Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
New Line Cinema readies a pair of "Hobbit" films
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


Jan 23 2010, 10:32am

Post #26 of 59 (818 views)
Ha! [In reply to] Can't Post

That made me snort my hot chocolate! ;o)

Kangi Ska

Jan 23 2010, 10:34am

Post #27 of 59 (882 views)
I would say that a Green Light is irrelivant on these movies. [In reply to] Can't Post

"It's similar, though this is more expensive and much more of a known entity," says Emmerich of the "LOTR" ramp-up vs. the advance work being done on "The Hobbit."

Once the script for the second film is in -- Jackson and his longtime collaborators Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens are working on it with Del Toro -- New Line will work up a budget for both films and start casting. New Line exec Michael Disco, who was once Emmerich's assistant, will oversee for the studio.

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.

Growlithe the Grey

Jan 23 2010, 12:49pm

Post #28 of 59 (828 views)
It's not even a bet [In reply to] Can't Post

In Reply To
It may be a good bet but it is going to be big.

In the context of "Hollywood," there's no more of a sure thing than the Hobbit films. It's not a bet. A bet implies risk, or at least risk relative to the norm. To on top of that call it a "big" bet is just lame. It sounds to me like the guy is trying to make excuses as to why it hasn't been greenlit yet. And the only reason it hasn't is that WB/NewLine, to put it bluntly, doesn't have a clue what they're doing.

(This post was edited by Growlithe the Grey on Jan 23 2010, 12:53pm)


Jan 23 2010, 1:18pm

Post #29 of 59 (846 views)
There are sure a lot of uncertainties in this article... [In reply to] Can't Post

Read the last few lines of the article:


Horn won't predict when the first of the two "Hobbit" films will be out, but says the most probable scenario would be a release in the fourth quarter of 2012.
"It's a big bet for us. But it's one we think will pay off given the success of 'Lord of the Rings,'" says Emmerich. "This is one of the few movies it feels like people are waiting for."

"Won't predict, most probable scenario, a big bet." That sounds to me as if he's uncertain himself and has not a clue if he's right about his prediction of The Hobbit coming out in the fourth quarter of 2012.



Jan 23 2010, 5:54pm

Post #30 of 59 (790 views)
Depressing if true but doesn't this add to costs [In reply to] Can't Post

This certainly would appear to be a reliable source, but as others hav said on this thread - he does seem to be contradictory and unsure. It could well be the case that Disco ( cool name!) really isn't that well acquainted with the project, at least not yet. The other point is that the longer these films take to complete, the more the cost will balloon - its not green lit yet but clearly alot of money is being shelled out. Actors will also be wanting a date span of when theyre needed before they sign contracts etc.

Kangi Ska

Jan 23 2010, 6:34pm

Post #31 of 59 (796 views)
Third Thoughts [In reply to] Can't Post

A. Peter is driving the truck. The crew in NZ is in the middle of massive Pre-production that includes:
1. Writing Two interlocked scripts
2. Previse animated story boards based on scripts &
3. Character and creature designs that Weta, and conceptual artists Lee & Howe and GDT are working on.
4. Preplanning for casting
5. What ever else it takes to get this monster set up to roll cameras.

B. Peter is driving the truck. The suits are a little nervous about a sensed lack of control, after all a couple hundred mil ain't chump change. (A big bet! from their point of view.) But they have the golden gosling in hand and Emmerich was already along on the LotR ride. The Disco Dude is the Corporate Bagman/PointMan and they are asserting ownership of the truck that Peter is driving.

C. Peter is driving the truck and providing cover for GDT while steering said vehicle through the formal wickets to become a (Wink-wink-nudge-nudge) Green-lighted project.

I would trust what ever Peter has to say. The long silence with little spurts of damage control is probably necessary for the truck to reach its destination.

But waiting patiently on the outside of the box sure sucks!

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Jan 23 2010, 6:34pm)


Jan 23 2010, 7:11pm

Post #32 of 59 (845 views)
a suit's lame attempt at gaining leverage [In reply to] Can't Post

Peter is firmly in control of this process. He holds all the cards.

I think that "It's a big bet for us" nonsense was just a suit's lame attempt to get some leverage in the process.

All we need the suits for is to throw money at Jackson and del Toro.

Back during the Lord of the Rings, to fund those films was a couragous act. Now it's a no-brainer.

Just green-light the films and stay out of the way before someone else buys and sells you.

L. Ron Halfelven
Grey Havens

Jan 23 2010, 8:44pm

Post #33 of 59 (740 views)
That's the Arkenstone? It looks like a mirrored ball./ [In reply to] Can't Post


"'Avatar' asks us to see that everything is connected, all human beings to each other, and us to the earth." -- James Cameron

"Everyone please take extra care not to touch any live wires until this hazardous condition has been corrected." -- L. Ron Halfelven


Jan 24 2010, 12:50am

Post #34 of 59 (713 views)
* mods up* [In reply to] Can't Post

I always look forward to your postings. They often make me laugh out loud.

Mark Sommer

Jan 24 2010, 1:38am

Post #35 of 59 (731 views)
*Sigh* [In reply to] Can't Post

I guess I've been out of the loop for a short while. This must have broken just after I did my last "Hobbit" News Search on the internet.
This is not getting me too excited/upset at this point. How many times have we seen this type of report, and then saw a retraction soon after?
However, this was reported by Variety, and they are usually a pretty reliable source. But...
1. The statement is very vague. I would think if the writer knew about the date controversy, he would have nailed this to the page better than he did if this was anywhere close to being firm information. My guess is the writer hasn't really got a clue, like most of the Entertainment writers out there. They do not follow The Hobbit films as closely as the vast majority of us on this Forum do.
2. The writer does not tell us when Horn made this statement, or exactly what he said. It could be something he said a couple days, or a couple months ago, and the writer may have misunderstood what was being conveyed. Also, was this a conversation the writer had directly with Horn, or was there a third-party source?
3. 2012 could be a typo. :-)
I'm certainly not going to jump on the bandwagon and report 2012 as the probable date as many sites are doing!

Mark Sommer
Hollywood Jesus The Hobbit Whole
Check out my review of the new Fan Film, Born of Hope. Born of Hope is first-rate film and great story

(This post was edited by Mark Sommer on Jan 24 2010, 1:41am)


Jan 24 2010, 1:41am

Post #36 of 59 (739 views)
Grrrrrrrr..... [In reply to] Can't Post


TORn member formally known as ryan1976.

Kangi Ska

Jan 24 2010, 3:55am

Post #37 of 59 (695 views)
Never heard it said better. // [In reply to] Can't Post


Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Jan 24 2010, 3:55am)


Jan 24 2010, 9:07pm

Post #38 of 59 (638 views)
Harry Potter 1 and FOTR... [In reply to] Can't Post

...were released only a month apart, and both were spectacular box office successes. I don't see how this would be different, especially since Avatar 2 will probably use a lot of 3D screens that The Hobbit wouldn't need anyway.

The Shire

Jan 24 2010, 9:16pm

Post #39 of 59 (651 views)
Hobbit 3D [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't see how the Hobbit would be greenlit without being 3D . We're going to get a LOTR 3D re-release, right? I would expect in 2-3 years time that there would be many more 3D screens available. That is a good point about the Harry Potter though.

Kangi Ska

Jan 24 2010, 9:20pm

Post #40 of 59 (644 views)
Why? [In reply to] Can't Post

 It is still just a fad. Maybe when they get it so you do not need glasses. The Hobbit does not need it.

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.

The Shire

Jan 24 2010, 11:39pm

Post #41 of 59 (685 views)
If we have to wait til' 2012....this is SAD news, Mates. [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, mates, I'm going to be a bit passionate about this.

The Hobbit is my favourite Tolkien book and come on! 2012 it's too much time from now! It's like two years...The Hobbit is two parts and a December, 2011 release will be the ending of a great and promising year (the Spielberg take on Motion Capture with Tintin, produced by Jackson, The Del Toro take on...also produced by Jackson).

This 2010 looks a bit tired in blockbuster matters: Iron Man 2 will be a funny ride, but not a great directed one (Favreau is remarkably mediocre in the action sequences and it's quite frustrating), Tim Burton career is less interesting and more repetitive in ideas and Alice in Wonderland couldn't look worse (a good vs. evil and 'save wonderland story' using Carroll? Come On!), Clash of the Titans could be great and spectacular (and the oracles are very del toro-esque, so this looks like an expensive exploit ).

The Harry Potter franchise has lost the opportunity of adding another great director to the franchise (the great director was Alfonso Cuarón and the third instalmment is the best, by far), and Yates is fine and midly diverting and has some meorable visual moments, but its lack of personality is a bit tiring. In terms of narrative, they never get entirely satisfying. The most strong movie could be Inception, followed by The last Airbender and Scott Pilgrim, both by two great and personal voices.

2011 looks promising: opening with Cabin in the Woods, with two Marvel Movies (Branagh's Thor looks like real fun and the First Avenger) and closing it with Hobbit and Tintin it will be orgasmic. This time, I'll prefer not waiting that much.

About the bet stuff:

I'm also sure that The Hobbit isn't a risky inversion but at 2011 will be ten years after the first LoTR movie or eleven if it's confirmed this devastating news. The movies have changed a lot since then and the campaign of LoTR was a success because it announced not a movie properly, but a three year event. This may be the reason of Mr. Emmerich to think this as a bet. It's also true that the LoTR movies have made more money every sequel (from 800 milions of the first one to the -american- bilion of the third) but this time you have to think this as a prequel without the battle to destroy the ring as a center. The Star Wars prequels were less succesful than the first prequel.

The mainstream audience is still a mistery for me. I read the Wall Street Journal, the Variety and the box office reports from every online journal. But there's no possible theory.

James Cameron has made the two most grossing films (all-time worldwide) with Titanic and Avatar and they aren't franchise and they're very different. One is the last example of classic cinema and the other is a thrilling ride to a new level of cinematic language. Avatar is a child-teen fun, packed with action, but it's important because this new mutant image that makes real the dreams.

We will be ten years after the first LoTR. ¿How the people will react? The 3D movies are trendy nowadays, but this will be a trend till 2011 and make the blockbusters more attractive? I don't know, it isn't clear.

(This post was edited by IreneoFunes on Jan 24 2010, 11:41pm)


Jan 25 2010, 1:54am

Post #42 of 59 (630 views)
I trust Peter's judgement, [In reply to] Can't Post

and he keeps saying they're on track for a late 2011 release. I'll stick with his projection since he, better than anyone, knows what putting these films together entails. :)

sample sample

"There is more in you of good than you know, child of the kindly West."
~Hug like a hobbit!~

I really need these new films to take me back to, and not re-introduce me to, that magical world.

TORn's Observations Lists

Kangi Ska

Jan 25 2010, 2:08am

Post #43 of 59 (607 views)
He Is Behind the Wheel! // [In reply to] Can't Post


Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


Jan 25 2010, 2:10am

Post #44 of 59 (609 views)
3D isn't that important [In reply to] Can't Post

GDT has made it clear already that he has no interest in filming The Hobbit in 3D. Besides, this is the follow up to not one but three of the biggest blockbusters of all time. Any studio functioning studio would be mad to pass up on TH, even a 2D version.

As far as I know there are no concrete plans to release LOTR in 3D. None that have been made public, at least. Were you thinking of the coming Blu-ray release, perhaps?

Kangi Ska

Jan 25 2010, 2:15am

Post #45 of 59 (608 views)
No 3D Hobbit No 3D LotR [In reply to] Can't Post

And exactly how would 3D improve either?

Kangi Ska

At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.


Jan 25 2010, 2:24am

Post #46 of 59 (611 views)
I don't think it would [In reply to] Can't Post

3D can make people ooh and aah, but it does not, at this point, make movies look more real. If anything it makes movies less real because the 3D tricks jolt you out of the moment even as you ogle the cool technological trick.

2D films look plenty realistic, especially with good CGI. I don't think that movies are improved by looking like things on screen are going to hit you in the face.

The Shire

Jan 25 2010, 5:18am

Post #47 of 59 (615 views)
Smaug 3D [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems to me that 3D is fast becoming the expected norm for big event films. The projectors are in now in place, theaters have spent the money to upgrade, the stereoscopic cameras are available, people have shown that are willing to pay a premium for 3D.

The technology and clarity of the new 3D systems makes it much more plausible for accepted regular use than various attempts in the past. 3D may finally have caught up with color and sound as far as graduating beyond gimmick status. It's certainly not going away any time soon.

Silly 3D novelty effects like throwing stuff at the audience don't have to be used, any more than any other obnoxious editing, sound, or special effects/CGI trick that draws attention to itself and distracts from the film.

For the immediate time being, 3D is also a piracy deterrent.

WETA has been involved with at least one well known 3D film and I am sure will be working on others.

I can't imagine anyone putting up hundreds of millions of dollars in financing for a big fantasy film franchise right now without being seriously concerned as to whether 3D would be a public expectation by the time it was in theaters. Some conversations would be taking place on the subject.

I am sure the Hobbit films will be at the very least, as amazing and successful as the LOTR films. If GDT/PJ remained dead set against 3D, I am certain they have the clout to ultimately get their way. Who's going to tell them no and pass up on a pair of films that will likely gross two billion dollars?

After repeated experiences viewing film with the new style of 3D, I can't imagine why anyone would not want to use it, especially for a fantasy setting. Of course, I will be just as excited to see the Hobbit even if it is shot in black and white.


Jan 25 2010, 8:13am

Post #48 of 59 (586 views)
sure [In reply to] Can't Post

the hobbit may make more money as 3D, and then I talk about those viewers who comes to the cinema just to see flashy stuff , but its nothing (most of us) fans wants. TH is good enough in 2D.

Another interesting thing is this - how many would have watched Avatar if it wasnt in 3D? A lot less, for sure.

Kristin Thompson

Jan 25 2010, 9:42am

Post #49 of 59 (606 views)
No green light, but definite news [In reply to] Can't Post

No, unfortunately we don't have a greenlight yet and won't until the second script is approved and budgeted. Frustrating, but no studio would greenlight a film without knowing what it's committing to.

I've just posted an analysis of the Variety article on the "Frodo Franchise" blog. Unlike some commentators here, I tend to think Variety's story is probably accurate and based on up-to-date information. New Line probably arranged an interview with Variety in order to let out specific information that they wanted out. The main information is that New Line is doing very well since its absorption by Warner Bros. That's the bulk of the story, and of course it's good publicity for their 2010 slate of films. That's item number one as far as they're concerned.

Item two is to let out some Hobbit info. What that information is and might mean I discuss in the new entry. But I would give a word of caution those on this thread who assume that Peter is in complete control and that only what he says is true. He may be in complete, or at least extensive, control over the filmmaking process, i.e.,so far, pre-production. But he has a massive confidentiality clause in his contract. So does Guillermo and every other person even remotely involved in that production. They cannot tell us everything they know, not by a long way. Whatever they tell us is what they believe they are allowed to. Occasionally they say too much and are reined in. (Guillermo has several times implied that he has been told not to say as much as he had been in interviews and online.)

The last official announcement we had was that Part 1 comes out in 2011. Until a new official announcement comes out, that one stands. I will go out on a limb and say (I already have, actually) that we will see Part 1 in 2012. In the logic of Hollywood, that will only be true when it's official.

One final point. Toby Emmerich says The Hobbit is a big bet for the studio because that's the dramatic way to present this story in the news. He can't say, "Oh, yeah, we're guaranteed a hit, no problem." First, it's not dramatic. Second, on the off-chance that the film is not as big a success as LOTR, Emmerich looks like a fool. The studio has already committed to the film (short of a greenlight), so it has announced that it believes it will be a success. If it's a huge success, they were right; if it's not, they bravely took a risk. That's the way publicity stories are crafted. It's not an opinion, it's a slant on a story. (In Chapter 1 of my book I analyze the whole business about LOTR being considered a huge gamble by New Line. That, too, was a publicity image.)


Jan 25 2010, 11:42am

Post #50 of 59 (567 views)
sigh. [In reply to] Can't Post

in other words - another (almost) 3-year period of waiting.On the other hand , i'd rather see the movie beeing brilliant than mediocre if it takes them one year extra to do so. But to my eyes, 3 years are almost too much time.


edit: the official statement they have given was dec 2011. If they are going to push it back a whole year, why dont they at least inform us in a better way than this?

(This post was edited by macfalk on Jan 25 2010, 11:44am)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.