McKellen To Follow Del Toro?

[Inziladun]

The news probably should be treated with a grain of salt, but I would think it likely there is a least a kernal of truth in it, that McKellan is dissatisfied.

Here is another source for the same story.

[Morthoron]

They should just sack Ian McKellen and use that replacement wizard from Harry Potter, what's his name, Micheal Gambon? Hey, he's already replaced Richard Harris, so what's another white-bearded, muttering wizard, more or less.

The movie will be a travesty anyway.

[Morsul the Dark]

Negative Negative Negative....

So the movies didn't follow Every Single word in the book so they had to take certain creative leaps for the movie...

A "Travesty" is a far far overreaction to the idea of a film.

now on to the story. If they change Mckellen cancel the movie he was one of two(the other being Sean Astin) to get his part right.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Morsul the Dark

Negative Negative Negative....

So the movies didn't follow Every Single word in the book so they had to take certain creative leaps for the movie...

Nonsense Nonsense Nonsense...

I don't believe any logical poster here expected a movie wherein every line was repeated like biblical text. I, myself, would call out anyone for making such an inane comment.

However, when you say 'they had to take certain leaps', that seems to be merely apologist flimflammery -- a sycophantic genuflection to weak revisionism. There was much that was haphazardly tossed in that was not even germane to the stilted plot jury-rigged atop the original storyline. Many of the film sequences were unnecessary, irrelevant and inherently flawed. Just because someone stamps 'Middle-earth' on something doesn't mean I have to get all goose-pimply and bow to the maker of the product.

P.S. And it is a 'travesty' the way The Hobbit has been handled, by all and sundry. Del Toro leaving so abruptly tells me all I need to know about the manner in which the film is being tossed about like it was a porcupine with flatulence.

[Morsul the Dark]

Never said you had too... Just pointing out a Film maker has to appeal to a broader audience than just those who read the book. And while not "Canon" I feel you can enjoy the films without dissecting it.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

They should just sack Ian McKellen and use that replacement wizard from Harry Potter, what's his name, Micheal Gambon? Hey, he's already replaced Richard Harris, so what's another white-bearded, muttering wizard, more or less.

The movie will be a travesty anyway.

Well, let's hope not.

However, aside from money and personality clashes, etc. there is a fundamental problem with doing the The Hobbit as (to quote the article) "the newest installation of Lord of the Rings". Really, they can either make it fit the tone of the existing films OR do a faithful adaptation. Not both. Either way, a lot of people are going to be disappointed.

Now what it seems we're going to get is another "kidult" adaptation, and the trouble is, I think that particular fashion is likely to play itself out long before the "The Hobbit" gets released. On the other hand, if they were to do it as a children's film– well, can you imagine the reaction from the movies' existing fanbase?

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is, maybe the underlying reason for all these delays and shenanigans is that the filmmakers are finding themselves in a bit of a double-bind. It's just a thought.

[LadyBrooke]

I think he'll stay. While he may be exasperated with the film makers he has to know that if he drops out it would break some fans hearts.

What worries me is that according to some articles the White Council is going to be shown on screen. We know the Saruman, Galadriel, Cirdan, and Elrond were on it with Gandalf. Since five people would be pretty small for a council, it's been speculated about who else is on it. I've heard Gildor, Glorfindel, Erestor, Celeborn, Thranduil, Galdorn, and Radagast all speculated as possible members. While for most of those it would be no problem because they weren't in the first movies in any recognizable form (trading cards don't count) Saruman, Galadriel, Elrond, and Celeborn all represent problems.

Galadriel played by Cate Blanchett could still pull off the eternally youthful elf. So, unless the movies are delayed for another decade, it's not a big problem.

Celeborn: Okay, I had trouble believing Marton Csokas as an elf lord in the Fellowship of the Ring. I sincerly doubt that now that he is a decade older (he'll be 46 in 2012) I could believe him as an elf.

Elrond: Hugo Weaving is 50 this year. He looked too old for Elrond in Lord of the Rings. Now he would look way too old.

Saruman: Christopher Lee is 88. While he is still filming movies, there is going to come a time when he isn't able to film any more.

Quite frankly if they don't start filming soon they're going to have to find a completely new cast because all the original actors will be too old.

[PrinceOfTheHalflings]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

I think he'll stay. While he may be exasperated with the film makers he has to know that if he drops out it would break some fans hearts.

I am absolutely certain that he is extremely frustrated with the delays. However, I doubt that he'd just abandon the entire project because of that, so yes, I agree.

They could probably do a little makeup trickery to make Hugo Weaving look a little younger for Elrond. He's not in the film that much anyway. I'd imagine that Celeborn would get minimal screen time, if at all. The tricky one is definitely going to be Saruman. However, since they're going to have to cast a new Bilbo anyway, I suppose they can get a new Saruman too.

[LadyBrooke]

They could get a new actor to play Saruman but, to me, Christopher Lee is Saruman. I can't imagine any one playing him better. Plus, he is a Tolkien fan. I think movies are better when the actor genuinely enjoys the story being told.

[Morthoron]

If they wait much longer with The Hobbit, most of the original cast will be dead from old age.

[Mister Underhill]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

The news probably should be treated with a grain of salt, but I would think it likely there is a least a kernal of truth in it, that McKellan is dissatisfied.

Here is another source for the same story.

Aaanyway... I don't doubt that McKellan is eager to play Gandalf and impatient with the delays. But the idea that he'd walk from the project altogether? I doubt it. He's a bit of a wild-card too, isn't he? Wasn't he the one who made some announcement about a start date a few months ago that the Jackson camp then had to walk back?

Despite the "all is well" PR, one gets the impression that they've been trying to get this thing out of the gate for months now, but that MGM's financial trouble has kept it stalled. I'm sure it's annoying, but I think McKellan is just venting.