Arwen during Bilbo's first visit to Rivendale (Aragorn grew up there, you know, and Elrond is a given), we could maybe get a cameo of Legolas when Bilbo and co. are held prisoner by the Elves of Mirkwood/when the Elves go to fight at the Lonely Mountain, and shiat, let's throw Gimli in there when the army of Dwarves shows up at the Battle of Five Armies ... hmm, so many possibilities ... oh, and John Rhys-Davies could play Gloin. Now all we gotta do is castrate Chris Tolkien for farking with his dad's legacy and holding Tolkien to some kind of snobbish literary standard the JRR himself despised.
Hobbit Thoughts by FrankCobretti	Dec 9th, 2003 02:54:32 PM
1. Of course I want to see it. These guys can do no wrong. 2. Where there's a paycheck, there's a way. C'mon, guys - surely you can negotiate a reasonable deal.
sonofdarkbastion, you are an ass indeed by blue7	Dec 9th, 2003 02:59:22 PM
"First? Holy shit. Thank god I didn't make an ass out of my self like normal first posters." No, you made an even bigger ass out of yourself by posting around fourteenth and thinking you were actually first, not to mention getting all stiffened up about it. Your idea, by the way, is the product one might expect to see come from an ass as well. Serial, right. Really neat idea, gee whiz and jeepers and all that. Go back to plorf.com or whatever the fuck and stay there.
Humbled by DarkBastion	Dec 9th, 2003 03:00:24 PM
Of course, as soon as I say anything about being first, I get humbled by the fucked up order of these stupid talk backs. Harry, for fucks's sake, fix these things! I've seen geocities websites with better message boards than this one.
blue7 by DarkBastion	Dec 9th, 2003 03:03:14 PM
Wow, blue7, little anrgy are we? Calm down brother, we're just talking about movies here. You don't think serials would be a good idea? I think it'd be great for The Hobbit. The story is a much longer adventure than what a normal movie calls for. I'd hate to see it trimmed to a single movie. And serials would allow it to be a cool movie-quality project without feeling as cheap as a TV show. Just a thought.
Clearly The Hobbit would only be made to captilise on the Succes by Magnus_Steele	Dec 9th, 2003 03:04:15 PM
You know it's true baby.
New RotK clip by Mostholy	Dec 9th, 2003 03:04:55 PM
Enjoy -http://www.themoviebox.net/mo vies/2003/Lord-of-the-Rings_RO TK/trailer-page.html - Scroll to the bottom...more spoiler-ish than the nine minutes that are already floating around.
I dunno, I think all of the hobbit could be squeezed into one mo by mortsleam	Dec 9th, 2003 03:10:13 PM
One three hour movie, perhaps, but still. Boil down the prose and carefully edit out talking finches and whatnot and the actual plot takes up about 200 pages of a screenplay. Actually, as laughable as the "Lemmiwinks" folk music and twee faerie Elrond was, the Rankin-Bass Hobbit was a fairly concise adaptation. And it's only 90 minutes. Double that, add in Beorn and a truly epic PJ-ish Battle of the Five Armies, maybe even preface it with the final meeting of the White Council (when Saruman chides Gandalf for his pipe-smoking) and you could easily tell the whole story.
ShadowInc, good idea. by DarkBastion	Dec 9th, 2003 03:10:42 PM
As much as I like PJ's work, I don't want him to be forced into Middle-earth again. He's said himself he'd love to sit down and see The Hobbit himself, and see it as a film like the rest of the world, rather than having to craft it himself. So long as the same actors, props, and "feel" remain the same, another director wouldn't be a horrible idea. But PJ doing it would kick ass, too.
creeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaak by OldManWillow	Dec 9th, 2003 03:11:29 PM
Christofer Tolkien has become a miserable old fellow who refuses to talk to his son and grandson just because they went to see the movies...the grandson even has a small part as a ranger in ROTK.It's good he looks after the integrity of J.R.R's work,but his mind seems to be way too narrow.J.R.R. would probably have loved to see a decent take like Jackson's on his story.And all of us lovers of Middle-Earth has the right,the necesity,we demand to see The Hobbit made a movie. So who really has the rights in the end?Does Christofer have a right of vetoing the project or not? Not to make the movie in the middle of all the hype is a good argument,but if the right people do it...Jackson wouldnt let the hype affect him.Actually he has learned to listen more to the fans.AND...with the interest so huge,it might even let the story be filmed,not abreviated like TLOTR has been,but COMPLETE in all its little details...say made into another three movies?yes pleaaase!Not only Smaug,but the Eagles,the three Trolls,Gollum in his cave in the bowels of the mountain,the city of the Forest Elves,the Spiders,and BEORN!
Hulk Hogan by Itchy	Dec 9th, 2003 03:14:38 PM
Okay. That's it. I officially find the Hulk Hogan cracks funny. So sue me. I mean, come on .... Imagine a digitally shrunken testicle-free steroid addled Hogan with a CGI beard playing one of the dwarves. Hilarious ! Now line up Mr. T and The Haitian Kid to play some of the others and you've got yourself a movie worth making ! Hail to the King, Brother !
Why Peter Will Make the Hobbit Eventually by Knightsong	Dec 9th, 2003 03:21:25 PM
First of it'll be because of King Kong...there has not been a decent Kong film sinse the original almost 70 years ago. Why do you ask? Because people grow less and less willing to accept the idea of him. How could an 100 foot tall gorilla exist without someone finding it. The answer, it couldn't. Now I know he's taking it back to formulla and making it take place in the 30's as the original did. That is a smart idea, there's a chance he might pull it off. But, the movie is destined to fail. First of all it'll be touted as "From the Director of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy" so naturally expectations will be high...too high. Then there will no doubt be alot of media hype and by the time the movie actually hits the screen it's doomed. Even if it's an alright or even great movie. People will expect more of it than possible. (See the Matrix Sequels for details) Then he'll do his little indy New Zeland thing that will get critical raves, but no one will want to see because they want action and special effects from the Director of LOTR and King Kong! So he'll finally be urged by people to go back in the direction which made him famous and do the Hobbit, which people will then blow off thinking this guy hasn't had a successful movie since LOTR so now he's running back trying to cash in again. This is what I fully expect to happen and any other person should too. Is it Jackson's fault...no. Is it my fault...no. Is it popular cultures fault...yes. It has been, and always will be, the hype of gossip hounding pop culture that always kills great directors and great movies. And I dare any of you to post otherwise.
The Tolkien Estate and The Hobbit by elanor	Dec 9th, 2003 03:28:25 PM
To clarify matters for those who are confused, like darkbastion, the Tolkien Estate is "being a prick" over the idea of creating a LOTR museum in New Zealand, not over "The Hobbit". Peter Jackson (and Mark Ordesky and Barrie Osborne) has been quoted on both subjects recently and the two stories are being reported so sloppily that there was bound to be confusion. The Tolkien Estate no longer controls the on-screen rights to "The Hobbit". Those rights are contolled exactly as Harry outlined in his article above. Clearly, the two studios should stop being stupid, agree to share the cost of production 50/50 and split the take 50/50 and they will both make gobs of easy money. Neither will make a dime on it if the project just sits on a lawyer's desk. Since studios rarely stop being stupid on their own, even iconclastic studios like New Line, I think the fans should try to help by applying pressure to BOTH studios.
PJ's future by DarkBastion	Dec 9th, 2003 03:32:16 PM
Does it have to happen that way? Could we see King Kong as a genuine kick-ass movie, and could the public go into it knowing it won't be the dramatic action of LotR? I think its possible. People can accept it for what it is, they way they saw Pulp Fiction awarded that Oscar and didn't expect solid gold from Tarentino the next time. Oh well, I really hope he's not as doomed as you think, but sadly, it does seem to be a possability.
Ah yes, elanor, thanks for the clarification, but more important by mortsleam	Dec 9th, 2003 03:34:39 PM
Can you tell someone has started drinking caffeine again? Anyhoo, what are your thoughts re: One Hobbit movie or two+ ? And should Jackson direct or step aside for someone more kiddie friendly and merely produce? And what about adding White Council scenes and showing the clearing of Dol Guldur? See, this is how to keep the Tailends a-flippin' like a kitty on catnip...
Lucas should be the one to make "The Hobbit" by Atticus Finch	Dec 9th, 2003 04:28:43 PM
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!
I think we have a new catchphrase, HardcoreRocker... by DarthSnoogans	Dec 9th, 2003 05:22:49 PM
"Fuck the Hobbit". Just really slides off the tongue, doesn't it? And I'm all for Hulk Hogan as Gollum. "What has it got in its pocketses, BROTHER?!!"
Atticus Finch...ARE YOU INSANE? by Halloween68	Dec 9th, 2003 05:48:04 PM
That's a joke right? George Lucas to direct the Hobbit? Did you ever see Willow? You want The Hobbit to turn out like that? A big part of what makes The Hobbit so great are all the great, colorful characters and the many friendships they forge. Lucas can't direct actors. I would personally hunt Lucas down and bitch slap him several times over if he turned The Hobbit into Willow Ofgood meets Jar Jar and Howard the Duck for tea. I repeat, are you insane? You had to be kidding. If so, my apologies...and, good one.
Holm? Don't be ridiculous, there's no way he'd be in it. by minderbinder	Dec 9th, 2003 05:50:30 PM
They'd recast Young Bilbo and hopefully McKellen, Weaving and Serki would return.
actually, the aforementioned Kill Bill comparison is more accura by Rhuragh	Dec 9th, 2003 06:01:01 PM
See, there's a hell of a lot of material, narratively, to cover in The Hobbit. There are also some big holes that wouldn't make for a very good movie, I'm speaking specifically of Gandalf's unexplained disappearance, then reappearance later on. Very unwieldy in the context of the big screen. Instead, what PJ, Fran Walsh, and Phillipa Boyens should do is write the story of what Gandalf does along with Saruman and the rest of the White Council. Then, split Hobbit into TWO movies. End the first one with the White Council driving Sauron's spirit out of Dol Guldur in the South of Mirkwood (GOD I hope they show the army of Lothlorien defeating that castle in ROTK, this was described in the ROTK Appendices; also, pulling Christopher Lee into the project would be nice considering the ass farking PJ is giving him cutting his scene from theatrical ROTK, also a good opportunity to give some more screen time to Cate Blanchett, Marton Csokas, and Hugo Weaving, perhaps even work in a few Legolas/Orlando Bloom moments in Mirkwood), movie two could continue starting around the time of the Dwarves getting stopped in Mirkwood, and run through the battle of the Five Armies. Sounds good to me. Hope you're reading this PJ. I know I'd love to have two more years to look forward to Christmas releases of MORE Tolkien lore.
I, too, hate political beeshee by Ribbons	Dec 9th, 2003 06:09:46 PM
I really do. It's frustrating, but if you wanna keep your job in such a competitive market you basically have to be a selfish dick. Think of why bastardizations of things deemed trendy flood the market. But I digress....ballyhoo, MGM should strike some sort of deal instead of holding onto it like a raccoon holds onto nickels.
I think it should be made by... by SkuaSeptember	Dec 9th, 2003 06:34:51 PM
Frances Walsh, personally. She co-wrote the flicks with Jackson, she knows the world as well as he does by now. She directed the "Birth of Gollum" sequence at the beginning of ROTK, which I've heard rules (haven't seen it yet). And, since she hasn't been directing the whole blody thing, she may not be burnt out on it at this point. I think she's the perfect choice, to get it done before the actors get too old for it. OUT
Legolas going to be at the Battle of the Five Armies? by My Ass Smells	Dec 9th, 2003 07:23:02 PM
Peter Jackson must know that stupid little bitches who aren't old enough to shave their own pussies will flock to see homo Orlando Bloom. Stupid bitches = $$$$$$$$
ahem by Nyx_Spiral	Dec 9th, 2003 07:57:15 PM
King Kong is 50 ft tall, Not 100 ft. I mean really, 100 ft?! That's just silly. No gorilla is bigger than 50 ft! 50 ft is the standard giant monster size. Godzilla, King Kong, Gamera, etc. etc.
the hobbit? by Bourne GreyElf	Dec 9th, 2003 09:06:31 PM
it would be nice, but making prequels hasn't exactly been a good idea of late(starwars). and I think they would have to add alot to the hobbit that wasn't in the book to make it kick any sort of ass. and who know, maybe they'd fix the way the stupid worgs look, by actually making them look like wolves, not low budget looking hyennas. and the story of one hobbit and 12 dwarves going after treasure? eh....and gollum would have to be redone to fit the way he acts in lotr. the council kicking the shit outta the necromancer would rule all hell, and sticking legolas in mirkwood makes sense, hes the prince after all, and his father is in the book, so why not? and sticking gimli in the battle of 5 armies is another great idea. some character interaction between the two fellowship members and character development would be cool.
how did my post become first? by Bourne GreyElf	Dec 9th, 2003 09:09:15 PM
how did my post become first?
Ian McKellen by BigBadBalls	Dec 9th, 2003 09:27:57 PM
However New Line and MGM/UA work it out, they had better not let it drag on forever. Ian McKellen isn't getting any younger.
MGM? by lynxpro	Dec 9th, 2003 09:38:25 PM
I thought it was Warner Bros. themselves that held the theatrical rights to "The Hobbit" now. If that had been true, the top brass of Time Warner would've had them waive it on over to New Line, their sister company. I think Jackson should jump on it while many of the original cast are still around. Last time I checked, Sir Ian isn't getting any younger, and Count Dooku pretty much sounds off that he will be dying soon. Not to mention what if Orlando Bloom suffers a Mark Hamill-esque accident and his face is completely changed? Get it made, and then do KONG if you must... Perhaps Jackson should throw his hat in for Spider-Man3 if Raimi decides to opt out...
Chizzled Hard by lakerfan32	Dec 9th, 2003 10:33:15 PM
www.chizzledhard.com
all about YOU, mort! And yes, FRAN should direct! by elanor	Dec 10th, 2003 12:07:53 AM
I think it should be one movie (as much as I would love two, I think it should be one 2 and a half hour movie.) Yes, I think it would be WAY cool to include some glimpse of the White Council and driving out the Necromancer, but remember, the Hobbit was written as a children's book. I think its overall tone should be aimed more for the Harry Potter audience than the LOTR audience (granting the substantial overlap that exists). But Bilbo is still hired as a burglar which is a "cute" idea and that has to play throughout (until he elevates himself to peacemaker with the Arkenstone business.) AND, far more problematic, is The Ring. It is treated in an altogether different way - every time Bilbo puts it on won't audiences be waiting for the screech of a Wraith or the flaming slit to come roaring into view? And then there are the REALLY important issues like how will it end? With Thorin's death? With Bilbo's return to the Shire in time to stop the S-B's auction? And you CAN'T leave out the knocking thrush! That's too cool. They don't have to speak but they DO have to knock. (hee hee, it's Tom Bombadil, BOW and SOTS all over again!)***I agree with another poster who thinks PJ deserves to "watch" the Hobbit as he never really got to "watch" the LOTR. I think Fran should direct and PJ can be her consultant. Richard Taylor and WETA must be involved, of course. And Howard Shore, to wipe out whatever memory remains of the Rankin-Bass stuff.
PHEW! by scumbag	Dec 10th, 2003 02:48:55 AM
For a minute there I thought there was going to be an article that didn't mention BNAT 5...
Potential LOTR cameos in The Hobbit by Antiriad	Dec 10th, 2003 04:01:20 AM
Well apart from Gandalf, Elrond and Gollum as a prerequisite you can have many of the LOTR chrs. Legolas could make a brief appearance at the elves woodland kingdom as he is the son of the king. As Aragorn is 87 and the Hobbit set 60 years prior, you could see him at Rivendell - maybe even meeting Arwen for the first time? The Dwarf Gloin (father of Gimli) could be played by John Rhys Davies, or even Gimli could be seen when Gandalf visits Thorin in the mountains west of the shire. Hell, you could even show the council of the wise (regarding the necromancer in Dol Guldur in the south of mirkwood) and have Galadriel & Saruman present! An opportunity to see the beginning of the latters treachery...
In some ways, there's no reason they shouldn't cast Holm, becaus by BarrelRider	Dec 10th, 2003 05:32:21 AM
But I guess with the movie trilogy, they've kind of gone down that road so for the sake of congruity, a new Bilbo should be cast. Tobey Maguire! Only joking. Or am I? He does bear a certain similarity to Elijah Wood. Whatever, we need to see this movie, and thanks for name-dropping me Harry ;-)
elanor by Ribbons	Dec 10th, 2003 05:53:08 AM
Based on the scenes Fran Walsh specialized in directing in LotR, I don't think she's any kind of candidate for directing a movie with a light-hearted tone.
Hobbit trailer by Wyrdy the Gerbil	Dec 10th, 2003 06:47:10 AM
Steve Lathams Hobbit trailer was better than most of the films ive seen this year.....
I'm sorry. But The Task must be given to Peter Jackson by JAGUART	Dec 10th, 2003 07:21:52 AM
The future fate of Middle Earth is with him. To be a filmmaker in Middle Earth is to be alone. This task was appointed to Peter Jackson, and if does not find a way, no one will.
A few things... by Halloween68	Dec 10th, 2003 10:01:20 AM
I'd love to see the Hobbit made into a live action film. I think it is actually more suited to the film media, therefore there should be fewer changes necessary to make the adaptation. I'd love to see PJ and crew do it. (Noticed I said "PJ" and "crew". Fran Walsh has never directed a film. She's directed some scenes, under the direct supervision of PJ. I do not wish for The Hobbit to be Fran Walsh's first film. Also, no offense, but the battle of the five armies, all the monsters involved...this is right up Jackson's alley. He'd be reveling in this sort of thing. I like the team of he and Fran. I don't wish to see them apart, but I think PJ needs to stay at the reins for The Hobbit).*Hey, any ideas out there of who else might be able to do The Hobbit justice? John Boorman at one time wanted to do a LOTR adaptation. Anyone think he'd be up to directing The Hobbit. I think visually he'd nail it, but I'd be worried about his committment to the story. Whoever does pick it up, they have to be committed to the book. How about Ridley Scott? Hmmm. I think he could do it. I'd like to see whoever does do it, continue to use the forced perspective technique. I want to see the hobbits and dwarves built to their size. Really, since the majority of the story is from the prespective of Bilbo and the dwarves, the only time size would be an issue is when Gandalf is in the picture, the visit with Bjeorn, the visit with the elves which can be directed around since there aren't any direct shots with the company and the elves in the same picture (I'd also like to see the elves taller, more slinder and more lithe as described in the books. Maybe stretch the film for effect - kind of like in the intros to the old Kung Fu theatre films), and lastly in Lake Town. It should be a simpler job to do than in Rings. Sam Raimi might could do a good job at it. He definitely has the sense of humor needed for The Hobbit. Here's a bizzare thought...how about the Coen's. Look at Oh Brother for proof that they could handle it visually. They also have the sense of humor. Gore Verbinski. (sp?) Guilermo. Gilliam. Burton. I think there are capable directors out there, but Jackson is still the best suited for the project.*As for casting, if PJ picked it back up, Sir Ian would be more than welcome back as Gandalf. I don't know if I could picture anyone else at this point of doing it anymore. They'd have to recast Bilbo. Ian Holme is too old. Bilbo is supposed to be Frodo's age when he first leaves the Shire. Arwen could be in Rivendell, but she better not be featured is all I have to say. She's not mentioned in the book. She has no dialogue. Elrond... I wouldn't mind a different person being cast as Elrond. To tell you the truth, the only person I've had a real problem with casting-wise for the Rings films is Hugo Weaving as Elrond. To me, the way he looks, sounds, and his demeanor, he's still playing Agent Smith. Elrond should be more graceful and have more personality than the way Hugo is playing the role. And frankly, the guy just doesn't look the part of Elrond. No offense against Mr. Weaving. I think he's a splendid actor. I just don't think the part was right for him. Re-casting Elrond would be a-okay with me. It would be kind of cool to see Orlando Bloom in a bit part at the tree fortress in Mirkwood or fighting alongside the Elven King in the Battle of the Five Armies. But again, it should be a bit part with none if any dialogue. With this in mind, I'm not sure if Liv or Orlando would consent to being cameos. Especially if they had to fly all the way out to New Zealand again and get into the costume and makeup again. But who knows, maybe by then, they'll want to revisit, and possibly miss the Tolkien way.
Nyx Spiral and 1933 Kong height by m2298	Dec 10th, 2003 10:26:35 AM
From www.aboyd.com/kong/kongfaq2.ht ml#A2: How Tall is Kong? Posters advertise King Kong as being 50 feet high. This is an exaggeration to help sell movie tickets. In reality, Kong was much smaller. For the scenes on Skull Island, Kong is made to appear eighteen feet high. This height was appropriate for the sequences where Kong interacts with Fay Wray. Merian C. Cooper, the producer, felt that an eighteen foot high Kong was too small for the New York sequences compared to the giant skyscrapers there and ordered Kong's height changed to twenty-four feet high for those sequences. Most viewers of the film never notice the change in Kong's height. While trying to sell his film project King Kong vs. Frankenstein, Willis O'Brien gave Kong's measurements as Height 19'-8", Weight 38 tons, Reach 27', Chest 17', Waist 11', and neck 9' I don't know about the '77 KONG. The Japanese films were larger, particularly the one where he had to fight Godzilla.
If they have to re-cast Bilbo by mortsleam	Dec 10th, 2003 10:50:03 AM
I think Kenneth Branagh would be a good choice. He can pull off the bluster and haughtiness of Bilbo during the Unexpected Party, and convincingly portray his gradual steps towards adventure and heroism. Plus, he sorta looks like Ian Holm did in his "young age" makeup in Fellowship. Remember, in Fellowship they de-aged Frodo to his coming of age (33), so there's no need to get a WB actor to portray the 50 year old Bilbo in the Hobbit.
Question by raker	Dec 10th, 2003 11:15:10 AM
how long does a piece of music or a book remain under protection from copying? Is it forever? Or do we pay for using Shakespeare or homer? will Tolkiens other works ever be allowed to be put into film?
raker... by mortsleam	Dec 10th, 2003 11:57:31 AM
As far as I know, for works created after 1957, they should go under public domain 50 or 75 years after the death of the creator. Unless specifically held by offspring, who are entitled to apply to retain ownership for an additional 50 years. I'm talking about music copyrights here, but I'm pretty sure literature works the same way.
Aliencaptive(insertnumberhere) by Halloween68	Dec 10th, 2003 01:08:40 PM
What's wrong with a Dungeons & Dragons look. Much of the look of Dungeons & Dragons was directly inspired by Tolkien. I agree with your assessment that The Hobbit is lighter and funnier than LOTR, and maybe a bit more imaginative if you are referring to a more fairy tale-ish look about things. The Hobbit "was" orgininally a children's fairy tale. The professors originally read these same stories to his children at bedtime. This latter bit you addressed strikes me as saying you do not wish for anyone to address The Hobbit in the same "Historic" representation that Rings was given. Jackson was shooting for realism in Rings. I'm guessing you're wanting a more fantastical representation of The Hobbit. Something more along the lines of Peter Pan, (dare I say it...gasp) Willow, or Legend as far as tone. I'm all for that. But at the same time, I want frightening images. The orc caves should be spooky. Gollum should remain creepy (please keep Andy Serkis as Gollum). Mirkwood should scare the be-jesus out of me. Especially when the spiders start crawling about the captured dwarves. Smaug should be intimidating. And the big Battle at the end should be relatively climatic, stirring, and somewhat violent. The thing I like about Jackson doing The Hobbit is that his team seems to have noticed things that other directors would simply skimmed over. I think Jackson would address the Necromancer (Sauron), where as no one else probably would. It's the little details PJ brings to the table. PJ's already been to Middle Earth. It would seem to be an easier thing for him to revisit the world than for someone else to start from scratch. I'm sure he would love to check the tone. As I said before, he's got a killer sense of humor - see any of his previous films. He's great at fantasy - see Heavenly Creatures dream sequences. He loves monsters - see any thing he's done in the past. He loves battle sequences - see LOTR. Maybe on this one, as far as art and production design, maybe he can inlist the additional help of the Brothers Hildebrandt and some of the more fantastical Tolkien artists.
So mgm should make it themselves. Lets see a new take on lotr by TheGinger Twit	Dec 10th, 2003 01:11:12 PM

jackson and the hobbit by perryfarrell	Dec 10th, 2003 02:46:12 PM
jackson's a smart guy and he loves tolkein. so if he were to do the hobbit, i sincerely doubt that he would do stupid shit like throwing in the white council and the necromancer. it just doesn't fit the mood of the rest of the story. it's a good-natured, imaginative fantasy story, not an Epic Battle of Good Vs. Evil story like lotr. yes pj does add and subtract stuff from the books for the lotr movies, but only to make the moods and themes transfer more easily to the screen, never to change the main idea at all. ///////////////////////////// the only problem that the hobbit might have is that it existed mostly to introduce the whole universe to readers, and most of the joy of reading the book came from discovering all of these fantastic things like hobbits and wood elves and gandalf, etc. the lotr trilogy already introduced all this stuff to audiences, so the hobbit doesn't really have much of a selling point anymore. it would be a much easier movie to translate to film than lotr probably was, i think, but maybe a harder movie to sell. i say, pull out all the stops and give it to pixar.
5 armies? by HorseloverFat	Dec 10th, 2003 03:08:54 PM

Ian Holm would still be perfect. by DocPazuzu	Dec 10th, 2003 03:50:35 PM
He's very spry for his age, and with the "younger" wig he had on in the FOTR prologue, he certainly looked the part. Also, how could you cast someone younger in The Hobbit and then have Gandalf say in FOTR: "Why, you haven't aged a day!" It would look silly. Holm still has it in him to be Bilbo. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
black shuck by perryfarrell	Dec 10th, 2003 04:09:34 PM
lol, there's that word again, facist. btw, quick movie-making fact, the director does not create the cgi.
Hobbit As One Film by goldboink	Dec 10th, 2003 05:13:12 PM
First of all the Hobbit is not a prequel, it is the original story regarding the Third Age of Middle Earth and is not even really consistent with LOTR in several places. It is not a "Wall-Mart stocked entirely with Ball Stomp". It is more of a childrens story and therefore the only battle is at the end and that is not even described in great detail. It is more like Willow than anything else. It can be done easily in 3 hours without cutting anything major from the story. 45 minutes to Rivendell, 1 hour to get to the Lonely Mount, 1 hour of dragon stuff culminating with the battle of the 5 armies (which should not be more than 10 or 15 minutes) and the last 10 minutes or so of Thorin's funeral and Bilbo's arrival back at Bag End to thwart the SB's. No Love Interest, No Arwen, No Gimli or Legolas, Exactly By the Book.
Ribbons - about Fran Walsh by elanor	Dec 10th, 2003 05:41:28 PM
Oh dear, Ribbons. I do disagree with you about what is revealed in the scenes we know Fran directed in LOTR and thus her suitability for directing "The Hobbit". I suppose I see something altogether different than you do. Of course, using your line of "judgement" PJ would never have gotten the LOTR job either, and a million Tolkien fans would be far less joyful right now than we are. If you had been in charge, might not you have said "Judging from Dead Alive and Meet the Feebles, Peter Jackson should not be trusted with a serious-minded epic based on a literary classic". You do make me chuckle, though. Were I as closed-minded as you, I might assume, judging from many of your posts, that you are in a bad mood all the time. I know that's not true, of course. But that's because I try to look past the obvious.
re: goldboink by perryfarrell	Dec 10th, 2003 05:57:00 PM
exactly....................... .............. and done by pixar. ;)
Well, that was harsh by Ribbons	Dec 10th, 2003 06:23:32 PM
I'm not condemning her to the second unit, so I'm not sure where that outburst towards me came from (yes, I know you were trying to prove a point). I'm simply saying that she had her pick of the transcedental and went specifically for the fractured and melancholy, and she'd have to make a better case for directing than being wuvable and maybe kinda having it in her. If I was privy to a pitch of hers that outlined what she planned on doing as director, maybe I'd change my mind. Who's to say she even wants to do it? What makes you think she can do it? And what makes you think I'm so angry? Just because I said she's no kind of candidate for lighter-hearted fare? Well, I'm kind of angry right now, but....anyway, if you have such disdain for my opinion, explain to me what makes you think she can do it.
*****MY POST IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TALKBACK! HEY, LOOK HERE, M by Ribbons	Dec 10th, 2003 06:26:28 PM
If this post is in the middle of the talkback and your alias is Elanor, please direct your attention to my other post.
hobit trailer online kind of by joeylee23	Dec 10th, 2003 06:38:05 PM
ive got a trailer for the hobit from a popular shareware programme that someone showed me. it isnt footage using the lotr trillogy, and the date is dec 2006. the trailer is purely awseome, so i wonder whats really going on? anyone help
I'll watch it., if they ever make it, whatever format. by BigW	Dec 10th, 2003 06:47:23 PM
But I think I'd really like it to be a mini-series. The book is, after all, extremely episodic in nature, and I think a mini-series could really do it justice. Maybe PJ could be more of an executive producer, much like what Spielberg did when he exectutive produced Band of Brothers after direting Private Ryan.
Come on... by GrandTheftWatto	Dec 13th, 2003 10:46:17 PM
Ian Holm MUST be Bilbo. He was just so damn good..and he and Ian McKellen had such a great chemistry. As for his age, wasnt Bilbo in his 50's during the time period of the Hobbit?

Talkbacks

Regarding this whole Peter Jackson - HOBBIT story coming out of Berlin!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks