Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Filming For The Hobbit Begins In July

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the chip-the-glasses-and-crack-the-plates dept.

Books 298

krou writes "Sir Ian McKellen has revealed that filming for The Hobbit and its sequel is scheduled to begin in July, and will take approximately a year to complete. Casting is now 'taking place in LA, London and New York,' and [director Guillermo] Del Toro is already 'living in Wellington, close to the Jacksons and the studio in Miramar.' Apparently the script is still being worked on, and 'the first draft is crammed with old and new friends, again on a quest in Middle-earth.' The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an original story not written by Tolkien, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and The Lord of the Rings."

cancel ×

298 comments

The audition (4, Funny)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523682)

I have visions of furries lined up for the audition.

Re:The audition (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523706)

*yiff* *yiff* *yiff* *fap* *fap* *fap*

Re:The audition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523792)

Hey, who leaked the "plot" of the sequel to you??

Though I'll admit, it's pretty easy to guess what a movie about a bunch of "bachelor" hobbits hanging around a hole together would amount to.

Re:The audition (1)

zero_out (1705074) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523824)

Furries? Let's see, what roles could they play... a spider? Naw. How about a goblin? Nope. A warg? Hm... a nasty super-wolf ridden by green midgets. Maybe. A Great Eagle? No way. A troll? Not a chance. Well, I guess all those furries are going to be disappointed, since the wargs in LOTR were CG.

Re:The audition (2, Informative)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523978)

Beorn could turn into a bear....

Re:The audition (4, Insightful)

mweather (1089505) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524252)

Beorn will probably get cut like Tom Bombadil did.

ugh, sequel (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523710)

I'm all for the creation and filming of The Hobbit, but I really don't know about the idea for that "sequel".

Re:ugh, sequel (5, Insightful)

hey! (33014) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524042)

Well, I read *The Hobbit* to my son when he was in 2nd grade. After I read the last word on the last page, the instant I set the book down he said, "Can we read *The Hobbit 2* next?"

Poor kid. That's just how I feel.

*The Hobbit* is greatly underestimated by even Tolkien fans, who pooh-pooh it because it's not LotR. The tone of the story is a bit condescending at first, something that Tolkien himself expressed dissatisfaction with in later years, but as in LotR there's a lot going on under the surface of *The Hobbit*. It's a story well worth serious study. Achieving that in story so readable and enjoyable on a superficial level is a tremendous achievement.

Re:ugh, sequel (4, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524314)

I love the book, but I don't think it's a good idea for someone else to try making a sequel.

Re:ugh, sequel (2, Interesting)

hey! (33014) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524384)

I'm agnostic on that.

Drama is not a medium Tolkien wrote for, so we can expect The Hobbit, like the LotR film trilogy, to be largely paraphrase. The Hobbit film will be a different story set in the same world, more or less following the events of the novel.

That said,the vast world Tolkien created practically begs for more stories to be written in that setting. It's a shame that copyright prevents this. Little of what would be written would do it justice, but it's not like there's a lack of writing genius in the world. Neil Gaiman could do wonderful things with that world. It wouldn't be Tolkien of course, but it would definitely have echoes. Gaiman is one of the most unpretentiously erudite writers I can think of.

Sequel (5, Insightful)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523712)

"The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an *original story not written by Tolkien*, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."

Thanks but no thanks.

Re:Sequel (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523828)

Sounds like the filler episodes in anime, when they've already make all the current manga into anime, but want to make more anime something anyway. And we all know how great those are.

Re:Sequel (0, Offtopic)

trurl7 (663880) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523876)

+5 Insightful!

Re:Sequel (2, Funny)

daremonai (859175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523906)

Wait, so you mean it will be a swimsuit episode? Oy!!

Re:Sequel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524000)

My preciousssss bikiniiii

Re:Sequel (3, Informative)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524196)

Sounds like the filler episodes in anime, when they've already make all the current manga into anime, but want to make more anime something anyway. And we all know how great those are.

For those of you not familiar with anime, that last part was sarcasm. Filler episodes are utterly craptastic. In that case, because the story continues on as if nothing significant happened in the time the filler is showing, any plot or character development has to be disposable. Nothing happens.

Same thing here. What could happen in the sequel to the hobbit? Spoiler: none of the characters that are in lord of the rings will die in the prequel, wheras any characters they introduce will die before the events in lord of the rings or will have to come up with some reason they're insignificant for lord of the rings.

Re:Sequel (5, Funny)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523848)

I heard George Lucas is writing it. Young Gollum will be a comedy character to lighten the mood. His appearance has been changed a bit to appeal to the 5-10 age range that have the most pester power over merchandise sales, e.g. big floppy bunny ears. To save time it will all be CGI scenery. Human actors will be dosed with Thorazine to make them more docile and easier to pose.

Re:Sequel (0, Troll)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524020)

Wow, someone is Troll-modding the hell out of anyone who has anything bad to say about the proposed sequel.

Re:Sequel (0)

wisnoskij (1206448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524050)

Young Gollum does not exist between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Ringd stories. I believe that during that time is actually when he is being tortured in mordor (but that might be during the beginning of the LoTRs), among other things. But either way, he is not comedy material. Not that I would put it past GL to destroy the spirit of Tolkien's work that much.

Re:Sequel (2, Funny)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524380)

Gee, it was almost as if the GP was making a joke. Geez, fucking lighten up.

Re:Sequel (1)

dkf (304284) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524194)

I heard George Lucas is writing it.

Could (just about) be worse. Uwe Boll is not involved in the project.

Re:Sequel (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524376)

People come down on Lucas for changing Star Wars, but Tolkien changed the Hobbit so he could use it as a prequel to The Lord of the Rings. Read "The Annotated Hobbit." Very interesting stuff.

Re:Sequel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523858)

Troll? hmmm mods?

Re:Sequel (1, Insightful)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523936)

Ooh, looks like I pissed off a Peter Jackson fanboy with mod points!

Re:Sequel (2, Informative)

RDW (41497) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524006)

'The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an *original story not written by Tolkien*'

Pretty much like most of Jackson's version of 'The Two Towers', then!

Actually, I wonder how accurate the BBC story is. Jackson and del toro have suggested elsewhere that they intend to spread out the story of 'The Hobbit' over both films, supplemented by material about (e.g.) Gandalf and Dol Guldur:

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/hobbitfaq/#1.1 [theonering.net]

Since details of events outside Bilbo's direct experience are sketchy (LOTR appendices, 'Unfinished Tales', etc.), they'll have to invent quite a lot to fill in the gaps (especially if they intend to include Aragorn's early adventures).

Re:Sequel (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524116)

Actually TFA is wrong on that account. That was the original plan.
More recently they decided make a 2 part Hobbit film instead by filling in the gaps not mentioned in the book. Like e.g. what Gandalf was doing while he was gone etc.
Can't find where I originally read this but it's on wikipedia [wikipedia.org] too.

Re:Sequel (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524126)

Depends. Tolkien didn't flesh those years out much beyond a general timeline, so there's nothing for them to outright destroy. As long as they do enough research to stick with the general setting and history, it could work out well.

(I'm an optimist, I know.)

Re:Sequel (1)

VJ42 (860241) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524128)

"The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an *original story not written by Tolkien*, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."

Thanks but no thanks.

The summary is wrong, from TFA:

"According to studio New Line, the first film will be an adaptation of The Hobbit, the novel Tolkien published before his Lord of the Rings cycle.
The second will be an original story focusing on the 60 years between the book and the beginning of the Rings trilogy. "

So we're getting a hobbit movie AND a new story.

Re:Sequel (4, Funny)

Zalbik (308903) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524200)

"The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an *original story not written by Tolkien*, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."

The summary is wrong, from TFA:

"According to studio New Line, the first film will be an adaptation of The Hobbit, the novel Tolkien published before his Lord of the Rings cycle.
The second will be an original story focusing on the 60 years between the book and the beginning of the Rings trilogy. "

So we're getting a hobbit movie AND a new story.

So you're saying, we're getting "The Hobbit" movie, and a planned sequel to "The Hobbit" which is to be an *original story not written by Tolkien*, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."?

Thanks for clearing that up.

A good hobbit pipe (1, Funny)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524214)

"The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an *original story not written by Tolkien*, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings." Thanks but no thanks.

Hey come on now, Tolkien's grand kids need Ferraris, hookers, and blow. Don't begrudge them the simple hobbit necessities of life....

Hobbit sequel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523720)

The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an original story not written by Tolkien, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."

Oh god, that's going to suck. Can they get Uwe Boll to direct so as to remove all temptation to see it?

Re:Hobbit sequel (1)

twidarkling (1537077) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524084)

Are you shitting me? Uwe Boll would provide the ultimate reason to see it. His movies should be required viewing.

After all, even Plan 9 and Ed Wood's movies look like masterpieces in comparison, and film quality might rise if people see really shitty movies.

To quote the great Randall Graves (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523722)

Oh jeez, MORE walking?!?!?

Can't wait! (1)

Grench (833454) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523724)

I'm very much looking forward to The Hobbit (very skeptical about the "original" sequel).

When I read the Lord of the Rings as a youngster, I was able to picture all the major scenes, and the characters, the locations... then to see Peter Jackson's films as an adult was just astonishing; they obviously had the same ideas as I had.

Yes, I know there were some differences between book and film (the Ring going to Osgiliath, and the omission of the Scouring of the Shire, in particular), but I still loved the films, and felt they were a lot more faithful to the original story than some other big budget Hollywood productions have been.

I hope the same is true for the Hobbit. Any word on who will play Bilbo?

Summary is wrong ... (5, Informative)

krou (1027572) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523728)

I commented on the post in the Firehose after I submitted it, but the summary should've said "... is scheduled to begin in July ..." instead of June.

Re:Summary is wrong ... (4, Funny)

maxwells daemon (105725) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524282)

dammit. should have gotten the refundable plane tickets.

same actors for immortals? (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523736)

Gandalf, Elrond, Galadrial (she is not in book). And Gollum too.

Re:same actors for immortals? (1)

Bicx (1042846) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523776)

Galadriel is definitely in the book

Re:same actors for immortals? (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523892)

Galadriel is in The Hobbit? [citation needed]

Re:same actors for immortals? (1)

Bicx (1042846) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523956)

Oh I see what he's saying now. For some reason I was thinking of the whole series. The Hobbit does contain a lot about wood elves, but not her.

Re:same actors for immortals? (2, Informative)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524344)

Also, Galadriel isn't the same kind of elf as the ones in The Hobbit, if I remember correctly. They are the elves who remained in Middle-Earth instead of going to Valinor, Galadriel is part of the gang that went to Valinor and came back to Middle-Earth later.

Re:same actors for immortals? (5, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524386)

Yup, she bought the level 80 expansion and left her guildies behind.

Re:same actors for immortals? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524478)

She's not a wood elf either. She is a High Elf (an exiled of the Noldor to be specific). No Wood Elf is blond-haired. Legolas is half Wood Elf / half Grey Elf (actually, the son of their king, Thranduil and some elf princess of the Sindar) and cannot be blond-hair because of his genes. Also, he's not retarded like Orlando Bloom.

Re:same actors for immortals? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524002)

Gandalf goes galavanting off and leaving the dwarves and Bilbo halfway through the book, and it's told later he met up with Saruman, Galadriel and some other powerful people to fight Sauron. It happens "off-camera", but maybe the film will include it.

imdb says she is in Hobbit movie (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524394)

The screenplay writer, Mrs. Jackson, expanded the role of female characters in the Lord of Rings, I presume to add balance. It appears they are doing the same for the Hobbit. The Hobbit novel is even more all-male than LOTR.

Re:same actors for immortals? (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524074)

That won't be a problem. They can digitally youthen them by a decade without washing over the nuances of their performances.

Hobbit sequel prediction (2, Funny)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523748)

The sequel will feature a new dragon, named Aesydrayne, and a battle involving six armies, and a ring that makes you completely odorless.

Re:Hobbit sequel prediction (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524024)

Yes. This is what I don't understand. The 60 years in between the Hobbit and the LotR is so utterly boring that Gandalf is surprised he's had the One Ring under his nose (although he had suspicions). It was all "rumors of a necromancer", Biblo living quietly in the Shire, and Aragorn living in the woods and scaring the locals.

Re:Hobbit sequel prediction (1)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524434)

...Biblo living quietly in the Shire, and Aragorn living in the woods and scaring the locals.

Presented in awesome 3-D! I can't wait.

Oh yippy skippy (4, Insightful)

bziman (223162) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523754)

Oh joy, another visually stunning film with a disjointed script, mixing Tolkien's brilliant timeless dialog with flat modern drivel penned by Fran Walsh. And the sequel... that's just going to be visually stunning with drivel for plot and dialog.

It wouldn't be so bad if they didn't screw up the plot and dialog so badly. Ugh.

Re:Oh yippy skippy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523802)

Oh joy, another visually stunning film with a disjointed script, mixing Tolkien's brilliant timeless dialog with flat modern drivel penned by Fran Walsh. And the sequel... that's just going to be visually stunning with drivel for plot and dialog.

But the "original sequel" will be 3-D, and the three-way fuck scene between the dragon, Bilbo, and some nameless hot female Elf should go a long way toward making up for a lack of plot and dialog. I mean, we can't have it all. Sheesh.

Re:Oh yippy skippy (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524378)

And the plot to the as yet unannounced Hobbit prequel [xkcd.com] has already been leaked.

Re:Oh yippy skippy (4, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523968)

Three words, Guillermo [wikipedia.org] del [wikipedia.org] Toro [wikipedia.org]

Brilliant timeless dialogue? (3, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524070)

Tolkien wrote dialogue? I thought his books were fantasy travelogues: descriptions of places, leaving places, walking through places, and arriving at other places. I don't remember much in the way of dialogue. I just remember lots of walking. Oh, and maybe a few spiders and a dragon or something.

You see, in order to have 'brilliant timeless dialogue' your characters have to have interesting motivations. The Hobbit was a classic adventure story, which quite simply does not lend itself to interesting motivations or dialogue. The only relevant motivation in an adventure story is "We've got to achieve The Thing!" and the dialogue boils down to"Have we achieved The Thing? No? How do we achieve The Thing? Ah, we need to (go somewhere/get something/kill someone/help someone/destroy something). Let's do that now!" repeated until the answer to the first question is "Yes! We have achieved The Thing!"

The Hobbit, and Tolkien's other works are nice stories, and amazing for their time, but don't try to make them into something they aren't. "Visually stunning" was exactly what Tolkien was going for, otherwise the books wouldn't read like a travelogue.

Re:Oh yippy skippy (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524152)

Get over it, already.

Tolkien was not a writer, he was a linguist and English professor, and it shows. His world building, mythology, and language development is awe-inspiring. His writing, dialogue, plot development and pacing is atrocious.

Plus, much of the "flat modern drivel" you are complaining about, was merely a rearrangement of the originial text, or reassignment of dialogue between characters.

Again, get over it.

The films are superb. The books are a trial to read.
(And I say that as a 35 year old fantasy and SF fan who has read widely and deeply. If you want some good fantasy writing, just pick up some Le Guin, or Octavia Butler, or Delaney, or Wolfe, or any other number of fantastic authors.)

Re:Oh yippy skippy (1)

IorDMUX (870522) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524188)

Tolkien's brilliant timeless dialog

Are we referring to the same Tolkien, here? If you read his books, you see that J.R.R. Tolkien was not much of a writer of dialogues or painter of characters. What he was, though, was a designer of worlds of epic proportions. Tolkien's Middle Earth is what made The Lord of the Rings what it is, not the banter of transient characters.

Because it's so easy (1)

Myrcutio (1006333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524294)

That whole plot/dialog thing is so much simpler than the visual graphics right? I mean heck, Shakespeare never had to deal with raycasting or aliasing, he had it EASY!

Re:Oh yippy skippy (5, Interesting)

Eil (82413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524480)

Tolkien's dialogue can't, and never could, survive a direct adaptation to the big screen. Even if it could be managed, people would still complain that the actors didn't act in the manner that they themselves had envisioned while reading the books. Perhaps more importantly, books have the luxury of taking up entire chapters to describe background, settings, and conversations; movies do not. Tolkien purists will never be satisfied with *any* adaptation of his work. Luckily for them, the source material will always be available for their enjoyment.

Sequel will add valuable new characters (3, Insightful)

Bicx (1042846) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523762)

... like Jar Jar Binksarrim of the water people. And Elrond will have an affair with Galadriel. That's right, as soon as we fully Americanize this story, we will have a real winner here, folks.

Hobbit 2: Electric Boogaloo (4, Funny)

xleeko (551231) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523842)

... like Jar Jar Binksarrim of the water people. And Elrond will have an affair with Galadriel. That's right, as soon as we fully Americanize this story, we will have a real winner here, folks.

Sorry, that was only the first draft. Now, Bilbo is a time-traveling immortal who joins with a hip new Gandalf to save Middle-Earth's ozone layer.

Then, they break dance!

Re:Hobbit 2: Electric Boogaloo (4, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523920)

No, we all know that the real title will be The Hobbit 2: The Search for more Money.

Re:Hobbit 2: Electric Boogaloo (1)

thijsh (910751) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524048)

If they choose a Hollywoodesque name based on Tolkien wouldn't that be: The Hobbit 2: ... Back Again

Re:Hobbit 2: Electric Boogaloo (0, Troll)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523964)

Then, they break dance!

You saw Alice in Wonderland too it seems.

Re:Hobbit 2: Electric Boogaloo (1)

Scrab (573004) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524256)

I would totally watch that....

Re:Hobbit 2: Electric Boogaloo (1)

DeadDecoy (877617) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524320)

That might not turn out so bad. It sounds like the plot to a Dr. Who episode (Fix with the Sontarins). We just need Davies or Moffet penning the script : D.

Re:Sequel will add valuable new characters (1)

zero_out (1705074) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523946)

Ewww... Elrond having an affair with his MOTHER-IN-LAW?! I know that elves age gracefully (as in, not at all), but I think that their moral standards are a bit higher than you give them credit for.

Re:Sequel will add valuable new characters (1)

snspdaarf (1314399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524142)

Well, maybe they are "hill country" elves.

Re:Sequel will add valuable new characters (1)

DarkSarin (651985) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524236)

I think most Tolkien fans would agree that elves had higher morals than that.

Hollywood, however, has none. Thus we get...Frodo saving the shire from dinosaurs on frickin pogo sticks--30 years before he was born.

Bilbo Baggins (-1, Offtopic)

greenlead (841089) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523766)

... Greatest Hobbit of them all! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC73PHdQX04 [youtube.com]

Re:Bilbo Baggins (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524056)

... Greatest Hobbit of them all!

I see what you're doing there. You're trying to Spock Roll us. Well, I've seen it before and whilst I can't un-see it I don't need to see it again.

Dont' they mean... (-1, Offtopic)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523768)

The Hobbit in 3-D
and an unnamed sequel in 3-D

Wait, what? (1)

zero_out (1705074) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523770)

The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an original story not written by Tolkien, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."

I know that there is a lot going on during those 60 years, but none of it involves any hobbits. In fact, all the stuff that's happening is centered around Aragorn growing up and going to war, Sauron regaining his power in Mordor, after having been tossed out of Mirkwood, and Elrond's sons searching for their mother. These are unrelated story lines that are too short to constitute a movie independently.

If there is going to be another movie based on Tolkien's Middle-Earth, it should be drawn from the Silmarillion. That's full of awesomeness, that is otherwise written very confusingly (and blandly). The Silmarillion would benefit greatly from a movie adaptation of even one story arc mentioned in there.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Nidi62 (1525137) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524066)

I know that there is a lot going on during those 60 years, but none of it involves any hobbits.

Weren't there some battles and such that were fought right by the Shire, or at least near it? If I recall, that was the point of the Rangers, to protect the Western areas. And it's been a while, but in the books didn't the Hobbits have some knowledge of who the Rangers are? This would indicate an interaction of some sort. In any case, you still have Balin trying to recolonize Moria, and didn't some of the other dwarves stay after they killed the dragon?(been a while since I read the Hobbit, high school to be exact, so my memory is fuzzy). Perhaps the sequel will be more dwarf and human oriented?

They can't just leave it alone (3, Insightful)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523840)

Imagine buying the White Album and finding Green Day tracks spliced in to 'fill in' what The Beatles meant to do.

I don't think I'll see either of them out of principle.

Sequel? No, give us Silmarillion (5, Interesting)

PHPNerd (1039992) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523910)

The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an original story not written by Tolkien, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings."

A sequel NOT written by Tolkien? Ew. How about instead another prequel taken from The Silmarillion? That would be full of awesome, almost guaranteed to win several internets.

Re:Sequel? No, give us Silmarillion (1)

Foolomon (855512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524136)

Agreed. The Silmarillion has a lot of background information that people, especially those who aren't (yet) fans of the books, would find interesting.

I remember when The Fellowship of the Ring came out, and - at the movie's end - a lot of the teenagers who came to see the movie thought the ending was crappy. They didn't realize that the movie was only 1/3rd of the total story and commented that the movie itself was very exciting.

Re:Sequel? No, give us Silmarillion (3, Informative)

pieceofstone (1579885) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524228)

I think the news article is wrong/has outdated information. See http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41848 [aintitcool.com]

Re:Sequel? No, give us Silmarillion (3, Insightful)

bughunter (10093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524242)

In theory, you're 100% correct. There's tons of material in The Silmarillion and the other early writings that are ideal for translation into screenplays... but there's two problems: 1) Licensing; the producers would have to pay even more money to Tolkein's estate; and 2) you can't fail by overestimating the American appetite for banality, but plenty of people have failed by overestimating their appetite for intelligence and depth.

You and I, as JRRT fans, would love to see a big screen representation of The Fall of Numenor or The Tale of Beren and Luthien. These tales are the right length and the right level of complexity to permit a screenwriter plenty of artistic license and still remain faithful to Tolkein's originals. But to a studio exec, those names aren't familiar. They're only familiar to a nerds and geeks, and a minority of them at that, and they're notoriously hard to please and, even worse, known pirates and downloaders.

Nope. The Hobbit has name recognition. Kids in the 70's and 80's were given that book to read in 9th grade Lit classes. Now those kids have money and their own kids. They're going to milk that name for all it's worth.

I'll give del Toro the benefit of the doubt. He earned that with Pan's Labyrinth. But as soon as he shows signs of kowtowing to the studio execs and marketing pressures, I'm out. It will happen, the question is how many movies will it take?

Re:Sequel? No, give us Silmarillion (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524316)

I doubt it.

As impressive as the Silmarillion is as an exercise in world building, it lacks the narrative ingenuity and poetic diction of LotR and even the humble *Hobbit*. The sheer scale and grandeur of the stories almost overshadows the characters in them. It is the personal urgency of doing the right thing that drives the action of LotR, at the end of which we see the entire providential tapestry. The characters of the Silmarillion are largely trapped by fate in a doomed struggle with a foe far beyond their strength. It's extremely un-dramatic. There's hardly any dialog.

Not that this couldn't be shaped into drama, but you'd need a Shakespeare to do it justice. I like to imagine what he'd do with the Akallabêth.

"The Hobbit" not "The Hobbit" ? (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523912)

How can you call something by a book name and not actually be referring to the book? That seems weird. *sigh*

Re:"The Hobbit" not "The Hobbit" ? (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523970)

Shameless reply to myself: there's no REASON to do so, either. Tolkien wrote tons and tons of history and stories to make movies with. Writing your own seems senseless and a waste.

Re:"The Hobbit" not "The Hobbit" ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31523976)

Yeah, how can one name possibly refer to two different things? Isn't language confusing.

Kids book? (1)

currently_awake (1248758) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523934)

The Hobbit was definitely written for a younger crowd. Of course once Hollywood gets through with it you won't know that- are they going for a younger crowd or what?

Two films? Oh, right: There... (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523940)

and Back Again [wikipedia.org] .

I'll go ahead and be first (3, Insightful)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523972)

I'm in favor of the sequel. In all due reverence to Tolkien, there are other authors on this planet who have done well with fantasy works. In fact every single work of modern fantasy is derivative from Tolkien's works, and if you've ever enjoyed any of them, there's a distinct risk you'll enjoy this, too.

What's more, since you haven't read this particular book, you're probably less likely to be underwhelmed by it. You can't compare the dialog to a book which doesn't exist.

Finally, I think it absolutely vital for fantasy, and all fiction everywhere, to move beyond reverence for certain works. Somehow humanity managed to move beyond Shakespeare, creating new-ish works which we prefer to his, and I believe we can move beyond Tolkien. I also feel that making a new work in that same setting can be a catalyst for that evolution.

I'm also a strong proponent of 'Lucas' Law' wherein we can democratically remove an author's control over a project if they cease to contribute to society. Introduce one too many Jar-Jar-Binks-types and the people put a referendum on the ballot to put your work into the public domain...

Tolkien's work should be eligible for this transition as well, because nothing new is coming out of it. Or nothing was, until this sequel.

Or You Can Just Leave Tolkien Alone... (3, Interesting)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524120)

...and create something new, genius. Something that would require a little more effort, something that would have a little more risk because it lacked an installed fan base. Something without a fuckin' elf.

Re:Or You Can Just Leave Tolkien Alone... (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524246)

...and create something new, genius. Something that would require a little more effort, something that would have a little more risk because it lacked an installed fan base. Something without a fuckin' elf.

Because no one has tried to do that ever. What brilliantly fresh idea!

Re:I'll go ahead and be first (4, Insightful)

VShael (62735) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524144)

I think it absolutely vital for fantasy, and all fiction everywhere, to move beyond reverence for certain works.

Somehow humanity managed to move beyond Shakespeare, creating new-ish works which we prefer to his, and I believe we can move beyond Tolkien

Yeah, there's a difference between making a modern adaptation of Shakespeare, or even a whole other thing INSPIRED by Shakespeare, and writing "Hamlet 2: The Revenge of the Prince!"

sequel? (1)

pieceofstone (1579885) | more than 4 years ago | (#31523990)

This sound wrong to me. The last I read was that the two movies would just be the Hobbit, broken into two but with some segments of the book expanded upon. I know there was talk earlier about a non-Hobbit sequel for the 2nd movie, but I don't think that's the way things stand right now unless things have changed again for some bizarre reason. Okay, here's one link: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41848 [aintitcool.com] "Where as many months ago, writers Jackson, Guillermo del Toro, Philippa Boyens, and Fran Walsh were contemplating the first films as essentially being the Tolkien book, and the second film being a bridge movie between THE HOBBIT and THE LORD OF THE RINGS, Jackson told a select group of online journalists a couple nights ago that that clearly wasn't going to be the case. The two films will be the novel stretched out and supplemented by material from appendices, and other background source material written by Tolkien."

better lotr sotry ideas: (4, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524012)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion [wikipedia.org]

duh

it will be hard to nail tolkien's tone in a made up "middle movie". even if it isn't "studio committee of frat boys"ed to death, lotr fundamentalist fanboys will eviscerate it. they can deal with no tom bombadil, since its a story line that's so out of touch with the rest of lotr that it can safely be surgically removed, but whatever they do with the rumored necromancer plotline for this "middle movie" they better be damn respectful to the world of lotr:

http://www.storyscape.net/hobbit_necromancer.html [storyscape.net]

as an aside, i always thought a good jumping off point for lotr fanfiction/ hollywood exploitation would be an examination of the blue wizards:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Wizards [wikipedia.org]

so little is sketched by tolkien of them and the world to the east of mordor they went too, that it could make for some great lotr-type stories without stepping on any middle earth toes or the fanboys who guard the mythology's continuity

it could have an east asian or russian mythology theme, keeping in touch with all those maps that overlay mordor with either germany, transylvania, or the middle east

and maybe we would get more oliphants! ;-P

Re:better lotr sotry ideas: (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524372)

would be an examination of the blue wizards

Blue wizard needs food badly!

May be too late. (2, Interesting)

VShael (62735) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524106)

Gandalf tells Bilbo he hasn't aged a day. He's celebrating his 111th birthday in the first movie.

And in the flashback, where Bilbo finds the ring, obviously Ian Holm looked pretty much the same as he did in Fellowship.

They should have made The Hobbit with Ian Holm a few years ago. Or at least scanned him in so we could AVATAR his performance into the movie, if the need arose.

Now, we'll have a movie with a different Bilbo, an older Aragorn, an older Gandalf... even an older Elrond.

Re:May be too late. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524288)

Aragorn plays no part in The Hobbit.

Re:May be too late. (2, Funny)

GuJiaXian (455569) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524290)

Perhaps we should just sue the actors for aging. That'll show 'em.

I ask only one thing... (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524212)

please no singing.

Re:I ask only one thing... (0, Troll)

east coast (590680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524424)

I hear Leonard Nemoy [youtube.com] has already sung... er sorry... *signed on* for this project.

Not to be the Grammar Police.... (1)

NScott1989 (1767498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524234)

"The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an original story not written by Tolkien, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit, and the Lord of the Rings." The planned sequel to The Hobbit is to be an original story, not written by Tolkien, covering the 60 years between The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings. Sorry but misplaced punctuation is like J-walking... A very serious offense. ...

As a massive faggot, (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31524390)

As a massive faggot, I quite enjoy the LOTR series. I suspect this is true of other gay ass nerds like myself! Thanks Tolkien!

The sequel will not be an unknown story (2, Informative)

m93 (684512) | more than 4 years ago | (#31524436)

From theonering.net

1.2. What will be included in the two movies? According to the Empire Online interview with PJ and GDT (link above), the two movies will include all of the iconic moments in the book, The Hobbit, as well as being expanded to follow other events that occur ‘offstage.’ This includes the White Council and Gandalf’s comings and goings to Dol Guldur. Pj: “We expanded out the universe a lot more so that we weren’t just staying with Bilbo and the Dwarves on their journey, as the book pretty much does. We started to expand some of what’s happening to Gandalf outside of that journey.” Things we know are included so far: - backstory of Thrain, Thorin’s father - Beorn - Spiders - The White Council - Gandalf’s journeys to Dol Guldur - The three trolls (Tom, Bert, William) - Sauron ( including some of his history)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...