Two Hobbits?

[loz]

At the moment Guillermo del Toro (who could well be the finest director since G4 picked up a lump of plasticine and thought 'cheap remake') is working on The Hobbit with, slightly strangely, Peter Jackson working on the screenplay. Now I can't say this disappoints me because as much as I enjoyed Jackson's Lord of the Rings Trilogy I am in no doubt that del Toro is as suited to Tolkien as I am to a bottle of Highland Park that someone else paid for.

However what I have heard is a rumour that one year after the Hobbit comes out (scheduled for 2011) there is to be a Hobbit 2 (which must surely be a working title). I can only imagine that it is simply a case of the story being split in two however I think I dread that as I am not convinced that would work. Having said that I hate the idea of the Hobbit being reduced to a two hour film. I would much rather see a four hour film than two films released over the course of 12 months but I realise that box office doesn't like that idea.

Anyway what I am getting at is have I heard this rumour wrong or has anyone else heard the same thing (or able to confirm it).

Having said all that I must say that del Toro making the Hobbit practically guarantees a masterpiece so I am more than happy to wait a year between films.

 

[The Moos]

First of all I'm really, really looking forward to this movie. It's one of my favourite books and I think Jackson did a really good job on the Lotr-trilogy and Del Toro has proved himself (I love Pan's Labyrinth). Jackson is a huge fan of Tolkiens books and has great knowledge about them and Del Toro is a visual genius and has huge imagination. The creatures in "The Hobbit" will be something special (hopefully in a good way :lol: ).

I think we can say for sure that "The Hobbit" will be split into two movies. I've read several interviews with Del Toro and Jackson and I think both have mentioned that it will be two movies.

I also read something today about them working together on both movies. Apparently they were going to split the work between them so that Jackson and his friends were going to work on the first movie and Del Toro on the second. But now they'll work together on both and that will slow things down a bit.

One thing that sounds a bit disturbing to me is that they plan to end the first movie with the death of Smaug. So the first movie will cover atleast 14 chapters of a 19 chapter book. Sounds like there's little to do in the second movie.

Hopefully (and I think I've read this too somewhere) they will make it so that the second movie not only deals with the last 5 chapters of "The Hobbit" but also sets up the events in "The Lord Of The Rings".

Not sure if I like that or not.

Finally, they are going to contact some of the actors from Lotr and I hope they all wants to be a part of these two movies too. I just can't see anyone else than McKellen as Gandalf or hearing someone elses voice as Smeagol/Gollum.

 

[loz]

I read that they may be looking to build in some parts of 'The Silmarillion' as well but apparently they don't have the rights to that story so it will purely be The Hobbit and maybe an overlap with parts of Lord of the Rings. As for casting the only thing I have heard is that McKellen is looking a safe bet as Gandalf. I would have though Andy Serkis would jump at the chance of Gollum again as he is hardly fighting off the blockbusters with a big stick and the Gollum role is pretty short lived in The Hobbit.

It will be hard to cast the dwarves well - for example there is a real danger of making Thorin too much of a 'to be laughed at' figure when he should really be a character whose flaws are more than counter balanced by his courage.

 

[mad_mac]

Think you hit the nail on the head inyour first post Loz. For anyone who has read the Hobbitt, I am sure they wouldn't mind sitting through a 4 hour movie telling the tale in it's entirity. However, I am also sure that the LOTR trilogy has drawn in a few people who will have never read the book. So, the marketing of a Hobbitt movie would be geared towards the purists, like ourself, and then the people who were drawn in by the other movies.

Therefore, why have one 100million movie, when you can have two!?

Scott

 

[Maksimov]

As far as I know(read a pretty recent Del Toro interview about it) it's not gonna be split into two movies. The first movie is The Hobbit and the second one bridges the gap between the Hobbit and the start of Lord of the Rings.

 

[loz]

As far as I know(read a pretty recent Del Toro interview about it) it's not gonna be split into two movies. The first movie is The Hobbit and the second one bridges the gap between the Hobbit and the start of Lord of the Rings.

Yep it appears that is the case

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/apr/29...ings.jrrtolkien

not sure I like the idea of the second one (although no doubt I will see it) as I don't really like the idea of making up a Hobbit story (albeit partially based on some of the narrative from LOTR) .

It is going to be a visual feast - nobody does monsters, dwarves, dragons etc etc better than del Toro! Pleased to see he is not going down the CGI route as much as Jackson did. The animatronics route is definitely the way to go - the two Hellboy films are great from that perspective.

 

[byatt]

i saw the thread title and expected a joke, i'm slightly disappointed now, although i'm excited about the upcoming movie, i loved the Hobbit as a kid and loaned it from the school library so many times

 

[Maksimov]

...not sure I like the idea of the second one (although no doubt I will see it) as I don't really like the idea of making up a Hobbit story (albeit partially based on some of the narrative from LOTR).

I'm not so sure about the second film either. It's going to consist of a collection of unfinished writings and I took a look at the timeline at the back of my copy of Lord of the Rings and I didn't see any obvious story structure for a movie in the happenings between the Hobbit and LotR. I fear it's going to be the movie equivalent of the Unfinished Tales with the exception that it pretends to be a complete story.

 

[The Moos]

Have to bring up this thread again because I just read something very interesting on: http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2009/11/06/the-h...story-concerns/

Yesterday, we posted some of Eric Ditzian's interview with Sir Ian McKellen, who plays the wizard Gandalf in the "Lord of the Rings" and upcoming "Hobbit" movies. In one of the more compelling bits, the actor revealed that the scripts for the two films with feature plotlines culled from other J.R.R. Tolkien sources.McKellen wouldn't elaborate any further than that, but a recent interview Guillermo del Toro gave to TotalFilm may shed some additional light on what the Gandalf actor was referring to. "We are respecting the structure established by Professor Tolkien because the order of the adventures in 'The Hobbit' is well known to generations and generations of kids," the director said. "You don’t want to be moving stuff like that." So what's new?

"We will be integrating Gandalf’s comings and goings [into the script] because he does disappear in the book quite often," he continued. "So, as opposed to the book, we see where he goes and what happens to him."

For those who don't remember or haven't read the book, frequent references are made to Gandalf's and his fellow wizards' campaign against the shadowy Necromancer. The story never explicitly shows us what happens there, but Tolkien did elaborate on those events in his other writings.

Del Toro also spoke some on his plans for the creatures in "The Hobbit." As anyone who's seen his earlier efforts -- the two "Hellboy" movies, "Pan's Labyrinth" and so on -- knows, this is an area of particular interest for the director.

"In 'The Hobbit,' the creatures speak: Smaug has beautiful lines of dialogue; the Great Goblin has beautiful lines of dialogue; many creatures do. So we had to design them with a different approach because you are not just designing things that are scary," he said. "I wanted the Wargs to have a certain beauty so that you don't have a massively clear definition: what is beautiful is good and what is ugly is not." (Editor's note: Wargs are oversized wolf-like creatures ridden by Orcs in Tolkien's fiction)

It's Smaug the dragon that we should be most excited about, if del Toro's words are any indication. "The bulk of the design took about a year, solid. It’s because of the unique features of the dragon," he explained. "Early in production I came up with a very strong idea that would separate Smaug from every other dragon ever made. The problem was implementing that idea. But I think we’ve nailed it."

Sadly, we'll be waiting quite some time before we find out if del Toro's can deliver on such a grand promise. It's easy to put faith in the guy though. Between his own background and producer Peter Jackson overseeing everything, fans can probably expect another "Lord of the Rings" grand slam in "The Hobbit." A work that is at once faithful to the source and a unique work that stands on its own.

I think the idea to show Gandalfs little adventures are very interesting. I just hope it doesn't distract from the "real" story about Bilbo and the dwarfs.

And I have very high expectations for Del Toros Smaug and the other creatures.

I wanna see this movie now!

 

[Ruh Buh Juh]

I think the 2nd movie is something that'll be a completely different story that no one's read before, to connect Fellowship and the Ring and The Hobbit, now that's something I'm worried about. Tolkein's stories are pure genius, and a story that Tolkein didn't write may stumble and fall. Nevertheless, I'm very much looking forward to this.