Slashdot Mirror
Jackson Slated to Make Hobbit Movie, Sequel
syrinx writes "Peter Jackson, New Line Cinema, and MGM have agreed to work on two new movies: a film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's 'The Hobbit', and a further sequel. From the article: 'The two Hobbit films ... are scheduled to be shot simultaneously, with pre-production beginning as soon as possible. Principal photography is tentatively set for a 2009 start, with the intention of 'The Hobbit' release slated for 2010 and its sequel the following year, in 2011.'" Not sure if it would be possible to nab Ian Holm as Bilbo, but here's hoping.
Didn't he already shoot the sequel to The Hobbit?
finally have a place to apply.
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
Jackson has always wanted to do film The Hobbit, but due to legal issues they couldn't agree on terms.
They've finally resolved, woo!
But of course, like every such statement people make (e.g. "There's no way i'm sleeping with that donkey"), there is an unstated but very much present addendum of "unless someone gives me enough money, in which case hell yeah".
P.S. examples are not from personal experience, and you can't prove otherwise.
The enemies of Democracy are
He will disappoint you. Bank on it. The other 99.99% of us will, however, probably like it.
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
Peter Jackson did a great job in visualizing and bringing to life a story in which the plot was already fully written. I love the fact he's producing a version of "the hobbit" to go along with the LOTR Trilogy, but I'm not so sure about the sequel to it. I realize there is a gap between the two stories (around a 70 year gap actually) but what will the plot consist of?
I suppose it could go both ways, the first way with Peter Jackson doing a great job of tying the two books together and leading straight into the LOTR trilogy, the other with Peter Jackson unzipping and urinating on JRR Tolkien's masterpieces.
Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
"The daily life of Tom Bombadil, Treebeard, and Radagast" Sponsored by Green Peace.
Am I the only one who's noticed that Martin Freeman wasn't actually in the LOTR?
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
But, Jackson didn't do that in LOTR did he? Except for some minor changes to the overall arc of the film, I found he did a pretty faithful job of it.
I think he's the director we have the least to worry about. At least, I hope he is. The cinemas wanted him because he has proven he can make the movies (and, of course, make the money) - at least it's not Uwe Boll.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I believe that Sir Ian McKellen has said that he would be overjoyed to play Gandalf-- but not if Peter Jackson wasn't involved. I would say he's likely to reprise the role, which is more important than Ian Holm (who would clearly be too old) in terms of continuity. I'd say the other big role to worry about would be Gollum.
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
Unless I pay someone enough money for the tape, right?
Ah, you're catching on.
The enemies of Democracy are
I hope they get the the ending right this time.
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashdot.org Errors found while checking this document as HTML5!
There, fixed that for you.
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
I don't think Ian Holm will be able to be cast as Bilbo... they made him look younger for a brief shot in LOTR, but from what I remember it involved stretching the skin on his face, etc, and wouldn't be workable for a full movie.
Ian McKellen and Andy Serkis I believe have both said they'd be very interested in coming back for a Hobbit movie as Gandalf and Gollum. The only other cross-over character bookwise would be Elrond; I don't know if Hugo Weaving has said anything one way or the other. (I suppose there was some guy in the FOTR movie who was ostensibly Gloin at the council scene, but I don't think anyone would notice if he came back or not...)
They could sneak in cameos from other actors I suppose; there's nothing saying Legolas wasn't hanging out with his father in the Elves' home in Mirkwood. I don't know that I want Legolas showing up at the Battle of Five Armies to surf on an eagle shooting down wargs though.
(Hey, so about 7 years in between accepted Slashdot submissions. Roland, I'm catching up!)
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
For some reason, I initially thought of Samuel L Jackson. Wouldn't that be interesting? "Get away from the gemstone Mother F*cker!"
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
The second movie will be a TV special entitled: "The Lord of the Rings Holiday Special", in which Gandalf and Frodo visit the shire to celebrate "Life Day". Meanwhile the town of Hobbiton is being overrun by ringwraiths who try to ruin everything but eventually learn the true meaning of Life Day. Also includes Liv Tyler singing the main theme of "The Lord of the Rings".
What was Jackson thinking there? "Hey, let's make an epic movie, based on an epic novel. And why not change the complete character of one of the key players?"
He was thinking, "Goddamn, this Tolkien guy needed to get laid. This whole thing is one giant sausage-fest, and ol' J.R.R.'s idea of comic relief appears to have been, well, Tom Bombadil. If I'm going to bring these stories to a wider audience, which I have to do in order to justify the production costs needed to do justice to the material, I'm obviously going to have to tweak a few things. I can have turn Gimli into a goofball and have Arwen save Frodo, or everything else about the production is going to suck. Gee. What do I do here?"
I say "apparently" because TFA is actually blocked where I am right now, but the most common questions people seem to be asking in this discussion are:
1) "Sequel, WTF?"
and
2)"Will Ian McKellen return as Gandalf?"
According to this article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7150644.stm
the answers are:
1) No, there will not be a sequel based on some new not-created-by-Tolkien story, The Hobbit will be two movies.
2) Yes.
I'm just sayin'.
Somehow I think that this has more to do with the disappointing results from the Golden Compass movie, which New line was hoping would be a 3-year blockbuster holiday series. It appears that the various religious groups are convincing their members to stay away from it due to the anti-religious message in the books.
Unless Jackson is able to completely redo his visual style (and/or the way of thinking) for this project, I would not call this a good idea. "Hobbit" and "LOTR", even though separated in time by only several dozen years, evoke completely different feelings - with the former still staged inside a fairy tale, a time of wonders, while the latter is a clinical account of the fading of the Age; and since Jackson completely nailed that one, I find it hard to believe that the all-important overall tone is going to be adequate for the "Hobbit" project. He's going to film another installment of the same movie, and no mistake.
I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
Don't write- just film the book. Thank you.
Yes, because there's nothing the general audience adores more than a 20 hour movie, of which 15 hours are shots of people walking, accented by the occasional 2 hour Ent song.