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: Northern Mine Barrage :
thoughs on The Hobbit and Movie #2
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 3:28am

Post #1 of 29 (474 views)
Shortcut
thoughs on The Hobbit and Movie #2 Can't Post

I'm kind of excited at the prospect of finally getting The Hobbit and a bonus movie as well. I’m probably one of the few that says ‘bring on another movie!’ despite the potential for disaster. Here are some hopes and fears:

First off The Hobbit should be a grand film in terms of length. One of the things that helped the Lord of the rings story fit into 3 movies successfully is the way that the story breaks into 3 plot threads after Fellowship which run sort of parallel through the next 2 books, allowing jump cuts and other devices to keep things moving through the films. Yeah, yeah, I love Tolkien's masterful writing just like everyone else, I grew up with it for Christ's sake. But I'm also a fan of Peter Jackson's ability to keep the movie exciting and well-paced when it could have gotten bogged down. The movies never seem slow to me, even in the expanded editions, which I love and consider to be close to definitive (they'll be truly definitive after Jackson adds another 30 minutes to each ;o) ).

The Hobbit, however, has no parallel plot threads to capitalize on, just one linear plot with a lot of stuff going on and less fat to trim. One of my pet peeves about the LOTR movies was the hacking of Tom Bombadil from the story, but I could understand the move from a filmmaker’s perspective. But the loss of a character like Beorn from The Hobbit (which I dread and almost thoroughly expect, just as with the Rankin Bass version) would have much more impact on the story, not only because he aided the party by giving them shelter and interrogating a goblin, but due to his major role in the Battle of Five Armies. That battle itself in fact is covered quite quickly in Tolkien's narrative but will require a lot of screen time. You have a quest on a scale of that in Fellowship, an encounter with a dragon which should not be rushed through, and on top of everything else a full-scale battle to cram into one movie. What I am getting at with all of this, as I said to begin with, is that The Hobbit should be long. At least as long as ROTK if not longer.

Since Peter Jackson pushed for long movies and longer special editions it can only be hoped that del Toro's vision will be similar. His running time for the Hobbit will be the first real indication of whether he 'gets it' or not. Any attempt to clock The Hobbit in at anything significantly under 3 hours will be misguided in my humble opinion. Peter Jackson's ability to make epic length movies with great pacing is what really made these movies work for me. It's also why I have doubts about anyone else being able to achieve what he did. But Guillermo del Toro is one of the best gambles out there, so we'll see.

Speaking of Tom Bombadil, Jackson, Boyens and Walsh have a great opportunity to redeem themselves with Tolkien fandom by bringing this great character into the story being prepared for film #2. Now I wouldn't generally condone writing a character into a movie just for the sake of it (or to make someone else happy, for that matter), but on the other hand Bombadil is such a multi-faceted character (check out a great essay: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/...o+heroes-a0163972510 ) that there ought to be many possibilities to work him into a brand new story in a compelling and relevant way.

I'm going to pause here for a general suggestion to fandom and moviemakers to consider. I think the title of movie #2 should be The Ranger (starring Viggo Mortensen).

Certainly there is lots of speculation about which actors might reprise their roles from LOTR in movie #2 and how it would tie in with the Trilogy. But as much as I like Elijah Wood in the character of Frodo, the character of Aragorn is much more complex and has so much more history to explore. What happens to Bilbo and the Ring (nothing) between The Hobbit and FOTR is pretty well documented. What happens to Frodo is also nothing, or maybe he could have some sort of adventure but then that would change the intentions of Tolkien for the character in a major, major way, wouldn't it? I don't care if he's popular… a story based around him wouldn’t make sense. It would be great if Frodo appeared in the movie for a cameo, but The Ranger and what happens to bring his character into the LOTR story we saw in the movies is much more relevant and important. It's really of parallel importance to Bilbo finding the ring. What events led up to Aragorn sitting at that table in the Prancing Pony? There is further depth that could be added to the Arwen & Aaragorn story (however, the movie should not be just an Aragorn/Arwen drama… Tolkien wouldn’t ever have bothered with a simple love story). If you look up Aragorn on Wikipedia you’ll find a brief history that condenses Tolkien’s appendix writings into a few paragraphs and sets the mind a–wandering. Certainly Aaragorn’s search for and questioning of Gollum could work it’s way into a plot, bringing King Thranduil (of Mirkwood) into the plot as well… a tie-in to The Hobbit (and the Trilogy… Thranduil is also the father of Legolas). Side note: I’ve always wanted to know more about the relationship between the wood-elves of Mirkwood and the Elves of Rivendell. Aragorn's relationship to Elrond could be further explored. Strider knew Tom Bombadil as well. What was their earlier relationship like? What of the other Istari? Radagast could be brought into the story. What other regions could be explored? Arnor? Ered Luin (Blue Mountains)? Forodwaith (I always loved that name)? The Witch-Realm Of Angmar (didn't you always want to know more about that?)? Great possibilities.

In fact there are so many possibilities you could almost make another trilogy with The Hobbit as part one… ok, well maybe I’m going overboard but what the hell. I’m a firm believer in messing with tradition so I have none of the canonical issues that many Tolkien fanatics have. The books are the books… the movies are a different animal. Why not have some fun?

Anyway, as I’m bringing all of this what-if scenario stuff up, I'm thinking two thoughts that I want to throw out there and then I'll shut up. First of all, Fran, Phillippa and Peter should use every speck of information that they can find in the books and appendices to develop the story as closely as they can to something Tolkien himself might have concocted. If there's any more obvious thread to develop than the story of Strider I can't imagine what it would be. Obviously they will have to create a lot, including a major dramatic plot device to carry a story so it's not just a documentary of 40 years of history... but of course they know all that. I hope they can succeed. Secondly, and just as importantly to me, I think to make the story feel the way Tolkien feels, and to make the movie feel the way a Tolkien screen adaptation feels, they need to write a narrative that they can't possibly film. Give it depth that couldn't be touched in 3 hours. Then make the best movie they can from that starting point. Again, this is probably already obvious to them.

I wish I could be a fly on the wall as they toss ideas around. I for one am excited to see what they might come up with. But I pray that they follow the path of Aragorn. And I am also nervous for them because they will be up against such a great deal of scrutiny. Making a story and a film of the story that are worthy of Tolkien as well as their own previous effort is probably a much more daunting task than the original trilogy was.

So I guess I'll stop there. I was gonna make some cast suggestions but I've already gone on too long so I'll save that for some other time. I would love to hear what people think about some of my comments. Cheers everybody!
Keith Fotheringham
Ballston Spa, New York


N.E. Brigand
First Mate


Apr 30 2008, 4:43am

Post #2 of 29 (236 views)
Shortcut
About Beorn's "-major- role in the Battle of Five Armies". [In reply to] Can't Post

How major could it be if Tolkien relegated it to a few sentences described after the fact?
Although I also hope Beorn will be in the film. Thanks for the link to the Mythlore article!


Quote
I’ve always wanted to know more about the relationship between the wood-elves of Mirkwood and the Elves of Rivendell.


Well, you won't learn that from a fan-fiction film by Guillermo del Toro (no matter how excellent it might be as a movie).

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!

Join us Apr. 28-May 4 for "Treebeard".


Aerin
Boatswain


Apr 30 2008, 4:55am

Post #3 of 29 (182 views)
Shortcut
Welcome to the boards! [In reply to] Can't Post

I haven't really spent much time thinking about what should be covered in movie #2, but it really does make sense to focus on Aragorn. The big question (besides whether the filmmakers agree) is whether Viggo would be available, since I now can't see anyone else in the role. I would also LOVE to see more of Hugo Weaving's Elrond.

BTW, I grew up in Niskayuna, so hi to a fellow upstate New Yorker.


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 4:59am

Post #4 of 29 (205 views)
Shortcut
learning more from a fan-fiction film... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
How major could it be if Tolkien relegated it to a few sentences described after the fact?
Although I also hope Beorn will be in the film. Thanks for the link to the Mythlore article!


Quote
I’ve always wanted to know more about the relationship between the wood-elves of Mirkwood and the Elves of Rivendell.


Well, you won't learn that from a fan-fiction film by Guillermo del Toro (no matter how excellent it might be as a movie).



Of course I won't learn anything new about Tolkien's original creative work. It's just one of the many *fun* plot ideas that could be explored. Please don't take the tone of my post as thinking that Tolkien's writings are unimportant. I love them with all of my heart. I just think that in the context of the movie it will be fun to see some 'what-ifs' explored and some existing history elaborated on. And this is the last I'll say on the subject because I don't want to get into a grand debate about whether they should do it or not. It's already decided on. It is what it is. We'll always have the books, people, so don't let it bother you!
Cheers!
Keith Fotheringham

P.S. perhaps a few decades from now someone will film 'The Complete Tolkien' as a 60-part internet distributed dramatic series, making sure every detail and line of dialog in all the books is intact. Then and only then will the purists be happy. ;o)


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 5:13am

Post #5 of 29 (200 views)
Shortcut
Beorn's role in The Battle Of Five Armies [In reply to] Can't Post

One other point...


In Reply To
How major could it be if Tolkien relegated it to a few sentences described after the fact?
Although I also hope Beorn will be in the film. Thanks for the link to the Mythlore article!



Yes, but those few sentences describe a very major role, don't you think? Beorn came late to the battle and turned the final tide, saving Thorin and killing Bolg, causing the Goblins to flee. His role was relegated to a few sentences because Tolkien is describing events that Bilbo did not take part in and learned of after he was 'stunned.'

As for the link, it's my pleasure. Mythlore rocks!
Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


N.E. Brigand
First Mate


Apr 30 2008, 5:22am

Post #6 of 29 (188 views)
Shortcut
Not even then. [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
Perhaps a few decades from now someone will film 'The Complete Tolkien' as a 60-part internet distributed dramatic series, making sure every detail and line of dialog in all the books is intact. Then and only then will the purists be happy.


Every line of dialogue might be there, but the intonation, pacing and accents would never satisfy everyone. And then there's all the unfilmable stuff. One of my favorite examples: how do you film the comment, as Aragorn leaves Cerin Amroth in Bk. II, Ch. 6, that he "came there never again as living man"? Do you keep a picture-in-picture at the corner of the frame until the end of the film, showing that Aragorn still hasn't returned? But what if he came back later? Or what if he came back as a ghost? That's one possibility -- but deciding to show it is making a choice that not everyone will agree with? Or maybe you use a narrator -- but whose voice should it be?

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!

Join us Apr. 28-May 4 for "Treebeard".


N.E. Brigand
First Mate


Apr 30 2008, 5:25am

Post #7 of 29 (176 views)
Shortcut
Well [In reply to] Can't Post

...certainly Beorn's role is decisive in the outcome of the battle, but (as I have been arguing over on the Main board) Tolkien seems to have felt no particular need to show that outcome directly or at length. So the filmmakers also could choose --if they are bold enough?-- to cut away when Bilbo is stoned, and have us like him learn about it afterwards.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!

Join us Apr. 28-May 4 for "Treebeard".


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 5:38am

Post #8 of 29 (190 views)
Shortcut
The Battle Of Five Armies... show it or not? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
...certainly Beorn's role is decisive in the outcome of the battle, but (as I have been arguing over on the Main board) Tolkien seems to have felt no particular need to show that outcome directly or at length. So the filmmakers also could choose --if they are bold enough?-- to cut away when Bilbo is stoned, and have us like him learn about it afterwards.



It would be a very interesting device if Del Toro decided to fade to black and leave the battle when Bilbo is knocked out, yes it would. I can't imagine them doing it though. The battle is such a spectacle, if they cut it short I for one would be very disappointed. Probably a lot of other movie goers (Peter Jackson included) would be disappointed as well. Since this a an epic movie and not the book, I would rather see the battle in full. That's just me.
Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 5:40am

Post #9 of 29 (166 views)
Shortcut
Hi Niskayuna! [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I haven't really spent much time thinking about what should be covered in movie #2, but it really does make sense to focus on Aragorn. The big question (besides whether the filmmakers agree) is whether Viggo would be available, since I now can't see anyone else in the role. I would also LOVE to see more of Hugo Weaving's Elrond.

BTW, I grew up in Niskayuna, so hi to a fellow upstate New Yorker.



I would also love to see more Hugo Weaving. I have friends in Niskayuna. Great town!
Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 5:52am

Post #10 of 29 (168 views)
Shortcut
Not even then... so true [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

Quote
Perhaps a few decades from now someone will film 'The Complete Tolkien' as a 60-part internet distributed dramatic series, making sure every detail and line of dialog in all the books is intact. Then and only then will the purists be happy.


Every line of dialogue might be there, but the intonation, pacing and accents would never satisfy everyone. And then there's all the unfilmable stuff. One of my favorite examples: how do you film the comment, as Aragorn leaves Cerin Amroth in Bk. II, Ch. 6, that he "came there never again as living man"? Do you keep a picture-in-picture at the corner of the frame until the end of the film, showing that Aragorn still hasn't returned? But what if he came back later? Or what if he came back as a ghost? That's one possibility -- but deciding to show it is making a choice that not everyone will agree with? Or maybe you use a narrator -- but whose voice should it be?



Well of course, what was I thinking. My attempt at sarcasm failed miserably because the purists won't ever be happy. But here's to the purists... the world would be less interesting without them.
Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


N.E. Brigand
First Mate


Apr 30 2008, 5:56am

Post #11 of 29 (166 views)
Shortcut
Indeed not! [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
My attempt at sarcasm failed miserably because the purists won't ever be happy.


I don't think so. It was me who failed in attempting to extend your joke too far.


Quote
But here's to the purists... the world would be less interesting without them.


Thanks! *decides to carry on another day*

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!

Join us Apr. 28-May 4 for "Treebeard".


entmaiden
Forum Admin / Moderator


Apr 30 2008, 9:20am

Post #12 of 29 (158 views)
Shortcut
Not sure I agree about "epic" [In reply to] Can't Post

The Hobbit is not an epic book, and I think that much of what I like about it will be lost if the movie becomes an epic type of movie. While I agree that the Battle of Five Armies will probably be shown more than what is described in the book, I don't want another movie version of Helm's Deep or Pelennor Fields.

From what I've seen in intreviews so far, GDT seems to "get" The Hobbit. I'm mildly hopeful he won't make LOTR - The Early Years, but will bring us a story of the awakening of a simple hobbit as he journeys outside his country, and the courage that hobbit shows when faced with a difficult choice.

Each cloak was fastened about the neck with a brooch like a green leaf veined with silver.
`Are these magic cloaks?' asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
`I do not know what you mean by that,' answered the leader of the Elves.


NARF since 1974.
Balin Bows


Unspoken_Request
Powder Monkey

Apr 30 2008, 2:03pm

Post #13 of 29 (157 views)
Shortcut
If they make a movie on Aragorn then it should be a trilogy... [In reply to] Can't Post

because I think the most important plot point related to both the Hobbit and to LOTR is Dol Guldur and the White Council.

While interesting, the Aragorn story is not related to the Hobbit. No storyline unites the two tales. Wanting to tell the tale of Aragorn shouldn't put aside the more important story for Middle-earth (and for LOTR) of how the ennemies of Sauron discover he has returned (the Necromancer) and how they decide to chase him from Dol Guldur.
Unless they find a way to mesh the Aragorn story into this major storyline, I would prefer that they let The Ranger story remain on the bookshelf for now (until they agree on making this new venture a Trilogy!!!)

A new trilogy: The Hobbit; The White Council; The Ranger
That sounds good to me!!


(This post was edited by Unspoken_Request on Apr 30 2008, 2:04pm)


Unspoken_Request
Powder Monkey

Apr 30 2008, 2:20pm

Post #14 of 29 (137 views)
Shortcut
Possible spoiler in my previous message [In reply to] Can't Post

I just re-read this from your first message: "If there's any more obvious thread to develop than the story of Strider I can't imagine what it would be"

Well Dol Guldur and the White council is the obvious thread. So obvious that GDT (and one of his interviewers who understood what he was talking about) have already hinted that they may go down this road...

If you don't know about it, maybe it is because you don't know about the Necromancer and how important he is to both The Hobbit and LOTR. The above message may spoil you the surprise about this whole thread...
Sorry if that was the case. You seemed quite knowledgeable about Tolkien and I lowered down my guard.



(This post was edited by Unspoken_Request on Apr 30 2008, 2:20pm)


Mirabella_Bunce
Cabin Boy

Apr 30 2008, 4:43pm

Post #15 of 29 (140 views)
Shortcut
that Worrisome Sequel... [In reply to] Can't Post

I must say the whole concept of this "sequel" movie worries me sick. It strikes me too much as FanFic, even if it is being created by the two or three human beings on Earth most qualified to do it.

I try to console myself by saying that well, yes, Tolkien did write and allude to many goings-on that may well go into a "sequel." At least: together with The Hobbit, there is enough material for at least Two Movies. I just can't convince myself these events should actually BE a "sequel" per se (as in: taking place only after Bilbo's return to Bag End and before his subsequent departure at age eleventy one.) Because so many of the important events that link the Hobbit to LOTR occurred during, and in some cases even before, Bilbo and the Dwarves' journey and "the incident with the dragon."

Knowing what Gandalf, Galadriel, Aragorn, Gollum, Saruman etc. were doing off the Hobbit radar is tremendously helpful in understanding how the Hobbit is indeed very much connected to LOTR. It's just the chronological sequence that has me worried.

In order to make "a sequel" in the strictest sense of the word, we would have to leave out many important events, namely ones that happened before April 25 2941 (For instance: Gandalf's finding Thorin's father in the dungeons of the Necromancer, and his talking with the Dwarves about how all-out war on Smaug would be a very bad idea and how he had thought of a better strategy involving a certain hobbit he knew of!) What happens between 2942 and 3001 might - with some padding (probably long, tedious battle scenes, ugh!) be enough to fill out a respectable-length movie. But without making up totally new (i.e. not written or even alluded to by Tolkien) events out of whole cloth, it would still lack certain elements that are essential to a good Story, namely: a Beginning, a Middle, and an End. And that's where the FanFic part comes in that worries me.

One thing I can say is that I do feel fairly confident that if Philippa Boyens is involved in writing the screenplay, whether it be "The Hobbit plus A Sequel" or actually incorporating enough backstory and afterstory to make the whole Hobbit venture into two movies, it will for the most part be really good stuff.


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 4:44pm

Post #16 of 29 (113 views)
Shortcut
sorry, but I think The Hobbit IS an epic book... and the Battle IS an epic battle [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
The Hobbit is not an epic book, and I think that much of what I like about it will be lost if the movie becomes an epic type of movie. While I agree that the Battle of Five Armies will probably be shown more than what is described in the book, I don't want another movie version of Helm's Deep or Pelennor Fields.

From what I've seen in intreviews so far, GDT seems to "get" The Hobbit. I'm mildly hopeful he won't make LOTR - The Early Years, but will bring us a story of the awakening of a simple hobbit as he journeys outside his country, and the courage that hobbit shows when faced with a difficult choice.



I think that the problem people have seeing the Battle Of Five Armies as the epic battle that it was, is the way that Tolkien treated it. It's so boiled down in it's description, so brief in the text, that it might seem to have less significance to the story. I've always thought it was one of Tolkien's mistakes (yes, mistake... he's not a god, just a man). It seems like he got to that point in the book and got lazy. He didn't want to write a huge battle, he just wanted to finish the book so he had Bilbo get knocked out. He took the easy way out. I don't believe he self-edited because children were reading. If so, why then would he present LOTR as a sequal to The Hobbit. Anyway, I might be wrong but if you read the text carefully I don't think you could come away thinking the Battle Of Five Armies was anything but a major conflict... probably on the scale of Helm's Deep in my opinion... perhaps greater. Of course Tolkien was doing something different with the Hobbit than he did with LOTR, and his treatment of it encourages some people to want it to be smaller in scale and a more intimate movie... less epic.

I have a different view of The Hobbit. I have always thought of The Hobbit as epic in the same way as I thought of LOTR as epic. I always viewed it as one part of a larger story... a book equal to FOTR, TT or ROTK. It really is an epic journey even though there's the personnal story of Bilbo being told. As with Frodo in LOTR, there is certainly more story being told than Bilbo's own awakening, even though it's the centerpiece of the tale. At the time I first read The Hobbit fantasy was not written in huge 3-part books like virtually every fantasy story is today so personally I never thought of The Hobbit as a lesser novel or a children's book. It seemed big to me. It may be a great book for kids but to think of it in just those terms is a mistake.

Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


Mirabella_Bunce
Cabin Boy

Apr 30 2008, 4:55pm

Post #17 of 29 (113 views)
Shortcut
Definition(s) of "Epic" [In reply to] Can't Post

Gotta love Google

Epic according to wordnet.princeton:
  • very imposing or impressive; surpassing the ordinary (especially in size or scale); "an epic voyage"; "of heroic proportions"; "heroic sculpture"
  • epic poem: a long narrative poem telling of a hero's deeds
  • constituting or having to do with or suggestive of a literary epic; "epic tradition"
Or, according to thefreedictionary.com:

1. An extended narrative poem in elevated or dignified language, celebrating the feats of a legendary or traditional hero.2. A literary or dramatic composition that resembles an extended narrative poem celebrating heroic feats.3. A series of events considered appropriate to an epic: the epic of the Old West.

According to these I think The Hobbit qualifies as an Epic - at least, once it stops being a Fairy Tale (somewhere along about the time the party is attacked by Wolves in the mountains and Gandalf drives them off by setting them on fire.)

OK so Bilbo is not exactly Beowulf. Sly But in time he became quite the folk hero among both Hobbits and other races. And The Hobbit is the story of his journey and his deeds. He even meets the qualification for "surpassing the ordinary (especially in size or scale)" although he surpasses it in the opposite direction...


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 5:15pm

Post #18 of 29 (116 views)
Shortcut
Dol Guldur.. an obvious thing I forgot about... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I just re-read this from your first message: "If there's any more obvious thread to develop than the story of Strider I can't imagine what it would be"

Well Dol Guldur and the White council is the obvious thread. So obvious that GDT (and one of his interviewers who understood what he was talking about) have already hinted that they may go down this road...

If you don't know about it, maybe it is because you don't know about the Necromancer and how important he is to both The Hobbit and LOTR. The above message may spoil you the surprise about this whole thread...
Sorry if that was the case. You seemed quite knowledgeable about Tolkien and I lowered down my guard.



... but I still think The Ranger is worth considering as well. You're right... a new Trilogy! With all the history leading up to LOTR there is more than enough story to fill another trilogy.

Actually Dol Guldur and the White Council are something I had simply forgotten about. Not a spoiler, don't worry. Even though I re-read The Hobbit and LOTR every year or two, it had been a long, long time since I had read the appendices, The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The Books of Lost Tales and such (and I have never read many of Christopher Tolkien's more recent volumes).

The Movie#2 thing has sparked my interest to return to these old books (as did reading The Children of Húrin last year) and refill my foggy brain with Tolkien trivia. I'll have to unpack my first edition Unfinished Tales that I got for Christmas in 1980 when I was 16 and crack it for the first time in years!

Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


Unspoken_Request
Powder Monkey

Apr 30 2008, 5:17pm

Post #19 of 29 (121 views)
Shortcut
Some of GDT's interviews could reassure you [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems the second movie is not strictly a "sequel" in the sense that the events occur after The Hobbit. GDT has explained that their ideas for a second movie involve a great of stuff that happens while the quest of the Hobbit is going on.
This clearly means: The White Council and Dol Guldur.

Considering this, I would be very surprised if the encounter between Gandalf and Thorin's father in the Necromancer's dungeon isn't shown somewhere during these two movies. Whether it is in the first or in the second movie is entirely up to them. It depends on how they decide to tell the story and when they want to reveal the essential background to The Hobbit.

Just an idea: this could be how they start both films (showing different informations about this pivotal moment in the history of Middle-earth) depending on the way the story is going.
Version 1) Thorin's father giving the map to Gandalf and talking about the Lonely mountain for The Hobbit...
Version 2) Gandalf discovering important information about the Necromancer as a way to start a second movie involving the White Council and how they deal with the Lord of Dol Guldur...


Unspoken_Request
Powder Monkey

Apr 30 2008, 5:23pm

Post #20 of 29 (103 views)
Shortcut
Wether in two movies or three, [In reply to] Can't Post

if they can find an effective way to tell both the Dol Guldur thread and Aragorn's story (this means Aragorn's story shouldn't feel tacked on the rest), we would have the best of both world.

This second movie also got me interested in re-reading my old Tolkien books. I just finished the Hobbit and I am hesitating about going to the appendices next or to the Unfinished Tales...

Anyweay, have a good read


(This post was edited by Unspoken_Request on Apr 30 2008, 5:23pm)


Magpie
Captain


Apr 30 2008, 5:31pm

Post #21 of 29 (102 views)
Shortcut
It's interesting, N.E. [In reply to] Can't Post

...how some people's humor goes right over my head but I usually get yours. I thought this was pretty funny:


Quote
how do you film the comment, as Aragorn leaves Cerin Amroth in Bk. II, Ch. 6, that he "came there never again as living man"? Do you keep a picture-in-picture at the corner of the frame until the end of the film, showing that Aragorn still hasn't returned?







magpie avatar gallery ~ soundtrack website


keithf777
Swabbie

Apr 30 2008, 5:36pm

Post #22 of 29 (131 views)
Shortcut
so now there becomes a need for three movies! [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
It seems the second movie is not strictly a "sequel" in the sense that the events occur after The Hobbit. GDT has explained that their ideas for a second movie involve a great of stuff that happens while the quest of the Hobbit is going on.
This clearly means: The White Council and Dol Guldur.



Your posts are sparking memories and I see clearly now how much sense it makes to pursue the White Council plot thread. However I still am attached to my idea of Strider as the centerpiece of a movie as well. How, oh how, will I convince Jackson enterprises to include film #3 (The Ranger! shameless plug)?
LOL, you never know...

Cheers,
Keith Fotheringham


FrodoEyes
Cabin Boy

Apr 30 2008, 5:53pm

Post #23 of 29 (93 views)
Shortcut
Beorn [In reply to] Can't Post

Didn't GDT say in a recent interview how important he saw Beorn? I must say I thought he would be the Tom Bombadil of the Hobbit too but maybe not! Speaking of Tom, I would love to see him in the sequel film but I don't see how. Him and the Scouring of the Shire (Plus to a lesser extent GTW's meeting at the gates of Minas Tirith with the Witch King and the whole of the conversation with the Mouth of Sauron) were the moments I missed most in the film.


Unspoken_Request
Powder Monkey

Apr 30 2008, 6:26pm

Post #24 of 29 (102 views)
Shortcut
Check out this thread [In reply to] Can't Post

http://newboards.theonering.net/forum/gforum/perl/gforum.cgi?post=93186;sb=post_time;so=DESC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

Especially the posts by AinurOlorin (go beyond the caps and bold characters).

He has an even more intricate idea of how the two movies could go together. To me, this is the way they should go. It would all make sense.
Unfortunately, this probably leaves very few moments for Aragorn's story...

Who knows, maybe there is an elegant way to link Aragorn's story to this whole story that we haven't thought of...

Elegant would mean not replacing Bard by Aragorn... This would be an easy solution that would leave a bitter taste to many fans (it would also feel tacked on)

Still, this is something I fear they will explore because they would solve 2 problems; 1) Bard is an unknown character that gets to kill the main antagonist in The Hobbit... it's not very cinematic to have the big Dragon you spent hours talking about killed by some random guy with a bow... 2) Bringing in Aragorn to kill Smaug would preserve the tale's structure (if not its content) and it would be a crowd pleaser. Since Bard is described a bit like Aragorn (grim, but still an honorable man), it wouldn't be a major change of tone to replace him by an already established character. + Bard wouldn't look like a proto-Aragorn (which he essentially is if you read Tolkien; both characters have a lot in common).


(This post was edited by Unspoken_Request on Apr 30 2008, 6:26pm)


Mirabella_Bunce
Cabin Boy

Apr 30 2008, 7:06pm

Post #25 of 29 (72 views)
Shortcut
Perfect! I love it! [In reply to] Can't Post

> Version 1) Thorin's father giving the map to Gandalf and talking about
> the Lonely mountain for The Hobbit...

That would make a very dramatic opening scene, and very Del-Toro-ish, too, I might add! If I'm remembering right, Thrain was more than half mad by that point and didn't even remember his own name anymore. All he could manage to stammer out was that he had to get these items to his son, and once he'd given them to Gandalf, he died.... cut to a sunny moring in the Shire with chirping birds and a little guy blowing smoke-rings on his porch...

(I am SO looking forward to being able to visit the Shire again!)


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

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

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

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

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