Two Hobbit Movies

[Bonecrusher Doc]

See this link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080525/ennew_afp/entertainmentnzealandfilmjacksonhobbit_08052506291 6):

So the first movie will be called "The Hobbit." The second one is as-yet-unnamed. To me the obvious choice would be "There and Back Again." What do you think? Do you think these movies will be in the same league as the LOTR movies?

[Guildorn Tanaleth]

I seem to recall that the second Hobbit movie will be about the events between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, so "There and Back Again" wouldn't really work.

[Kaelaroth]

Well, Jackson's involved, as if Guillermo del Toro, so, my bet is that they'll be better. Hopefully with less extended battle scenes, more magic, and at least some unslushy dialogue.

[Bonecrusher Doc]

The events between the Hobbit and LOTR? Cool, I didn't know that. I just assumed it was going to be The Hobbit split into two parts.

[factotum]

There isn't enough in The Hobbit to split it into two--they'd have needed eight movies for LOTR if they'd gone into that sort of detail!

[Bonecrusher Doc]

What books, if any, describe the events that take place between The Hobbit and LOTR? I want to be sure to read them before going to see the movie (though admittedly I have some time before then).

[Guildorn Tanaleth]

What books, if any, describe the events that take place between The Hobbit and LOTR? I want to be sure to read them before going to see the movie (though admittedly I have some time before then).

The appendices at the end of The Lord of the Rings include a detailed timeline of everything that happens in the Second and Third Ages, which is about the only source of information for that era other than a bit of background exposition in the beginning of LotR.

[Revlid]

What books, if any, describe the events that take place between The Hobbit and LOTR? I want to be sure to read them before going to see the movie (though admittedly I have some time before then).

The Silmarion, I would imagine.

[Neftren]

The appendices at the end of The Lord of the Rings include a detailed timeline of everything that happens in the Second and Third Ages, which is about the only source of information for that era other than a bit of background exposition in the beginning of LotR.

Try the Silmarillion. What is it... like 36 chapters of long stories detailing everything from the formation of Middle Earth all the way to the late second age. Don't forget the fifty-something page long appendix about the entire Lord of the Rings at the back of RotK.

[kamikasei]

The Silmarion, I would imagine.

Not at all. The Silmarillion is set millennia before either book.

There's not really anything that covers the gap, just mentions in the appendices and maybe in the notes, letters and such published in collections - no single book to read and say, "this is what they're adapting". There's not really that much that happens, either, at least, not that you could make much of a coherent narrative out of. It seems like a bizarre idea to me.

[Rasagal]

my money's on a story detailing the fall of the Necromancer by the actions of the White Council as was hinted by Gandalf in the end of the Hobbit if i recall correctly. I mean, what else is there to fill the gap apart from "Lord Of The Rings: The Further Adventures Of Aragorn" ?

[Kai]

For what it's worth, this is from IMDB...



What do they mean when they are referring to a "sequel" to the Hobbit? Isn't the "sequel" the Lord of the Rings itself?

The sequel has been alleged to be an original, untold story, not directly adapted from any of Tolkien's novels:

The plans call for Guillermo del Toro to work back-to-back on "The Hobbit" and its sequel, which will deal with the 60-year period between that story and "The Fellowship of the Ring," the first of "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, the studios said.

Source: Reuters

However, Yahoo! News has added the following notation at the bottom of their own April 24th story about Guillermo del Toro being named as director for the two films:

Please note that this version DELETES INCORRECT reference to second movie spanning time between "Hobbit" and "Rings"; New Line now says movies are based on book only.

[Bonecrusher Doc]

I've got the complete scoop here (http://www.wetanz.com/holics/index.php?itemid=695&catid=2#more) - the interview with Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro.

[Don Beegles]

That's interesting. I wonder how they're going to find enough notes/letters and such to fill the gap between the two books with Tolkien's stuff. I hope to God they don't just make it up, because that would be a recipe for a summer flick that sucks. I also hope they don't try to stretch a little bit of butter over too much bread, like I've heard that Chris Tolkien did in Children of Hurin. If they have enough stuff from Tolkien to do it, I think that could be a really good movie, but if they don't, I hope they scrap the idea.

[Turcano]

This (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/28) sums up my opinions succinctly.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Not at all. The Silmarillion is set millennia before either book.

There's not really anything that covers the gap, just mentions in the appendices and maybe in the notes, letters and such published in collections - no single book to read and say, "this is what they're adapting". There's not really that much that happens, either, at least, not that you could make much of a coherent narrative out of. It seems like a bizarre idea to me.
There's some stuff in Unfinished Tales about the Hunt for the Ring, and we know the events that happen during that time span, such as Aragorn's hunt for Gollum, which is alluded to in LOTR.

As a whole...I don't know what to think of this.

[Prophaniti]

Honestly, I agree whole-heartedly with the Penny-Arcade comic, kindly linked by Turcano. A Hobbit movie? Fine. They might screw it up, but I can just do what I do with the LotR movies and pretend I've never read the book. Then I can enjoy them.

A movie about the time in between?! That's a purely ludicrous idea. There's simply not enough there (though I do find Rasagal's idea strangely intriguing...) to justify a whole movie. And that raises the Suck-Potential to dangerous levels.

[LordVader]

Well, Jackson's involved, as if Guillermo del Toro, so, my bet is that they'll be better. Hopefully with less more extended battle scenes, more less magic, and at least some unslushy dialogue. (Emphasis and strikes mine.)

There we go. :smallbiggrin:
Seriously, though, I'd like to see some good dialogue, but I never really noticed outright magic in the LOTR books. Sure, there's enchanted swords and the like, but there's no outright magic. Not even in the Hobbit, a much more children-oriented book; there's the Elven disguise spells and Sting and Gandalf's bright flashes and firey pinecones and that's about it, as I recall.

Frankly, I'd rather have it just be two movies about the Hobbit; 1 from Bag End to the escape from Mirkwood's elven halls, and the other from their arrival at Laketown to the end. I think that'd be quite good.

[Revlid]

Frankly, I'd rather have it just be two movies about the Hobbit; 1 from Bag End to the escape from Mirkwood's elven halls, and the other from their arrival at Laketown to the end. I think that'd be quite good.

I agree. As it is, the whole thing in one film strikes me as very cramped.

Hell, if they wanted to they could stick in the second film anyway as a the third.
Make themselves another trilogy.

[poleboy]

A movie about the time in between?! That's a purely ludicrous idea. There's simply not enough there (though I do find Rasagal's idea strangely intriguing...) to justify a whole movie. And that raises the Suck-Potential to dangerous levels.

I disagree. Making a movie loosely based on source material equals more creative potential. Making one strictly based on source material is fanboy flame bait. Besides, I trust Jackson not to screw it up, I think he did the best anyone could with LOTR in this day and age of CGI and snappy one-liners.

[Telonius]

my money's on a story detailing the fall of the Necromancer by the actions of the White Council as was hinted by Gandalf in the end of the Hobbit if i recall correctly. I mean, what else is there to fill the gap apart from "Lord Of The Rings: The Further Adventures Of Aragorn" ?

Wait, I know! A Victorian-style piece set entirely in Hobbiton! The Sackville-Bagginses' various social machinations designed to isolate Bilbo, the tragic death of Frodo's family ... there's plenty of material to work with there. :smallbiggrin:

[Revlid]

my money's on a story detailing the fall of the Necromancer by the actions of the White Council as was hinted by Gandalf in the end of the Hobbit if i recall correctly. I mean, what else is there to fill the gap apart from "Lord Of The Rings: The Further Adventures Of Aragorn" ?

I don't think that's what'll happen, but it would be pretty awesome. Games Workshop has already done some nice background filling-in there, already.