|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
carrioncrow
Menegroth
Jan 9 2008, 10:11am
Post #1 of 19
(1061 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Framing the Story : a 2-Film Hobbit
|
Can't Post
|
|
For LOTR, Peter Jackson's original proposal was for a two film version of the story (the first focused on dispatching Saruman, the second focused on Mordor&Gondor. The eventual +10 hour film trilogy gave him the freedom to include alot more story detail but also created a structural problems as to how to frame the story so that each of the three films could stand alone and as part of the whole. His ROTK probably gets the most criticism as a stand alone film (the endless endings)
So, although the news that we will get TWO MORE Middle Earth films is great, I still wonder how they will frame the story for each film.
One thing I don't understand is to what degree the filmmakers will have a free hand to utilize information from Tolkien writings other than the Hobbit. Although many of the same people are involved, the development of the two properties as films are two separate and tangled mess of partnerships, rights and agreements. The assumption that these two new films may borrow freely from the LOTR appendices aint neccesarily so.
But thinking big for a second, for Film One I keep getting drawn to Gandalf's 3 visits to Dol Guldur...it almost reads like a rough 3 act outline for a movie. (1) Year 2063-Gandalf goes goes to Dol Guldur/Sauron retreats/Dragon sends Dwarves into exile/white Council forms. (2) Year 2850-Gandalf re-enters Dol Guldur and discovers Sauron is the Master there and receives key of Erebor from Thrain, who has been imprisoned after his failed first attempt to reclaim Erebor. (3) Year 2941- The White Council attacks Dol Guldur, Dragon is killed and Dwarven Kingdom is restored.
For Film Two...I keep seeing this as opening with Sauron declaring himself openly in Mordor (Year 2951) and playing out through Aragorns great journeys and errantries...maybe crossing paths with Balin & Gollum and ending with Rangers taking up watch on the borders of the Shire.
The big problem with this outline is that the brilliant little childrens story of the Hobbit kind of gets lost in the shuffle. It would be a misnomer to even call either of the two resulting films: "The Hobbit"
(This post was edited by carrioncrow on Jan 9 2008, 10:18am)
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Gondolin
Jan 9 2008, 8:52pm
Post #2 of 19
(806 views)
Shortcut
|
|
A few problems with those scenarios.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Your first film is centered on Gandalf. Insofar as Gandalf is a very minor player in The Hobbit (he kicks it off and reappears at a couple of critical junctures), I don't feel that's appropriate. This is really Bilbo's story all the way through.
A second film centered on Aragorn could work, but it needs a climax, and taking up stations to protect the Shire is a bit underwhelming. I prefer to think that a 2nd film structure around Gandalf and Sauron, with the climax being ousting him from Dol Guldur.
As far as I know, The Hobbit and LotR are in the same 'rights' package, so reaching in to the LotR Appendices should be perfectly legal.
"Are you frightened?"
Discussing "Strider" Jan. 6-11 in the Reading Room
Elizabeth is the TORnsib formerly known as 'erather'
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Gondolin
Jan 9 2008, 9:59pm
Post #3 of 19
(777 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Gandalf is a pretty major character in The Hobbit
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Elrond is a minor character in The Hobbit, Gandalf factors heavily into over half the chapters in The Hobbit, and is very active. Also, without him there is no quest. You see more of him than in The Two Towers, and probably as much of him as you see in Fellowship, which is pretty major by my reckoning.
Yet I agree about the Second film. We see Orodruin burst into flame again in Fellowship, so it seems highly unlikely that the film would begin with Sauron's declaration. I doubt it will have the luxury of going back a thousand years to Gandalf's first visit to Dol Guldur, but will almost have to cover, even if in back telleing, his Second visit roughly 100 years before The Hobbit, as well as The White Council Business, and The Council's attack on Dol Guldur, as well, perhaps, as Balin's failed attempt to retake Moria, Aragorn's hunt for Gollum, and Saruman's search for the ring.
"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."
|
|
|
entmaiden
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jan 9 2008, 10:18pm
Post #4 of 19
(773 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Gandalf doesn't affect the outcome, though.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
He's a tertiary character, after Bilbo and Thorin. Gandalf might have a lot of page-time, but in terms of the plot, I agree with Elizabeth. The Hobbit is Bilbo's story, hence the title.
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
|
|
|
burrahobbit
Nargothrond
Jan 10 2008, 12:29am
Post #5 of 19
(775 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Possible for a 2 film Hobbit that keeps the story?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You're right that the structure of the upcoming films are going to be interesting. What will be the character arcs, the themes, and the climax of the films, and what are the key events that could link the films together- both to each other and to Lord of the Rings?
The current consensus seems to be around a Hobbit film, followed by a prequel film. This has the advantage of having a Hobbit film that is largely faithful to the Hobbit book (though perhaps not faithful to Tolkien's later Quest for Erebor ideas). The Hobbit has a great climax with Smaug and the battle of the five armies, and good character development (though it's rather linear and predictable).
The big problem with this idea is the second prequel film. A couple of pages in the appendices a film does not make. Most suggestions (like AinurOlorin above) revolve around Aragorn, Gollum, Saruman, and driving Sauron from Dol Guldur. I find these difficult to put together into a film plot. The key parts of Gollum's story (that he had the one ring and has told Sauron of 'Shire and Baggins') are told in Lord of the Rings, so chasing Gollum to find out what we already know doesn't seem much of a story. We can't reveal Saruman is searching for the ring (as Gandalf still trusts him in LotR) so we're in a bit of bind there. Aragorn's main story again is told in LotR, and while there is the meeting Arwen story and adventures in Rohan, it's still a bit of a sideshow and repeating themes from LotR. Driving Sauron from Dol Guldur could work as a climax, though it wouldn't be a very triumphant climax as Sauron gets away.
For me the key event that brings together The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings is Gandalf's second visit to Dol Guldur when he discovers Sauron and Thrain, bringing the two story lines together. But crucially this occurs before The Hobbit, so would be awkward to describe in a prequel film that comes after the Hobbit.
I've been trying to think of ideas of a two film Hobbit that could retain The Hobbit as the core of the story, but also act as a prequel to Lord of the Rings by including the Dol Guldur story. It's proving tricky but I think it could work. The dwarven rings story, where Sauron's rings cause greater greed in the dwarves bringing the dragons, unites Sauron rings of power and the Quest for Erebor stories. Searching for Durin's ring could lead Gandalf to Thorin, then to Dol Guldur and by finding Thrain to kickstarting the Hobbit story. The general themes of greed and the conflict between dwarves and elves could hold the story together, along with Bilbo discovering his courage. I'll post again when I've developed this ideas in more detail.
This idea would involve splitting the Hobbit into two films, probably after escaping from the orcs via the eagles, or escaping from the elven king. Neither is a massive climax, but would be similar in feeling to the ending of FotR and TTT. Maybe this isn't ideal, but on the other hand leaves more time for some great scenes like Riddles in the Dark to get their full treatment. It would also involve changing the Hobbit to more of a Lord of the Rings darker style.
|
|
|
carrioncrow
Menegroth
Jan 10 2008, 12:30am
Post #6 of 19
(756 views)
Shortcut
|
If The film maker chooses to recast The Hobbit as a PG-13 film to match the tone of Jackson's previous film's then the actions and strategems of the White Council will move to the foreground and Gandalf will be undeniably a major character second only (prehaps) to Bilbo.
|
|
|
burrahobbit
Nargothrond
Jan 10 2008, 12:43am
Post #7 of 19
(759 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Could those prequel ideas come together into a plot?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm having trouble putting suggestions for events and characters in the prequel together into a good plot. Do you think it could work?
The attack on Dol Guldur ends with Sauron getting away, the search for Gollum ends with Sauron getting there first, Balin's attempt to retake Moria ends nastily too. It's not going to be a very uplifting film! 
The Saruman story with the white council could be good, but the film couldn't take it to it's conclusion as Gandalf still trusts Saruman in the Fellowship of the Ring.
Incidentally I totally agree that Gandalf is a major character in The Hobbit, he's very active. The only sense he's not major is that his character doesn't really develop in the way that Bilbo and Thorin's characters do in the story.
|
|
|
carrioncrow
Menegroth
Jan 10 2008, 12:57am
Post #8 of 19
(759 views)
Shortcut
|
The current consensus seems to be around a Hobbit film, followed by a prequel film. This has the advantage of having a Hobbit film that is largely faithful to the Hobbit book (though perhaps not faithful to Tolkien's later Quest for Erebor ideas). The Hobbit has a great climax with Smaug and the battle of the five armies, and good character development (though it's rather linear and predictable). I don't agree with that consensus, If the plan is to make a faithful Hobbit film that does not interest in itself in Tolkien's Quest for Erebor ideas (which would be absolutely okay with me)...then there is no reason for a bridge film between Bilbo's adventure and LOTR.
For me the key event that brings together The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings is Gandalf's second visit to Dol Guldur when he discovers Sauron and Thrain, bringing the two story lines together. But crucially this occurs before The Hobbit, so would be awkward to describe in a prequel film that comes after the Hobbit... I was thinking along these very lines earlier today after my original post. It also occured to me that my original post may contain an escape clause. I mentioned that Jackson's original plan was for a 2 film LOTR but that was later 'upgraded' to a 3 film project. Couldn't maybe the same thing happen again. Some one said we don't have the luxury of showing Gandalf 1000 years earlier. Why not? The gap in time would not have to be explicitly stated to have been 1000 years. So here's an alternative. Make Prequel Film 1= "The Hobbit" containing more or less the events of the Hobbit + some White Council stuff including making the casting down of Dul Guldur and ending with Gandalf, Balin and Frodo at Bag End. Make Prequel Film 2= a prequel to the prequel, in other words from the White Council striving with Dolguldur tied with the Dwarves exile and first failed attempt at reclaiming Erebor with the obvious lynch pin being Gandalf's second investigation of Dol Guldur when he finds the key and map. It could end in the Shire where (according to the unfinished tales) Gandalf coincidental crossing paths with Thorin and Bilbo plants the seed of his idea for the second Quest of Erebor. Make Prequel Film 3= The Young Aragorn "Hero's Quest sword and sorcery thingy" with cameos by any or all of the following: Gandalf Gollum Bilbo Arwen Elrond Denethor Balin Saruman Legolas Gimli. In fact, Prequel Film 3 would work whether or no you make Prequel Film 2...or you could make them in the opposite order.
(This post was edited by carrioncrow on Jan 10 2008, 12:58am)
|
|
|
Sunflower
Doriath
Jan 10 2008, 1:20am
Post #9 of 19
(748 views)
Shortcut
|
AllI can say is, Jackson has a plan for this. He sat down with Harry Sloan at MGM and outlined the 2-film scenario in detail. That was a large reason why Sloan laid the ultimatum down to NL, that he could not allow any sort of a deal to go through without him. So what PJ must have down on paper must be quite feasible. The problem, of course, is that he won;t be directing it, and likely won't be writing any of it either. And I fear that only a PJ script, or a Fran one, could have pulled it all creditably together. We shall see....
|
|
|
Compa_Mighty
Dor-Lomin
Jan 10 2008, 1:36am
Post #10 of 19
(773 views)
Shortcut
|
I am borrowing from a post I made around July of last year:
I want to elaborate a little on the first minutes of the first movie.
The Hobbit: A Hobbit's Tale
The first image is Lonely Mountain at night. Then we come in and see a feast the King under the Mountain is hosting. We get to see all the majesty of both the King and the Kingdom of Erebor. Suddenly, there's screaming by the sentinels, and we start seeing fire, terrible noises of wings flapping are in the air... the warriors take their weapons to face the threat but never come back, dead by the fire of the beast.
The title comes on... The Hobbit.
Perhaps the track Concerning Hobbits comes in very lightly in the background.
Gandalf, in voice off, starts speaking the classic lines of the beginning of the book, not all the chapter, but a nice selection that could be done to introduce the movie:
We'll take a kind of tour of Bag End, the camera moving as if it were the spectator who just entered the place.
"In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort."
From then on, Gandalf continues:
"This hobbit was a very well-to-do hobbit, and his name was Baggins. The Bagginses have lived in the neighbourhood of The Hill for time out of mind, and people considered them very respectable, not only because most of them were rich, but also because they never had any adventures or did anything unexpected. This is a story of how a Baggins had an adventure, and found himself doing and saying things altogether unexpected. he may have lost the neighbours' respect, but he gained -- well, you will see whether he gained anything in the end."
Voice off ends, we see a shot of Gandalf near Bag End, and Bilbo says: Good morning!
That's what I thought so far.
The rest of the flashback of the destruction of Erebor could be told later by either Gandalf or Thorin, depending on the effect and storytelling decisions they make. They would need to complete it with group of dwarves walking in the open, with the smoking silhouette of Lonely Mountain behind. We then see Thrain and Thror, the map, etc.
Throughout the first movie we see the events in the book and the core of the debates at the White Council, these scenes are obviously cut in between, as to explain the importance of Gandalf leaving the company.
I believe the sequence for the end of the first one should be: Gandalf leaves them in the verge of Mirkwood, and we know nothing of him until the second movie. All the action in Mirkwood happens, and the last shot of the first movie is Bilbo clinging to the barrell and seeing the Lonely Mountain from afar.
It's a little beyond the half of the book. But I think it would work, given the amount of action that happens afterwards.
The Hobbit: There and Back Again
Second movie begins with Gandalf, showing us where he went, probably the last decision of the White Council to attack Dol Guldur and the march of whatever army they assembled towards the site of the battle.
The dwarves arrive to Esgaroth, and once they decide to leave, we have a new update on the White Council story, then on, all focuses on Bilbo and the dwarves, the story goes as it is in the book. We get to see Smaug for the first time in the same way as John howe drew him http://img-fan.theonering.net/...ages/howe/smaug2.jpg. It is an impresive scene, both for Bilbo and the spectator. The outcome of the Battle at Dol Guldur is seen in a flashback when Bilbo asks Gandalf where he was when he left them (right before the Battle of the Five Armies), in the fashion of Gandalf's flashback in the Fellowship, where we see it, although he only tells Frodo he "was delayed". The flashback also includes the fleeing of Sauron, possibly embodied as a dark, almost physical shadow. The the Battle of the Five armies happens, we see Thorin's funeral, and the kiss and make up of dwarves, elves and men of Dale.
Second movie ends with a collage. Gollum going into Mordor, and seeing the contruction of Barad Dur from the pass of Cirith Ungol, Aragorn and the Rangers in the border of The Shire, they look, turn back, and ride towards the open field. Finally Bilbo arriving to Bag End displaying a little of the comfort of his hobbit-hole. The Sackville-Bagginses problem will probably be eliminated, for similar climactic reasons for which they eliminated the Scouring of the Shire.
So there, hope you like it.
Let it be heard! We want Jackson to direct The Hobbit!
Essay winner of the Show us your Hobbit Pride Giveway!
|
|
|
Finding Frodo
Dor-Lomin
Jan 10 2008, 4:32am
Post #11 of 19
(737 views)
Shortcut
|
I do. I like it much better than a single Hobbit movie followed by a movie of who-knows-what? A couple of questions: In the second movie you say we get our first view of Smaug as John Howe drew him. Do you mean that we don't get to actually see his attack on Erebor and Dale at the beginning? I'm not sure I like that destruction being laid out right then either -- I think I'd rather have the backstory go in the party scene, and I definitely want to see the dragon. That way, we have a really innocent opening (and I'd keep the voiceover and 'Good Morning" as you wrote it), and then when Thorin tells Bilbo the story and we see the fire and the deaths of the warriors and hear the terrible noise of the wings, we'll want to freak out along with Bilbo.
Great post -- I don't remember reading it before.
Where's Frodo?
|
|
|
Compa_Mighty
Dor-Lomin
Jan 10 2008, 6:02am
Post #12 of 19
(728 views)
Shortcut
|
I think Smaug could be played by his shadow, fire and noises in the prologue, just to keep the mystery and make the audience marvel at the dragon the same way Bilbo does.
But if they show teh dragon at the beginning I'll be just as happy. 
Let it be heard! We want Jackson to direct The Hobbit!
Essay winner of the Show us your Hobbit Pride Giveway!
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Gondolin
Jan 10 2008, 9:08am
Post #13 of 19
(734 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Entmaiden, I agree Bilbo is central, but Gandalf is MAJOR. as to the plot of film 2
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
(Ah, God, the page didn't dispaly, and I am re-writing this!)
I think that the Dol Guldur sequence, having happened about 100 years before the Hobbit, but being crucial to any bridge story, Must be in film two. It could be nicely handled in flashback retellings, or even as the prologue. Fellowship had a lengthy one, and certainly, next to the finding of the ring, Gandalf's unveiling of Sauron in Dol Guldur and his subsequent efforts to counter him are probably the most significant events leading up to The Great Years. Also, It would afford a great opportunity to amend the omission from the Fellowship film of Gandalf battling The Nine atop Amon Sul. ( I know they were in Minas Morgul, but they could have gone to Dol Guldur for security purposes in the 180 years between Gandalf's infiltiration and FOTR. Larger deviations have already been made by Jackson). Maybe they chase him towards Rivendel or Thranduil's realm and he battles them. What a SCENE!
I don't see the film team trying to truncate the near thousand year span between Gandalf's first visit and his second, just for the purpose of fitting it into the film, and I don't think they should.
I also don't believe things like Glorfindel driving off The Witch King at the end of The North Kingdom, or of Durin being slain, and dwarves and Elves being driven out of Moria and Lorien by The Balrog will make it in either, however I think some great concessions could be made where both these things are concerned.
In the case of Glorfindel, I would be greatly dissapointed and surprised if he wasn't in film two, considering that a fair deal of filler will be needed to flesh out the skeleton left by Tolkiens notes, which will have to involve The Council heavily, and considering how disheartened many of us were over his omission from Fellowship. I think there is at least as much room for the great Elf Lord, close friend to Gandalf and later to Aragorn, to have as substantial a secondary role in the bridge film as Haldir enjoyed in the Lotr films. He could even be shown conftronting wraiths in the battle on Dol Guldur, which MUST be in the second film, and will likely be its climax.
As to Balin and The Balrog. . . Balin's failed journey to Moria could be shown in much the same way that the ruin of Rohan and the Fall of Osgiliath were showcased in the LOTR films. It would be relevant bridge material, as Balin is a bridge character, featuring heavily in The hobbit, and being involved (albiet dead) in The Fellowship film. This would also provide a great chance to display The Balrog as the Sorcerous Captain of Melkor that he was, rather than a primarily a brute. The Balrog commanding orcs and trolls against Balin's small army of dwarves. What a scene! I don't think a merger of Balins fate with Durins would be too heretical (certainly not as much as many of Jacksons choices in the LOTR films).
I think Tolkien's main reason for not featuring the Balrog in Balin's colonial account, was that he was saving The Demon of Might as a dreadful surprise for the readers. Peter already cleverly forshadowed The Balrog and worked him into the fate of Balin's regiment, by placing that passage in The Colony Record tome. "A Shadow moves in The Dark." Besides, all filmgoers already know the Balrog is there, and it would be an odd let down to have Balin march into Moria and just "happen" to miss him.
As to Saruman, there is no reason the film can't show his plotting. the film is in 3rd person Omnicient, and thus, even though Gandalf should and likely will be the central character to The Bridge film, that does not preclude us from seeing Saruman doing things that he doesn't see. And remember that his trust in Saruman was already wavering slightly. But even were it not, to suggest that it would bar the director from showing Saruman plot would be akin to saying that Jackson should not have shown Gandalf's capture by Saruman, because Frodo is the main character in Fellowship, and doesn't discover this until Rivendell. Also, this would be a good chance to display Saruman's true intentions to capture the ring for his own ends, rather than portraying him as fully subserviant to Sauron. Lots of room for amendment in this film.
AND LET US SEE THE BLUE FLAME OF GANDALF"S MAGIC AS TOLKIEN RELATED IT!
"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."
|
|
|
carrioncrow
Menegroth
Jan 10 2008, 1:16pm
Post #14 of 19
(735 views)
Shortcut
|
|
let me mull that over a while.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Here's an Idea outline I had when we were still just expecting a single Hobbit Film.
I was try to swing it so the theatrical release was more or less the straight Hobbit but the DVD extended edition integrated a bunch of White Council stuff:
AN OUTLINE OF STORY STRUCTURE FOR FILM VERSION OF ‘THE HOBBIT’
SCENES INTENDED ONLY FOR EXTENDED EDITION DVD ARE DESCRIBED IN RED
Extended Edition DVD Scene(EEDVD): OPENING SCENE - Mayhem in the dwarf encampment under the eves of Mirkwood as King Thrain is overtaken and abducted by servants of the Necromancer. This would be an adrenaline rush ‘Bond-type’ opening, ending inconclusively with Balin leading the remnants of Thrain’s company into a uncertain and humiliating retreat.
FADE IN: The Theatrical release of the film begins with a straight on shot of the front door at Bag End. The opening title reads "THE HOBBIT".
CUT TO: A variety of vignettes of life around Hobbiton on a bright summer’s morning.
(EEDVD): CUT TO: A Hobbit, Master Samwise Gamgee (a respectable 102 years old), stands alone with the aid of a walking stick in contemplation in what appears to be a beautiful well tended garden in the midst of the glade where Frodo first appears in Peter Jackson’s FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. (It is, in truth, now the gravesite of Sam’s wife, Rose Gamgee).
CUT TO: A few more scenes of morning in Hobbiton.
CUT TO: A "well-to-do" Hobbit is shown tidying up on the doorstep of Bag End and preparing to settle down and enjoy a "pipe of tobacco out of doors". This hobbit is Samwise Gamgee, Master of Bag End. His morning regimen is disrupted by an intrusion...several of his own grandchildren (including a young Holfast Gardner) and other children from the holes of the Lower Hill. Up to mischief or actually seeking Samwise for entertainment…a tale is called for…"Frodo of the Nine-Fingers"…no…here on the doorstep of Bag End on this morning it is the Tale of Bilbo and "The Road going ever on and on…" that Sam has in mind. Sam sits down with the children all around and begins the tale of Bilbo’s adventure with Gandalf and the Quest for Erebor…
FADE TO: The events of THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 1 "An Unexpected Party" – PAGES 11-14
(EEDVD): CUT TO: Gandalf and Thorin’s Company strategize at an Inn of the Shire (The Ivy Bush?). Balin’s link to Thrain’s previous failed expedition and Gandalf’s acquisition of the key and map may be explained through a flashback.
CUT TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 1 – PAGES 15-36
(This scene may be edited down to avoid redundant exposition once the "Ivy Bush" scene is added)
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 2 "Roast Mutton"– PAGES 37-43 up to the point where Bilbo steps into the firelight of the three trolls…"and this is what he saw…" One of the trolls turns from the fire to face Bilbo. It is a terrible creature just as full of menace as those trolls portrayed in Moria or the Black Gate of Peter Jackson’s LOTR…
CUT TO: A trembling hobbit child (Holfast Gardner?). The story has become a bit too intense for the young hobbit. Sam interrupts the tale to speak a word of comfort, pauses to consider…The story resumes, but now in a gentler (strictly PG-rated) tone more reminiscent of JRRT’s original HOBBIT as written. The tone of the Film will only slowly build back to the PG-13 intensity of Jackson’s LOTR films.
FADE BACK: The story picks up again at the trolls’ camp. They are still threatening creatures, but now with intelligible speech and a slightly comic aspect to their character. Proceed with the story:
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 2 – PAGES 44-54
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 3 "A Short Rest" – PAGES 55-64
…"None to be seen by this moon", said Elrond…(EEDVD) At this point, Bilbo and most of the dwarves leave the council chamber, but Elrond, Gandalf, Thorin, Balin and perhaps Gloin remain for a brief conversation regarding the geopolitical ramifications of the dwarves’ expedition.
CUT TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 4 "Over Hill and Under Hill – PAGES 65-78
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 5 "Riddles in the Dark" – PAGES 79-100
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 6 "Out of the Frying Pan" – PAGES 101-106
Sam’s presence as "THE NARRATOR" will be keenly felt from the point Bilbo finds the ring until Bilbo is reunited with the dwarves on the Mountain side. Perhaps we’ll hear the children shout out the answer to the riddles…
CUT TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 6 – PAGES 107-121
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 7 "Queer Lodgings" – PAGES 122-148
(EEDVD) Under the eves of Mirkwood the Balin keenly feel the old loss and the old humiliation and a very immediate foreboding. Balin perhaps has a last separate word with Gandalf before the wizard departs on his business to the South.
FADE TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 8 "Flies and Spiders" – PAGES 151-181
(EEDVD) As Thorin is captured by the Wood elves (page 179), Gandalf can be shown also encountering wary elves in The Wild. These are elves of Lothlorien and might include Haldir.
FADE TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 9 "Barrels Out of Bond" – PAGES 183-200
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 10 "A Warm Welcome" – PAGES 201-213
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 11 "On the Doorstep" – PAGES 214-223
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 12 "Inside Information" – PAGES 224-226
CUT TO: Sam looking into the eyes of the hobbit children. "…Going on from there was the bravest thing Bilbo ever did. The tremendous things that happened afterwards were as nothing compared to it. He fought the real battle in that tunnel alone, before he ever saw the vast danger that lay in wait…" Sam pauses and looks into the eyes of young Holfast. Holfast sets his jaw and nods deliberately as if to say "Yes. Go on." At this point the tone of the film has returned to the PG-13 level and intensity of Peter Jackson’s LOTR films. The image of Bilbo walking down the dark tunnel toward the light and heat of the dragon’s lair draws obvious parallels to Sam’s own experience at Mount Doom.
FADE TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 12 – PAGES 227-245
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 13 "Not At Home" – PAGES 246-257
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 14 "Fire and Water" – PAGES 258-267
(EEDVD) As the people of Laketown overlook the ruins, Gandalf and Haldir investigate the now abandoned Dol Guldur. What do they find there that justifies their immediate departure for Lonely Mountain?
CUT TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 15 "The Gathering…" – PAGES 268-278
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 16 "A Thief In The Night" – PAGES 279-285
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 17 "The Clouds Burst" – PAGES 286-298
THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 18 "The Return Journey" – PAGES 299-307
(EEDVD) Some supplemental scene is needed to connect the alliance of the people of Thranduil, Dain and Bard to the greater aims of the White Council.
CUT TO: THE HOBBIT – CHAPTER 19 "The Last Stage" – PAGES 268-278
(EEDVD) The visit of Balin and Gandalf to Bag End will be expanded.
Gandalf, Balin and Bilbo settle down with their evening pipes outside the doorstep of Bag End.
FADE TO: Sam and the children sitting on the very same doorstep all those years later. It has changed little. It is now evening for Sam and the children as well. He finishes the tale and sends the children off to home and bed. Some reside at Bag End. Sam takes a moment alone to look at the stars. He recites a bit of his own poetry.
(EEDVD) As a few of the children enter the front hall of Bag End, Elanor (Sam’s eldest daughter) steps outside. She brings a satchel and Sam’s Elvish cloak. He has a moment with his daughter. A company of Elves comes around the hill on their way west to the sea. Sam has been expecting them. He heads off to join them with walking stick in hand.
THE END
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Gondolin
Jan 10 2008, 9:40pm
Post #15 of 19
(709 views)
Shortcut
|
Though I cannot imagine Gandalf taking Haldir with him into the dungeons of The Necromancer. Haldir was no high-elf and was not even on The Council. For all his fine Elven attributes, it seems there would be little for Haldir to do in that grim place than to be as a third foot to the great Wizard.
I think the film makers are pretty set on two films. I also think the first one, The Hobbit will likely be PG. I cannot imagine, bearing in mind that it was a book for children, and that, aside from having loved it as children, there are millions of parents (myself included, admitedly) who read it to their children, who show the old Rankin & Bass, and are eager for the day when they can take their 4 to 11 year olds to see a live version of the film. Of course all the adult fans will return. No one is going to boycott the film for having one less disemobowling. Any way, the Fellowship could have gotten a PG with a few slim omissions. The Narnia film, The Neverendign Story, Willow and the first three Harry Potter films were all wonderful, and all had tense moments and frightful creatures, but they enjoyed the broader audience of a PG rating. The only reason Fellowship fell short of this were, perhaps the ghoulish spectacle of Lurtz rising from the muck, but more consequntially, it was the scene of Lurtz loosing an arm and then being graphically decapitated by Aragorn. All that would be needed to sure up PG for The Hobbit would be to leave any grisly beheadings for the extended, and to let the second film go darker in that way.
"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."
|
|
|
burrahobbit
Nargothrond
Jan 11 2008, 12:07am
Post #16 of 19
(702 views)
Shortcut
|
Thanks for expanding on your thoughts- interesting ideas!
In terms of characters, I'm thinking the prequel film would very much revolve around Gandalf as the central character. He begins the story by identifying the threat of Sauron at Dol Guldur, Saruman overruling him at the White Council becomes the main obstacle to be overcome in the story, and the climax and resolution of the film would be the elves/rangers and wizards driving Sauron from Dol Guldur. Is this a fair summary of the core of the story? Lots of other story threads could be woven in (like Balin at Moria) but this would be the core I'm guessing.
I think we'd experience the film maily from Gandalf's point of view. That's where my thoughts on the difficulty with showing too much of Saruman's deceit comes from. Gandalf has to cooperate with Saruman at the climax of the film so can't suspect too much. You're right to say that the director could take a third person view like FotR, but I think the difference here would be that the Saruman-Gandalf conflict couldn't be brought to a resolution within the prequel film.
One reason I like a two film Hobbit over a Hobbit and prequel, is that when Gandalf is overruled at the White Council his response is to start the Quest for Erebor (at least as described in the appendices), to stop Sauron allying with the dragon and strengthing his orcs in the mountains. For me this story is easiest to tell before the Hobbit rather than as a backstory in the prequel. This would mean some serious alterations to the linear fairy tale Hobbit story, but for me that would be a good thing.
Another issue with the prequels is that we've got to feel like we're going somewhere new. All the Lord of the Rings films brought new amazing locations and cultures. I'm finding it tricky to see what new locations the prequel films will take us to, except Dol Guldur, whereas there is lots of new characters and locations to explore in the Hobbit, and these would have to slimmed dramatically to fit into one film.
Well, it's going to be interesting seeing what the scriptwriters come up with...
|
|
|
burrahobbit
Nargothrond
Jan 11 2008, 12:30am
Post #17 of 19
(690 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm a fan of the two Hobbit films concept, and you've got some good ideas there!
For names of the two films I was thinking-
The Hobbit: Riddles in the Dark
and
The Hobbit: The King Under the Mountain
If the two film Hobbit is going to bring together the Quest for Erebor and the Dol Guldur storylines then I'd be tempted to make some bigger changes to the Hobbit. What is Gandalf's motivation for starting the Quest for Erebor? How do the actions of Sauron relate to Smaug and Thorin? I'm thinking along the lines of the dwarven rings (given by Sauron) encourage greed, and bring Smaug to Erebor. Then Thrain is taken to Dol Guldur due to Sauron recapturing the ring. These ideas could form the prologue I think, then Gandalf's failure to get the White Council to attack Dol Guldur could encourage him to start the Quest for Erebor. Bilbo's journey has got to be the heart of the story, but changing the tone and bringing in more Sauron involvement would make it more exciting for the Lord of the Rings audience I think.
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Gondolin
Jan 11 2008, 3:16am
Post #18 of 19
(700 views)
Shortcut
|
...can't be resolved at all. Gandalf totally trusted him at the start of FotR. All things considered, I think they're stuck with playing Saruman as a good guy who makes a wrong decision (not to look for the Ring). We can think he's arrogant, we can think he's wrong, but we can't think he's an Enemy without invalidating FotR.
"Are you frightened?"
Discussing "Strider" Jan. 6-11 in the Reading Room
Elizabeth is the TORnsib formerly known as 'erather'
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Gondolin
Jan 11 2008, 5:32am
Post #19 of 19
(720 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yet The Hobbit must be preserved. THe Saruman issue is not such a quandry
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Thanks for expanding on your thoughts- interesting ideas!
In terms of characters, I'm thinking the prequel film would very much revolve around Gandalf as the central character. He begins the story by identifying the threat of Sauron at Dol Guldur, Saruman overruling him at the White Council becomes the main obstacle to be overcome in the story, and the climax and resolution of the film would be the elves/rangers and wizards driving Sauron from Dol Guldur. Is this a fair summary of the core of the story? Lots of other story threads could be woven in (like Balin at Moria) but this would be the core I'm guessing.
__________________________________ I entirely agree with all of that. Though, as much as I agree that a two film expanded hobbit would increase clarity, it would also greatly alter the Hobbit story of Film one, and quite possibly ruin it for many who come specifically to see THe Hobbit. We must remember that a great many fans of the films, and of The Hobbit as a book, are not Loremasters like ourselves. They will be looking to see, and bringing their children and aged grandparents to see, The Hobbit, and might be quite troubled and confused by a heavliy ploted, densely woven version of the first film. So I think Jackson's original idea is best, and can work well, if enough morsels are dropped into film one, and if film two has the requisite prequel and need flashbacks. As to Saruman. He is not barred from being shown plotting in Gandalf's absence. In Fellowship, WE knew that the Nine had left Minas Morgul long before ANY of the protaganists found out. We saw them ride forth from its gates even as Gandalf was riding for Gondor. He saw Orodruin burst into new flame, but he did not discover, cinematically, that the Nine had come forth until Saruman told him, and Frodo didn't even know they existed until they chased him into the Brandywine river. Also, as nearly all Hobbit goers will have seen Fellowship, we already know where Saruman is headed. What many non readers don't know is how he got there. These films wil give a chance to redress the over-stated and slightly erroneous film representation of Saruman as purely being Sauron's lackey, and give more of the Saruman who sought the ring to overthrow Sauron and gain mastery for himself. It needn't be overdone, but we also do not have to get a white-washed Saruman whose motives are as hidden from us as they are from an increasing distrustful Gandalf (lets not forget Gandalf's grim expression and the great smoke ring that he blew for Saruman at the council meeting in which he was overruled. The smoke ring that vanished when he reached out to seize it. {See UNF Tales]) In a side note, along with desprately hoping (even daringly expecting) to see Gandalf's blue flame wizardry at work, and to see glorious Glorfindel. . . I also hope the wargs have darker fur, and slightly more wolfish muzzles. I know Jackson wanted a fiercer look, and I think their great size was right on, but. . . the hyena faces and mottled fur seemed an error to me. Tolkien was explicit in their wolfishness. Hyena are not even especially close in relation to wolves and dogs, being instead a sort of half way meeting point between the dog and cat families. Really, hyena are about as closely related to felines as to canines. So I hope that is dealt with.
"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."
|
|
|
|
|
