Jackson Slated to Make Hobbit Movie, Sequel

A user writes "Peter Jackson, New Line Cinema, and MGM have agreed to work on two new movies: a film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's 'The Hobbit', and a further sequel. From the article: 'The two Hobbit films ... are scheduled to be shot simultaneously, with pre-production beginning as soon as possible. Principal photography is tentatively set for a 2009 start, with the intention of 'The Hobbit' release slated for 2010 and its sequel the following year, in 2011.'" Not sure if it would be possible to nab Ian Holm as Bilbo, but here's hoping.

Re:sequel?

[moderatorrater]

I would prefer he do a series of short films based on the Unfinished Tales, then a documentary based on the Silmarilion. That would be awesome beyond all reason.

Beorn

[mamono]

I just hope he doesn't cut out Beorn like the cartoon did. Whereas I thoroughly enjoyed the LOTR movies, I was disappointed when Tom Bombadil was removed.

Re:sequEl?

[arkham6]

More likely, this is Peter Jackson doing what he can not to butcher the Hobbit by having to cut the book down to a 2-3 hour movie. Most likely its going to be a movie in two parts, with part 1 being up until Bilbo escapes from the wood elves, and Part 2 being the Dragon, the battle of the 5 armies, and some other things tying the movie further into the first 3 (Gandolf poking around the necromancer's home and finding out he's Sauron perhaps?)

Re:sequel?

[fyrie]

Don't forget the part about fixing the ozone hole over Middle Earth.

Re:sequel?

[xSauronx]

i enjoyed the movies, and while i love the books, i dont get nitpicky over the changes to the story for the most part, and just try to enjoy it. but i dont think hes a perfect director. however, since hes done 3 of them already, id rather he continued to do them to keep a similar look and feel to the movies. the books will always be better, the movies are for entertainment.

I've got a bad feeling about this.

[Steauengeglase]

The press release says that he will be the Executive Producer, not Director, so effectively he has only agreed to place his rubber stamper on the film and I'm sure he is contractually obligated to say that it is a magnificent film no matter what MGM/New Line have made. I can only imagine that New Line must have had him legally nailed to the wall when "settling" over the previous films). Sadly, this means there is nothing to keep these movies from being directed by committee. Unless he directs them I expect nothing to crap.

Re:sequEl?

[Artifakt]

Expanding on what Gandalf did while he was away from the Dwarves and Bilbo, and better tieing the Hobbit to the LotR actually seems like a good thing, if the expansion really focuses on Sauron's temporary occupation of Mirkwood, etc. Jackson could stay pretty accurate to the original, just working off of parts found in the LotR appendices, Tolkien's notes, and the pre WW2 variant text of the Hobbit itself. There's a good story possible that would vary less from the original than his giving the female roles a larger part in LotR. (Something that I didn't mind, but seems to get some people all upset).
          The real question is, would this involve a face to face conflict between Gandalf and a (still much weaker) Sauron? Would Sauron be visualized as an EYE or just a dark wraith-like presence? And does Jackson bring in some of the other 4 wizards, or other powers that be in middle earth, or make it a Gandalf solo mission? I'm afraid a 1 on 1, gunslingers in the streets style conflict, mostly involving flashy magic, is the easiest path there.

I'd rather not

[Yurka]

Unless Jackson is able to completely redo his visual style (and/or the way of thinking) for this project, I would not call this a good idea. "Hobbit" and "LOTR", even though separated in time by only several dozen years, evoke completely different feelings - with the former still staged inside a fairy tale, a time of wonders, while the latter is a clinical account of the fading of the Age; and since Jackson completely nailed that one, I find it hard to believe that the all-important overall tone is going to be adequate for the "Hobbit" project. He's going to film another installment of the same movie, and no mistake.

Re:sequel?

[eyrieowl]

turning faramir into a flawed human almost like his brother instead of a noble character was done for time? making the elves and elrond out to be cowards was faithful to the original text? aragorn had to be pushed to be king, he didn't *always* recognize it as his birthright? jackson did an excellent job creating the world of lotr, but he fails utterly to understand the nobility in the books. he only can conceive of the hobbits as the heroes, doesn't understand or was incapable of portraying the unswerving nobility of aragorn, the rangers, and the elves. if all he did was shorten the books, he would have nothing but my utmost admiration. otoh, the hobbit is a more folksy book, and those grander themes are only hinted at, so mayhap it's better suited to his talents.

Re:If they're going to make up a new sequel...

[sm62704]

... they might as well have the soundtrack performed by Led Zeppelin.

You mean like

The pain of war cannot exceed the woe of aftermath,
The drums will shake the castle wall, the ring wraiths ride in black, Ride on.

Sing as you raise your bow, shoot straighter than before.
No comfort has the fire at night that lights the face so cold.

Oh dance in the dark of night, Sing to the morning light.
The magic runes are writ in gold to bring the balance back. Bring it back.

At last the sun is shining, The clouds of blue roll by,
With flames from the dragon of darkness, the sunlight blinds his eyes.

or how about

Mine's a tale that can't be told, my freedom I hold dear.
How years ago in days of old, when magic filled the air.
T'was in the darkest depths of Mordor, I met a girl so fair.
But Gollum, and the evil one crept up and slipped away with her, her, her....yeah.

Yes, I'm a Zeppelin fan. So sue me.

-mcgrew

Re:sequel?

[RDW]

Who said anything about not enjoying it? I'm just disappointed we didn't get to see this idea in the final cut as well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IAYNYaNCz8 [youtube.com]

Though even Jackson has yet to achieve anything approaching the level of inspiration shown in an earlier adaptation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y [youtube.com]

There is too much that wasn't said...

[geekwench]

While this comment is likely to get buried in the avalanche that preceeded it, I feel that it's necesary to point a few things out.

Most glaringly, the press release doesn't have any mention of Warner Bros. MGM doesn't hold the film rights to The Hobbit; Warner Bros. does, after purchasing them from the Saul Zaentz Corporation. The only thing that the press release mentions is that legal difficulties over The Lord of the Rings have been resolved, none of which involved the labyrinth of licensing issues around Tolkien's other works. Warner Bros. has been blocking the idea of letting the rights go ever since The Fellowship of the Ring turned out to be a hit. I see no indication that this has changed.

Second, although TheOneRing.net has a pretty good track record, they've been wrong before. Several years ago, they trumpeted the release of a "trailer" for The Hobbit, and later had to correct themselves when it turned out to be a fan-created work. Yes, TORn links to MGM's official media release page, but the only other link is to The Hobbit Blog. The blog seems to be officially sponsored by New Line, but the only link to it is in the sign-up page (for New Line's privacy policy), and the only link from New Line to the blog is in the press release, which is also posted on New Line's site. There aren't a lot of branches on this particular "family tree".

Next, there's Christoper Tolkien's long-standing disdain for any and all film adaptations of J.R.R.'s work. There wasn't much that he could do about The Hobbit and LotR, because his father sold the film rights to Zaentz himself. However, Christopher takes his position as his father's literary executor very seriously, and the chances that he will give the nod to use of any of his father's notes for a film that fills in the gap between The Hobbit and LotR are minute to the point of nonexistance.

I doubt that this is an elaborate hoax. I could see hacking one film studio site, but not two. However, I would be much more sanguine about the project if there were a linked article from an industry publication such as Variety, and preferably one that went into detail about how the legal wrangles with Warner Bros. and Zaentz were resolved.

Re:sequel?

[bigstrat2003]

To each his own. Personally, I prefer the Silmarillion, for painting a more epic story, and for having more precise, formal language. It wouldn't work well as a movie at all, though, considering the book has gaps like, "And the siege of Angband lasted 400 years...". That sort of passage of time would make a movie pretty jarring.

Re:sequel?

[jonatha]

Fran and Philippa are on record as saying that Tolkein's Faramir was not believable. Having just re-read the series, I still think this is the most harmful change that they made.

I felt the same way until I saw the extended cut of The Two Towers.

I think the familial tension that scene establishes not only makes Jackson's treatment of Faramir forgiveable, it makes it better than Tolkien's original.

Re:sequel?

[russellh]

jackson did an excellent job creating the world of lotr, but he fails utterly to understand the nobility in the books.

Yes, yes... but the "nobility" in the LOTR comes off as so much history-written-by-the-victors bullshit. So it's written in the style of an ancient legend, and the good guys are as gods and the bad guys are demonized.... literally. Evil is evil because it is evil. Good is good because it is tall, pure, true and of an ancient noble race with undiluted blood, etc, like the Men of the West. I love LOTR but that aspect makes me laugh. I think that's because I had to explain all this to my daughter as I read it to her.

I agree that the Hobbit ought to be a lot better though. I hope as additions we get the battle of Moria, Balin & co. returning to reclaim it, and Gandalf and the white council's fight with the Necromancer.

Re:Not that I care, but

[nuttycom]

Or maybe The Golden Compass was just wretchedly directed?

I swear, with virtually no changes to the script it could have been a decent movie if they'd just made it 20 minutes longer by means of 4-second increments distributed throughout. The pacing was horrendous - it left no time for anything resembling decent character development. Which, of course, is essentially what the first book is all about.

Ian Holm?

[Arancaytar]

I seem to remember some comment saying it was difficult to make him look like a "younger" Bilbo in the introduction for a single scene. Would he be able to play the young Bilbo for the entirety of a film?

(If so, it would be cool if they managed to insert a part of the LotR ring-finding scene as it is, retroactively turning it into a flashback scene from the prequel while maintaining continuity with the other scenes in the Hobbit film itself. Movie continuity is an amusing topic.)