Do we want to see the Hobbit on the silver screen ?

[Starflower]

Seems I get the honors of opening this forum :)

Right. Rumours abound. Hobbit the movie seems ever more likely. But is it going to be good? Will it be the success that LOTR was ? Most of all, what on earth will they do with Smaug? I think there is a lot of room for this movie to be really amazingly great, but also room for it to be a complete and utter failure. What do you think?

[celebdraug]

Well, as with everything there is going to be a 50:50 chance if it's is going to be a success or a failure! :rolleyes: But they should still give it a go, (and remakes can be done if its v. bad).
Its also going to cause alot of arguments like it did with LOTR (but maybe not as many) about how much they stuck to the book! Everyone has their own expectations, and the producer (whoever it will be) will be making it to his standars, and therefore won't be able to please everyone!

[Barliman Butterbur]

Seems I get the honors of opening this forum :)

Right. Rumours abound. Hobbit the movie seems ever more likely. But is it going to be good? Will it be the success that LOTR was ? Most of all, what on earth will they do with Smaug? I think there is a lot of room for this movie to be really amazingly great, but also room for it to be a complete and utter failure. What do you think?

Bring it on! (I think it will be quite some time yet, considering the legalities, and Christopher Tolkien's murderous antipathy to Peter Jackson. Rumor has it that he has even disowned his son on account of the son's positive feeling toward PJ's movies.)

As for Smaug, if PJ has anything to do with it, that will indeed be worth waiting for!

Lotho

[rs691919]

Bring it on! (I think it will be quite some time yet, considering the legalities, and Christopher Tolkien's murderous antipathy to Peter Jackson. Rumor has it that he has even disowned his son on account of the son's positive feeling toward PJ's movies.)

As for Smaug, if PJ has anything to do with it, that will indeed be worth waiting for!

Lotho

Jackson could certainly do less harm to The Hobbit than he did to The Lord of the Rings. It's a simpler, more linear tale, with less of that "high style" that Jackson apparently had a difficult time dealing with. Moreover, the morals contained in The Hobbit are less remote to the "modern" reader: greed and pride underly much of the later chapters. Jackson, therefore, would not have to manipulate the story and characters in order to fit his own moral framework. Finally, there are no romantic undertones, and one would hope that it would be kept that way.

[joxy]

....there are no romantic undertones, and one would hope that it would be kept that way.
No undertones, overtones, or any other romantic tones, I'm very pleased to say!
And pleased, not least, because surely that eliminates Jackson as the director: to him a film without a romantic tone would be out of the question!

[rs691919]

No undertones, overtones, or any other romantic tones, I'm very pleased to say!
And pleased, not least, because surely that eliminates Jackson as the director: to him a film without a romantic tone would be out of the question!

Well, maybe it only eliminates Walsh and Boyens from the screenplay, which would be welcome indeed.

Incidentally, the rumors of CJRT's hatred of Jackson are just that: rumors. He has made only one public comment on the movies, and his opinion is that the book is not suitable for dramatic adaptation by anyone. As for the disagreement with the son, it's unclear what actually happened. The son has encouraged the story that he was booted from the executive board of the Tolkien Estate because of disagreements about the movies, but that's only one side of the story. It is to be noted, however, that Simon Tolkien is Christopher's son by his first marriage. So a family soap opera is possible.

[Sôval Phârë]

No undertones, overtones, or any other romantic tones, I'm very pleased to say!

But there are also no female characters, which means that whoever decides to bring The Hobbit to the screen is going to feel some societal PC pressure to add some. :rolleyes:

[33Peregrin]

I would love to see The Hobbit as a movie. It would be odd though- I read The Hobbit before ever seeing LOTR- and thought I didn't like it. The night after I saw LOTR I read it right, and loved it. Two days later I began FoTR. It would be so weird. One thing about The Hobbit and LOTR are how they really taught me to read.
I was only thirteen when I saw LOTR and read the book. It seems so long ago! And I saw ROTK for the last time in theaters the day before yesterday, it would be so cool to have The Hobbit as a movie to look forward to. And I would want PJ to do it! No matter how the movie turned out for me, I would always be able to keep the book.

[LegolasLuver]

I think that making The Hobbit a movie would be a pretty good idea. They would have to put quite a bit of work into it. I mean the battle, the trolls, and smaug. They's really have to work on that. But I'd like to see it as a sucess so I think that they should give it a go.

[Mrs. Maggott]

There is, of course, a certain problem with TH. It is a "children's" story. In order to maintain it's "purity" (yes, I know how many hate that word), it cannot be "deepened" or made more "complicated" without totally changing the meaning (yet again!) of the story!

Jackson made every effort to "simplify" (remove all those difficult moral absolutes) from LOTR but if he decides he wants TH to be "important" - like LOTR - he may try to do just the opposite - yes, including that female element that is "missing" in the book! Doubtless we'll have more "elf involvement" as well - that is, if the past is any example of the man's thought process.

It would be nice if Jackson were content with TH as TH and not decide that he wishes to produce yet another "blockbuster" fantasy film. However, I am not sanguine that he has actually learned that "less is often more". God knows he didn't learn it in the last three films.

[Samweis]

I don´t think that it is really "necessary" for a movie "THE HOBBIT", because in the three parts of LOTR it had been already shown: how Bilbo "acquired" the One Ring / how Gollum is connected to the One Ring.

But I would like to see "THE HOBBIT" on screen - and I have to admit that I have no problem, when the "kid-story" is changed into an "adult-story"

[Lantarion]

Although the idea of seeing 'The Hobbit' as a film version strikse me as an interesting idea, I think there is a significant difficulty involved: 'The Hobbit' was written long before, and with a style almost contrary to the 'Lord of the Rings', but it still contains very many elements which are also present later in 'LotR'. But as PJ has already presented us with the legions upon legions of cliché-golden-and-long-haired Elves speaking calmly, in whispers or abstract phrases, I think he might not like the idea of "reducing" (I use the term extremely ironically and sarcastically, be assured) Elves to something mysterious, impalpable and indeed mythical when he has already made everything so painfully clear in his "trilogy" (again, used with irony ;)).

The effects team and the location of the 'LotR'-films were truly stunning, and it would ease my heart to know that the same measures would be taken even with this comparatively small tale; but if the screenplay writers and director stay the same, I have serious doubts..
When I think about the concept of 'cinemagraphic art' and then of Jackson's "trilogy", I do not see any great resemblance. PJ obviously intended the films for all possible audiences - this can be seen both by the over-simplification and by the lowered admittance age to see the movies. Although this was a very smart move production-wise and income-wise, I think it did damage the experience that the films were supposed to (and I do think in the end, in their own flawed way, did) incite.

I think as long as no character changes or significant plot changes (or insignificant for that matter, hehe) were to be made, if the location and casting were nailed, and if the atmosphere was not dampened by over-simplification, 'The Hobbit' could be successful as a film.

[Snaga]

We need lots of controversial plot changes, including female dwarves, appearances by Legolas and Arwen, Beorn to be a girl with the hots for Gandalf, Smaug to be defeated in one-on-one combat with Thorin as the climax of rather than before the Battle of Five Armies, a special appearance by Radagast the Bad, and the Arkenstone to be mystical jewel able to talk and control the minds of all who look upon it....

You think I'm joking?... I'm not...

It would keep TTF in business debating it for years!;):D

[Saucy]

We need lots of controversial plot changes, including female dwarves, appearances by Legolas and Arwen, Beorn to be a girl with the hots for Gandalf, Smaug to be defeated in one-on-one combat with Thorin as the climax of rather than before the Battle of Five Armies, a special appearance by Radagast the Bad, and the Arkenstone to be mystical jewel able to talk and control the minds of all who look upon it....

You think I'm joking?... I'm not...

It would keep TTF in business debating it for years!;):D
with such creative thinking Snaga u should write and submit the script. :)

[Snaga]

Good plan! As long as New Line are prepared to offer me a change of identity, and armed protection against the more militant of the purists...;)

Anyway I was more thinking of writing Silmarillion film scripts. So far I only have one line written though. Feanor stands on the deck of a stolen white ship and says to Eonwe: "Butt out angel-face. Morgoth sucks, and we're gonna give him hell. You'll be kissing my a$$ when we get us some Silmaril!"

Whaddya think? It brings it right up to date. Tolkien would love it, I think.