PDA

View Full Version : The Hobbit SBG in Nov 2010?



Brandir
18-12-2007, 18:08
I wonder if The Hobbit SBG will be released in November 2010:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7150644.stm

Horus84
18-12-2007, 18:18
at last!

this is great news in my opinion. A Hobbit film without Mr Jacksons input would have been a disaster so it is warming to know that he and I would guess fran and philipa will be behind the wheels.

As for a hobbit game/ expansion for Lotr. I would say there is a fair chance. i Would think that it would depend on whether GW think that the fall out from the lotr can be avoided.

Col.Gravis
18-12-2007, 18:41
The official movie blog

http://www.thehobbitblog.com/

Eldanar
18-12-2007, 20:32
I'm glad they brought him on as the producer rather than the director, as I think The Hobbit has a slightly different feel and tone to it than LOTR does. Plus, I think the lion's share of the work here is done in production rather than in actual "directing." (And besides, after the LOTR windfall, and with the types of actors who will be lining up for these roles, how much direction will really be needed?)

Brandir
18-12-2007, 20:56
I suspect Jackson and his wife Fran Walsh have written the script already. Jackson also stated that the props from LOTR were stored in a way to ensure they were in good order and available for The Hobbit. It will be a relatively cheap film to make!

Killshot
18-12-2007, 22:05
I still hope Sir Ridley Scott will direct, but this good news. Bring on the Smaug and the Battle of the Five armies!

Wintermute
19-12-2007, 06:55
I still hope Sir Ridley Scott will direct, but this good news. Bring on the Smaug and the Battle of the Five armies!

I doubt it.

I suspect, now that Peter Jackson is producing, Sam Raimi will be prepared to direct.

harrowing
19-12-2007, 07:35
Sorry Wintermute. Something tells me with the way they keep saying Jackson and Fran will be bringing it to life via the MGM response, I have a feeling Jackson will be doing it. however, originally he was sighted as shooting a Halo Movie at the same time. I have a feeling, we're just waiting for him to juggle his schedules for now and he'll be in charge of the whole shi-bang. Wait a few months, and we will certainly here, Peter Jackson is directing the hobbit.

Take it or leave it.

Cypher
19-12-2007, 12:10
I hadnt thought about it till now, but the news of new movies is extremely good from GWs perspective. As we all know the success of GW's LotR products was directly related to the movies, and new movies means a massive marketing opportunity.

Although it does mean we'll be stuck with LotR in WD for at least another 5-6 years.

BigRob
19-12-2007, 14:54
Two movies from Peter Jackson.... so that means 6+ hours of film, although removing unneccasary slow motion bits more like 4 hours.

How can they do it in two films, whats to do? Its not a long book, you could easily make 1 film the length of King Kong to cover it. I'm worried it will become very drawn out and filled with non action. Obviously it will be hoping to drag peopel in on the bac kof LoTR and the good name of Tolkien but I hope they dont murder it like they did with the Golden Compass.

Gaebriel
19-12-2007, 16:30
Hmm, nice that the film is in Jackson's capable hands, but I'm sceptic about the "additional" material. Though I am not as purist about the Hobbit as I was about the Lord of the Rings. Funny how they desperately cut the LotR to fit into three movies, and now try to elongate the Hobbit to fill two.

And if there is only one film dealing with the Hobbit, and another with the tie in to LotR - why market both as the Hobbit then? Isn't Tolkien a household name now, so another film could be advertised as dealing with "Middle Earth of the third age" or something?

My worries aside, it will at least be two good Fantasy films based on one of the best settings there is :) And GW will deliver marvelleous sculpts for sure.

Llew
19-12-2007, 17:09
Honestly, there's so much material in the Tolkein canon that they could make movies for decades...and I bet Christopher Tolkein would be happy to help polish his dad's notes to make it happen. ;)

Honestly, they'd be crazy to do it just as a one-off. And if they tie some of the other information to help link the Hobbit and LotR more closely for people who weren't already Tolkeinites, I don't see why it's a bad thing. Costs are kept down and they can almost certainly get a worthwhile draw on a second movie, making it more profitable for the studio.

Wintermute
19-12-2007, 17:51
Sorry Wintermute. Something tells me with the way they keep saying Jackson and Fran will be bringing it to life via the MGM response, I have a feeling Jackson will be doing it. however, originally he was sighted as shooting a Halo Movie at the same time. I have a feeling, we're just waiting for him to juggle his schedules for now and he'll be in charge of the whole shi-bang. Wait a few months, and we will certainly here, Peter Jackson is directing the hobbit.
.

The Halo movie died months ago.

In all honesty I would prefer Peter Jackson to direct The Hobbit in preference to anyone else.

Dosadi
19-12-2007, 18:33
There is certainly enough material out there to fill in several other films based in Middle earth. I’m not sure what they would build a movie about that takes place between Hobbit and Fellowship. Seeing some of the stuff in the Simarillian would make me very happy and would give GW the ability to really open up the LoTR game for a lot more products/armies. I’ve recently re-discovered this game and it’s tons of fun and I’d go out on a limb to say it’s their best “tournament” game.
I’m sure that the heads of GW are all sighing in relief that this is being done as the popularity of the books/movies picks up again. A Hobbit expansion for LoTR would be great as well as it could all be done in a single plastic starter set much like Mines of Moria…except you would need to sell Smaug as a separate (and awesome) plastic kit.

Dosadi

Wintermute
19-12-2007, 18:35
I'm moving this thread to Random Musings.

Wintermute
The WarSeer Inquisition

Eldanar
19-12-2007, 19:00
Hmm, nice that the film is in Jackson's capable hands, but I'm sceptic about the "additional" material. Though I am not as purist about the Hobbit as I was about the Lord of the Rings. Funny how they desperately cut the LotR to fit into three movies, and now try to elongate the Hobbit to fill two.

And if there is only one film dealing with the Hobbit, and another with the tie in to LotR - why market both as the Hobbit then? Isn't Tolkien a household name now, so another film could be advertised as dealing with "Middle Earth of the third age" or something?

My worries aside, it will at least be two good Fantasy films based on one of the best settings there is :) And GW will deliver marvelleous sculpts for sure.


I'm still waiting for a "super-extended" version of LOTR to be put out, that follows the books more closely, etc. We know he has the material thanks to the photo in the old WD of Lorien Elves walking through dead Orcs from Moria. Plus that hobbit actors have all stated that he did the Scouring scenes, they just got cut. And every time I watch the Army of the Dead on the Pellenor Fields (and cringe) I keep getting the feeling that it was cut and spliced together in order to cut out 30 minutes of film...

Vodevil
19-12-2007, 19:33
I'm glad they brought him on as the producer rather than the director, as I think The Hobbit has a slightly different feel and tone to it than LOTR does. Plus, I think the lion's share of the work here is done in production rather than in actual "directing." (And besides, after the LOTR windfall, and with the types of actors who will be lining up for these roles, how much direction will really be needed?)

It seems like your looking at this like a stage play rather then a movie... In the film world the producer takes care of the money side of things, generally they don't have much to do with the creative aspects of the film. The Director is in charge of EVERYTHING, not just directing actors. So rest assured, no matter what film it is there will be plenty of directing to do. ;)

Dargon
19-12-2007, 20:09
For my part, this is the best Christmas Present I could have asked for...

A return to Hobbiton and Rivendel!
Trolls arguing and turning to stone!
The discovery of Sting and Glamdring!
Wargs and Eagles and Were-bears... oh my!
More focus on the Goblins (like those in Moria), instead of Orcs and Uruk-hai.
Riddles in the Dark my precioussses!
Mirkwood with Legolas' kin and hundreds of little Shelobs!
Erebor, the Lonely mountain and Laketown!
The Battle of Five Armies!
And of course... SMAUG!

Most of all, I'm particularly looking forward to seeing the Dwarves take centre stage like the Elves did in Lord of the Rings. The Hobbit is the Dwarves story. The loss of Erebor to Smaug's attack. Thorin's father captured by Sauron (the Necromancer) and passing his map on to Gandalf to deliver to his son. 13 Dwarves (and a Hobbit)on a quest to slay the Dragon. And finally Dain and an army of fully armed Dwarf Warriors in full battle mode. YES!

The two-movie deal also holds alot of promise. Potentially getting to see the White Council in action will no doubt be spectacular - Gandalf, Radagast, Saruman, Galadriel, and Elrond demonstrating their true power against Dol Guldur. Potentially getting to see Saruman's fall from grace as he grows ever more obsessive over the ring will likewise be fascinating.



I'm betting it's the best present the suits at GW could have asked for too, and they're probably already planning how to make the most of it. This news will no doubt save GW's financial butt and allow the suits to pretend they are doing a good job for another few years.

Just a (reposted from the other Hobbit Thread) thought...

Brandir
19-12-2007, 20:24
..........I'm particularly looking forward to seeing the Dwarfs take centre stage like the Elves did in Lord of the Rings. ...

Don't you mean Dwarves as we are talking Tolkien?

Although the Great Professor in his letters did say he regretted using the plural Dwarves. With hindsight he wished he had used the term Dwarrow:

No reviewer (that I have seen), although all have carefully used the correct dwarfs themselves, has commented on the fact (which I only became conscious of through reviews) that I use throughout the 'incorrect' plural dwarves. I am afraid it is just a piece of private bad grammar, rather shocking in a philologist; but I shall have to go on with it. Perhaps my dwarf since he and the Gnome are only translations into approximate equivalents of creatures with different names and rather different functions in their own world may be allowed a peculiar plural. The real 'historical' plural of dwarf (like teeth of tooth) is dwarrows, anyway: rather a nice word, but a bit too archaic. Still I rather wish I had used the word dwarrow. Quote taken from Letter 17 dated 15 October 1937.

Only here to help and serve up knowledge of the Professor!

:D

Crazy Harborc
19-12-2007, 20:49
I am thinking that after the Hobbit....one and two.....THEN a newly edited, extended version of the three LoTRs movies will come out.

Gee, I wonder if this was all planned from day one??? Another on-going Star Wars style of enterprise....Naaawwww.;);)

Brandir
19-12-2007, 21:01
.......Gee, I wonder if this was all planned from day one??? Another on-going Star Wars style of enterprise....Naaawwww.;);)

You cynical young man!

Eldanar
19-12-2007, 21:06
...yes, but unlike Star Wars, lets hope this one gets better with each re-telling...:p

pwrgmrguard
19-12-2007, 21:17
You know, jackson could make a career out of nothing but JRRT works. If someone was to give him the materials to do it, i bet he wouldn't stop till he told it all, silmarillion to unfinished tales.

Dargon
20-12-2007, 00:15
Don't you mean Dwarves as we are talking Tolkien?
Err, um yes of course, err I mean (ninja edit) What Dwarfs? Only Dwarves here.:angel:

mumble, mumble, blasted GW and their use of "f" mumble grumble

Just a thought...:D

Crazy Harborc
20-12-2007, 03:07
...yes, but unlike Star Wars, lets hope this one gets better with each re-telling...:p

What I had in mind is the mega-millions.....hundred of millions(maybe billions now) of $$$$$$ brought in world-wide from movies and merchandise sales.

I agree about the quality. Over all, I give them a 8 1/2 out of 10.:D I was there on day 1 of Star Wars (IV). At the time NO ONE had ever done a movie like it. The special effects were new on a screen that size world wide. At the time adults (parents) children, even grand parents.....we all went back for seconds. Then the movie came out on that high tech thing.....a VHS tape. Yeah. that's what it was called.

That was, that IS the memory....at the time....it WAS AWSOME:D I hope all of you have or will experience a movie that has THAT kind of impact on you.

Eldanar
20-12-2007, 03:19
I don't know if they have ever released the merchandising money, or the DVD sales, but LOTR made $3 billion just in movie ticket sales.

Although I agree about Star Wars...saw it six times in theatres in 1978(?); and I think Empire is one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. Kind of in the same way that TTT was probably the best Fantasy film ever made (particularly the extended version), and IMHO, the best of the three LOTR chapters.

salty
20-12-2007, 13:12
I think I mentioned this in another thread about this somewhere, but I'll say it again.

From what I have heard, and I stress that this is really only hear-say to my knowledge, the two films will indeed contain bits from other sources that will make the whole thing more rounded, and easier to understand, for people new to the Tolkien universe. Rather like the way LotR had the bit introducing Elves and Dwarves (I prefer that version to Dwarfs anyway) and Gollum etc.

The second film, again, hearsay, will consist of information from notes JRR made concerning another book, that would plug the gap between the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit. Unfortunately, it was never made, but looks like now it will be polished off and produced.

Salty :)

de Selby
20-12-2007, 16:11
I can see how it could be two films, what with the Dol Guldur-related back story and the heavily episodic nature of most of the book (almost every chapter is a little self contained story in itself). Anyone know if Ian Holm is going to be in it?

Dwarf Supreme
20-12-2007, 16:47
Anyone know if Ian Holm is going to be in it?

I hope not. He'll be too old to play a young Hobbit.

I know it's still early, but has anybody heard anything about possible actors?

salty
20-12-2007, 17:40
I hope not. He'll be too old to play a young Hobbit.

I know it's still early, but has anybody heard anything about possible actors?


Ian McKellan has at least expressed an interest in reprising his role as Gandalf.

Salty :)

Arnizipal
20-12-2007, 18:30
I hope not. He'll be too old to play a young Hobbit.

And Elijah Wood was way too young to represent Frodo (who in the books is older than Sam IIRC). That didn't stop him from getting the part though.

I wonder how the movies are going to deal with the "silly" bits of the books, like the pointy hatted Dwarves and talking Trolls/purses/arrows.
I think it'll be hard to make a serious movie about a children's book without it turning into Harry Potter. The LotR setting is a bit more serious than that.

Aurelien
20-12-2007, 20:19
For all you Ian Holm is too old Naysayers, look at the lead actor for Beowulf, and try and tell me Weta cant do the same to keep Holms magic.

Inquisitor Engel
21-12-2007, 01:33
For all you Ian Holm is too old Naysayers, look at the lead actor for Beowulf, and try and tell me Weta cant do the same to keep Holms magic.

CG has come a long way, touchups and all, but there's still something rubber about the face. We've already got a shot of Ian Holm finding the Ring in FotR, so I'm sure they might, he does look rather old as Bilbo, looks much younger in Lord of War for instance.

The Dude
21-12-2007, 02:46
CG has come a long way, touchups and all, but there's still something rubber about the face. We've already got a shot of Ian Holm finding the Ring in FotR, so I'm sure they might, he does look rather old as Bilbo, looks much younger in Lord of War for instance.

Plus Gandalf comments that he hasn't aged a day when he meets him in Fellowship.

mistformsquirrel
21-12-2007, 03:20
I'm glad they brought him on as the producer rather than the director, as I think The Hobbit has a slightly different feel and tone to it than LOTR does. Plus, I think the lion's share of the work here is done in production rather than in actual "directing." (And besides, after the LOTR windfall, and with the types of actors who will be lining up for these roles, how much direction will really be needed?)

Gotta agree with this all around.

This is great news though. I know some people who were very 'eh' to the LOTR movies, but I thought they were probably the best on screen adaptation one could have hoped for from such an epic series of books. It'd be hard to have done it better.

I hope the Hobbit movies are every bit as good!

Eldanar
21-12-2007, 03:28
For all you Ian Holm is too old Naysayers, look at the lead actor for Beowulf, and try and tell me Weta cant do the same to keep Holms magic.

One thing you can't change though is voice. And Beowulf just sounds "old" to me, regardless of the CGI. Kind of like the CGI movie where Alec Baldwin was voiced over a character that looked like Ben Afleck...just couldn't get past it, and it ruined the entire experience for me...

Although wasn't Bilbo around 50 or so? (If I am mistaken, I might have my card revoked...:o ). Ian Holme is not too much older, and I think he would be excellent.

The Dude
21-12-2007, 05:01
One thing you can't change though is voice.

I'd say voice is one of the easiest things to change ;).

Brandir
21-12-2007, 06:11
......Although wasn't Bilbo around 50 or so? (If I am mistaken, I might have my card revoked...:o ). Ian Holme is not too much older, and I think he would be excellent.

Bilbo was born 22 Sep 2890 TA.

He found the One Ring in 2941. I think it was before his birthday that year, as I remember Bilbo celebrating his birthday during the escape from Thranduil episode.

So 50 was a good guess. Your card will not be revoked!

Note that Hobbits had a generally longer lifespan than humans so a 50-year old Hobbit would be the equivalent of say a 30 - 40 year old human.

Odin
21-12-2007, 12:31
I really hope Ian Holm stays on as Bilbo, not just for continuity, but also because he was superb in the part. With a much smaller cast of characters in the Hobbit, you need actors of the quality of Holm and McKellen to really make it work.

I assume Dol Gildur will form part of the story if they're extending it to two films. Could be good (though GW may need to re-work their Dol Gildur expansion).

Inquisitor Engel
21-12-2007, 16:57
Kind of like the CGI movie where Alec Baldwin was voiced over a character that looked like Ben Afleck...just couldn't get past it, and it ruined the entire experience for me...

Yes... the Final Fantasy movie... Then again in Beowulf you have Brendan Gleeson (aka Mad-Eye Moody) playing his sidekick Wiglaf, who sounds approrpriate no matter what.

Crazy Harborc
22-12-2007, 01:46
If I want a movie to be good, I can ignore flubs, shadows from equipment, etc.

If I go into a theater wanting to see mistakes, looking for goof ups.....I will find them:evilgrin:.