The Hobbit Part 1

[Taco-Calamitous]

A while ago, I posted about this movie in my "Development Hell" thread. Looks like they're finally starting to get the cast together. Arl Eamon is going to play Dwalin, and Spock is allegedly going to be the voice of Smaug. As of right now, the page also says that Peter Jackson is going to direct these two films, as well, although I had heard that he'd only intended to produce them before. So that's cool.

The presence of certain characters who weren't present in the Hobbit, however-Frodo, Frodo's father Drogo, and Legolas in particular-have me raising my eyebrows a bit, but hopefully there's a good excuse for them to be there, and not a lame one. Like in FotR, when Arwen carried Frodo to Rivendell like baggage, instead of him practically making it there himself with only the aid of the horse, thus wussifying him a bit. I suppose I don't mind if these characters are there or if they explore other parts of the story that weren't in the actual Hobbit book, so long as it's not to the detriment of the characters who appeared in the book, and the tone of the Hobbit isn't totally changed to be more dark and epic, as the Narnia movies have tried to do. Kinda excited that Beorn is actually going to be in this after Tom Bombadill wasn't in LotR, and I wonder how this Richard Armitage guy is going to be as Thorin (him and Balin are a couple of my favorite characters from literature.)

Excited for this. Definitely going to theaters in '12. Hope it isn't pushed back! Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

[midgetbob]

Yeah... I was looking through the cast list and definitely raised an eyebrow over a few of the characters they're adding in: namely Frodo, Drogo, Smaug, Thranduil, Legolas, Galadriel and Radagast. With this being Part 1, how can some of the names that actually are in The Hobbit be viable when they're not mentioned until the second half, and how are they adding in people that weren't even in the Hobbit?

The only thing that has kinda made me excited is, as you said, the possible explanation of things that didn't make it into the book: what Gandalf did when he went to visit Radagast the Brown in the south for example.

Now... Frodo being in the Hobbit? He wasn't even alive yet. Galadriel and Legolas I'm hoping just happen to be at the Last Homely House and are just cameos.

With it being split into 2 parts, the only "logical" split I can think of is Beorn's house after they escape from the Worgs and Goblins with the Eagle's help. Hell... even ending the movie on The Cleft would work. That meaning Smaug and Thranduil never being seen.

At any rate, it'll be a great movie, and I've been waiting for them to come up with a script. I've just recently re-read it (it's sitting to my left actually, haven't put it back on the shelf yet) and it never fails to return me to the days of my childhood filled with wonder.

[Alpha]

I've got a lot more to say on this, but it can wait until I am not so pressed for time.

A few of the characters they are adding in have been explained (I thank the extensive media coverage anything LOTR/Hobbit-related gets in the NZ press). Frodo, for example, is in the film because it begins with him telling the tale of Bilbo to his grandchildren. I'm picturing a story-time sort of deal here.

Other characters are also explained. There are a few female characters being added to bring in, you know, that entire gender that is absent from the book. Not sure exactly how they'll work them in, but Elven maidens aren't hard to imagine.

[Calvan]

As long as the characters don't start singing. Like in that DAMN CARTOON!

[Fred]

haha, now I want them to sing in the live-action movie. It'll be just a big "F U, this is what you paid for" to the audience.

[OnOneRyder]

The Hobbit: Start of production, video from the set. [VIDEO] Good video introduction to filming

The hobbit was the first real novel I ever read, and one of the few I can genuinely say I fell in love with. It's going to take a lot to live up to the expectations I have...and I don't expect them to be met. I'm still debating with myself whether or not I will even watch it, because it's just one of those stories you don't want to spoil. Excited to see how it progresses, but I hope they do it justice.

[Locke4God]

I like the idea of Frodo narrating. It works and gives a little bit of a tie back to the LOTR for any casual viewers that wouldn't "get it" otherwise perhaps.

And Legolas will likely be a small cameo once they make it through the wood and are held in the caves. ALTHOUGH, now that I say that he'll probably show back up during the battle of the 5 armies. I find that acceptable.

I've always thought the best Break between movies would be after Riddles in the Dark. They escape the cave, Bilbo captures the ring, and then there's a fading shot as they continue off into the woods on the eastern side of the mountains. That would leave the forest, elves, spiders, the dealings of Gandolf with the gathering of the dark in Mirkwood, and the war of the 5 armies for the 2nd film, with the Golum meeting as the climax to the first.

NOTE: I was completely understanding of why they left bambadil out of the LOTR. And I would have too. He reads like a character that he through in after the facts and who has not much real barring, which is exactly what he was. Imagine if I created Frank the Dragon right now, who swooped down and attacked the Fellowship from Weathertop and then was never heard from again. Would be an exciting little part to the story, but in the end doesn't have much to do with the story and the rest would go on as you saw it, because I wrote it in after the fact. That's what Bambadil was, and that's why he was cut. Too much time and energy for a character who utterly does nothing. not that I dislike him, but it's just what he is.

[Taco-Calamitous]

The Hobbit: Start of production, video from the set. [VIDEO] Good video introduction to filming

THANK YOU for that, man. This is pretty sweet.

And yeah, I could see how Tom Bombadil would seem like an afterthought, but I think he was always intended to be there. He is a product of the mystery of old Middle Earth, to give that feeling to the reader. He also actually saves the hobbits on a couple of occasions, and is someone who was strongly considered to keep the ring by the Council of Elrond. I think he works very well in the first book in Fellowship of the Ring; fits in very nicely there. And of course, with a book, you have enough time to tell whatever you want to tell; in a movie, they have to worry about pacing and such. I still would've liked to have seen him, though. Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

[Locke4God]

Yeah my Bro always gives me the "they intended him to be the ring bearer" line when explaining Tom's importance, but that's just as much of an insert to try to make him seem important as the existance of his character in the first place. Ultimately they don't chose him, so the fact that they were "thinking" about it is irrelevant, and other than saving the hobbits, which were also contrived situations designed to give Tom importance, he does nothing to effect to larger outcome of the story. I'm not against Tom, but he has no influence on the story as a whole. He's just not an important character. Certainly not on the level of any of the main characters, and less so than most of the minor ones.

[IdiotWithHair]

As long as the characters don't start singing. Like in that DAMN CARTOON!

Dude, those are the BEST SONGS EVER. Why would you hate? Seriously. That dude who sang the opening song totally had the folk soul going on.

I think the new live action movies will pale in comparrison the classic Rankin Bass adaptations. Peter Jackson only ****ed shit up with his LotR movies.

[Locke4God]

did you seriously not think he did well with the LOTR? because I thought they were near perfect. I do feel the 3rd one might have gotten a touch campy, but just a little, however the first 2 were as good as could ever be imagined. Heck, the academy sure wouldn't have bestowed their precious best picture title on a fantasy film of all things if it truly wasn't that good.

[IdiotWithHair]

I think the movies were too damn long; I fell asleep in the theatres watching them. I think should've been an hour and a half each, like the Rankin Bass cartoons from the 80's. I also missed all the singing that was in the books! Sure there was some, but what about Sam's song about the troll, or Frodo's song about the inn and the spoon, or Tom Bombadil's song about Tom Bombadil? Those are key elements to the trilogy that were left out! Ralph Bakshi included Frodo's song in his movie, so he gets points for that.

[smurphy]

Key elements to the trilogy left out? How about my favourite part of the trilogy at the end of the Return of the King, the occupation of the Shire and the subsequent insurrection was the the perfect way to close the story of the War of the Ring. For Christs sake Saruman didnt even appear in the RotK movie.

But regarding "The Hobbit", I think they have done the right thing splitting the movie in two. As long as they concentrate on "The Hobbit" itself and not Frodo narrating. I really like the cast they have assembled. No really new big names but thats perfect for this kind of movie.

[Taco-Calamitous]

Well, whatever. You I can't really argue with you about it, though I think to call his rescues of the hobbits "contrived" is a little harsh. I still think he was important to the atmosphere of the first Fellowship of the Ring book. Fun character to me. Then again, the LotR books have a different tone than the movies; different emphasis on different things. For example, the songs fit better in the book than they would in the movies.

I liked the Scouring of the Shire too, but that would've made the end of Return of the King drag on, and it already did that a lot, heh ("multiple endings." Although personally, I didn't mind that much. Although I imagine people would complain even more than they already did.) Anyhoo...

Wuv, Yer Mom

EDIT: Oh yeah! I forget that Christopher Lee wasn't in the original theatrical cut, probably because I only ever watch the extended edition anymore. But yeah, that does kinda blow, especially for him.

[Locke4God]

Agreed, they couldn't have really done the Scouring of the Shire scene, so I wouldn't be upset about that if i were you. It wouldn't have felt like the movie was just never ending at that point. the main story was wrapped.

Plus you got a little taste of it with the flashforwards they showed in the mirror of Lothlorien.

You have to remember that it isn't the movies job to verbatum copy the book. There are certain things that don't work in every medium, so it's more than understandable that they left this out, it was necessary.

I don't know what other important things they left out. Bambadil again is useless to the main plot. Maybe there were a couple little other things, but the movie itself was near perfection for what they needed to accomplish.

[Locke4God]

SORRY FOR THE DOUBLE POST, but it's been days and I just had a chat with my Bro about the break in the film.


They have to break after or right about the time the Dwarves arrive in Dale!

I'd thought they should break after riddles in the dark as it's very climactic and familiar, but when we thought about it, only Rivendell, the Trolls, and An Unexpected party really happens before that, and so there isn't much going on. Now I thought once you added the Spiders, the Wolves, and the Elves after that it might be too much because then you get to Dale, and I wasn't sure there was enough after that for a 2nd film, BUTTTT!

If they end the first film looking off toward the lonely mountain it does provide a cliff hanger, then you get to see the Dragon at the start of the 2nd, his attack on Dale, the war of the 5 armies which is long, the aftermath of all of that, and along side of those things, we will likely get to see the meetings held in Mirkwood with Saurumon and others to discuss the emergence of Sauron and the buildup of evil in Mirkwood. We may also get Golumns trip to Mordor, and a first appearance of Aragorn watchign over the Shire as the film ends. So that could definately be enough for a 2nd film and ending the first one in Dale would seem appropriate at that point.