The Hobbit ~ coming to a theater near you... maybe.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:35 pm

According to Variety Magazine, MGM plans to once again start making and financing tentpole movies and will begin with various highly anticipated projects.

The article states that over the next few years MGM plans to release about six tentpoles, some of which will be budgeted in the $150 to $200 million range.

The film that I'm most concerned with in MGM's lineup is THE HOBBIT. Rumors were flying for the past few weeks now that their could be a live-action Hobbit film! It was reported a few weeks ago that New Line Cinema had on it's budgetary report for 2007 a film called "The Hobbit." This report was seen by an intern and reported, of course to the internet. With MGM's annoucement, it looks like this could be true!).

And even a more interesting tidbit from the Variety article is that MGM has/is considering The Hobbit as one or TWO films!

Talk about THE HOBBIT mentions that the studio wants Peter Jackson to direct. New Line would co-produce the film.

MGM and Saul Zantz Co. currently own the film rights to any "The Hobbit" movie (at least that's what they BOTH say). The rights to a live-action film version of The Hobbit have been bogged down in litigation for almost 4 years (and longer) now. It looks like MGM, New Line and Saul Zantz Co. have worked out their differences. Let's hope this is true TRUE, TRUE!!!

................................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Arioch · Post by **Arioch** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:50 pm

I just can't imagine them making 2 films out of it

ken
_________________
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics

Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil than you

Slice N Dice: Game and Pizza Parlour

WWBYD What would Brigham Young do ?
http://www.geocities.com/J_Elric_Smith/Index.html

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 4:52 pm

Yep, hopefully it'll happen and the film needs to have Peter Jackson directing!
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:20 pm

If the movie goes heavily into the Battle of Five Armies, then I could see two films out of it. Other then that, the two films idea is probably just a strategy to get more $$$ out of the singlular project.

As for Peter jackson directing, yeah i hope they get him to do it. The reason for this is more about continuity then ability. Peter Jackson has proven he can direct big-budget blockbusters, but moreso then that, PJ set a certain style to the LOTR films. Love or hate him, I wouldn;t want to see a Hobbit film that didn't look and feel like the LOTR films. I think at this point it's almsot a necessity that PJ be involved in some way.

.......................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Dakhysron · Post by **Dakhysron** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:26 pm

I'd love to see Peter Jackson do this film. No movie can hope to truley capture any book, but PJ, in my opinion, was true to the spirit of The Lord of the Rings.

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:32 pm

*wry smile* Unfortunately I find this news to be rather depressing. Strange as it may seem, I found the LOTR's movies rather jarring. Too many differences, alteration of characters, left out scenes, re written scenes. And while I can appreciate Peter Jackson's attention to technical detail, I would have been more impressed had he put such efforts in to his own story line. Rather that than mangle the books.

And I am quite aware that one can't always do a movie 100% accurate to a book. But the fellow who did Bicentenial Man proved rather nicely it can be closer than LOTR's was.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Inkpot · Post by **Inkpot** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 5:34 pm

I just wanna see Smaug....and the Great Goblin.
Ink
_________________
Check out Inkpot's C&C Downloads: http://www.cncplayer.net/inkpot/index.htm

C&C: Blissfully devoid of gestalt neko-hin rogue/fighter/mages!!

andakitty · Post by **andakitty** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:04 pm

What are some of the other projected tentpole movies? Would one happen to be a little project titled 'Elric of Melnibone'?

Dakhysron · Post by **Dakhysron** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:29 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
*wry smile* Unfortunately I find this news to be rather depressing. Strange as it may seem, I found the LOTR's movies rather jarring. Too many differences, alteration of characters, left out scenes, re written scenes. And while I can appreciate Peter Jackson's attention to technical detail, I would have been more impressed had he put such efforts in to his own story line. Rather that than mangle the books.

And I am quite aware that one can't always do a movie 100% accurate to a book. But the fellow who did Bicentenial Man proved rather nicely it can be closer than LOTR's was.

Yep. I am well aware of the changes. Even Gandalf and Aragorn were speaking each other's lines in different places. Story lines were added and plenty were dropped. But I still loved the movies. I suppose I just didn't "allow" the character changes that Jackson put it. For every release, I re-read the book before going to see the film so I could have a fresh understanding of the books before seeing the cinematics. Oh well, I count myself lucky that I could enjoy the film so much.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:38 pm

andakitty wrote:
What are some of the other projected tentpole movies? Would one happen to be a little project titled 'Elric of Melnibone'?

Other tentpole films for MGM that were reported by Variety were Terminator 4, and Thomas Crown Affair 2.

........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:48 pm

While I love the movies a great deal, there was just enough changed from the novels to grate on my nerves. I fully understand that little bits and pieces of the novel need to be different in the movie. Dialogue must be different and certain scenes have to be changed to fit with pacing, actors, and technical aspects.

That being said, I completey and utterly dispise what Peter jackson did with Saruman and Wormtongue. That part kills me to death. Saruman dies so pathetically, so hollywood-like that I complete FF through that scene.

I can even live with not putting the Scourging of the Shire in the films, but what happened with Saruman is completely unforgivable.

Peter Jackson admits that he never persobnally liked the Scourging of the Shire at the end of ROTK. Who the F cares what PJ likes?!?! If he is going to spout that rhetoric about being as thruthful to the material as possible, then suck it up and do JRR justice by not killing Saruman in that way, and leaving IN the Fall of the Shire.

DAMMIT!!!
............................................. mote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:52 pm

Omote wrote:
As for Peter jackson directing, yeah i hope they get him to do it. The reason for this is more about continuity then ability. Peter Jackson has proven he can direct big-budget blockbusters, but moreso then that, PJ set a certain style to the LOTR films. Love or hate him, I wouldn;t want to see a Hobbit film that didn't look and feel like the LOTR films. I think at this point it's almsot a necessity that PJ be involved in some way.

.......................................Omote

FPQ

Thanks for articulaing what I was thinking about why PJ should direct. And so he'll need to make Ian Holm look young again!
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

gideon_thorne · Post by **gideon_thorne** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:59 pm

*chuckles* Ya. What Omote said. I could have lived with the tweakage...but leaving the Shire bit out, when the whole series was about the triumph of the Hobbits, hit entirely the wrong set of nerves for me.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:08 pm

I hadn't read the books for about 20 years, and I still haven't re-read them. So I completely enjoyed the movies. Since I haven't read "The Hobbit" for about 25 years now I am sure I would enjoy a new movie, especially one done by Peter Jackson.

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:17 pm

gideon_thorne wrote:
*chuckles* Ya. What Omote said. I could have lived with the tweakage...but leaving the Shire bit out, when the whole series was about the triumph of the Hobbits, hit entirely the wrong set of nerves for me.

I knew going in that I would have to separate the book(s) from the movie in my mind or I would probably feel the way you do. I've done this for other movies based on books I've enjoyed. I can hardly think of any movie that was a good as the book . . . Gone with the Wind might be one of the few.

Incidentally, Christopher Lee said he reads the LoTRs book every year. I wish I could do that along with the Dune and Foundation/Robot series.
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

Inkpot · Post by **Inkpot** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:22 pm

I literally *despised* Two Towers when I saw it in the theater. Then I got the extended DVD (along with the extended editions of the other two films in the trilogy) and was satisfied. The extended versions really are the better films, imho.

Ink
_________________
Check out Inkpot's C&C Downloads: http://www.cncplayer.net/inkpot/index.htm

C&C: Blissfully devoid of gestalt neko-hin rogue/fighter/mages!!

Dakhysron · Post by **Dakhysron** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:40 pm

Omote wrote:
That part kills me to death.

I hate when that happens.

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:37 pm

I read that when PJ originally was asked about the Hobbit, he said no. He would rather like someone else take on the project but admitted that it would feel strange *not* to take part. At the time he was looking towards King Kong and about to start that project.

Ian McKellin stated he would *love* the chance to play Gandalf again in the Hobbit.

I think it could be fun! But to do it right and incorporate as much as possible to film, it would be long. There was some suggestions that a mini-series might be an interesting way to go about it. However, I'm sure a theatrical version would gross a lot more cash.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Rigon · Post by **Rigon** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:14 am

gideon_thorne wrote:
*wry smile* Unfortunately I find this news to be rather depressing. Strange as it may seem, I found the LOTR's movies rather jarring. Too many differences, alteration of characters, left out scenes, re written scenes. And while I can appreciate Peter Jackson's attention to technical detail, I would have been more impressed had he put such efforts in to his own story line. Rather that than mangle the books.

And I am quite aware that one can't always do a movie 100% accurate to a book. But the fellow who did Bicentenial Man proved rather nicely it can be closer than LOTR's was.

You hit the effing nail squarely on the head Peter.

If I ever win the PowerBall, I'm going to New Zealand and havin' me a good old talk with PJ.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

BeZurKur · Post by **BeZurKur** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:03 am

I don't expect a movie to be identical to the book. You can take liberties with scenes, but not with characters. The Fellowship of the Ring was a good example of this. It was a good movie. Yeah, they cut out a lot, but it is to be expected. As PJ said, it remained true to the spirit. However, Gandalf giving up hope, Frodo sending Sam home, and Aragorn cutting the head off the Mouth of Sauron goes against the spirit. The last one gets me the most; I've heard people defend the action as "it makes sense to do." I suppose that's why Aragorn is the King: he's made of better stuff than most people.

Omote · Post by **Omote** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:58 am

Dakhysron wrote:
I hate when that happens.

Now you feel my pain on this subject.

.........................................Omote

FPQ
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

Akrasia · Post by **Akrasia** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:20 am

Rhuvein wrote:
... I knew going in that I would have to separate the book(s) from the movie in my mind or I would probably feel the way you do. I've done this for other movies based on books I've enjoyed....

This is key. You have to view the films as separate creations from the books. When I first began to watch the 'Fellowship' film, I kept comparing the scenes to the novel and started to feel frustrated.

Then I told myself that this is simply a different creation altogether, and subsequently enjoyed the films immensely.
_________________
While it is unlikely to interest most of you, here is my 'cunning' blog: http://dailyakrasia.blogspot.com/

Akrasia · Post by **Akrasia** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:23 am

Inkpot wrote:
.... The extended versions really are the better films, imho...

This is true! Although I enjoyed the theatrical versions, the extended DVD versions are surprisingly -- and decisively -- superior.
_________________
While it is unlikely to interest most of you, here is my 'cunning' blog: http://dailyakrasia.blogspot.com/

Maliki · Post by **Maliki** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:21 am

Akrasia wrote:
This is true! Although I enjoyed the theatrical versions, the extended DVD versions are surprisingly -- and decisively -- superior.

I agree as well.
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 3:56 pm

I'm one of those heretics that didn't enjoy the books at all when I read them. I mean, the concept was great but the writing style was too ponderous for my taste.

So, the movies didn't bother me in the slightest. I'd like to see a Hobbit movie.

Inkpot · Post by **Inkpot** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:26 pm

My problem is I can never get anyone to watch the extended versions with me....they're each four hours long. At best, I can get my kids and my girlfriend to watch *a* disc with me. Ah well....what's a fanboy to do?

Ink
_________________
Check out Inkpot's C&C Downloads: http://www.cncplayer.net/inkpot/index.htm

C&C: Blissfully devoid of gestalt neko-hin rogue/fighter/mages!!

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 4:35 pm

Eh, the movies don't bug me. How can they? I will not read the books. Tried after seeing the first movie, to see what was so special about them... and, I got about 50 pages in, put it down, and said "f this!" Boring. Trivial. Its like reading an encyclopedia rather than a fantasy epic. Give me Beowulf or The Nibelungen Cycle any day. At least those are exciting.

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 5:11 pm

serleran wrote:
Give me Beowulf or The Nibelungen Cycle any day. At least those are exciting.

I agree completely, the Nibelungenlied ranks among my favorites.

It took me roughly 8 attempts to eventually read all of The Fellowship of the Ring. So, when the movies came out I was thinking "Hell Yeah!" Surely Tolkein's, I'm sorry but boring is the right term, writing style wont convey over onto the screen.

Tadhg · Post by **Tadhg** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:18 pm

serleran wrote:
Eh, the movies don't bug me. How can they? I will not read the books. Tried after seeing the first movie, to see what was so special about them... and, I got about 50 pages in, put it down, and said "f this!" Boring. Trivial. Its like reading an encyclopedia rather than a fantasy epic.

Bah, you just don't like halflings, orcs, dwarves, wizards, elves and human heroes, etc. set in a magical fantasy setting that has dragons and dungeons in it!
[Oh and btw, are you sure you're not referring to one of Tolkien's ancillary books like The Book of Lost Tales or The Silmarillion? Those are more "encyclopedic" than the Hobbit/LoTR books!]
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

johns · Post by **johns** » Tue Sep 12, 2006 10:43 pm

I think I have to fall into the MEH category, primarily concerning Peter Jackson.

I've read the first 2 books of the LOTR trilogy and half of the 3rd. Loved the first movie in the theatre, enjoyed the second (mostly for a few scenes) but found myself annoyed at the changes (because they weren't necessary cuts for time - just somebody else piggybacking his vision on someone else's) and didn't really care for the 3rd. I have them on DVD (my wife wanted them), and have watched each one once, except for the third. Haven't felt the need to watch any of them again.

For me, there were great moments, and definitely a great tribute to the spirit of the books (though I agree with Serleran, the actual books can be plodding and trivial), but Jackson's shadow kept looming larger and larger, and I just didn't care for his "vision". Oh well.

EDIT: Yay! I just made Goblitt!

Troll Lord Games

The Hobbit ~ coming to a theater near you... maybe.

The Hobbit ~ coming to a theater near you... maybe.

Re: The Hobbit ~ coming to a theater near you... maybe.

Re: The Hobbit ~ coming to a theater near you... maybe.

Re: The Hobbit ~ coming to a theater near you... maybe.