Tons o' Hobbit News

[Mister Underhill]

So as has been mentioned elsewhere, PJ and GDT did an hour-long chat and answered a load of questions and revealed a lot about their plans. There has been some speculation in a couple of threads about the content of the new films, but this infodump seemed big enough to merit its own thread.

A few highlights are here.

A complete transcript of the chat is available here.

Discuss!

[skip spence]

Interesting...

It looks like the Dol Guldur episode indeed will be delt with in the second movie.

GdT (When asked if Gandalf would be given a more active role then in the book): I believe that Gandalf is meant to be used in that way- coming and going in and out of the narrative. If anything, this creates the perfect setting for those “gaps” to be bridged by the second film…

Here's what GdT said regarding talking animals.

I think it should be done exactly as in the book- the “talking beast” motif has to exist already to allow for that great character that is Smaug. It is far more jarring to have a linear movie and then – out of the blue – a talking Dragon.

Regarding the tone of the movie:

GdT: We’ll see about the “Tra-la-la-“ later- but the book, I believe, in echoing the “loss of innocence” England experienced after WWI, is a passage from innocence to a darker, more somber state- The visual / thematic progression should reflect that in the camera style, color palette, textural choices, etc.

PJ: As I said earlier, I personally feel that The Hobbit can, and should have a different tone. The "tone" of these stories shouldn't be defined by the pressure our characters were under in LOTR. The world is a different place at the time of the Hobbit. The shadow is not so dark. However, what should stay the same is the reality of Middle-earth, and the integrity we bring to it as film makers.

GdT:...the world must feel like the same world [as in the LotR movies]. The aspect ratio, music, essential established costume and production design trademarks but I would love to bring a lot of new flavours to the table.

Looks like Del Toro wants to be faithful to the original narrative:

GdT: I am all for trying to preserve every idiosyncrasy the novel has- the very things that seem “unfilmable” and that – in my mind- will make it thrilling as a film. The novel is much, much more inventive and dislocated in its narrative (Bilbo being hit by a rock during the Battle) than you may think at first.

I wonder if he'll have to fight for this:

GdT: I may be in the minority, but I absolutely LOVE Beorn and I intend to feature him in the films.

About their first meeting:

GdT: We finished a tray of shrimps together and agreed that NEW LINE should keep hiring round, bearded directors with funny accents...

[Bêthberry]

Thanks for those links, Mister U. How fascinating to see the internet/chat used for such creative public relations. If I remember correctly, Chris Carter of XFiles fame cursed internet communities for hamstringing possibilities on the show but here PJ and GdT seem to be embracing the opportunity to develop a positive rapport. By and large, each director hit the right buttons to keep me mildly interested in what might come of this (although not to relieve my qualms over "Film 2").

GdT's explanation of his "sword and scorcery" comment is about exactly what I would expect from someone with his interest/credentials in traditional fairie.

It's also interesting to hear that he "has other plans for R[on] P[erlman]". Coming with his declared interest in the character of Beorn, one wonders . . . . And at least they didn't mention James Earl Jones as a potential candidate for Smaug's voice.

All in all, a nice bit of prepping of the fandom.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

It's dangerous to make too much from their
comments, but there seems to be some
hope that GdT is interested in being more
"faithful" to the books then PJ (especially in
TTT and ROTK). I like it that he appears to
want to keep elements/events that could have
been changed or eliminated, such as his view
of talking animals and including all of the dwarves.
Marrying his interpretations with PJ's visual success in recreating
M-E [U]could[U] lead to a quite successful interpretation.

Also, I still like the idea of "aging" Aragorn 10 years
to have his initial encounter with Arwen (or alternately)
10-year-old Aragorn chatting with his mum.

Or just have Bilbo meet young Aragorn briefly and in
the (inevitable) extended dvd Aragorn and his mother
chatting- with Agent Elrond?

And from the thread
"Christopher Tolkien: Kill HOBBIT film"

Today the film-makers will confirm that Sir Ian McKellen is returning to his role as the wizard Gandalf in The Hobbit and that Andy Serkis will reprise his role as the murderous creature Gollum.

Sir Ian Holm, who played the hobbit Bilbo Baggins in The Lord of the Rings, is expected to narrate. Viggo Mortensen has unexpectedly been asked to return as Aragorn, a character who does not appear in the original Hobbit story, published in 1937.

[Sir Kohran]

I can't say I'm happy about Aragorn returning as an adult - the whole point of the original book was that the central 'hero' is not a sword-swinging champion but a small hobbit. Also, I don't know how they'll fit him in - Aragorn was a big character in the LOTR films and for him to be included in TH in the same style will require some pretty big alterations to the story (as if Aragorn being an adult wasn't already).

That said, him being there as a child is a good idea.

[Hilde Bracegirdle]

I guess I'm not the only one who thought the wargs could be given a different treatment. And it is encouraging to find that GDT is concerned with staying faithful to the book. But that said, I leave you with the following I heard recently...

"No two persons ever read the same book." ~Edmund Wilson

Now that is something to keep in mind!

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Sir Kohran

I can't say I'm happy about Aragorn returning as an adult - the whole point of the original book was that the central 'hero' is not a sword-swinging champion but a small hobbit. Also, I don't know how they'll fit him in - Aragorn was a big character in the LOTR films and for him to be included in TH in the same style will require some pretty big alterations to the story (as if Aragorn being an adult wasn't already).

That said, him being there as a child is a good idea.

Bear in mind that the two ME movies will be filmed together. The return of Viggo doesn't nessesarly mean he will feature in The Hobbit and I don't think he will either. The character Aragorn as a young adult will however certainly feature heavily in the second "bridge"-movie.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Originally Posted by Tuor in Gondolin

It's dangerous to make too much from their
comments, but there seems to be some
hope that GdT is interested in being more
"faithful" to the books then PJ (especially in
TTT and ROTK). I like it that he appears to
want to keep elements/events that could have
been changed or eliminated, such as his view
of talking animals and including all of the dwarves.
Marrying his interpretations with PJ's visual success in recreating
M-E [U]could[U] lead to a quite successful interpretation.

Quite, quite... very odd to hear that from me (and I am not the last to be surprised, for sure), but I like that fella, and I may even start to like it thanks to that fella. Well, of course, still with maaany reservations (like my belief that nothing should be filmed in the first place, for more see Tolkien's On Fairy-Stories).

And someone said something about Ron Perlman? That may be another reason. If there will be actors I actually know and like (like him), then it may be a good reason to really watch the movie in the first place And I daresay he would have made a good Beorn, but whatever...

[skip spence]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

And someone said something about Ron Perlman? That may be another reason. If there will be actors I actually know and like (like him), then it may be a good reason to really watch the movie in the first place And I daresay he would have made a good Beorn, but whatever...

I can actually see Ron Pearlman doing a great Bombur. Imagine a fat, sullen and slightly retarded Bombur played by Pearlman. That would be a classic role for him!