THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

[Greylock Crescent]

^ Speaking of which, theonering.net has an article in which someone spotted Hugo Weaving in Wellington.

he has reported seeing Hugo Weaving here in Wellington this afternoon ... it’s probably a bit too hasty to assume that he’s here to be in The Hobbit, but I can’t think of any other reason why he would come here right now, just when they’re discussing Rivendell scripts. It’s certainly not for the weather (it’s howling a cold southerly gale out there at the moment).
​

Source

 

[TheSeeker]

Sounds promising!

 

[Argus Skyhawk]

I assume it will also be released in a 24fps version so other theaters can also show it, right?

We will be completing a "normal" 24 frames per second version—in both digital and 35mm film prints.

I was right!

 

[Greylock Crescent]

Keep up the good work, Nostradamus.

 

[Worf2DS9]

Thanks for that tidbit on Weaving, Samuel Walters!

 

[Greylock Crescent]

^ My pleasure. Speaking of casting rumors here are two more (one already fairly well-established, the other more recent):

Christopher Lee reprising his role as Saruman:

Farrell on his blog ... mentioned that Lee was ”getting ready to reprise his role as Saruman in Peter Jackson’s two-part production of The Hobbit”.While there is nothing on the video discussing The Hobbit nor is the statement itself a confirmation, the fact that Farrell recently spoke with Lee and chose this particular phrasing of words (without hedging) suggests this was part of their conversation and that Lee directly stated this. It could be a case of an over-zealous Tolkien fan reading too much into that statement but TORN followers may want to scour any future videos for tidbits of information. Source

​

Orlando Bloom reprising his role as Legolas:

“I’m going to bet on it,” [Bloom] said in an interview with MTV. “But I can’t really talk too much about it at the moment because it’s still sort of in the ether. But I would love to go back to work with Peter Jackson. It would be an honour.” Source
​

 

[Davros]

My problem with Saruman being in this movie is that I do not remember him ever being in the book. If you have to cut out parts of a book to make it into a movie, why add in parts that were never there?

 

[Greylock Crescent]

Saruman being in the movie fits with the intent to include what happened when

Spoiler: The Hobbit Book

Gandalf leaves the Dwarves and Bilbo at the borders of Mirkwood to attack Dol Guldur. The White Council confrontation with Sauron (The Necromancer) is heavily implied by the book -- it essentially happens "off screen" -- so including it in the film isn't all that different than including the scenes in which the Ents attack Orthanc in The Two Towers (an event never explicitly described in the book, even though we see it happen on screen in the movie). Since Saruman was, at that time, the leader of the White Council, it makes perfect sense to include him.

 

[Klaus]

^^that's what I assumed from the beginning in order to fill out 2 movies. And similarly, Legolas is Thranduil's son, so it would make sense to see him in the Elvenhalls in Mirkwood when the party is captured.

Which reminds me... is "Attercop!" going to be in the movie???

 

[Skywalker]

The only thing about Christopher Lee coming back is he's said that at his age, he doesn't want to fly all the way out to New Zealand. Maybe they'll bring the requisite cast up to England and film the White Council scenes up there.

 

[InklingStar]

I would love to have Christopher Lee as Saruman for the White Council scenes. He is an ally at this point, and for new viewers (if there are any left) it will come as quite a twist for him to betray Gandalf in FotR.

 

[John O.]

This may be like, OT or non-contributory to discussion specifically about this film, but my problem with the making of The Hobbit is that I'm a huge, huge JRRT fan - and it's taken years to get this project MOVING, much less completed, I think the estimated release date is in 2012? or 13?

But my gripe isn't how long its taken, it's the fact that for all this work, for all this waiting... to be prefectly honest, the Hobbit is the retarded kid of the bunch - there are SO MANY MORE interesting stories to be told OTHER than The Hobbit. If they managed to get production companies onboard for a 2-part Hobbit movie, they could've probably gotten them onboard for a 2-or-3 part story based on the Silmarillion... AND BEFORE I hear one damn whiney little LOTR-poser of a JRRT fan bitch and moan about how the Silmarillion is like an encyclopedia that you can't tell as a story, I've read it like 5 times, I've read the entire history of middle earth, the tales of numenor and middle earth, the poems of tom bombadil tales from the perilous realm - and The Silmarillion ABSOLUTELY has a primary continuous storyline that could be followed - the war of the jewels.

A Silmarillion film would have way, way, WAY more solid storytelling material to work with than The Hobbit. You've got fantastically interesting characters like Feanor, Fingolfin, the whole House of Elwe, the killing of the Trees of Valinor by Morgoth and Ungoliant, and story of the Noldor, the story of Turin Turambar and Niniel, these huge epic battles that took place between the Elves and Morgoth, the fight of the first Balrog with Glorfindel, the story of the fall of Gondolin; you have plenty of opportunities to reference or even include familiar characters from LOTR like Elrond and his brother the first king of Numenor Elros, Galadriel, possibly Arwen since her date of birth isn't set in stone, Celeborn, even antecedents of Aragorn like his ancestor Earendil, you've got the early history of Numenor if it went that far, I mean if it were ambitious enough you could lead right into the prologue of FOTR with the battle where the ring was cut.

The Hobbit was written in the 30's, basically for Christopher, as a little children's story side project, it just so happened to take place in the same universe. LOTR and The Silmarillion have far more in common in terms of style, composition, and story elements.

 

[Skywalker]

They don't have the rights to The Silmarillion, and as long as Christopher Tolkien lives, the Tolkien estate won't give them up.

And The Silmarillion would need probably about five movies to really have enough time to tell all the most important stories.

 

[John O.]

They don't have the rights to The Silmarillion, and as long as Christopher Tolkien lives, the Tolkien estate won't give them up.

And The Silmarillion would need probably about five movies to really have enough time to tell all the most important stories.

Well he IS getting pretty old, it probably won't be too long. Dumb question but I don't know much about this legal stuff - how were the rights to the Hobbit acquired?

I bet they could do it in 3 - but they'd be long like the trilogy - and I'd agree it probably couldn't be done in any fewer.

 

[Gaith]

I would love to have Christopher Lee as Saruman for the White Council scenes. He is an ally at this point, and for new viewers (if there are any left) it will come as quite a twist for him to betray Gandalf in FotR.

Nah, apart from the fact that he's Christopher freakin' Lee, his calling Hobbits "halflings" is a dead giveaway.

 

[Set Harth]

The Silmarillion ABSOLUTELY has a primary continuous storyline that could be followed - the war of the jewels.

But not a consistent group of characters. You could do it as a miniseries with almost a whole new cast in each installment, if the public would go for that.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

And let's face it, comparatively few people ever read the Silmarillion as opposed to the Hobbit or the LOTR trilogy.

I owned every JRRT book at one time, but never read the entire Silmarillion.

 

[Skywalker]

I actually really like The Silmarillion, but yeah, it's a pretty dry read, even compared to LOTR.

If by some miracle a series of Silmarillion movies (either theatrical or television) happened, I'd split it up something like this:

Movie 1: The forging of the Silmarils and Fëanor's quest to retrieve them after their theft by Morgoth (Ainulindalë and the pre-Silmaril history of Arda summed up during opening credits)
Movie 2: Dagor Bragollach, death of Fingolfin, Beren and Luthien and their quest for the Silmaril
Movie 3: Nirnaeth Arnoediad, capture of Húrin and the tragedy of Túrin Turambar
Movie 4: Tuor and the fall of Gondolin
Movie 5: Eärendil's journey to Aman, the War of Wrath, and the end of the First Age (final scene being the Edain sailing for Númenor)

 

[Alidar Jarok]

As someone who read the Appendix to the Return of the King, even I think the Silmarillion would make a bad movie. Maybe it's just the way the story was told. The LOTR was a personal story focusing on characters. The Silmarillion is sort of detached folk lore. It has an omniscient narrator throughout if I recall correctly. It doesn't lend itself to the same style as everything else (while the Hobbit does, aside from being a lighter tale).

 

[AJBryant]

As someone who read the Appendix to the Return of the King, even I think the Silmarillion would make a bad movie. Maybe it's just the way the story was told. The LOTR was a personal story focusing on characters. The Silmarillion is sort of detached folk lore. It has an omniscient narrator throughout if I recall correctly. It doesn't lend itself to the same style as everything else (while the Hobbit does, aside from being a lighter tale).

Dude, it could be EPIC.

The Silmarillion is not ONE tale. It's a collection of unrelated stories. Beren and Luthien would make a hell of a movie. And, man... the story of Feanor and his sons -- that would be majorly BITCHIN.