"The Hobbit" project discussion thread

John F · June 5th, 2008, 09:35 PM

Well, Sir Ian McKellan has stated he will indeed reprise his role as Gandalf the Gray in the Peter Jackson produced, Guillermo Del Toro directed "Hobbit" films. Del Toro offered him teh roll and McKellan accepted.

Christopher Lee has now publicly stated he'd return as Saurman if offered the role. This coincides a few Lord of the Rings actors who have said they would be willign to rejoin Middle Earth if offered a chance to return to their roles.

Of course that can happen too. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) comes from a race with long lifespan. Lord Elrod (Hugo Weaving), Gadriel (Cate Blanchette) and Legos (Orlando Bloom) are Elves.

bedir than average · June 5th, 2008, 09:36 PM

I'm still curious as to why they decided to do this as two films.

John F · June 5th, 2008, 09:42 PM

J.R.R. Tolkien left a ton of notes. Some fo them have been published as books...

he amassed such a huge world. The basis fo the 2nd movie is what makes me most curious...

SugarBaby · June 6th, 2008, 09:24 AM

Oh God, not The Simarillion. Christopher Tolkein does not have his father's gift.

John F · June 6th, 2008, 10:47 AM

There were more than that, Sugar, but yeah -- that was part of it.

IT's not the book that one should focus on, it's the note that comprised the books. Tolkien (JRR) had thousands and thousands of pages of notes about Middle Earth! There is so much to draw from is the point.

SugarBaby · June 6th, 2008, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John F

There were more than that, Sugar, but yeah -- that was part of it.

IT's not the book that one should focus on, it's the note that comprised the books. Tolkien (JRR) had thousands and thousands of pages of notes about Middle Earth! There is so much to draw from is the point.

I know. And all that info is absolutely fascinating. Tolkien created a whole other world. Believe me I've read it all. I've even been to the pub in England where Tolkien, CS Lewis and Kenneth Graham met every week. The Inklings, I presume.

John F · June 6th, 2008, 12:16 PM

Ah, ok, pardon my ignorance... just makin' conversation.

I trust in Jackson, Fran Walsh and del Toro (only director besides Jackson that I'd trust with thsi content) will not "invent" a secodn story as so much draw together from the notes a second movie... They must already have a concept if they are going ahead with it.

SugarBaby · June 6th, 2008, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John F

Ah, ok, pardon my ignorance... just makin' conversation.

I trust in Jackson, Fran Walsh and del Toro (only director besides Jackson that I'd trust with thsi content) will not "invent" a secodn story as so much draw together from the notes a second movie... They must already have a concept if they are going ahead with it.

No way for you to know I'm a huge fan. I think Russ may be a bigger fan than me, but only because he bought one of the Rings of Power back when they were for sale when the first Lord of the Rings movie came out. I think he bought Sauron's ring. I'd want Elrond's. I know it has a name, I've just forgotten it at the moment. How many times have you read the books? I have committed them to memory to such an extent that I could quote the lines as the actors gave them in the movie. My husband was astounded...and irritated. lol

John F · June 6th, 2008, 01:43 PM

Honestly? Never. True story. I respect the works simply because of what Jackson put on film. I knew NOTHING of LOTRs besides that it was an epic with a huge following when news came out that the books were being made into films.

And I tried to remain as completely ignorant about the books as I could -- besides soem back story on Tolkien and the Ringer phenomenon -- as the films progressed. I mean, I got really upset before Return of The King simply because I had watched a documentary about LOTRs (the books, the following) and had seen a graffiti tag, during one of the documentary shots from the 1970's -- that said "Frodo Lives"

I thought that meant for certain Frodo was a goner and I was going to be disappointed and the suprise outcome ruined. Of course, even with 5-10 distinct endings for Return of the King as Pete Jackson filmed it, Frodo didn't die at any point... I still went into each movie with nothing.

I've asked myself questions and researched a bit through Wikipedia about backstory (Aragorn's people, for instance) but I still haven't sat down with either the Hobbit (which I figure woudl be an easier read) or Lord fo the Rings.

In a way I am scared to as well. Sometimes, too much info can ruin a movie. I mean, speaking in a film-only reference, Star Wars ruined Star Wars with the prequels. You don't define The Force as a blood condition for god sake!

Then you have Harry Potter, I've seen certain movies and read most of the books. Reading "Goblet of Fire" after seeing the movie a few times... The book fleshes out things more but I found the film actually better even though it dragged at times. Conversely, I read "Order of the Phoenix" before I saw the movie and I was aghast how condensed the book was this time around.

A book has a ton more context int eh tell, don't show. And sometimes the tell is showing things in a definitive sense. I get scared with that becasue it may ruin the experience of the film (or the book)

SugarBaby · June 6th, 2008, 05:34 PM

You should read the books! They stuck very close to all the important parts of The Trilogy in the movies. The Hobbit was a children's book for Christopher, JRR's son. The Lord of the Rings trilogy was written during WWII and sent to Christopher as he fought in the trenches in Europe. He would read each installment to his buddies and of course they loved them. In the books are Tolkien's own illustrations of how Middle Earth looks and vast amounts of incredible poetry and elfin language. You are missing out on a lot if you do not read them. They are magical. They saved me during an awful time in my life. Long story short, my ex husband was abusing me horribly. I kept Tolkien by my bed and when I was feeling so very terrible and alone, I read of Middle Earth. I could go there and know I would be safe with Bilbo, Frodo, Merry and Pippin and of course Gandalf. I could visualize Rivendell and the tree mansions of Lothlorien. I haven't read those books in years now. I have a new husband and a new safe life, but I remember how they were a haven for me, and a light when all other lights went out.

T

noetsi · June 7th, 2008, 09:36 AM

I thought Simarillion was much better than the LOTR or the Hobbit. But regardless suggesting C Tolkien wrote it is simply wrong. JRR Tolkien completed the Simarillion in the Thirties, it was written before the LOTR not the other way around. JRR Tolkien considered the Simarillion to be his greatest work by far, and long tried to publish it. All his son did was edit and publish it. Its sales, in hardcover, crushed all other books in 1977, it was number 1 on the NY Times best seller list for something like 23 weeks, an incredible occurance.

The Hobbit is likely to long to do in one movie. And they may pull in elements related to the event not in the book but in Tolkien's other writtings such as the White Council or Gandalf's dealing with Thorin before the book begins.

Some of the actors are quite old now, in their late seventies, and you wonder if they can do well in an action film. There is a practical problem with the Elvish characters, say arwen or elrond, in that the actors are older but the elves dont age. And Aragorn, for example, was nearly fifty years younger at the time of the Hobbit than he was in the LOTR.

Continuity is always a problem with Tolkien's writings as he constantly changed stories over a fifty year period. Thus Legolas, in the LOTR, was the son of the Elvish king Thanduril who imprisson the dwarves but he is never mentioned in the Hobbit although he obviously would have been involved in the dealings with the dwarves.

Arwen btw was about 800 years old at the time of the LOTR, she sure does not look it

SugarBaby · June 7th, 2008, 02:07 PM

Russ...I know Christopher didn't write The Simarillion.

noetsi · June 8th, 2008, 07:59 AM

I thought from your comments about C Tolkien above you did think that. My error.

G-Man · June 10th, 2008, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SugarBaby

You should read the books! They stuck very close to all the important parts of The Trilogy in the movies. The Hobbit was a children's book for Christopher, JRR's son. The Lord of the Rings trilogy was written during WWII and sent to Christopher as he fought in the trenches in Europe. He would read each installment to his buddies and of course they loved them. In the books are Tolkien's own illustrations of how Middle Earth looks and vast amounts of incredible poetry and elfin language. You are missing out on a lot if you do not read them. They are magical. They saved me during an awful time in my life. Long story short, my ex husband was abusing me horribly. I kept Tolkien by my bed and when I was feeling so very terrible and alone, I read of Middle Earth. I could go there and know I would be safe with Bilbo, Frodo, Merry and Pippin and of course Gandalf. I could visualize Rivendell and the tree mansions of Lothlorien. I haven't read those books in years now. I have a new husband and a new safe life, but I remember how they were a haven for me, and a light when all other lights went out.

T

Nice story. I second this.

G-Man · June 10th, 2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Of course that can happen too. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) comes from a race with long lifespan. Lord Elrod (Hugo Weaving), Gadriel (Cate Blanchette) and Legos (Orlando Bloom) are Elves.

Not sure how they could possibly work Aragorn into this story, unless he is being portrayed in Rivendell as a boy or teenager.

Anybody read Children of Hurin?

June 5th, 2008, 09:35 PM	#1 (permalink)
John F Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tampa Bay area, Florida Posts: 2,510	"The Hobbit" project discussion thread Well, Sir Ian McKellan has stated he will indeed reprise his role as Gandalf the Gray in the Peter Jackson produced, Guillermo Del Toro directed "Hobbit" films. Del Toro offered him teh roll and McKellan accepted. Christopher Lee has now publicly stated he'd return as Saurman if offered the role. This coincides a few Lord of the Rings actors who have said they would be willign to rejoin Middle Earth if offered a chance to return to their roles. Of course that can happen too. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) comes from a race with long lifespan. Lord Elrod (Hugo Weaving), Gadriel (Cate Blanchette) and Legos (Orlando Bloom) are Elves. __________________ The more they over think the plumbing, the easier to stop up the drain.

June 5th, 2008, 09:36 PM	#2 (permalink)
bedir than average Hall of Famer Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,258	I'm still curious as to why they decided to do this as two films. __________________ I'm sorry I left for a while. I needed a vaction, and then work changed substantially. I'm over 50 hour weeks, plus two hours a day of commuting time. A few weeks ago I launched my own blog about Seattle Sounders FC and Life in Puget Sound. I won't be by these parts often as my focus has changed. Sorry about the unannounced retirement.

June 5th, 2008, 09:42 PM	#3 (permalink)
John F Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tampa Bay area, Florida Posts: 2,510	J.R.R. Tolkien left a ton of notes. Some fo them have been published as books... he amassed such a huge world. The basis fo the 2nd movie is what makes me most curious... __________________ The more they over think the plumbing, the easier to stop up the drain.

June 6th, 2008, 10:47 AM	#5 (permalink)
John F Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tampa Bay area, Florida Posts: 2,510	There were more than that, Sugar, but yeah -- that was part of it. IT's not the book that one should focus on, it's the note that comprised the books. Tolkien (JRR) had thousands and thousands of pages of notes about Middle Earth! There is so much to draw from is the point. __________________ The more they over think the plumbing, the easier to stop up the drain.

June 6th, 2008, 12:16 PM	#7 (permalink)
John F Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tampa Bay area, Florida Posts: 2,510	Ah, ok, pardon my ignorance... just makin' conversation. I trust in Jackson, Fran Walsh and del Toro (only director besides Jackson that I'd trust with thsi content) will not "invent" a secodn story as so much draw together from the notes a second movie... They must already have a concept if they are going ahead with it. __________________ The more they over think the plumbing, the easier to stop up the drain.

June 6th, 2008, 09:24 AM	#4 (permalink)
SugarBaby Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: South Carolina Posts: 3,110	Oh God, not The Simarillion. Christopher Tolkein does not have his father's gift.

June 6th, 2008, 01:43 PM	#9 (permalink)
John F Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tampa Bay area, Florida Posts: 2,510	Honestly? Never. True story. I respect the works simply because of what Jackson put on film. I knew NOTHING of LOTRs besides that it was an epic with a huge following when news came out that the books were being made into films. And I tried to remain as completely ignorant about the books as I could -- besides soem back story on Tolkien and the Ringer phenomenon -- as the films progressed. I mean, I got really upset before Return of The King simply because I had watched a documentary about LOTRs (the books, the following) and had seen a graffiti tag, during one of the documentary shots from the 1970's -- that said "Frodo Lives" I thought that meant for certain Frodo was a goner and I was going to be disappointed and the suprise outcome ruined. Of course, even with 5-10 distinct endings for Return of the King as Pete Jackson filmed it, Frodo didn't die at any point... I still went into each movie with nothing. I've asked myself questions and researched a bit through Wikipedia about backstory (Aragorn's people, for instance) but I still haven't sat down with either the Hobbit (which I figure woudl be an easier read) or Lord fo the Rings. In a way I am scared to as well. Sometimes, too much info can ruin a movie. I mean, speaking in a film-only reference, Star Wars ruined Star Wars with the prequels. You don't define The Force as a blood condition for god sake! Then you have Harry Potter, I've seen certain movies and read most of the books. Reading "Goblet of Fire" after seeing the movie a few times... The book fleshes out things more but I found the film actually better even though it dragged at times. Conversely, I read "Order of the Phoenix" before I saw the movie and I was aghast how condensed the book was this time around. A book has a ton more context int eh tell, don't show. And sometimes the tell is showing things in a definitive sense. I get scared with that becasue it may ruin the experience of the film (or the book) __________________ The more they over think the plumbing, the easier to stop up the drain.

June 6th, 2008, 05:34 PM	#10 (permalink)
SugarBaby Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: South Carolina Posts: 3,110	You should read the books! They stuck very close to all the important parts of The Trilogy in the movies. The Hobbit was a children's book for Christopher, JRR's son. The Lord of the Rings trilogy was written during WWII and sent to Christopher as he fought in the trenches in Europe. He would read each installment to his buddies and of course they loved them. In the books are Tolkien's own illustrations of how Middle Earth looks and vast amounts of incredible poetry and elfin language. You are missing out on a lot if you do not read them. They are magical. They saved me during an awful time in my life. Long story short, my ex husband was abusing me horribly. I kept Tolkien by my bed and when I was feeling so very terrible and alone, I read of Middle Earth. I could go there and know I would be safe with Bilbo, Frodo, Merry and Pippin and of course Gandalf. I could visualize Rivendell and the tree mansions of Lothlorien. I haven't read those books in years now. I have a new husband and a new safe life, but I remember how they were a haven for me, and a light when all other lights went out. T

June 7th, 2008, 09:36 AM	#11 (permalink)
noetsi Legend Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 17,321	I thought Simarillion was much better than the LOTR or the Hobbit. But regardless suggesting C Tolkien wrote it is simply wrong. JRR Tolkien completed the Simarillion in the Thirties, it was written before the LOTR not the other way around. JRR Tolkien considered the Simarillion to be his greatest work by far, and long tried to publish it. All his son did was edit and publish it. Its sales, in hardcover, crushed all other books in 1977, it was number 1 on the NY Times best seller list for something like 23 weeks, an incredible occurance. The Hobbit is likely to long to do in one movie. And they may pull in elements related to the event not in the book but in Tolkien's other writtings such as the White Council or Gandalf's dealing with Thorin before the book begins. Some of the actors are quite old now, in their late seventies, and you wonder if they can do well in an action film. There is a practical problem with the Elvish characters, say arwen or elrond, in that the actors are older but the elves dont age. And Aragorn, for example, was nearly fifty years younger at the time of the Hobbit than he was in the LOTR. Continuity is always a problem with Tolkien's writings as he constantly changed stories over a fifty year period. Thus Legolas, in the LOTR, was the son of the Elvish king Thanduril who imprisson the dwarves but he is never mentioned in the Hobbit although he obviously would have been involved in the dealings with the dwarves. Arwen btw was about 800 years old at the time of the LOTR, she sure does not look it Last edited by noetsi; June 7th, 2008 at 09:40 AM.

June 7th, 2008, 02:07 PM	#12 (permalink)
SugarBaby Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: South Carolina Posts: 3,110	Russ...I know Christopher didn't write The Simarillion.

June 8th, 2008, 07:59 AM	#13 (permalink)
noetsi Legend Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 17,321	I thought from your comments about C Tolkien above you did think that. My error.