Sage Hobbit movie advice for PJ?

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Originally posted by Menemtarmacil
"As for Aragorn, I think (sticking to the book's version of his age) that it might be fun to have Aragorn as a 10-year old show up, act really excited at seeing Gandalf, Bilbo, and the dwarves, and then pester them with questions about where they came from, what they were doing, etc."
=========================
Interesting. But better yet, don't have Aragorn mentioned by name, but
have his mom with him and someone call her Gilrain, and see who notices.

[Gil-Galad]

to me i think that not so famous actors should portay different acts, cause it would be hard to imagine comedy actors taking a serious role...

[Encaitare]

I think that Alan Rickman would be a good choice to play Thranduil, as a lot of his lines in the book would sound great coming from him. Ok, they'd have to give him blond hair, but that's probably the only change necessary.

Ooh, Alan Rickman? Putting him in there would be awesome, although I have a difficult time seeing him as a blond. And he is rather beginning to show some signs of aging, so I don't know how well that would work for an Elf. I do like the idea of putting a young Aragorn in there, and dropping the names Gilraen and Estel just to see who catches it. That would be very spiffy.

Hugo Weaving must return as Elrond (hey, maybe PJ can work the script so he says "DOOOOOOM!" a couple of times ), and Ian McKellen and Christopher Lee are a must, too. I'm sad to hear that Ian Holm won't be returning.. he was such a great Bilbo.

[the phantom]

If you're going to include Aragorn, Arwen, the White Council and everything it wouldn't be a separate story- it would just be a fourth Lord of the Rings movie.

I'd rather have it be just like the book and not include all the extra stuff. If PJ wants he can make a movie called "Aragorn" and have it follow old Strider from birth till death, or he can make "Olorin" and cover Gandalf and the Istari from beginning to end- but if PJ makes "The Hobbit" I want it to be "The Hobbit".

And why does everyone think there needs to be a love interest? There wasn't a love interest in the book but you still enjoyed it didn't you? Did anyone read the book and suddenly stop in the middle and notice, "Hey, there's not a love interest in this book"? The thought never even occurred to me. If the story is good then do you really notice or care if there is a love interest?

I think it'd be cool to see some of those extra things (Sauron in Dol Guldur, Aragorn in Gondor, etc) but honestly, after some of the sins PJ committed with LOTR I would just like to see him do a Tolkien book THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN!!

[gorthaur_cruel]

1) make it a two-part movie, more time to cover the story, but
more importantly, lotd more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ (or pounds) (or euros).

I don't want the story spoiled for more money. LotR was 3 books, so 3 movies. The Hobbit is 1 book, and a short one at that, so 1 movie.

3) Part one romantic interest (okay, a little playing with Middle-earth
history is involved in some of these ideas), Aragorn and Arwen's first
meeting (yeah, he was really about 10, and not yet invented when the
Hobbit was written, but PJ makes him 20).

Enough tampering with the story! Arwen and Aragorn's story has a conclusion in LotR; they marry. But why show the two meet, when nothing happens after? A meaningless inclusion, IMO. Even the love-story lovers wouldn't like having a couple meet when they have absolutely no place in the story and nothing happens to them. Perhaps a cameo appearance, but no more.

4) Since it's unclear who actually was in the attack on Dol Guldur, and
knowing PJ's battle scene fetish, include elves and Dunedain in the
attack (Aragorn can "earn his spurs" and impress his mates). Also
have the hint of tension between Gandalf and Saruman.

All right...I'll accept that, except Aragorn. The attack on Dol Guldur and the White Council can show what Gandalf's doing...sort of a side story.

5) In Part II Legolas is present. If he had been invented it's very
possible Thranduil's son would have been involved and in LOTR I don't
believe there's any "Oh hi, Gandalf, we've never met before, I'm..."

I don't mind him being present...after all, Bilbo sees a lot of the Mirkwood Elves. But I don't think having him appear too much is good. Perhaps he can appear next to Thranduil, be one of the Elves who ship the barrel, or perhaps Thranduil's ambassador to Esgaroth (the one that declares Thorin to be a vagabond Dwarf).

6) Part II love interest, either Bard has a girlfriend (he shoots Smaug
just before she gets really hot, or Legolas with any available
elf or Laketown girl.

Again, a love that has no conclusion will satisfy nobody. Not the love-scene lovers nor the Tolkien purists.

7) Part II bits with Aragorn fighting for Gondor, and a young Denethor
getting steamed with Aragorn's success. Again, dates and the ages of
people are a bit off but I think it sticks, at least in the movie
universe, closish to Middle-earth events, and it allws especially
non-book people to relate to more characters.

This is a completely different story from Bilbo's adventure. The attack on Dol Guldur relates to Gandalf's leaving. Aragorn's adventures are completely off the track. You're suggesting way too many side-stories. I mean, imagine Bilbo fighting against the spiders, then suddenly Aragorn's fighting for Gondor, while Gandalf is meeting Elrond, Saruman, and Galadriel. Too confusing, IMO.

8) Casting--- Unfortunately, Ian Holmes would probably be not only too
old for Bilbo, but not up to the almost total screen time the character
would call for. But movie Aragorn, Arwen, Gandalf, Galadriel, Agent Elrond,
John-Rhys Davies as Thorin Oakenshield, Smeagol, etc.

I actually think Ian Holm could play Bilbo. After all, Bilbo was over 50 in The Hobbit. Seeing how the average life span of a Hobbit was about 100 (Tolkien says they reached 100 as often as not), and our life span is about 80, there's not too much of a difference. So Bilbo has to look to be about 40. With some young-looking WETA make up, Ian Holm could look to be around 40, I think. Don't ask why they chose a 20 year old for Frodo...I've got no idea.

One reason for suggesting Aragorn/Arwen is so non-book readers
won't be asking during the film: "Where's that cute elvish babe?
"Yeah, and what about hunky Aragorn?"

You could reply: Hunky Aragorn is 10 years old at this time Arwen could make a cameo appearance, I guess.

[Essex]

I don't think 1 or 2 movies would work for the hobbit. even though it's a kid's novel, it would still require a fair bit of dumbing down. why not, as Sir Ian has mentioned, have it as a tv mini series? The way the book is written (to me anyway) would lend to this idea, as the chapters seem 'episodic' in their construction.

ps no doubt this has been mentioend before, but there's only 1 person who could play Beorn, and that's Robbie Coltrane.......

[Encaitare]

You could reply: Hunky Aragorn is 10 years old at this time Arwen could make a cameo appearance, I guess.

No, because Arwen was in Lothlorien at the time.

And why does everyone think there needs to be a love interest? There wasn't a love interest in the book but you still enjoyed it didn't you? Did anyone read the book and suddenly stop in the middle and notice, "Hey, there's not a love interest in this book"? The thought never even occurred to me. If the story is good then do you really notice or care if there is a love interest?

It depends. If it is aimed at children like the book was, then a love interest isn't all that important. But if it's made out to be a huge story, then why would it hurt to give Bard a love interest? He ends up having a son, so why not include his future wife?