Hobbit cameras start rolling in July

Original story

does not sound like a good idea!

a title

i hope they set it in wizards school! with vampires and sparkle!

A solution

Do not go and see it.

This has the twin benefits of leaving you happier and sparing the rest of us from your pointless moaning.

Really?

I think an original story would be terrific, especially if it incorporated everything we love about Hollywood. You know perhaps, and this is just an idea so don't shoot it down, they could turn The Hobbit into a romantic comedy, involving some cute tale about children and how we should all get along.

There's nothing I love more than being told by the film industry of a country that killed and maimed millions of people on a whim across two continents that we should "think of the children" and how much better the world would be if we treated everyone else with respect.

I think somebody should write...

"LOTR - the 10th age".

This will be where there are CCTV cameras on the corners of every shire town to prevent hobbits in hoodies mugging al insundry (but failing due to no budget to staff the monitoring centres) and where the atmosphere is more fucked up than that already surrounding Mordor.

Would be a bit of a surprise commuting to Rivendell in your high speed train only to find congestion caused by a dragon or a troll on the line.

Naming suggestions for the "original story"

"Frodo Baggins--The Early Years"

"My Precious--based on the memoir "Fish" by Smeagol"

"Separating an Audience From Their Gold While Separating "The Hobbit" From "Lord of the Rings"

"60 Years Before the Mast(erpiece)"

New Story?

It's not new, it's not entirely made up, it's not the equivalent of the star wars prequels etc. All the material exists in printed form in either the 12 strong "History of Middle Earth" series of books that Christoper Tolkien edited, or Unfinished Tales etc. That which is not already extant in story form, is already part of the canon in reference form, either in timelines or other "reference" forms.

It'll be no different to the existing trilogy, by which I mean it might not be "pure", but the tonal quality should be enough. Anyone that wants "pure" won't like the film trilogy as it stands, so why please them for these films, they'll already be predisposed to hate them.

Let's have it, I say, I want to see the Council of the White, and the removal of Sauron from Dol Guldor. I don't care if they are not in the Hobbit book, I know they "happened", and that there is plenty of information kicking around on what happened during the events to make a good stab at filming it.

@AC: If we just had a proper, faithful adaptation of LotR and The Hobbit, that'd be grand.

...and it'd be about 50 hours long... you'd need dwarf bread...

Now, a faithful screen adaptation of *Bored* of the Rings, that I would pay to watch.

Lord of the Rings - the MMO

OK, this is an advert for someone else's site, but Shamus Young is doing a series of comics about LotR the MMO. Well, it makes me laugh ;-)

(Best to start from episode one at the bottom of the page.)

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/tag/shamus+plays

And for those who know that they will never, ever, EVAR, watch the LotR films again, the same guy spliced another comic together from the movies as if it was a bunch of guys roleplaying the plot.

http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?cat=14

Huge Tolkein Fan

I'm a huge Tolkein fan and I found the LotR movies to be very good really. I thought his playing with the structure of the books worked very well - other than making the last movie far too long. For example, dropping the old forest, barrow downs and Tom Bombadil was generally a good thing (doesn't really drive the story). Also things like the warg attack on route from Edoras to Helm's Deep was reasonably well done. Most of the best dialogue in the film was lifted straight from the books (for example, in Moria: "Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo's hand. Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise can not see all ends. My heart tells me that Gollum has some part to play yet, for good or ill…")

The Hobbit worries me a little because the story is nowhere near as compelling as the LotR story. Nevertheless, it will probably hold up. The original story thing is much more of a concern - but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. However, I personally wish they had ended Return of the King at the point at which the King returned. Then they could have done the Scouring of the Shire as an additional film instead of making stuff up for a 5th film. Oh well...

Bunch of incurable sad little geeks

... so predictable - typical 'stupid lotr geek' response, that Peter Jackson 'ruined' LOTR in the movies.

Look, stupids, there's NO way of directly interpreting such a huge tome in a series of movies unless you make 90 hours worth, instead of 9.

Go have a little sit down, take a few deep breaths and think about how you would interpret the books, with the same passion, depth and management Jackson managed to do, in the medium of film.

Hopefully, sanity will return and you'll realise the two mediums - written works and film - are very different beasts.

Perhaps sanity won't return and you'll keep waving your fists about like a twat.

Perhaps the proposed 'Original Story' will be a bunch of total Hollywood pants, then again, perhaps Jackson will borrow from 'Farmer Giles of Ham' or 'The Silmarillion'

Perhaps Jackson will consult Christopher Tolkien in the creation of this original tale.

Just be positive - if you didn't like Jacksons LOTR movies, your obviously a bottle short of a party or an incurable loser - or worse still, someone who struggles to tie shoelaces and drools a lot, but has a degree in nuclear physics. (and owns lots of strange shaped dice)

IT angle?

Maybe... Hobb-IT?

I'll get my coat.

Musical Theatre?

Just as long as Leonard Nimoy won't be singing in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC73PHdQX04

PH because shes got dirty hobbits.

Get the facts right - Yes, 2 movies, but NO original "bridging" story

That was the original thinking back when they didn't have concrete script ideas, but some time ago Peter Jackson said that once they started working on the script they realised they had more than enough material to make two movies from The Hobbit, without needing to invent anything.

They may embellish a little, expanding on things that are only alluded to in The Hobbit narrative itself, working in some of Tolkien's extensive notes and background material, in much the same way that they did with Lord of the Rings and material contained only in the appendices.

Can't wait!

And as for an 'original story' being penned for the second movie, I imagine this will be appropriately and sympathetically pieced together from all the untouched and barely touched upon material in The LoTR books and appendices and any relevant cross referenced bits which appear, are mentioned, touched upon and/or alluded to which also appear in some form in the other books for which Jackson doesn't have the rights to (i.e. The Silmarillion and Unfinished Tales).

I've read both The Hobbit and LoTR several times each, and I agree that some important sections were left out of the movies, abridged or altered and transferred to other characters to maintain important content, spoken lines and concepts, fit with a movie timeline (and time limit) - I was desperately disappointed that "The scouring of the Shire" was completely butchered and lost forever. I understand in movie making, sacrifices have to be made.

Where will the first movie break, and what will the second movie comprise of? We shall see, but I have confidence that Peter Jackson will get it mostly right and honour JRR Tolkien's magnificent work.

Oh calm down! These are the movie versions

...not the books. No one is rewriting history here. There are people (like me ) who love the movie versions but have no interest in the books. There is nothing wrong with adding more to the movie versions.

Also, it's not out of Hollywood really, is it? It's out of Wellington, NZ.

Guillermo del Toro, good? perhaps bad

Allow me to explain, I think Guillermo del Toro is a brilliant director, Pan's was a superb movie rich in colour and played out beautifully. I am just wary of the crossover; it’s been tried before with famous cult directors being roped in to do a Hollywood movie and it becomes more art than entertainment.

Its difficult to be critical of an arty movie though because they push boundaries and whilst on some level you enjoy them and they have cult appeal for a number of arty fantasists but lets face it this needs to be entertaining not arty.

Simples...

Following the book closely

Well I for one hope they don't insist on having "Hey fiddledy dee, twelve dwarves in a tree!" moments every f****g chapter. Somehow, the sight of orcs singing might just put me off the whole thing. Ditto for singing to distract spiders, elves singing to welcome you to Rivendell, forest elves singing when throwing barrels around and dwarves singing at any time. In fact, the complete removal of all songs from the story would suit me just fine.

There's a reason why they pay someone to adapt the book for the screen so could all of you pedants please just shut up and let the rest of us enjoy the bloody thing?

Simply Connect,....

Prequels, Sarah Bee's moderation, Book-to-Movie adaptions, Taxes.

Give up? They are alll in-evitabilities that comes with some visible drawbacks but far more benefits in the end.

I for one am dreading the "hey, look at us, aren't we still so amazing / edgy / world-beating?" tripe that NZ as a nation will trot out to accompany these movies. PJ seems a cool guy, who doesn't buy too much into the hype but the kiwi media and joe public get a little carried away with all this attention.