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:
Greenbooks guest post: in defense of a Hobbit trilogy

News from Bree
spymaster@theonering.net

Aug 3 2012, 9:33pm

Post #1 of 112 (6770 views)
Shortcut
Greenbooks guest post: in defense of a Hobbit trilogy Can't Post


The announcement of The Hobbit as trilogy has caused a lot of head-scratching about exactly how such a sequence might play out.

Here, guest writer Thomas Monteath goes into detail about how he feels the screenplay might work. These views are his own, and do not necessarily represent those of TheOneRing.net or its staff.

In defense of a Hobbit trilogy
A Greenbooks guest post by Thomas Monteath


Peter Jackson has just announced The Hobbit will become a trilogy, triggering trepidation and enthusiasm in equal measure across the internet.

The dissenting voices argue that the novel cannot support three films, and the narrative will thus be "stretched", not unlike proverbial "butter spread over too much bread".

I want to make the case here that a Hobbit trilogy should not only work, but could redefine what we think is possible in cinema, and do Tolkien's world (beyond just his individual books) true justice.

We first must realise that the plot and point of The Hobbit, set in its broader context and including Tolkien's appendices, is as the preliminaries to the War of the Ring - as recounted in Lord of the Rings (LotR). In other words, Sauron (referred to as the "Necromancer" in the Hobbit), and his minions the orcs/ goblins, are the real enemy.

Smaug the dragon is but a secondary villain, much as Saruman was the primary villain in the first two Lord of the Rings films but the secondary villain of the LotR trilogy.

Remember, according to the appendices, the whole point of Gandalf taking an interest in Thorin's quest, was his worry that, with Smaug ensconced in the Lonely Mountain, the north was vulnerable to attack, and thus if the Shadow grew again out of Mirkwood, the forces of good would be outflanked from Mordor and the North. In light of this, The Hobbit breaks naturally into three distinct parts, each with its own narrative structure, story and character arcs, each of which can constitute a film without sacrificing anything, and without "stretching" the narrative.


Film One. The Hobbit -- An Unexpected Journey



The first film, An Unexpected Journey, will not only trace the formation of the Company of Dwarves (including Bilbo and Gandalf), and their whimsically eventful journey across Middle-earth, but also set the scene by unveiling the historical backdrop to not just the Quest, but the whole War of the Ring. Indeed, we know from the trailer that the first film will be set up as a 'flashback', with the plot device of old Bilbo writing his memoirs for Frodo at the time of the Birthday Party in the Fellowship of the Ring (FotR): 'I told you about my adventures, but I may not have told you all of it'.

This device allows the narrative of the proposed Hobbit trilogy to potentially include everything up to the time of the LotR trilogy, and even possibly to include events contemporaneous with the end of Return of the King (RotK), such as the Battle of Dale, as in the book while Bilbo begins writing his book in Hobbiton, he tells Gandalf he wants to retire to Rivendell "to finish my book".

The plot of The Hobbit inevitably requires including a number of extended "flashback" sequences that would naturally occur in the first part. For example, when the dwarves are at Bag End near the beginning of the Hobbit, the narrative will require flashbacks of:
  • Gandalf visiting Dol Guldur and finding Thrain, in order to explain how he came upon the key and map.
  • The halcyon days of the Kingdom of Erebor and Dale, to demonstrate what motivates the dwarves to go on the Quest, and what is at stake.
  • Smaug's subsequent attack on the Lonely Mountain, which brought the Kingdom to an end and sent Thorin into exile, to show what dangers and obstacles lie ahead, if they even get to the mountain.


But there will be other flashbacks necessary in the first film, and these will not only extend it beyond the main scene-for-scene narrative of the book, but give dramatic weight and historical depth to the whole Hobbit trilogy, and set up subsequent tensions and story arcs throughout the three films. For instance, to build up the encounter with the Orcs/Goblins under the Misty Mountains, and of course to establish the significance of the Battle of the Five Armies, the antagonistic dwarf-goblin history will also have to be recounted in "flashback".

The logical place for this to happen is in Rivendell, following the encounter with the trolls. Elrond will undoubtedly enlighten the Company on the origin of the swords they found in the trolls' hoard. In the book, he explains that they are famous blades that were used against the goblins in previous centuries. Probably using a wide eyed, questioning Bilbo as a device, there will here be historical flashbacks that reveal the depths of the hatred between the Dwarves and the Goblins, culminating in the ancient battle of Azanulbizar, and the role of Azog the Goblin in triggering that war.

This historical "flashback" exposition would be perfectly timed to happen in Rivendell, as it ratchets up the dramatic tension as the Company begin their ascent into passes of the Misty Mountains, which results, of course, in their capture by Goblins.
Along with everything else that happens, there is thus - when one takes the necessary flashbacks into account - a lot of plot to get through in order to get to the barrel sequence, which appears to be the end of the first film, judging by the recently released panoramic poster.


To get from Hobbiton to the barrel sequence (although there is an argument to be made that a better break point is the Company's internment by the Wood-elves, leaving something of a cliff-hanger, not to mention that the break between films would then allow a sense of Bilbo having spent some time familiarising himself with the Wood-elves palace and locating the Dwarves' cells, setting up their escape at the beginning of the second film) is a lot of plot if one simply follows the book: trolls; Rivendell; the mountain pass; Goblin Town; riddles in the dark; wargs; eagles; Beorn; Mirkwood; spiders; wood-elves.

Bear in mind the first movie will also have to account for Gandalf's arc once he breaks from the Company at the eaves of Mirkwood. As this happens quite late in the film, he will likely only get so far as meeting with Radagast to the south, travel with him to spy on Dol Guldur, and/ or meet with the White Council. Gandalf's progress in the first film will probably end with him convincing the Council to assault Dol Guldur, but before the assault actually begins.

Thus the first film being titled "An Unexpected Journey": Thorin as an exile trying to band together a disparate group of dwarves on a quest; Gandalf realising what is at stake and convincing the Council of the need for action; and the dramatic heart will be of Bilbo's journey from Bag End to burglar, and his struggle to gain the respect of the dwarves and to "find his courage".


Film Two. The Hobbit -- The Desolation of Smaug




The second film, likely to now be retitled The Desolation of Smaug, could therefore begin with an escape sequence from the Wood-elves via Barrels, and the Dwarves' arrival in Lake-town. This will involve the introduction of an entirely new culture, much like Rohan in The Two Towers (TTT), and like Rohan, controlled by a corrupted ruler (Theoden was under a spell; the Master of Lake-town is simply corrupt), with a young protagonist who is introduced as an outcast and is rehabilitated and becomes a hero by the end of the film (Eomer in TTT; Bard here).

Although the film will then follow the Dwarves on their mission to the mountain via the ruins of Dale - the finding of the door; Bilbo's interactions with Smaug; the dragon's scorching of the mountain - the culmination will be the attack on Lake-town and Bard's killing of the Dragon. Thus the main protagonist - apart from Bilbo of course - will be Bard, and the main dramatic location will be Lake-town, as the film will trace its character at the start - its corruption, and small minded skepticism of the dragon's existence - to its symbolic cleansing by fire at the end, which represents the vindication of Bard, and his elevation in the eyes of the men of Esgaroth.


The second film will also have to include two other story arcs: that of the Dwarves obviously culminates with them emerging from the secret passage into the now empty Kingdom of Erebor, realising that the Dragon is dead, and reclaiming the mountain. It will look like the end of the story, but no doubt this arc will be tempered with signs of foreboding, suggesting that their claim to the mountain may be short lived.

The other story arc is that of Gandalf.

It is likely that the generally slow-paced scenes for the dwarves and Bilbo in the second film - as they recuperate in Lake-town and plot their advance on the mountain; as they search for the door; and even as Bilbo interacts with Smaug - will be intercut with scenes of the White Council's assault on Dol Guldur in the South of Mirkwood. It seems plausible that the entire attack and the driving out of Sauron will take place in this second film. By the time this action heavy sequence is being resolved, the Lonely Mountain arc will be picking up speed, with Smaug searching the mountainside and then attacking Lake-town.


Thus there is ample scope for a second film that ends with the destruction of the dragon, but that is still rich in narrative and character arcs: Thorin, an arrogant exile in the first film, is a slightly humbled in the second, less forceful but ultimately a better leader for it; Bilbo has blossomed, the de facto leader of the Company; Gandalf has acted on his concerns in the first film, and dealt with the shadow in Mirkwood.

But the film is largely framed by the character arc of Bard for the purposes of the film as a stand alone story, as essentially the characters of Thorin, Bilbo and Gandalf are at the uncontentious apex of their arcs, and none have reached their denouement, which will come in the third film. In short, beginning the film with the arrival in Lake-town and ending it with the destruction of Smaug does not make for a thin film. It could largely stand alone, as Lake-town's "trial by fire" for it's sins - corruption and indifference - will carry it dramatically, despite it being the difficult middle act of a trilogy.


Film Three. The Hobbit -- There And Back Again



The third film, likely to be given the original title for the second film, There and Back Again, could then begin with the suggestion that some weeks have passed.

This allows for four things that otherwise would be hard to show dramatically.
  • The consolidation of Bard's authority over the refugees of Lake-town.
  • The arrival of the elves, who help Lake-town rebuild, and form an alliance with the men of Esgaroth.
  • The journey of Gandalf north from Dol Guldur to meet with the Elves and men of Esgaroth at the foot of the mountain.
  • The Company of Dwarves settling themselves into the empty halls of Erebor, and the implication that Thorin's character has begun to change, with traces of avarice, a sense of entitlement (and concomitant lack of empathy for the men of Esgaroth despite their sacrifice) and a delusional belief in the strength of the dwarves' bargaining position now that they are ensconced in their ancestral halls.


The third film will therefore centre on the two main characters, Thorin and Bilbo, reaching their denouement, but via a conflict with each other. Whereas the first film centred on Thorin's doubt of Bilbo, and the second on Bilbo's triumph over such doubt, this third could trace how that faith in Bilbo is almost lost through Thorin's pride before the fall, and its ultimate restoration as Thorin lies on his deathbed, an act that rehabilitates Bilbo and redeems Thorin.


Gandalf will also have the resolution of his key interest in the Company's quest, which is the retaking of the Mountain, and the crushing of the Goblin armies. This is because, as noted, Gandalf's interest in bringing the Lonely Mountain back under the control of the Dwarves was so that Middle Earth could not be flanked from the North when it came to the final showdown with Sauron.

This third film could therefore itself have three acts. First, there is the "build up", the "drumbeats of war": political machinations, failed diplomacy, the massing of the elves and men at the foot of the mountain, the drama of Bilbo's betrayal, the coming of the dwarves of the Iron Hills.

There is then the skirmish between dwarves and the men and elves. But there may also be signs of the Goblins amassing. Indeed, Benedict Cumberbatch, who will voice the Necromancer (i.e. Sauron), has been quoted as saying he has a role to play at the "Five Legions War", which sounds awfully like the Battle of the Five Armies, which suggests that Jackson has made a change where Sauron, in perhaps a diminished form, leads (or at least directs) the goblin/orc/warg armies into battle, and perhaps some attention will be given to how Sauron manages to amass the army for the assault on the Lonely Mountain.


The second act is the battle itself, which - as a visual spectacle - will likely dwarf (pardon the pun) the Battle of Pelennor from RotK, for the simple reason of geography: Pelennor was a flat plain, whereas the Battle of the Five Armies occurs in three dimensions, on the sides of a mighty mountain, and thus the fighting will occur over three dimensions, thereby being something utterly different from any other battle in the LotR trilogy.

This battle could easily last for easily an hour or more on screen, with so many armies involved, so much ebb and flow: arrival of the Goblins and wargs; the Company bursting from the gates in full armour; Goblins scaling the mountainside to gain the advantage; Beorn's arrival and his smashing of the Great Goblin; Fili and Kili's last stand; the arrival of the eagles. And of course, each of the main Dwarf characters will need to have their moment of battle.

The third act is the aftermath, which threatens to be a case of "many endings", as in Return of the King: Bilbo discovered on the field of battle; Thorin's death scene; farewells; Bilbo travelling back via Lake-town (with the skeleton of Smaug lying on the lake-bed, easily the most evocative image in the book); the return journey, via - briefly - the Woodelves; Beorn's house; Rivendell; and finally Hobbiton.


Material from the Lord of the Rings appendices


But it is quite likely here that a whole other section could be added, although it is quite possible this may be excised from the cinematic cut. Remember that Old Bilbo appears to be narrating the films, or at least, the Hobbit story is presented as a reflection by Old Bilbo while writing his book in a scene contemporaneous with the beginning of FotR.

As he goes on to finish the book in Rivendell, it is therefore possible to write into the story some events that pertain to events in the LotR trilogy, and in doing so "link up" the two trilogies more explicitly. Thus The Hobbit trilogy could well end with Bilbo closing his book, and handing it to Frodo in Rivendell, on Frodo's journey back to Hobbiton following the trip to Mount Doom in RotK.





In light of this device, the events that could thus be shown include:
  • Balin, a member of the Company, decades later travelling to Moria (introduced in the Hobbit as abandoned since the Battle of Azanulbizar) to start a new colony. In FotR, the fellowship of course discover Balin's tomb, where they fight the cave troll;
  • Gollum leaving the misty mountains after some years, and making his way to Mordor, where he is captured by Sauron and tortured. This ultimately leads to the Dark Riders seeking the Shire, as shown in FotR.
  • Given that it is possible that Old Bilbo could be concluding his narration in Rivendell, and after the ring has been cast into Mount Doom, Gollum could also be shown, following his escape from/ release by Sauron, trying to find a way across the Misty Mountains to find the Ring, and coming across Balin's company as they attempt to reenter and re-colonise Moria. To cleverly link up narratives, Gollum might even be presented as a witness to the death of Balin in Dimrill Dale, an act that precipitates the destruction of the colony by the orcs who invade Moria. This would do two things: explain how Balin's colony in Moria was laid waste and Balin given his tomb; explain how Gollum came to be in Moria, which is where he first appears in FotR tracking the fellowship. (In the book, Gollum begins tracking the fellowship in Moria as the gates by which they enter do not open from the inside, and thus that is as far as he could go when he crossed through Moria in search of "Baggins". He had been skulking there, alone in the dark of the eastern end of Moria, for some unspecified time by the time Gandalf opened the doors by saying the elvish for "friend").
  • A narration of the 'war in the north' - the battle of Dale, which Tolkien mentions in the appendices. This battle happened in the north at the same time as the Battle of Pelennor in RotK. Giving details of this battle is relevant to the story, as of course Gandalf took an interest in Thorin's quest in the first place because he wanted to buttress the North against future attack. Showing the Battle of Dale would demonstrate how Gandalf's quest was not in vain, and also provide a link to the trilogy. It is also possible to show this, as Old Bilbo is narrating The Hobbit, and thus he could be writing the battle of Dale, and narrating it, as a sort of coda, to ensure that the conclusion of The Hobbit trilogy does not just dovetail with the beginning of the FotR, but also aligns with the conclusion of RotK. It is worth noting that Peter Jackson has said there "is a lot of stuff in the appendices they want to put in the films", but if one looks at the appendices, the most filmable bits are the historical battle of Azanulbizar and the RotK-era Battle of Dale.


By this reckoning, which I believe to be consistent with everything we know about these films, the director, the scriptwriting team and Tolkien's source material itself, Jackson's proposal of a Hobbit trilogy makes perfect sense, but only when we see it as part of a broader project to do Tolkien's world more justice.

In light of them trying to do Tolkien's world more justice, I also suspect the filmmakers might well take the opportunity to film some scenes that use sets and actors available during the filming of the Hobbit that can be integrated into a "super extended edition" of FotR in the future.

These include:
  • Gollum's tracking and interrogation by Gandalf, including his internment with the Wood-elves (For practical reasons, Aragorn's role in his capture could be left out entirely without affecting the narrative, although his inclusion - perhaps just as a cameo - would no doubt please Tolkien aficionados). This would be possible due to the availability of the Wood-elves set. This flashback could be integrated with great success into the scene in FotR where Gandalf briefs Frodo in the Shire about the nature of the ring and the gravity of the threat.

    This scene, as it currently exists in FotR, is easily the weakest link in that film, because given that it is the scene that sets Frodo on the quest, it was far too tightly edited, and his departure from Hobbiton thus seems almost hasty and impetuous. Indeed, the Gollum section from FotR prologue could be moved to this scene, and integrated into this flashback sequence. (it is also worth noting that, given the suggestion above about a flashback in the third Hobbit movie showing how Gollum came to be in Moria, in a future edition of FotR Jackson will likely also re-jig the CGI for Gollum in Moria, and perhaps even add a few glimpses of him tracking the fellowship from the shadows before Frodo notices him.

    Giving Gollum a slightly less distant introduction in FotR must be almost obligatory now the Hobbit has been filmed, as if the six films are watched sequentially he is an established character by FotR, and would have to be given a more nuanced treatment with his reintroduction in Moria). What is more, the rest of the prologue from FotR, which lays out the history of the ring, could be moved to its proper place as it is in the book, which is Gandalf's explanation at Bag End to Frodo about the nature of the One Ring, once he extracts it from the fire and sees the markings. It would be possible to extend and film new dialogue for the discussion between Frodo and Gandalf in Bagend as both actors have reprised their roles in the Hobbit, and the Bag End set is also available.

    This restructuring would allow FotR to pick up precisely from where The Hobbit trilogy left off, in that the Hobbit trilogy would both begin and end with "Old Bilbo" narrating while writing in his book before Bilbo's Birthday Party, and FotR would then begin - as it does straight after the prologue in the Extended Edition - with Bilbo in the same scene, narrating about Hobbits.
  • The backstory for Gimli, to be integrated into the overly-truncated Council of Elrond in FotR. The "flashback" they could film during the filming of The Hobbit would be of an agent of Mordor coming to the Lonely Mountain seeking 'Baggins', which causes Gimli to later be sent to Rivendell for the Council of Elrond to seek advice (Gimli is undoubtedly in the films, as Rhys Davies has virtually admitted as much and has been filmed on set "visiting" the cast). It is quite possible Jackson is taking advantage of availability of Rhys Davies, the Rivendell set and the new Erebor set to film this scene, the latter of which was not available when they filmed FotR.
  • The backstory for Legolas, to also be integrated into the Council of Elrond. This could include Gollum's escape from the Wood-elves. Filming such a flashback is possible due to the availability of Orlando Bloom and the Woodelves set during filming of the Hobbit, the set of course not having been available when they filmed FotR.


In filming a Hobbit trilogy, I would therefore argue that Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens are not just doing a 'prequel' in the traditional sense, with the end of the prequel narrative dovetailing with FotR. What they appear to be doing is fleshing out the whole LotR world, partly by giving crucial background in a dramatic fashion by doing the story in the Hobbit book, but also by fleshing out the wider world of LotR beyond the character arcs of the nine members of the fellowship, which was the key focus of the original trilogy.

In conclusion...


If this is what they are planning, it would be unprecedented in film: rendering a world through trilogies that are not just sequential so much as also complementary and parallel. These will be 3D films not just visually, but in terms of the narrative too: both trilogies are an angle on the same world. If you watch them both, each presented from the angle of different protagonists and story-lines, you end up in your head with a '3D' picture of a whole world. Which is what Tolkien created: a world that is almost real in its detail, layers, complexities, and wholeness.

I think this is what, in proposing a Hobbit trilogy, they are trying to achieve, and the device of Old Bilbo as narrator allows them to span the story from as far back as the battle of Azanulbizar to as far forward as the Battle of Dale.

The crucial point is to get away from thinking that the primary villain of the Hobbit is Smaug. He is the main antagonist in the second film, and the main focus for the Dwarves themselves in the context of the Quest throughout films one and two. But from the broader perspective of Gandalf, Bilbo and the broader sweep of Middle-earth, the main antagonist of the Hobbit trilogy is actually Sauron, who emerges - through the proxy of the Orc host at the Battle of the Five Armies - as the primary villain in film three, not to mention a feature of films one and two as well.

In other words, Smaug is to a Hobbit trilogy as Saruman was to the Lord of the Rings trilogy: the main antagonist of films one and two, but the secondary villain of the wider trilogy. Saruman in the LotR trilogy was a secondary villain who, through his own vanity and attendant schemes, could nevertheless scupper the hopes of the free peoples of Middle-earth; Smaug in The Hobbit trilogy is a secondary villain who, through his own greed and avarice, could also scupper the hopes of the free people of Middle-earth. In other words, the story structures of the LotR and this likely Hobbit trilogy are almost identical, with similar character arcs, similar story beats, and similar secondary antagonists (and the same primary antagonist).

The Hobbit is ultimately about "setting the board" for LotR, in which, to quote Gandalf himself, "the pieces are moving". The Hobbit begins the story arc of Hobbits and the Ring, and the six films together form the third act of Middle-earth, with acts one and two being first and second age - "ancient history and a long story" - and not subject to film beyond a few flashback sequences, largely confined to the FotR prologue.

In terms of the cinematic experience, The Hobbit trilogy is therefore likely to be funnier, more richly textured and adventurous, and with a little more time to develop characters than LotR. In short, and before you even take into account the better special effects, larger budget, greater creative freedom, 48fps and 3D, this trilogy looks like being significantly more entertaining and faithful than the previous trilogy. And how many Oscars did that win? Far from disparaging the idea of a Hobbit trilogy, we should be salivating at the prospect.

Thomas Monteath is a life-long Tolkien aficionado, who still believes - with apologies to the excellent Andy Serkis - that the finest Gollum was Peter Woodthorpe in the BBC's 1981 Radio adaptation. In real life he an academic in the UK, who can on occasion be found propping up the bar at the Eagle & Child.

He can be contacted at thomasmonteath@gmail.com. His views are his own, and do not necessarily represent those of TheOneRing.net or its staff.

(This post was edited by Silverlode on Aug 4 2012, 5:43am)


Maiarmike
Grey Havens


Aug 4 2012, 4:29am

Post #2 of 112 (3980 views)
Shortcut
Excellent write-up... [In reply to] Can't Post

...this is how I would expect PJ to frame his three films, with some possible differences in when things take place. After thinking through the idea of 3 films for a few days, it does seem to make more sense than 2 films. If you have 2 films, the 2nd film would have multiple build ups and climaxes, and could potentially tax viewers. Whereas if you have Smaug as the main villain for one solid film, then you alleviate that problem to a degree, and lead into a 3rd film buildup and climax of it's own. I don't think you want to shove Smaug, Dol Guldur, and the Battle of Five Armies, and everything that happens in between into one film.

"I warn you, if you bore me, I shall take my revenge"
--J.R.R. Tolkien


(This post was edited by Maiarmike on Aug 4 2012, 4:30am)


Buchanicus
Lorien


Aug 4 2012, 5:32am

Post #3 of 112 (3886 views)
Shortcut
EXCELLENT [In reply to] Can't Post

Well done and an extremely thought out "defense".

Although I will admit that i have some questions and concerns about what appeared to be a "late" decision to do 3 films, I have always defended the idea that there was PLENTY of material in The Hobbit and appendices to easily have 2 films and also enough for a third. A LOT happens...and if the evidence that is in the book isn't enough to illustrate that, then this argument certainly does.

TORn member formally known as ryan1976.

(This post was edited by Buchanicus on Aug 4 2012, 5:32am)


Istaris'staffs
Rivendell


Aug 4 2012, 5:58am

Post #4 of 112 (3934 views)
Shortcut
Excellent Article! [In reply to] Can't Post

Incredibly well thought out and detailed--this does make me "salivate" for three "Hobbit" movies. Everything sounds wonderful that you said except for one thing:
To me, I would not want a physical representation of Sauron at the Battle of the Five Armies. Since we never really had that in the Lord of the Rings, that would seem odd to me and distracting to viewers. Now at Dol Gulder, yes, I could see that, but at the final battle, no.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 8:21am

Post #5 of 112 (3827 views)
Shortcut
The is great! [In reply to] Can't Post

Summed it up very nicely, and almost exactly what I think is going to happen! Smile


TheBeerBaron
Rivendell

Aug 4 2012, 9:03am

Post #6 of 112 (3810 views)
Shortcut
Wow! [In reply to] Can't Post

Fantastic article! Thank you for all of your time.

I only hope that you're wrong about Sauron turning up at bofa, that would be strange. Hopefully BC is just wrong, or it at least won't make it to the final cut.

Do you really think that PJ will re-release lotr with these changes? They might even re-release them (without horrible retroactive 3D please) in cinemas starting Xmas 2014 or 2015. That would be on their 14th anniversaries -but people might accuse him of doing a Lucas, eventhough I personally think that the changes would be very tastefully done.

I'm currently re-reading lotr for the first time in almost twenty years (at Cirith Ungol) and so far the only change that PJ made that I really disagree with was Faramir's and Frodo's character; a lot of the other changes I think we're for the better.


guitarzankansasfan
Lorien


Aug 4 2012, 9:48am

Post #7 of 112 (3813 views)
Shortcut
Jackson should hire this guy [In reply to] Can't Post

I think Peter Jackson should hire Mr. Monteath as a consultant to help with the edits and rewrites. Or at least he needs to read this article just in case there's something in there that could help him do this trilogy better.


TheBeerBaron
Rivendell

Aug 4 2012, 10:27am

Post #8 of 112 (3779 views)
Shortcut
Where can I find more [In reply to] Can't Post

Articles written by this guy?

I would just email him, but I figured others might be interested as well.


kiwifan
Rohan

Aug 4 2012, 11:23am

Post #9 of 112 (3759 views)
Shortcut
Congratulations! This is by far the best post/article I've ever read on TORn [In reply to] Can't Post

Very well-reasoned, extremely well-written (almost flawless prose and very few mistakes), beautifully structured and illustrated, and altogether the first collection of arguments to convince me that three Hobbit films might be a good thing after all. Like guitarzankansasfan, I'd rather not have Sauron in whatever shape or guise at the Battle of Five Armies, but apart from that, I'd second everything the author has suggested, and hope PJ, Fran and Philippa will read this, too!

'Goodness gracious, you really are a messie!' 'Oh no, I'm not, these are all just mathoms...'


Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 4 2012, 12:53pm

Post #10 of 112 (3823 views)
Shortcut
I have to disagree... [In reply to] Can't Post

...about the claim that PJ will "re-jig" the FOTR to fit in with The Hobbit trilogy. PJ has stated several times that he's unlikely to do "a Lucas" (to coin a phrase) and tinker with the films, adding new effects or scenes in Special Editions etc. This method (with the awful Star Wars Special Editions in particular, retrofitted to join up with the inferior prequels) has already been shown to be a bad idea, messing with classic films never works and the LOTR films should be left well alone and shouldn't be altered in any way to fit in with the new trilogy.

The clever thing is to make the new trilogy fit in with the LOTR. This is where I think the author is dead wrong here. The rest of the article is fine.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


DesiringDragons
Lorien


Aug 4 2012, 1:04pm

Post #11 of 112 (3738 views)
Shortcut
This is amazing. [In reply to] Can't Post

For the first time, I am actually no-holds-barred (well, a lot fewer holds barred) excited about the prospect of a trilogy.

(With the caveat that I'd still prefer not to see the Fall of Moria onscreen.)

But just about everything else - wow, yes, this makes a lot of sense and sounds fantastic.


Hanzkaz
Rohan

Aug 4 2012, 1:06pm

Post #12 of 112 (3813 views)
Shortcut
If they include the events of the War in the North - [In reply to] Can't Post

- this could end up becoming a 'Hobbit Quartet'.


The fourth film could begin with Bilbo receiving the bad news about Balin while in Rivendell, and then deciding to journey to Erebor to pay his respects to his old friend's kin.

And that would place the now-legendary Hobbit right in the middle of the Battle of Dale.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 1:09pm

Post #13 of 112 (3755 views)
Shortcut
No ... just no ... ;-) [In reply to] Can't Post

Bilbo never visited Erebor again. By the time Frodo (and the others Hobbits) reach Rivendell in The Fellowship of the Ring, Bilbo has (phsyically, and mentally) aged.

In terms of film canon, it would be Old Bilbo. At least M.Freeman as young Bilbo is semi-believable.


(This post was edited by DanielLB on Aug 4 2012, 1:11pm)


Ruxendil_Thoorg
Tol Eressea


Aug 4 2012, 1:47pm

Post #14 of 112 (3709 views)
Shortcut
Bravo! I'm sold! Let me count the ways. [In reply to] Can't Post

I was already on board with the 3 movie announcement, but now my confidence is reinforced. This upcoming trilogy has potential I had not considered until reading the OP.

Ideas from the OP that really caught my eye in a good way:

--Gollum ending up in Moria before finding, and beginning to follow, the Fellowship during FOTR.

--The use of the trilogy not only of a prequel to the LOTR films but also to run parallel and to expand on the happenings during the time of LOTR. The author is right--the upcoming trilogy has the potential of not only telling the story of TH but also enhancing LOTR and in doing so might even surpass LOTR.

--The observation that BoFAs will take place along the slopes of Erebor, making it multi-dimensional compared to Pelennor Fields...I was already looking forward to seeing that spectacle, but now even more so!

--The parallel between TTT and TH:TDOS in plot structure, with Bard v. Smaug as the arc that would make not only a 2nd installment of 3 but also a film that could stand on its own.

--The idea of intercutting between the slower scenes of Bilbo and the Dwarves in Erebor with the happenings of the White Council v. Dol Goldur during TH:TDOS is smart, and probably what PJ & Co would have thought of doing.

--The inspired idea of introducing the Azanulbizar and other Dwarf v. Goblin conflict-related flashback during Rivendell in TH:AUJ, just before the Misty Mountains ambush and after the troll sequence. Brilliant. I'm convinced that this is already the way AUJ has been scripted. I hadn't thought of that so specifically before.

--The idea of placing a possible Aragorn cameo for the interrogation of Gollum in Mirkwood--while emphasizing that such cameo wouldn't be necessary for such scene, in case it didn't work out in RL--is clever. I would imagine such a cameo would be doable--it's just a cameo-- and very exciting for fans.

--Of course OP is right that Sauron is the real villain, although the type of real villain that is not revealed until later. Smaug is of course a secondary like Saruman was in LOTR.

Outstanding post, thanks!

A bag is like a hole that you can carry with you.

http://newboards.theonering.net/...forum_view_expanded;


GoodGuyA
Lorien

Aug 4 2012, 2:03pm

Post #15 of 112 (3705 views)
Shortcut
Um.... What? [In reply to] Can't Post

There's more than a few pieces of this which don't particularly make sense, but I have to pull out this quote of the bunch:

The backstory for Gimli, to be integrated into the overly-truncated Council of Elrond in FotR. The "flashback" they could film during the filming of The Hobbit would be of an agent of Mordor coming to the Lonely Mountain seeking 'Baggins', which causes Gimli to later be sent to Rivendell for the Council of Elrond to seek advice (Gimli is undoubtedly in the films, as Rhys Davies has virtually admitted as much and has been filmed on set "visiting" the cast). It is quite possible Jackson is taking advantage of availability of Rhys Davies, the Rivendell set and the new Erebor set to film this scene, the latter of which was not available when they filmed FotR.

Prior to actually going to New Zealand, JRD specifically said at a convention that he didn't think he could take the role of Gimli again. He's aged a lot and after his unmitigated torture at the hands of the prosthetics on his face I doubt he would be willing to jump into that again. Also recall how we actually saw him, and he was just saying hi. Who wouldn't want to go to NZ again, just for a visit? Besides, putting this stuff during the Council actually completely overwrites Jackson's goal with The Council in the first place: Keeping it short and dramatic. This stuff might be useful before those scenes, like Boromir and Aragorn's confrontation, but The Council of Elrond was designed to minimize exposition. Some people think it's still overly long, but reading through that section in the book again makes me realize that it was probably the worst chapter in FotR (aside from Bombadil).


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 2:04pm

Post #16 of 112 (3644 views)
Shortcut
I hope it convinces others as well [In reply to] Can't Post

I really like the sound of the structure. Even excluding the pieces that would join the two trilogies together, I think these are going to be some exciting films!


Escapist
Gondor

Aug 4 2012, 2:08pm

Post #17 of 112 (3701 views)
Shortcut
I agree that there is enough for 4 movies. [In reply to] Can't Post

I think it is a question of which appendix stories dovetail with the Hobbit narrative in a way that can naturally flow with the story (and a clever use of Rivendell could mean "all of the above excluding events happening after the visit in Rivendell").

Show or do not show, there is no tell.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 2:09pm

Post #18 of 112 (3671 views)
Shortcut
See this thread [In reply to] Can't Post

http://newboards.theonering.net/...orum.cgi?post=461487


GoodGuyA
Lorien

Aug 4 2012, 2:11pm

Post #19 of 112 (3651 views)
Shortcut
I still doubt it's Gimli. Love his voice though! [In reply to] Can't Post

 


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 2:12pm

Post #20 of 112 (3627 views)
Shortcut
Whether it is a physical role or just a voice cameo [In reply to] Can't Post

This seems pretty certain:


Quote

At first [Rhys-Davies] denied it, but after a little pressing he smiled really big, laughed, winked, and said that maybe it was possible. His smile... his laugh... I'm taking this as a pretty big indicator that he will be involved in some small way.




Escapist
Gondor

Aug 4 2012, 2:13pm

Post #21 of 112 (3680 views)
Shortcut
Sorry - this article was so exciting [In reply to] Can't Post

that I forgot the rest of what I meant to say!

Assuming that the appendix material that doesn't fit into the narrative of the Hobbit smoothly is to be made as part fo the movie, it is tempting to add it to a third and shorten it all up - but I think this would be too much cramming.

It seems like a fourth movie could be made but it might be something like The Hobbit bridge / extended / aftermath.
Perhaps an extended edition The Hobbit in this case would be better designed as a separate movie following the events after the book with the theatrical editions including more of the added appendices instead of having those in an extended edition.

Show or do not show, there is no tell.


Escapist
Gondor

Aug 4 2012, 2:20pm

Post #22 of 112 (3648 views)
Shortcut
As a matter of preference, [In reply to] Can't Post

I would prefer to see more of the trials through Mirkwood emphasized in a bit of movie with a horror-thriller twist more so than an emphasis on the political build up of the BO5A.

However, I do realize that the target audience is not just an audience of me. I would suspect that putting the emphasis on the political build up would likely broaden the appeal of the movie to a wider audience and make the BO5A more lined with tension.

But the trials through Mirkwood don't necessarily have no bearing on the BO5A. By showing a very dark scary Mirkwood, it does put the events with the wood elves in Mirkwood in a little different light - it makes more sense of why the elves may have been a bit jumpy and paranoid - interpreting the dwarven action as some kind of attack. This doesn't build the same kind of tension, though. It builds a different framework that makes the elven reactions more understandable. While I prefer this, I understand that I am probably not the majority in this and this is a mass-audience targetted movie. GoT flavor fans would probably rather see sharpened tensions and political build-ups than frameworks of understanding between people of differing perspectives. I've already accepted this for other reasons so I don't think this is something that will bother me any futher above my radar of general peeves that I have grown used to.

Show or do not show, there is no tell.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 2:29pm

Post #23 of 112 (3708 views)
Shortcut
I do believe that Warner Brothers only has the rights to make three movies. [In reply to] Can't Post

They might do such a thing in the future but I doubt Peter Jackson would direct.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 2:50pm

Post #24 of 112 (3682 views)
Shortcut
Not so [In reply to] Can't Post

The way the licence agreement that Zaentz entered into with Miramax, which then was quitclaimed to New Line, and hence to WB when they bought NL, is structured, every time one movie is made based on either LOTR or The Hobbit, an option to make a new movie automatically vests, so long as production is begun on it within a certain amount of time. In theory, they could make an indefinite number of films.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Eruonen
Valinor


Aug 4 2012, 2:57pm

Post #25 of 112 (3602 views)
Shortcut
Brilliant speculation! I hope the actual films are close to this as it [In reply to] Can't Post

really makes the case for a trilogy. There is quite a bit of material that I in my opinion will really create the set up for the LOTRs and will not take away from Bilbo's adventure. It is just more goodness to explore from the books and as this will only be done once, most likely, in pur lifetimes it makes sense to make it like this. Those story elements need to be told as they make the adventure more than a lark or burglary or vengeance act. Now, I am even more excited about the trilogy. Hopefully, the writer is channeling PJ.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 3:09pm

Post #26 of 112 (733 views)
Shortcut
Thanks VF [In reply to] Can't Post

I was relying upon a faulty memory. I am glad for the correction. I would stand by Peter not directing any more Middle-earth movies.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Aug 4 2012, 3:10pm)


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 3:11pm

Post #27 of 112 (725 views)
Shortcut
He said that about The Hobbit [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I was relying upon a faulty memory. I am glad for the correction. I would stand by Peter not directing any more Middle-earth movies.



And he's just bumped it up to 3 films! If he has another 10 years Middle-earthless, I reckon he would Wink


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 3:12pm

Post #28 of 112 (760 views)
Shortcut
I would be shocked if Jackson directed any further Middle-earth films after this [In reply to] Can't Post

I really don't think he will go there.

Whether the studios try to milk the "franchise" further I cannot say, other than "I hope not."

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 4 2012, 3:20pm

Post #29 of 112 (695 views)
Shortcut
Well done [In reply to] Can't Post

A great summary. Monteath got a little carried away with his 'extras' stuff, but his basic structure for the Hobbit trilogy clearly illustrates why three was always better than two.

Serious issues involving pacing and multiple climaxes for Film Two evaporate when viewed as a three act play.

(This post was edited by Black Breathalizer on Aug 4 2012, 3:20pm)


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 3:22pm

Post #30 of 112 (717 views)
Shortcut
I can't imagine more films after this either. [In reply to] Can't Post

Maybe that should be "I hope" as well, rather than "I can't imagine". Crazy


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 3:45pm

Post #31 of 112 (739 views)
Shortcut
In all of this I hope that "The Hobbit" does not get lost. [In reply to] Can't Post

All of this history and context could drown the story.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Aug 4 2012, 3:50pm

Post #32 of 112 (735 views)
Shortcut
Again well-written article, however [In reply to] Can't Post

If one has to do this much talking, explaining, defending, and constructing of contrivances, it's probably not a good idea. Tongue

Also, "wrapping up/setting up" multiple "storylines" does not a strong third movie make...no one save but the most die-hard fans are going to want to see Balin going to Moria, Aragorn hunting Gollum, ETC in a 90-min epilogue to TH. That's not a story. Additionally, large chucks of text on the internet do equal lengthy, engaging, or valuable spans of screentime - one has to keep in mind what's actually inherent cinematic. Unsure

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


JayFank
Registered User

Aug 4 2012, 4:06pm

Post #33 of 112 (739 views)
Shortcut
Seems perfect [In reply to] Can't Post

With the way that is mapped out, it is ideal for a trilogy. I was uncertain at first dragging it out, but how it is mapped out above makes perfect sense and seems to parallel very well with LOTR.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 4:14pm

Post #34 of 112 (688 views)
Shortcut
Since it's been described as a third Hobbit film [In reply to] Can't Post

I doubt we're going to get an extended epilogue showing the events after The Hobbit, and up until The Lord of the Rings. Perhaps in an EE, but I'm not sure if there is place for it in the film. Unless people have read or watched the books or films, the hunt for Gollum is going to seem a strange way to end the trilogy.

And from the other thread, you know I disagree with you about film 3. Tongue


Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Aug 4 2012, 4:18pm

Post #35 of 112 (687 views)
Shortcut
I wonder what other work of Tolkien's could successfully be adapted to film...? [In reply to] Can't Post

The Sil. is a history, not really a narrative...and not sure how you'd adapt most of it anyway. CoH, again, is a biography and not really a story - Turin, our chief protagonist, has no goal, no real antagonist (save Morgoth in a very round-about way), no central obstacle to overcome, no real growth as a character (from moody & doomed to more moody & doomed.)

The Luthien & Beren could make a fun film, and is benefited by Sauron being one of the chief antagonists (linking it to LotR and TH). Ditto the Fall of Gondolin, though it would seem rather unrelated to the rest of the series...we already saw how the Last Alliance turned out.

Several years back, someone posted an outline for a "Fall of Numenor" movie, which IMO, seemed like the most interesting option for a post-TH Tolkien movie:

http://folk.uib.no/hnohf/num-intro.htm

Also, someone on the board (Daniel?) recently mentioned Aragorn's travels in Rhun and Harad with his stumbling on some "wayward Tooks" and Blue Wizards...would enjoy seeing the movie as well, though it would be mostly fan-fiction! Wink

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 4:50pm

Post #36 of 112 (712 views)
Shortcut
The strength of the proposal [In reply to] Can't Post

is found in the likelihood that this is a true statement:


Quote
In other words, the story structures of the LotR and this likely Hobbit trilogy are almost identical, with similar character arcs, similar story beats, and similar secondary antagonists (and the same primary antagonist).


Back in one of the title speculation threads, I made a similar argument, though without any of the depth or flourish of this article (and my title speculations were off). In my opinion, this is the only rational (and only one I can get behind) for doing what PJ is doing to The Hobbit.

I find it interesting too the amount of emphasis Monteath places on the Frodo/old Bilbo (aka framing) device. I can't help but wonder if we won't be treated to occasional interjections from them:

At the encounter with the trolls:
Bilbo: The dwarves don't get eaten by the trolls at this time.
Frodo: What?
Frodo: William doesn't get them. I'm explaining to you because you look nervous.
Frodo: I wasn't nervous. Maybe I was a little bit "concerned" but that's not the same thing.

When Kili meets Tauriel:
Frodo: Is this a kissing book?
Bilbo: Wait, just wait.
Frodo: Well, when does it get good?
Bilbo: Keep your shirt on, and let me read.

When Bard downs Smaug:
Frodo: See didn't I tell you he'd never miss with that arrow.
Bilbo: Yes you're very smart. Shut up.


Just a note of thanks to "News from Bree" for bringing us two excellent articles this week. Given the amount of plot (as described by Monteath) for film one, I'm not ruling out the possibility, as MrCere argued, that film one might be ended well before the barrels. This would save Tauriel as well as Bard for film 2 (Eowyn and Eomer). Perhaps they intend for Tauriel and Bard -- a single father? talk about trying to appeal to demographics -- to develop a relationship, thereby introducing a love triangle (with Kili as a third) similar to the Arwen/Aragorn/Eowyn arc from LOTR?


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 4 2012, 4:54pm)


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 4:50pm

Post #37 of 112 (672 views)
Shortcut
Two Disagreements.... [In reply to] Can't Post

The discussion of Glamdring and Orcrist should have more to do with the history of the elves (Gondolin) than of the dwarves....


In Reply To
Elrond will undoubtedly enlighten the Company on the origin of the swords they found in the trolls' hoard. In the book, he explains that they are famous blades that were used against the goblins in previous centuries. Probably using a wide eyed, questioning Bilbo as a device, there will here be historical flashbacks that reveal the depths of the hatred between the Dwarves and the Goblins, culminating in the ancient battle of Azanulbizar, and the role of Azog the Goblin in triggering that war.


I disagree with increasing Sauron's involvement in the story. The true antagonist in Film 3 (which I prefer to be called Battle of Five Armies) are not the goblins/Necromancer etc., but the bickering between the free peoples and the faults of the individual characters, and their abilities to overcome their faults in the end. That should be the focus of Film 3. My preference is that "Sauron/Necromancer" not be involved in motivating or directing the orcs/goblins.


In Reply To
In other words, Sauron (referred to as the "Necromancer" in the Hobbit), and his minions the orcs/ goblins, are the real enemy....
which suggests that Jackson has made a change where Sauron, in perhaps a diminished form, leads (or at least directs) the goblin/orc/warg armies into battle, and perhaps some attention will be given to how Sauron manages to amass the army for the assault on the Lonely Mountain.



Hanzkaz
Rohan

Aug 4 2012, 4:51pm

Post #38 of 112 (688 views)
Shortcut
Going by the Appendices - [In reply to] Can't Post

- I think the strongest contenders to be turned into movies are the War in the North and Witch-King of Angmar storylines. Of course this does depend on what happens in the 'non-Hobbit' parts of the Hobbit Trilogy.


If they want to go into more 'unknown' territory, they can feature stories involving the Blue Wizards or Eldarion (new actors, and so on - and you may get to see Viggo playing an older version of Aragorn). I also suspect that they've got a whole bunch of unused flora and fauna designs that they can use for movies set in the more unexplored regions of Middle-Earth (the warmer and icier regions, the seas, etc).. We've seen wargs, spiders, oliphaunts and eagles. Imagine Middle-Earth big cats and reptiles.


Hanzkaz
Rohan

Aug 4 2012, 4:57pm

Post #39 of 112 (650 views)
Shortcut
I don't want Sauron to be at the Battle of Five Armies [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
My preference is that "Sauron/Necromancer" not be involved in motivating or directing the orcs/goblins.


- but I'd be OK with him sending a horde of Orcs and Goblins in the direction of the Lonely Mountain as payback for the White Council messing up (at least some of) his plans.


(This post was edited by Hanzkaz on Aug 4 2012, 5:03pm)


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 4 2012, 5:10pm

Post #40 of 112 (632 views)
Shortcut
Certain Amount Of Tme [In reply to] Can't Post

I had the same unanswered question both times you've mentioned this recently.

What is a "certain amount of time?"


Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Aug 4 2012, 5:11pm

Post #41 of 112 (632 views)
Shortcut
Would love to see a story dealing with the explored regions of ME... [In reply to] Can't Post

and the Blue Wizards! Probably would never happen, bit still, would be exciting to see...Wink

A War in the North movie could work if done well, IMO, in a way that isn't LotR-lite.

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 5:13pm

Post #42 of 112 (618 views)
Shortcut
I'd prefer that the killings of the Azog, the Great Goblin, and Smaug would be enough motivation for teh Goblins and Wargs.... [In reply to] Can't Post

If the Necromancer is shown to also influence them, I'd almost prefer that it be to do the opposite. i.e.- the Necromancer attempts to convince them to stay close and defend Dol Guldur, but there hatred of the Dwarves causes them to seek their own agenda and abandon the greater strategy for the short-term tactical gain, thus causing them to lose on both fronts.

I'd rather the Necromancer not be involved, but if he was I'd prefer to show the Orcs/Goblins acting independently and heeding their own counsel to their own folly.


Hanzkaz
Rohan

Aug 4 2012, 5:18pm

Post #43 of 112 (621 views)
Shortcut
I wouldn't be surprised if Azog and his crew - [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
If the Necromancer is shown to also influence them, I'd almost prefer that it be to do the opposite. i.e.- the Necromancer attempts to convince them to stay close and defend Dol Guldur, but there hatred of the Dwarves causes them to seek their own agenda


- were intended to be reinforcements for Dol Guldur, but didn't get there on time - and then they received news of Smaug's death...


DesiringDragons
Lorien


Aug 4 2012, 5:19pm

Post #44 of 112 (615 views)
Shortcut
"Killed by pirates is good" ;) [In reply to] Can't Post

Bravo, sir, and well-done! That was hilarious.

Perhaps the goblins can ride ROUSes instead of wargs. :)

*cough* More seriously, I can see your point about the possibility of Film 1 ending before Barrels Out of Bond. I hope it doesn't, because I think that's a perfect stopping-point, but there really is an awful lot of plot that comes before that, especially in this model. Although this model also seems to put the material from the appendices primarily in Films 2 and 3, which might make up the difference.


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 4 2012, 5:19pm

Post #45 of 112 (620 views)
Shortcut
A third film's impact on Film 2 [In reply to] Can't Post

By focusing the second film on Smaug (ala Saruman in TTT), it allows the film makers to build the movie around the Bilbo - Smaug dynamic. Similar to Film One's Riddles in the Dark verbal dual between Bilbo and Gollum, Film Two will give us (I predict) a much expanded verbal exchange between Smaug and Bilbo.

Keep in mind that one of the reasons Jackson gave for being attracted to casting Benedict Cumberbatch as the dragon is because of the amazing chemistry that already exists between Cumberbatch and Freeman because of their work together in the BBC series, Sherlock.


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 5:23pm

Post #46 of 112 (594 views)
Shortcut
I'd prefer a brief reference to the war in the north be included in the existing films than that a stand-alone film be made [In reply to] Can't Post

I would be content if the films incorporated very brief flash-forwards to those events.
Perhaps a scene of Gandalf with old Bilbo in Bag End paying homage to Thorin's vision by describing Dain and Brand's last stand in Dale (in lieu of the scene with Gandalf, Gimli and Pippin(?) in Minas Tirith as described in the appendices in Return of the King);
or Gandalf presciently anticipating those same events during Thorin's funeral.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 5:30pm

Post #47 of 112 (615 views)
Shortcut
Answer and perhaps another conspiracy theory [In reply to] Can't Post

The amount of time is usually about 10 years (I think that was the time limit for PJ to keep access to the agreement). In order to hang onto the film rights, within 10 years of the start of production (don't quote me) on the previous film there has to be at least evidence that an additional film is in the works, or maybe even completed. However I think a pre-vis or mock-up production video is counted as a finished film for these purposes.

Now the conspiracy theory:

If the above is true, this might have been the rational for hiring a director well before PJ was available to do the film himself (which I believe he always wanted to). I grant that this is a cynical point of view, but it has been in the back of my mind for some years now. My wife feels even more strongly than I do that this is why things transpired as they did.

Before ripping me a new one... consider that I framed the theory as a conspiracy myself.


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 5:34pm

Post #48 of 112 (572 views)
Shortcut
That was the same point I was making in a previous post.... [In reply to] Can't Post

That Film 1 should push us as deep into the core story as practicable, and leave most of the supplemental material/backstory for Films 2 and 3:
http://newboards.theonering.net/..._time;so=DESC#475841


DesiringDragons
Lorien


Aug 4 2012, 5:38pm

Post #49 of 112 (558 views)
Shortcut
Apologies for having missed that. [In reply to] Can't Post

There were a few days when the threads multiplied and expanded so quickly that I had trouble keeping up with everything.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 5:39pm

Post #50 of 112 (631 views)
Shortcut
Back when Benedict Cumberbatch [In reply to] Can't Post

first made the comment about having something to do with the Bof5A in January, I speculated one way in which that might happen without him being physically present. I'll quote it here for ease of discussion in this conversation, but if you want to read the previous conversation you'll find it here.


Quote
My current theory is that the Necromancer organizes the goblins and sends the bats to the Bof5A as a diversion for himself, not because of a connection with Smaug. We know that the rabble of goblins and wargs were stirred up by the passage of the dwarves through the mountain and it's not unbelievable that they would follow and attack them, but they would have had to either go around Mirkwood or pass through. If they pass through, they'd be most likely avoid Thranduil's territory and to pass near Dol Guldur, where the Necromancer and the White Council are facing off. It's possible that something that happens in the attack on Dol Guldur makes Gandalf aware that the goblin/warg army is headed to Dale. Perhaps the Necromancer organizes and uses the goblins, wargs and bats as part of his feint strategy: they go north while he sneaks south to Mordor? The other thing that bolsters this view is the bats - they're never mentioned prior to the battle, and we didn't encounter them in the Goblin-king's halls, so what brings them? My guess is that the Necromancer uses bats like Saruman later uses crebain. I wouldn't be surprised if we see some bat spies at a few earlier key points of the story, and then see them sent off to gather more goblins for the battle.

Whatever happens, it certainly sends Gandalf hurrying off to warn the dwarves, arriving just in time for the dwarf wall standoff and just ahead of the approaching goblin army. I wonder, I wonder....if Beorn goes with Gandalf to fight at Dol Guldur and then comes with, or simply gets word of the goblin army passing by and follows them to arrive in time for the battle?

With this scenario, we might easily get scenes of the Necromancer orchestrating battle plans without actually appearing to fight in the Bof5A himself. And I certainly hope we won't see that. So far, we've only heard that BC is doing voice acting and motion capture. I don't think we've heard anything about weapons training. Even if it were only motion-capture battling, if he fights himself he would have needed to be trained for a certain fighting style....at least, that's my hopeful interpretation of the situation.



Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 5:42pm

Post #51 of 112 (755 views)
Shortcut
Well if film 2 is to focus on Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

they will need a significant amount of padding. Regardless, I'm not convinced film one, as we have been lead to imagine it, will be changed at all.

But as Monteath and others here have noted, there's an awful lot of encounters to wade trough for one part of a trilogy, if balance is any consideration. Perhaps they should retitle it "A Series of Unfortunate Events."

ETA: I would like to add that I found your post to be of highest quality, though I haven't commented on it (yet).


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 4 2012, 5:44pm)


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 5:45pm

Post #52 of 112 (747 views)
Shortcut
Wasn't me (assuming you mean me, and not another Daniel). [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Also, someone on the board (Daniel?) recently mentioned Aragorn's travels in Rhun and Harad with his stumbling on some "wayward Tooks" and Blue Wizards...would enjoy seeing the movie as well, though it would be mostly fan-fiction! Wink



SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 5:47pm

Post #53 of 112 (752 views)
Shortcut
Ack! That's twice today I've spelled "rationale" as "rational" [In reply to] Can't Post

how irrational of me! Crazy


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 5:57pm

Post #54 of 112 (744 views)
Shortcut
I like that approach also... [In reply to] Can't Post

especially if the Dol Guldur Orcs under the Necromancer's command are only shown to be joining forces with the much greater Gundabad and Misty Mountain contingents already mobilizing under Bolg's command, - and that Bolg is not beholden to the Necromancer in any way during that time.


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 6:02pm

Post #55 of 112 (797 views)
Shortcut
A good question [In reply to] Can't Post

And one that is very difficult to answer. The licence agreement provides that the "basic commencement period" is 30 months, but there are so many different provisions and extensions and complications, that it is difficult and or impossible for me to give a clear answer to that question. Hence my repeated "with a certain amount of time."

Another interesting provision in the licence agreement is that it requires that the person holding the licence produce one version of one of the films made in the series of films with an odd green tint. It further requires that the licence refuse to discuss this issue, and indeed deny that the green tint even exists!
Angelic

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 6:06pm

Post #56 of 112 (760 views)
Shortcut
LOL. [In reply to] Can't Post

That's the best Conspiracy Theory I've heard yet. *mods up* Laugh

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 6:43pm

Post #57 of 112 (783 views)
Shortcut
Doesn't it strictly forbid the use of the character Glorfindel [In reply to] Can't Post

with a similar denial clause?

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 4 2012, 6:56pm

Post #58 of 112 (745 views)
Shortcut
LOL II [In reply to] Can't Post

I didn't see that coming, making it all the more funny! Superb. May I quote you? Wink


Voronwë_the_Faithful
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 6:59pm

Post #59 of 112 (725 views)
Shortcut
At your own risk [In reply to] Can't Post

Wink

Glad you found it amusing.

'But very bright were the stars upon the margin of the world, when at times the clouds about the West were drawn aside.'

The Hall of Fire


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 7:09pm

Post #60 of 112 (791 views)
Shortcut
It could, or it could enhance both trilogies into one continuous story. [In reply to] Can't Post

by placing the story in its larger context. There are those who are worried about The Hobbit being overshadowed, and when the third movie was announced, there were those who then became worried that the LOTR trilogy would be overshadowed by the adaptation of the much-shorter and "simpler" Hobbit. But I'm beginning to think that if they play their cards right both stories might get justice.

I think we have to take it as definite that the "original" stand-alone Hobbit (that it was written before and unconnected to LOTR) is not going to happen. Clearly we are getting the post-LOTR revised Riddles in the Dark version of The Hobbit. That being so, what is the larger context? Tolkien himself said that the Ring was the obvious connection point when he went to write another story about Hobbits. And the second tie-in is the disguised Sauron in Dol Guldur who pulls Gandalf away from the main story of The Hobbit. What we may be getting here is the Rise and Fall of Sauron in six parts.

Hobbit, Part 1: Gandalf is worried about the stories he's heard about the Necromancer. He goes to investigate, discovers his identity and meets Thrain. He cannot convince the White Council to move (as Saruman speaks against it). But he hears that Thorin is planning a raid on Smaug. At least he can inconvenience any plans Sauron might have had to make use of a dragon to subdue/intimidate the north. He provides Thorin with a map, a key, a Burglar, and his own escort as far as Mirkwood, where he goes off to confer with Radagast. The White Council meets. Movie motivation: Nazgul weaponry proves to the White Council that they need to make a move.

Hobbit, Part 2: Thorin and Co stir up trouble all along the way. They get captured by goblins, killing the Great Goblin in the process and dragging the whole population of Goblin Town out to war. Bilbo finds a strange Ring and meets a strange creature. Gandalf is puzzled by Bilbo's newfound invisibility trick but has a few more urgent things on his mind just then, such as what Sauron is up to. The dwarves the proceed to involve Beorn and annoy the Elves and Laketown on their way to annoy Smaug. Bilbo, using his new Ring then proceeds to use to stir up Smaug, getting him out of his mountain, and appropriates the Arkenstone. Smaug is killed and Laketown and the Elves are stirred up to war. Meanwhile, Gandalf persuades the White Council to annoy the Necromancer. They battle, but (my personal theory here) the Necromancer takes advantage of the goblins tracking Thorin and Co. as a diversion, using them to distract and draw off Gandalf while he makes his pre-planned escape.

Hobbit, Part 3: Smaug is dead, but everyone hates Thorin. Goblins from Goblin Town, Elves from Mirkwood, Men from Laketown and a probable northern contingent of goblins from Mt. Gundabad converge on the Lonely Mountain. Gandalf hurries to get there before things go up. Thorin sends for help from Dain of the Iron Hills. Bilbo hides the Arkenstone and uses it as leverage. The Battle of Five (or so) Armies is fought. Bilbo survives, Thorin does not. Bilbo returns to the Shire and tries to pick up his life again. Sauron begins rebuilding his domain in Mordor in secret...

The Lord of the Rings, Part 1: Bilbo is old, eccentric, and is writing a book of his adventures, but he's itching to travel again and feeling that something's not right. He plans a joke, a retirement and an adventure all rolled into one. He leaves his old life, including the Ring, to Frodo and heads off to Rivendell. Sauron captures Gollum, and dispatches the Nine to find Baggins. Gandalf discovers the truth about the Ring, the Nine, and about Saruman. He and Elrond decide the Ring cannot be hidden or lost again, but must be destroyed. Bilbo passes on his sword, his mail and his story to Frodo. The Fellowship is formed, and sets out. Gandalf falls, Gollum follows, and Boromir falls. The Fellowship breaks.

The Lord of the Rings, Part 2: The War of the Ring begins. Sauron begins to mass his troops and sets out to take the fords of Osgiliath, while Saruman sends the Wild Men and Uruk-Hai against Rohan. Frodo and Sam join up with Gollum and meet Faramir on their way toward Mordor. Saruman's hold on Theoden is broken. He sends his army to destroy Rohan but they are destroyed instead at Helm's Deep. Merry and Pippin are captured by Saruman's Uruk-Hai and stir up the Ents to destroy Isengard and end his usefulness to Sauron. Sauron prepares to launch his final attack.

The Lord of the Rings, Part 3: All armies converge on Minas Tirith. Aragorn triggers Sauron's attack via the Palantir and summons the Oathbreakers. Minas Tirith is saved for the moment. Frodo and Sam bypass Minas Morgul as the armies march out but are betrayed by Gollum in Shelob's Lair and Frodo is captured by Mordor orcs. Sam aids his escape, but Sauron gains Frodo's mithril mail as a bargaining chip. Aragorn stages a feint to draw out Sauron's army and give Frodo a clear path to Mount Doom. The Ring is destroyed, Gollum dies, Mordor falls. Sauron is destroyed. The King Returns. Frodo continues Bilbo's book with his part of the Tale. Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf, Bilbo and Frodo take ship to the Undying Lands. Sam goes home (and finishes Bilbo's book).

Seen this way, all six movies make for one continuous story, and I don't think either needs overshadow the other. Bilbo's adventure was certainly of key importance to what came after, and Frodo's story is a continuation of what began during Bilbo's adventure. "Bookend" scenes may be entirely appropriate here, as the tale in its entirety is told in the Red Book - written by all three Ringbearers in turn.

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories

(This post was edited by Silverlode on Aug 4 2012, 7:31pm)


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 4 2012, 7:22pm

Post #61 of 112 (728 views)
Shortcut
Agree completely with this Silverlode [In reply to] Can't Post

When it's written out like this, you can't help but think how amazing the hexology will be!


Hanzkaz
Rohan

Aug 4 2012, 7:26pm

Post #62 of 112 (717 views)
Shortcut
I thought it might be interesting - [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
They battle, but (my personal theory here) the Necromancer takes advantage of the goblins tracking Thorin and Co. as a diversion, using them to distract and draw off Gandalf while he makes his pre-planned escape.


- if both sides underestimate each other. Sauron does real damage to the White Council and the Elves, weakening them and diminishing their numbers (which leads to the forces of good relying on the 'strength of Men' during the War of the Ring) , and the White Council weaken him a bit in return, so that it's more than half a century before his all-out assault on Middle-Earth. I think that would make sense to audiences.

(LOTR Elrond seems be a less cheerful character than his Hobbit-era self, from what I've seen.)


(This post was edited by Hanzkaz on Aug 4 2012, 7:31pm)


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 7:41pm

Post #63 of 112 (725 views)
Shortcut
Looking at it... [In reply to] Can't Post

some of the "annoying of everyone" by Thorin and Co on their way to the mountain will probably happen in the first movie and some in the second. As I was writing it, it all landed in a lump under my second heading but I do expect that they will at least reach Mirkwood in the first film. I still think it's possible for the first film to end with Barrels out of Bond, especially because I keep associating it in my mind with the blend of optimistic and ominous that we saw in the last scenes of FOTR, with Frodo and Sam looking at Mordor. I can see Bilbo and the dwarves floating down the river, maybe with an ominous glimpse in the distance of the Lonely Mountain wreathed in clouds....or smoke.

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 7:47pm

Post #64 of 112 (734 views)
Shortcut
This is brilliant speculation [In reply to] Can't Post

I am guessing that this is largely the thrust of it.

However, Bilbo will be far more center-stage than this suggests. Though I cannot say for certain, it seems PJ and company may end film 1 before Mirkwood, and perhaps even before Bern, in order to give Bilbo more to do in film 2.

Remember, PJ has stated that the main difference between his films and other fantasy films is that he has hobbits to work with. That's the way to keep the audience connected.

And frankly, Bilbo doesn't do much from Thranduil's to the Lonely Mountain.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 4 2012, 7:52pm

Post #65 of 112 (699 views)
Shortcut
Only if they're "man-in-suit" -- [In reply to] Can't Post

the way the ROUSs moved in The Princess Bride remains one of its endearing qualities. Knowing PJ, they would be mo-capped though. (On the other hand, there was that pony puppet on Caradhras.)

It would be cool if somewhere in the background noise of Mirkwood we are able to hear the sound that the flame spouts made in the Fire Swamp.

Laugh


HiddenSpring
Lorien

Aug 4 2012, 8:24pm

Post #66 of 112 (708 views)
Shortcut
That third film still seems like a drag [In reply to] Can't Post

3 hours of plotting and a battle---yikes. I'm very excited about the first and second films but fail to muster any enthusiasm for what's supposedly the "big finale." The rumor of Sauron in the Battle of the Five Armies starts to make sense now. There's no way PJ kills Smaug and vanishes Sauron in the second film to leave us with what... an Orc captain as the main villain of the final film?

Which brings us back to the "Smaug as secondary villain, Sauron as primary villain" nonsense. I fear this is indeed how the movies are going to play out, but it is a ridiculous notion. Smaug is indeed a secondary villain, but he is secondary only to our main characters' flaws and ambition (which create division among themselves and set the mood for the BofA), and certainly NOT to the Necromancer, who is thematically irrelevant at this point. Make no mistake - I'm very excited about seeing the White Council in action, but it should be action limited to Dol Guldur alone. Having Sauron as the main villain of all six films sounds not just unimaginative but ponderous.


(This post was edited by HiddenSpring on Aug 4 2012, 8:31pm)


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 4 2012, 8:26pm

Post #67 of 112 (718 views)
Shortcut
The "quiet bits" [In reply to] Can't Post

are where you have room for some character development. As an example from LOTR, that's where we got to see and like Boromir; when they inserted scenes of him interacting with the hobbits during the occasional quiet moment along the journey.

We have 13 dwarves for Bilbo to interact with - and be annoyed by; I have a feeling that Bilbo is going to be peacemaking and rescuing them from the results of their folly all the way through the story, especially once Gandalf leaves them. I see it as a sort of comic theme which culminates by turning deadly serious in his bargaining with the Arkenstone in Film 3. I think Bilbo is going to have important things to do in all three films.

Film 1: Hosts the Unexpected Party. Bungles his first attempt at burglary and is involved in the troll incident. Receives Sting. Meets Elrond and falls in love with the Elves in Rivendell (remember, he later chooses to spend his "retirement" there, they may do a few scenes to set up for that). Bilbo sees the crack in the goblin cave open and yells to wake up Gandalf. He has an extensive (12 minutes, according to comments from Martin and Andy) Riddles in the Dark scene with Gollum, then his invisible escape. He's has a very close call with wargs because of not being able to find a tree with a low branch, and then is only rescued by eagles by hanging on to Dori's legs. He meets Beorn. He climbs a tree in Mirkwood. He rescues the dwarves from spiders. He sneaks around the Elven halls in invisible form and plans and executes their escape via barrel. (I'm assuming this is still the end of Film 1 for now)

Film 2: He arrives in Laketown with a bad cold (comedy opportunity). I wouldn't be surprised if he makes friends with Bard - or Bain while in Laketown. I don't expect to see a lot of time spent on the journey between Laketown and the arrival at the foot of the mountain - probably more a travel/scenery montage. He joins in the search for the Back Door (we saw the location for some of the search in the Locations blog), and then sits on the doorstep until the thrush knocks (I expect quite a bit of conflict with grumbling dwarves here). He takes center stage with his encounters with Smaug, and I expect these will be set pieces, much like the Riddles in the Dark scene. One of his scenes ends with being scorched as he runs up the tunnel. He steals a piece of treasure, stirring Smaug up to come attack and smash the Back Door and then head off to attack Laketown (at this point the story switches away from the Lonely Mountain for a considerable chunk of time. He explores the hoard and finds the Arkenstone. He is given the mithril mail by Thorin.

Film 3: Lots of conflict with dwarves, especially arguments with Thorin over his warlike attitude and worry and guilt over the Arkenstone (he has to rationalize it to himself). He meets the thrush again, and is present when Roac arrives. He sneaks into the army camp and bargains with the Arkenstone, reuniting with Gandalf. I expect him to be present for some of the discussion with Thranduil, Bard and Gandalf before he goes back. He is kicked out by Thorin in a rage when he discovers his use of the Arkenstone. He gets knocked out in the battle (although I expect this will not happen in the movie until he's been through a number of near misses even though invisible. He has a major scene with Thorin on his deathbed. He comes home to an auction and begins his feud with the Sackville-Bagginses. We may even see him "adopt" Frodo.

That's quite a lot of major story. I don't think he'll be relegated to the background in any way. My overall summary was only meant to show the overarching theme and how his story affects the bigger story, since PJ was saying he wanted to show how important Bilbo was to the larger story. But I think that Bilbo's story will be intercut with the Gandalf/Sauron background so that at the end we will have a big picture as well, which will continue smoothly on into LOTR.

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 4 2012, 8:31pm

Post #68 of 112 (738 views)
Shortcut
Film 3 will likely include more than BOFA, IMO [In reply to] Can't Post

My guess is that PJ ends film 1 earlier than expected. Either before Beorn, or before Mirkwood. But I may be wrong.

This would give far more meat to film 2 and 3. It will also balance out the films in terms of Bilbo's participation.


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 10:21pm

Post #69 of 112 (695 views)
Shortcut
Film 3 has other key events.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In addition to the auction at Bag End scene,
another crucial scene that can't be underestimated is the moment when Bilbo reveals to Gandalf how he "appropriated" the ring from Gollum.
I'm very much looking forward to how this moment is treated by Jackson and interpreted by McKellen and Freeman.
I suspect it will happen either after the battle or in Rivendell during the "back again" journey.

In a two-film structure such scenes may not have been given the proper attention by the general audience suffering through 3-hr movie fatigue (aka - TME! - "To Many Endings!").
With a third film Jackson has the luxury to dwell a little bit more on these key character development moments.

On a different note (and as I've posted in the past), I'm still curious too see if Jackson will change when and how and if Bilbo reveals the ring to the dwarves.


(This post was edited by Bladerunner on Aug 4 2012, 10:28pm)


Yngwulff
Gondor


Aug 4 2012, 10:25pm

Post #70 of 112 (647 views)
Shortcut
Good article [In reply to] Can't Post

John Rhys-Davies in NZ possibly reprising hid Gimli role, to me is a clue this was planned or at the very least discussed far prior to the actual announcement.


Take this Brother May it Serve you Well
Vote for Pedro!


Lurker in the Dark
The Shire

Aug 5 2012, 3:06am

Post #71 of 112 (617 views)
Shortcut
Contents [In reply to] Can't Post

When I first heard that PJ was intending to make two films of the Hobbit I couldn't see how it could be done, at least without producing something aimed at fans who can never get enough while alienating everyone else with a slow and indulgent fairy tale. On the other hand there's certainly a lot else going on in Middle Earth at the same time but making the quest of the Hobbit dramatically central to those events poses story-telling challenges.

The original poster certainly shows what's there and available but except for die-hard fans it isn't relevant to the quest itself. Moreover the poster doesn't touch on what are, for me, two major elements the Hobbit is going to have to deal with to succeed.

1. Why does Gandalf choose Bilbo the Hobbit to be the burglar? Tolkien never explains this, that I'm aware of. Moreover had it not been for Bilbo's purely fortuitous finding of the Ring and the trick of invisibility it gives him, allowing him to actually succeed in his 'job' as burglar, is it really likely Bilbo would have pulled it off? Certainly Gandalf does not know Bilbo is going to find the Ring, as even at the beginning of LotR he still doesn't know what it is Bilbo found. To me this can only be 'pulled together' if Gandalf in the Hobbit is setting up the conditions for a fulfilment of prophecy - a prophecy dealing not so much with with Smaug and the Dwarves return to Erebor but Frodo's quest to destroy the Ring, defeat Sauron and end the Third Age. After all, for Middle Earth history and LotR by far the most significant event of the Hobbit is the finding of the One Ring although in the book itself this is a relatively underplayed event.

Unfortunately 'Prophecy' as a device does not feature much in Tolkien's writings - IMHO the closest we get to it in LotR is the Mirror of Galadriel, while Elrond's many visions of the possible future most of which showed Sauron's victory and Arwen/Aragorn unconsummated are a PJ addition .

In 'Fellowship' Gandalf tells Frodo that he was 'meant' to have the Ring but I believe that's also a PJ addition, not in the original. However it must be significant that in LotR Frodo's quest only succeeds because, perhaps alone of the denzins of Middle Earth, a Hobbit was the only race or culture which would have let Gollum live, while in the Hobbit the Ring was won not by an act of violence - the only time it isn't - but in a Hobbitish riddle game (tho' in truth Bilbo's winning question would have been ruled out of order in most quizzes, hence the ring was won by a cheat.).

Hence I think it inescapable that for some reason Gandalf becomes aware that the fate of the world depends on a Hobbit going on Thorin's quest. The how and why of it he doesn't know, and he doesn't even make sense of it when Bilbo returns. However the ultimate defeat of Sauron 'requires' that the One Ring come into the possession of the Hobbits in such a way that Gollum survives the initial encounter - and any another race coming across Gollum as Bilbo did would just have killed him and taken the Ring . This can be done because of some 'foresight' by Galadriel that 'the world is poised in balance on Erebor's peak and the smallest must become great to prevent it's fall' but which must obviously not be too explicit forcing Gandalf to 'take a punt' that it means a Hobbit has to go with Thorin on his quest. But then why Bilbo of all the Hobbits? However all this will need to be established at some point, by showing Galadriel's 'revelation', her discussing it with Gandalf and Gandalf's speculation as to what it means and requires.

2. Tauriel. PJ knows the story/film needs a romance - and in a major way. LotR without Arwen would just be a "Boy's Own" adventure. So we have Tauriel and... who? From what we know of the cast only Bard currently fits this role, Legolas being ruled out apparently. PJ won't repeat the Aragon/Arwen plot yet the tensions of elf/human romance are surely too powerful not to pursue, which leaves? Beren and Luthien, of course. So will we have Tolkien's wonderful Beren/Luthien story echoed in Bard/Tauriel? (Beren/Bard Tinuviel/Tauriel?) There would be plenty of scope for echoes of Beren/Luthien's quest for the Silmaril in the Hobbit story - the Necromancer and Smaug etc. - so my money's on it.

However to be a romance in a major way it needs to arc across all three films, which means we need to have met both characters before the end of film one. This is not a problem for Tauriel who we'll meet in Mirkwood, but Bard = Laketown which we aren't likely to get to until film two so my money's on Bard being in Mirkwood where he sees Tinuviel dancing in a glade a'la Beren, and on them both becoming involved in the quest.


Phibbus
Rohan


Aug 5 2012, 3:17am

Post #72 of 112 (609 views)
Shortcut
Still not sure about that third film... [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm a bit leery that the author can't seem to avoid analytical filler in order to beef up the written length of prognostication for the last film to match the other two.

The best I can say for this piece is that it argues for a split at the capture by the wood elves rather than after the barrel escape. That's always made much more sense to me, if doing any splitting in the first place. It then becomes the typical "carbonite" cliffhanger ending followed by an Indiana Jones rollercoaster escape opening for the next film.

The worst... "This battle could easily last for easily an hour or more on screen." If that's the case, I would hope, like the hero, to get fortuitously bonked on the head so as to miss most of it.

Man is but an ass if he go about to expound this dream.


Yngwulff
Gondor


Aug 5 2012, 3:22am

Post #73 of 112 (586 views)
Shortcut
Film 2 [In reply to] Can't Post

It will be fleshed out a lot more especially Dol Guldur and the cleansing of Mirkwood, which will become less a subplot and become a much more promient part of the story.


Take this Brother May it Serve you Well
Vote for Pedro!


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 3:24am

Post #74 of 112 (615 views)
Shortcut
Interesting theory about Bard and Tauriel... [In reply to] Can't Post

a substantial first post in general.

Do you think Gandalf, rather than foreseeing Bilbo finding The One Ring, simply had a hunch that Bilbo figured heavily in the fate of Middle-earth? As he said to Frodo:

"Hobbits really are amazing creatures, as I have said before. You can learn all there is to know about them in a month, and yet after a hundred years they can still surprise you at a pinch."

Or, do you think the film makers will somehow make the case that the Ring drew Bilbo into the adventure as a harmless courier in order to deliver itself to Sauron (who it seems will be at the Bo5A)?

Welcome to TORn Lurker!


Yngwulff
Gondor


Aug 5 2012, 3:30am

Post #75 of 112 (580 views)
Shortcut
Isn't Bard married? [In reply to] Can't Post

He has a son in the movie supposedly doesn't he?


Take this Brother May it Serve you Well
Vote for Pedro!


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 3:32am

Post #76 of 112 (638 views)
Shortcut
Hee hee [In reply to] Can't Post

following Monteath's theory that the movies will mirror the structure of LOTR (an idea I have said is sound) you just made me realize something...

Bilbo being out of place, then unconscious at Bo5A is a reflection of Merry being out of place, then unconscious at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. Though technically I guess, it is not a reflection but the source of an echo. Now I wonder how exactly it will happen? A Sting from behind at Sauron while wearing the Ring?


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 3:35am

Post #77 of 112 (627 views)
Shortcut
Ah yes, but no (living) wife as far as I've heard [In reply to] Can't Post

... they added a single father to appeal to a not insignificant number of fans. Wink


Yngwulff
Gondor


Aug 5 2012, 3:40am

Post #78 of 112 (611 views)
Shortcut
Could imply [In reply to] Can't Post

A wife or a widower also true.
Lots of NZ extras though ...


Take this Brother May it Serve you Well
Vote for Pedro!


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 5 2012, 4:04am

Post #79 of 112 (640 views)
Shortcut
Frodo being meant to have the Ring.. [In reply to] Can't Post

is not an invention by PJ; it is pure Tolkien, merely taken from one spot in the novel and spoken at a different point of the story in the movie. It's from the chapter The Shadow of the Past, in which Gandalf tells Frodo in some detail of the story of the Ring and Gollum. Here is the quote in context:

Quote
"It was not Gollum, Frodo, but the Ring itself that decided things. The Ring left him."
"What, just in time to meet Bilbo?" said Frodo. "Wouldn't an orc have suited it better?"
"It is no laughing matter," said Gandalf. "Not for you. It was the strangest event in the whole history of the Ring so far: Bilbo's arrival just at that time, and putting his hand on it, blindly, in the dark."
"There was more than one power at work, Frodo. The Ring was trying to get back to its master. It had slipped from Isildur's hand and betrayed him; then when a chance came it caught poor Deagol, and he was murdered; and after that Gollum, and it had devoured him. It could make no further use of him: he was too small and mean and as long as it stayed with him he would never leave his deep pool again. So now, when its master was awake once more and sending out his dark thought from Mirkwood, it abandoned Gollum. Only to be picked up by the most unlikely person imaginable: Bilbo from the Shire!"
"Behind that there was something else at work, beyond any design of the Ring-maker. I can put it no plainer than by saying that Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, and not by its maker. In which case you also were meant to have it. And that may be an encouraging thought."
"It is not", said Frodo, "though I am not sure that I understand you."



Regarding Tauriel, I don't mind her being a created character but I will be very unhappy indeed if she's there merely to be an object of romance, especially one which takes significant time in all three movies. For all the discussion we've had lately about the idea of gender representation in The Hobbit, the perceived benefit of having another woman would be significantly hindered by making her an excuse for a love story which has no real (or necessary) ties to the story. Besides, back when Tauriel was Itaril and the casting call description was circulated, it said that she was in love with an Elf lord (prime candidates being Legolas or Lindir), not a dwarf or a human. So if that bit was accurate and stayed part of the character, Fili, Kili and Bard would not be candidates. I'm very much hoping that the romance angle was dropped with the name change and she'll just be a featured supporting character. So in this case, I'm hoping you're wrong.

And last but definitely not least, welcome to TORN! It's always good to have a new voice in the mix. Smile

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Phibbus
Rohan


Aug 5 2012, 4:05am

Post #80 of 112 (614 views)
Shortcut
Prophecy and Tauriel [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Unfortunately 'Prophecy' as a device does not feature much in Tolkien's writings - IMHO the closest we get to it in LotR is the Mirror of Galadriel, while Elrond's many visions of the possible future most of which showed Sauron's victory and Arwen/Aragorn unconsummated are a PJ addition .


I suspect Jackson will be making something of this bit..

Quote

Surely you don't disbelieve the prophecies, because you had a hand in bringing them about yourself? You don't really suppose, do you, that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck, just for your sole benefit?

although, admittedly, it is not a terribly developed theme (at least so blatantly stated) in the book.

As to Tauriel, I had actually thought about the Beren-Luthien angle with Bard, as you describe, but I suspect it might be smack a little too much of "sacrilege," even for this writing team (and ughhh... there's that "Boys' Own" comparison, again.) I also suspect a romantic angle might not be so overtly the purpose of the character. I have my suspicions that many of the "prodigal son" tropes that the piece predicts for Bard might actually be pursued, rather, in the Tauriel character: e.g., she being the captain of the guard who allows (or actively abets) the escape, thus incurring the wrath of the Elvenking, and then making good with some derring-do by the end.

Man is but an ass if he go about to expound this dream.

(This post was edited by Phibbus on Aug 5 2012, 4:06am)


Plurmo
Rohan

Aug 5 2012, 4:21am

Post #81 of 112 (650 views)
Shortcut
But LOTR movie Bilbo has no connection with dwarves at all. [In reply to] Can't Post

Except for a passing by mention of the Lonely Mountain there's no mention by Bilbo of his old and enduring connections with the Dwarves in LOTR. Adjusting the new trilogy to fit in with LOTR would be a clever thing indeed, but the emotional link between Bilbo and the Dwarves is completely absent in LOTR and at least in this regard no adjustment can be reached.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 4:24am

Post #82 of 112 (633 views)
Shortcut
Unless Kili is revealed to be half-elven... [In reply to] Can't Post

otherwise a well reasoned response. Oh and joking aside (much joking I'm almost ashamed to admit) I do not believe Tauriel is being included just for a romantic angle, though I won't be surprised if it is part of her arc.

You're really on a roll Silverlode. I've greatly enjoyed your posts of late (not to say I usually don't of course). Cool


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 5 2012, 4:28am)


BeornBerserker
Lorien

Aug 5 2012, 4:29am

Post #83 of 112 (584 views)
Shortcut
Gandalf picking Bilbo [In reply to] Can't Post

I've always felt there was always bit of divine guidance in many of Gandalf's decisions. He is after all an "angelic" being or equivalent that has been entrusted with a mission to advise and council the people of Middle Earth against the evil of Sauron. I would think it sufficient that if he felt moved to do something and was true to his calling that he should trust his intuition and act on it.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Aug 5 2012, 4:33am

Post #84 of 112 (595 views)
Shortcut
*snort* Well at least... [In reply to] Can't Post

the timeline precludes her being the legendary Took "fairy wife" ! Tongue

Thanks much for the compliment, Sir Dennis! I've been so busy lately I've spent my little online time just reading and trying to keep up with discussions. It's nice to have time to actually join in. Smile

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor


Aug 5 2012, 4:38am

Post #85 of 112 (590 views)
Shortcut
I'll give you a big "Amen!" for that last paragraph. [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm still very seriously considering sitting this one out at home, and just waiting for the DVD, if early reviews reveal that the Bo5A runs longer than I think I can endure. Unless I could sneak an inflatable pillow into the theater, and have someone wake me up when the battle's almost over... :/

**********************************


NABOUF
Not a TORns*b!
Certified Curmudgeon
Knitting Knerd
NARF: NWtS Chapter Member since June 17,2011


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 5 2012, 4:39am

Post #86 of 112 (619 views)
Shortcut
Lucasian Structure [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
following Monteath's theory that the movies will mirror the structure of LOTR (an idea I have said is sound) you just made me realize something...

Bilbo being out of place, then unconscious at Bo5A is a reflection of Merry being out of place, then unconscious at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. Though technically I guess, it is not a reflection but the source of an echo. Now I wonder how exactly it will happen? A Sting from behind at Sauron while wearing the Ring?


Concerning whether Bilbo is made to be conscious or not, which might havee more to do with Phibbus's comment about getting bonked and Indiana Jones, by the writers for the duration, let me suggest the Lucasian method of structuring the battle with Bilbo being unconscious in a manner a lot like Jar Jar Binks at the battle in The Phantom Menace. Jar Jar's ineptness, or rather clumsiness, cause some respectable damage despite his (and Lucas's) mental handicap. If Lucas were to write and direct The Hobbit for Jackson, and Bilbo remained unconscious, he would have Bilbo carried or dragged about the battle field and his very presence, with such things as being accidentally dumped off a stretcher and rolling down rocks, would cause avalanches and other cascade effects of objects and characters doing things to bring about the end of the battle. All because of Bilbo, our unconscious hero.

Look at what Marcus Brody did in Indiana Jones 4. He was more than unconscious, he was dead, and the bronze statue bearing his likeness at the college stopped a car of KGB agents. What a guy.


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Aug 5 2012, 4:42am)


Sunflower
Valinor

Aug 5 2012, 4:56am

Post #87 of 112 (584 views)
Shortcut
Desolation of Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

LOL! I've just been "out-conspiracy-theoried". I take my hat off to you, sir!TongueLaugh

And FANTASTIC article above...Film 2 plays out here pretty much as I thought it would, right down to the Rohan/Lake-town, Theoden/Master, Eomer/Bard, and Helm's Deep/Endof Smaug scenarios..plus the title there's an operatic quality to the thing, that Lucas rarely achived in his Prequels (Tatooine scenes in 2 being a rare succes in this regard.)


In addition: let me speculate on the title The Desolation of Smaug. Some people don't like that title, thinking it too Lucas-y. I think it is not only BRILLAINT but the only possibe title. How?

Well, "desolation" can mean any number of things, depending on the context it is used in. It has so many layers.

--First what everyone immediately thinks of when they hear the title: on the Map: the "Desolation of Smaug" being the actual physical evidence of his destructive passing: the ruins of Dale, the scorched earth, ie the actual Destruction Zone, whic we will glimpses of in flashback and as the Company walks past it.
--The "desolation" also can refer to the KIND of world Smaug left behind: where hope no longer exists, ie hope for the future. In all the lands that he has touched, the great Worm has left woe in the hearts of all: Men, Dwarves..and in their wariness, even in the hearts of Thranduils' folk in Mirkwood. This part of M-e as passed from "innocence" to frightful Experience. In that terrible knowledge, there is the Desolation of newfound maturity.
--"Deslolation" can then be a spiritual state, affecting and exhibited by all the peoples that Smaug has touched. The greed of the Dwarves for their lost treasure (and what this does later to Thorin and the rest, but esp Thorins character); the corruption of the Master and Laketown's inner circle; a despair initially exhibited by the people of Dale akin to what we see first in Edoras...no "more cheer than a graveyard." I expect a similarmood among its people to previal when the company enters the city.
--finally..(and this is getting existential here I admit): how might Smuag himself be "desolate"? He appear to be on top of the world, but I'm sure Tolkien would have us beleive that he was a happier creature before he got bogged down by his "sickness". Having responsibilty for, and having to pretect, such a Hoard carries a personal price, no? If lust for the Jewels borught the Noldor down, then even such as Smuag can be brought from bad to infinetely worse, by his greed.


So "desolation of Smaug" exists on so many levels, and this desolation permeates Film 2 like a sponge.


(This post was edited by Sunflower on Aug 5 2012, 4:57am)


Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor


Aug 5 2012, 4:56am

Post #88 of 112 (595 views)
Shortcut
*heh* I can't complain [In reply to] Can't Post

about Indy4 spoilers because I made a choice to stay home during its theatrical run, and have walked out of any room in which it was playing on the TV! =) For me, it does not exist. There are only three.

*sigh* I hope The Hobbit does not suffer a similar fate.

**********************************


NABOUF
Not a TORns*b!
Certified Curmudgeon
Knitting Knerd
NARF: NWtS Chapter Member since June 17,2011


Phibbus
Rohan


Aug 5 2012, 5:06am

Post #89 of 112 (580 views)
Shortcut
Unconscious Bilbo [In reply to] Can't Post

I have this theory that Bilbo is unconscious during Bo5A because Beorn is one of his alter-egos. His being absent when Beorn is present in bear-form on the battlefield directly mirrors the tale of Bothvar Bjarki, who goes into a trance when the bear-form is present to win the day. In The History of The Hobbit, Rateliff makes the connection with the Bothvar Story (and Tolkien's keen interest in it) when discussing the main Medwed/Beorn chapters, but never (I think) notices the unconsciousness connection at Bo5A.

Interesting to note from your examples how these motifs keep getting reinterpreted right up to the current day.

Man is but an ass if he go about to expound this dream.

(This post was edited by Phibbus on Aug 5 2012, 5:10am)


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Aug 5 2012, 5:11am

Post #90 of 112 (587 views)
Shortcut
Personal Canon [In reply to] Can't Post

I feel the same way about (at least) Alien 3 and the brutal, unimaginative, and utterly wasteful writers' snuff of Newt, Bishop and Hicks. A total waste and thumbing of the nose at what Aliens built. I was glad to hear James Cameron feels the same way. It does not exist for me but, unfortunately, I went to see it unknowing. In my personal canon, all four make it back to Earth, Newt is the salvation of Ripley, and Uncle Hicks visits often.


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Aug 5 2012, 5:15am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 5 2012, 5:36am

Post #91 of 112 (551 views)
Shortcut
Nonsense [In reply to] Can't Post

The LOTR films broke all sorts of cinematic conventions, and did perfectly fine.

The tired formulas you deem necessary for success are simply examples of lazy, LCD thinking.

Though I do not think PJ is a great filmmaker, he does not strike me as the type that would find it necessary to dumb things down to that level.

Great artists create new tracks and pathways, rather than simply slavishly following the old.

Let's hope none of your suggestions bear any fruit.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 5 2012, 5:42am

Post #92 of 112 (570 views)
Shortcut
But is it a good idea [In reply to] Can't Post

To reinforce that similar structure?

I mean, do the filmmakers want viewers to think: hey, I've seen this story before?

Sounds like a potentially disastrous decision.


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 7:06am

Post #93 of 112 (557 views)
Shortcut
The structure yes [In reply to] Can't Post

but exact recreations of scenes/situations that came before, no. However, similarity is not necessarily undesirable altogether.

(I'm not sure the following makes sense. I've spent almost an hour beating it into shape... so bear with me please.)

Leaving aside judgements about the quality of LOTR's structure, building the three Hobbit films in a way similar to LOTR is their best chance of achieving a cohesive whole out of 6 films. They have said all along that they wanted to make a continuous narrative. Yet if the story is anything like what Monteath describes, it seems so convoluted now it will be remarkable if they can achieve such a goal.

Without the additional material, The Hobbit was already very much a prototype of The Lord of the Rings (minus an elf princess, Aragorn being split between Bard and Thorin, and so on). However, the additional material and breaking The Hobbit in three, threaten to disrupt the similarity that was naturally present between the two stories. (On the other hand, being able to draw parallels between Arwen/Eowyn and Tauriel may be their main rationale for including her.) As well, and perhaps most importantly, there is the difference between formats to overcome.

Replacing through structure the similarity that may have been lost in expanding, splitting, and filming The Hobbit in hyper real 3D is their best hope at this point -- though I'm sure the soundtrack and some of the sets will go a long way in this regard.

Besides, LOTR's structure worked well enough for them the first time around... and don't most mainstream movies follow a similar structure/pattern anyway?

Oh, in answer to your question, I think tapping into the nostalgia that surrounds LOTR has been a big part of their strategy all along (obviously).


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 5 2012, 7:14am)


Lurker in the Dark
The Shire

Aug 5 2012, 7:20am

Post #94 of 112 (530 views)
Shortcut
Contents [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Welcome to TORn Lurker!


Thank you.


In Reply To
Or, do you think the film makers will somehow make the case that the Ring drew Bilbo into the adventure as a harmless courier in order to deliver itself to Sauron (who it seems will be at the Bo5A)?


I'll confess it's been a while since I read "The Hobbit", and I always found it rather disappointing compared with LotR etc.

If PJ's Hobbit is, like Theoden, going to be able to stand proudly alongside its predecessors I think it can't have any loose ends - and to me the biggest loose end has always been why Gandalf selects Bilbo, a Hobbit, to go on Thorin's quest. I mean, why? Bilbo isn't a burglar and Hobbits, as we know, aren't adventurous. And as I've argued, it's obvious Gandalf didn't know that Bilbo was going to find the One Ring on the way yet without it the expedition would have ended in disaster in the Goblin tunnels, pretty near the beginning of the book as I remember!

If I were writing it the one screamingly obvious factor is that both Bilbo and Frodo allow Gollum to live when surely anyone else - elf, dwarf or man let alone orc etc. - would have killed him at the first opportunity almost without thought. It is that act of forebearance, of compassion, that is ultimately the Ring's downfall for had either Bilbo or Frodo killed Gollum Frodo would at Mt. Doom have claimed the Ring for himself and Sauron would have won.

So it only makes sense to me that some 'force for good' trying to counter Sauron is aware that only through the hands of a Hobbit is there any hope that the One Ring can be destroyed, so must bring a Hobbit to where it is. Yet whatever that force is it cannot act directly, so gives some sort of 'hint' (I'm guessing to Galadriel) that it's important for a hobbit to go on Thorin's quest which she and Gandalf choose to act on.

I suggest it's only at the time of Bilbo's party, when Gandalf first suspects what Bilbo's ring really is, that he fully realises the import of Galadriel's 'prophecy'. And why he later tells Frodo that he was 'meant' to have the Ring which gives him hope.

To satisfy me I need more than 'a hunch' on Gandalf's part that sends Bilbo on the quest. I think Gandalf needs to know that Bilbo must go or the world will fall, even if he has no idea why Bilbo must go and so must trust to luck that Bilbo will do whatever it's necessary that he does do.

I don't regard the One Ring as having any sentience of its own, and thus it doesn't make plans or try to influence events directly. Evil can sense it and be drawn to it - eg the Black Riders - but although corrupting it is essentially passive and so cannot look to 'use' Bilbo as you suggest.


Lurker in the Dark
The Shire

Aug 5 2012, 7:45am

Post #95 of 112 (538 views)
Shortcut
Tauriel [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
[ I also suspect a romantic angle might not be so overtly the purpose of the character.


I would agree that Taurel/Bard doesn't seem obvious yet:

1. Arwen/Aragon could have been omitted from the film trilogy - after all it's only in the appendices of the book. But it's so powerful in the film that I can't see PJ not having a romance of some sort to add that whole dimension.

2. For my part the idea of an elf/elf romance makes me cringe. I mean, it would be so 'proper' - almost emotionless. Certainly nothing I could relate to. And apart from Galadriel, Tauriel is the only candidate for the female side of it. Sure Bard has a son, but we don't know if his wife is still alive and if she isn't...

3. I'm not suggesting a rerun of Beren and Luthien - as a counter to the Aragorn/Arwen story Beren could fall hopelessly in love with Tauriel but denying it because he's sure she will have nothing to do with him. Indeed it isn't it returned until after he has 'proved himself' by killing Smaug echos of Beren here. I can even see a hapless, bemused Martin Freeman playing Cupid!

(This post was edited by Lurker in the Dark on Aug 5 2012, 7:52am)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 5 2012, 5:15pm

Post #96 of 112 (472 views)
Shortcut
Makes sense [In reply to] Can't Post

But did I miss something? Who is Monteath, and what has he described?


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 5 2012, 10:09pm

Post #97 of 112 (426 views)
Shortcut
Are you messing with me? [In reply to] Can't Post

Monteath is the guest author of this thread, the person whose ideas we're talking about -- I would have used OP but I actually remembered the person's name for once.

Angelic


TheBeerBaron
Rivendell

Aug 6 2012, 6:51am

Post #98 of 112 (372 views)
Shortcut
I just had a terrible thought... [In reply to] Can't Post

There's no way that Tauriel's love interest might be Bilbo right? I mean he is the hero of the book in some ways and he might chance upon her in the elven halls, and sparks fly etc.

Then they meet again when Bilbo steals the Arkenstone and goes down to bargain. She would of course have to die so as to explain her absence in lotr (but that seems rather inevitable).

In some ways this could reflect how his tookish side is growing stronger and so being drawn to the elves. Almost Freudian.

Don't get me wrong; I'd hate to see this happen, but you never know. Who else could her love interest possibly be?

-Bard would be too much like Aragorn-Arwen
-Legolas is out of the question apparently
-Thorin and dwarfes seems unlikely unless she bewitches and then breaks someone's heart which would give more meaning to film-Gimli's line at the council of Elrond "never trust an elf" (I love that small-minded bigotry he espouses, it always makes me laugh as its so silly)

Who else could it possibly be? Terrible thought I know!


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 6 2012, 7:14am

Post #99 of 112 (377 views)
Shortcut
Tauriel and Kili [In reply to] Can't Post

http://www-images.theonering.org/...lFilm-Summer2012.jpg


TheBeerBaron
Rivendell

Aug 6 2012, 7:19am

Post #100 of 112 (359 views)
Shortcut
I thought we figured that was in jest [In reply to] Can't Post

Didn't we? I've been lurking for ages, but finally decided to start posting btw.

If not then I guess that settles it. Will it be requited though do you think?


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 6 2012, 7:32am

Post #101 of 112 (367 views)
Shortcut
It's more real [In reply to] Can't Post

than the love between Gandalf and Galadriel.

We don't know much more than that - it could be unrequited.

I wouldn't worry though, they're not going to have any "alone time". Kili's locked up in Thranduil's Halls, and then dies at the end. We're not going to get a Middle-earth wedding. It could work nicely, as well, if similar to Gimli and Galadriel.

Welcome to TORn TheBeerBaron Smile


TheBeerBaron
Rivendell

Aug 6 2012, 7:35am

Post #102 of 112 (365 views)
Shortcut
Thanks DLB [In reply to] Can't Post

and I think that you're probably correct.


innoce77
Registered User

Aug 6 2012, 8:33am

Post #103 of 112 (390 views)
Shortcut
Tauriel and Bard [In reply to] Can't Post

First Post - I absolutely agree with your theory on Tauriel and Bard. (Beren and Luthien, you read my mind) As you mentioned to insert a romance in a major way, the two characters should be in the first film and i thought exactly as you said. They(Bard and Tauriel) will be present in the Mirkwood. I think Kill will have a crush on Tauriel but that's it. PJ loves love triangle and I smell Bard-Tauriel-Kill angle a little bit. I think bard will be a widower. It's too much like Aragorn - Arwen but I want to see how this plays out if this really happens.

Who's Tauriel's love interest?
Major love story needs major character - I think 4 major characters in the Hobbit are Bilbo, Thorin, Gandalf and Bard. (Sauron???)
Bard is the most suitable choice for Romantic lead.

I've been lurking on this board for 5months, have learned awful a lot about Middle earth history and Characters.
I'd never heard about Lord of the rings before PJ movies and It was Aragorn and Arwen's love story made me fall in love with this fantasy world.
I normally don't like cheesy romance in movies but Aragorn and Arwen's felt different and I want another love story in the Hobbit as well.(Although I didn't notice the fact there's no Female in the Hobbit while reading it)
I know most of the members on this board hates romance idea, but there are people like me.


(This post was edited by innoce77 on Aug 6 2012, 8:36am)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 6 2012, 2:20pm

Post #104 of 112 (380 views)
Shortcut
Prophecy appears in several places, most notably from Gandalf and Glorfindel, actually [In reply to] Can't Post

"Help will come from the hands of the small when The Wise falter," was said before Bilbo's birth and a century or more before The Quest for Erebor.

And, of course, there is Glorfindel's famous prophecy and foresight regarding The Witch-King.

Also there is the dream of Faramir and Boromir "In Imladris it dwells. There shall be counsels taken, stronger than Morgul Spells. . . a sign . . . that doom is near at hand, for Isildur's Bane shall waken, and The Halfing forth shall stand."

And then there is the matter of The Seeing Stones, which "Do not lie, and even The Lord of Barad-Dur cannot make them do so."

In Reply To

Unfortunately 'Prophecy' as a device does not feature much in Tolkien's writings - IMHO the closest we get to it in LotR is the Mirror of Galadriel, while Elrond's many visions of the possible future most of which showed Sauron's victory and Arwen/Aragorn unconsummated are a PJ addition .


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Aug 6 2012, 2:22pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 6 2012, 3:27pm

Post #105 of 112 (338 views)
Shortcut
Highly improbable [In reply to] Can't Post

That he would outright lie about how his character was expanded "in jest."

No, we will get a brief unrequited love story, I imagine.


Kassandros
Rohan


Aug 6 2012, 4:35pm

Post #106 of 112 (348 views)
Shortcut
Why Gandalf chose Bilbo *SPOILER - COMIC CON FOOTAGE* [In reply to] Can't Post

I haven't seen the Comic Con footage myself, but from the descriptions I've read, the scene between Galadriel and Gandalf in Rivendell involves Galadriel asking why Gandalf decided to include a hobbit.

Here's a description:

- THIRD SCENE: The ethereally beautiful Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) wants to know why Gandalf the Grey choose “the halfling” for this most difficult of journeys. Unlike fellow wizard Saruman who believes in power above all, Gandalf believes “it is the small things, every act of normal folk that keeps the darkness of at bay — simple acts of kindness and love.” He continues: “Why Bilbo Baggins? Perhaps it is because I am afraid, and he gives me courage.” Galadriel steps forward and takes ahold of Gandalf’s hand, saying that if has ever any need of her, he only has to ask and she will be there. It’s quite a touching and emotional moment that hints at something deeper between the two, particularly on the part of the wizard.

from http://thorinoakenshield.net/...tage-from-comic-con/

So yes, this will be covered.

all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us...


SirDennisC
Half-elven


Aug 6 2012, 5:16pm

Post #107 of 112 (332 views)
Shortcut
Welcome out of lurkerdom innoce77 [In reply to] Can't Post

What Thorin, Bilbo, and Gandalf have on their plates already tells me they are not candidates for a romance sub plot. Adding a romantic interest to their arcs would distract us over much from the rich story elements built into their characters already. That they beefed up the romance aspect of Aragorn in LOTR was foregivable since at least it was part of his story in the books.

Kili and Bard however both have room for such a thing especially as, at least in the case of Bard it's clear, they have expanded their roles. What better (or perhaps more convenient) way to flesh out a character?

For my part, I like PJ and co's approach to romance (ie in LOTR and King Kong); it is not so much cheesy, as it is not overtly sexual or gratuitous. It is in his approach to romance that PJ is most courageous as a film maker, especially in an industry that seems hardly to know the difference between sex and romance.


(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 6 2012, 5:17pm)


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Aug 6 2012, 8:24pm

Post #108 of 112 (315 views)
Shortcut
Divinely inspired [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't think there's any need whatsoever to 'explain' why Gandalf decides to choose Bilbo. Instead of coming up with some hokey prophecy to explain it way, I think it's better for the audience to simply sense that Gandalf is the hand of providence. The old wizard doesn't know why he chooses Bilbo, he only knows he must.

It ties in beautifully with his later comment in FOTR, that "Bilbo was meant to find the ring."


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 6 2012, 11:11pm

Post #109 of 112 (279 views)
Shortcut
Amen [In reply to] Can't Post

I really do despise this Lucasian need to explain away everything mysterious with some awfully unsatisfying logic.

However, I do imagine that Bilbo had way more midichlorians than other hobbits, largely due to his Took side, which had the highest midichlorian count of all hobbit families.


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 7 2012, 1:24am

Post #110 of 112 (264 views)
Shortcut
yes [In reply to] Can't Post

Not even Master Bombadil has a midichlorian count that high!


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 7 2012, 2:56am

Post #111 of 112 (280 views)
Shortcut
Love. lol [In reply to] Can't Post

I enjoyed reading that.

In Reply To
I really do despise this Lucasian need to explain away everything mysterious with some awfully unsatisfying logic.

However, I do imagine that Bilbo had way more midichlorians than other hobbits, largely due to his Took side, which had the highest midichlorian count of all hobbit families.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


redgiraffe
Rohan

Aug 13 2012, 11:16am

Post #112 of 112 (359 views)
Shortcut
I feel like I'm the odd man out on this. [In reply to] Can't Post

I think the article was really well written and has great ideas for that main story that I think/hope will be the structure of the films (excluding Sauron showing up at BO5A). His breakdown of the three parts really got me excited.

But then.... once he got into the part about how " it is quite likely here that a whole other section could be added" he lost my excitement as he said quite a few things that have me worried if they turn out to be true.

1) The Climax of film 3 needs to be the end of the Battle of Five Armies. I think it would be a REALLY bad idea if this were the second act and then continue on with other stuff that occurs well after Bilbo's journey home.

2) I think Bilbo's direct return home should be the end of the resolution of the film. Yeah, I'm okay with having a lengthy resolution to wrap things up with characters and possibly have Bilbo BRIEFLY MENTION some events that have happened since his return home. But I don't want to see an entire third half of the movie about the hunt for Gollum and whatnot.

3) OH MY GOD PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, PJ, do not go with this whole "Parallel" timeline to LOTR. PJ and even GDT said from the beginning that they wanted to hobbit to seamlessly transition into LOTR. The framing device with Holm really does that perfectly. PLEASE just have Bilbo narrating the story in hobbiton a short time before the party in FOTR. No Rivendell. No Post-ROTK narration. It flows so perfectly from one story to the next if he has bilbo narrating in hobbiton before the events of FOTR.

4) If PJ were going to film extra stuff like the battle of Dale, then why would he do it like that and put it in the hobbit when he could just easily go back and put it in a future extended version of ROTK?

Anyone else with me on this?

Other than that I LOVED the first part of his review. Everything would work out great as long as PJ ends it where the hobbit timeline ends and has the framing device set up the very beginning of FOTR.

-Sir are you classified as human
-Negative, I am a meat-popsicle

 
 

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.