# The Hobbit - Yes or No?



## Wolfshead (Dec 10, 2004)

Simple question - do you actually want them to make a Hobbit film? You can see my views here, [url="http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?t=15812"]http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?t=15812 [/url], so I won't bother writing them down again.


----------



## Ithrynluin (Dec 10, 2004)

Yes, I definitely would like to see _The Hobbit_ movie brought into being. Hopefully, the most capable hands will be in charge of directing and making it.


----------



## Astaldo (Dec 10, 2004)

Me too I would like to see the Hobbit. It would be great.


----------



## joxy (Dec 10, 2004)

CraigSmith said:


> ....pale dead horses, leading hosts of the slain.
> A Game Of Thrones, George R.R. Martin


That's an intriguing combination of ideas:
The title is reminiscent of Gormenghast,
we all know about hosts of the dead,
the pale horse is ridden by Death at the Apocalypse,
and H Potter could see the carriage horses only after he had seen death!


----------



## Sammyboy (Dec 11, 2004)

I'm another one that's for a Hobbit film! I wouldn't mind PJ directing it either - as long as he doesn't stray too far from the storyline (as much as filmaking allows anyway). I thought I'd heard a rumour that they'd actually started making the film already - is it just that though, a rumour?


----------



## Princess Joy (Dec 11, 2004)

The Hobbit is a great story. I would like to see a movie made of it. I am currious as to why one hasn't already been made. A movie of the Hobbit should have been made before the Lord of the Rings was made in my opinion.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 12, 2004)

CraigSmith said:


> ...do you actually want them to make a Hobbit film?



YES! See http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showpost.php?p=435673&postcount=37

Barley


----------



## Ingwë (Dec 17, 2004)

I like "The hobbit". I would like to see the movie and I will see it, I`m sure.


----------



## Niirewen (Dec 17, 2004)

I voted yes. I'd love to see a movie of the Hobbit. I'd hope, of course, that it would be portrayed accurately.


----------



## Eledhwen (Dec 17, 2004)

I would like to see The Hobbit made into a film to put right all that was wrong about the original animated version. Now whether that would actually happen...


----------



## reem (Dec 18, 2004)

Considering the relatively less detailed plotline, I think a movie would be great We wouldn't (or at least, shouldn't) have any problems with major events and characters being cut out, and it would be great seeing Bilbo in action It would be more of a comedy than anything, I should think, and after LOTR, it would be refreshing.


----------



## Turin (Dec 18, 2004)

The answer is still no .


----------



## Eledhwen (Dec 18, 2004)

It would be difficult to make all those dwarves look interesting to an adult audience; it would need superb writing, acting and directing to pull it off, and I'm not sure that level of talent exists.


----------



## Confusticated (Dec 21, 2004)

I vote no. The commercial success of LOtR films is the reason for most of my reasons.

Money will be too much a motive, other than overwhelming passion to bring one's imagination out for others to see. LotR will be looked to as the example of how to make that money.

They will probably try to get the same successful crew to make it, and they will not do it to my satisfaction. 

They will try to make it look exactly like LotR visually and other aspects of style, which has already been seen! If I think Jackson's style isn't right for LotR for me, I think it would be even less so for 'The Hobbit'.

It will probably try to be more of an extension to LotR than what 'The Hobbit' really is. It's own tale with very little foreshadowing of events to come, and the innocense and even naive perspective of Bilbo (who _makes_ the book).

My unrelated reason, I don't want _any_ tainting of my own imaginations of the looks or sounds of Middle-earth and its people. This reason alone is not enough to make me vote no though.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 21, 2004)

Nóm said:


> ...I don't want _any_ tainting of my own imaginations of the looks or sounds of Middle-earth and its people....



Your concern (an absolutely totally legitimate one) is solved: simply don't see the movie. For all the other reasons, you're outnumbered: 

PJ's movies created something new in countless respects. And I must disagree with you: it was about more than "just money": it was an artistic, technological and cinematic triumph, a revolutionary breakthrough — although it was also, in joxy's spot-on phrase, "a work of flawed brilliance" — as are so many — if not all — works of brilliance. 

You have too many people around the world wanting to see a PJ _Hobbit_; alas for you: if it's legally possible to do it, and PJ is alive and in good health and spirits, I daresay it _will_ be done, and I'll be — happily, enthusiastically — one of the first in line to see it.

Barley


----------



## Uminya (Dec 21, 2004)

Nom does have a point, though. If they try to make the movie like LotR was made, it's going to be totally rotten. They should have a lighter style, to reflect the Hobbit, and they are completely able to pull everything from the book, there's no need to make things up. I don't want to see Arwen walking around in Rivendell, and I don't want Bard to have some sort of love affair.

I say make it in the spirit of "_Goonies_"


----------



## Confusticated (Dec 21, 2004)

Barliman, I don't give a damn if I am outnumbered in my opinions. And I sure aint going to change them because of it.

I never said it will not be made, but that I would personally prefer if it is not made, and I gave my reasons why.

And I never said anything about Jackson's LotR not being anything new. I said that I believe 'The Hobbit' would be like it, and so would be nothing new.



> Your concern (an absolutely totally legitimate one) is solved: simply don't see the movie.


All of my concerns are legitimate.

And if it were made, I would watch it, especially if it had a different style and look than LotR. Like I said the reason alone isn't enough to put me against the movie being made.



> And I must disagree with you: it was about more than "just money": it was an artistic, technological and cinematic triumph, a revolutionary breakthrough — although it was also, in joxy's spot-on phrase, "a work of flawed brilliance" — as are so many — if not all — works of brilliance.



Was? What is all this talk of was?

Aren't we talking about 'The Hobbit' here?

How can you know it will not be about money if it isnt even known who all will be involved in its making?

If it isn't going to be about money tell me how many people were willing to invest in such a movie 6 years ago, and how many would like to do so today?


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 21, 2004)

Nóm said:


> Barliman, I don't give a damn if I am outnumbered in my opinions. And I sure aint going to change them because of it.



I'm sorry and do sincerely apologize if it was my post that made you so angry — it wasn't meant to.

Barley


----------



## Confusticated (Dec 21, 2004)

No Barliman don't worry about it. I apoligize, I wasn't as angry as I must have sounded.

Was a little irritated though.

How about the rest of the points in the post? Do you see my point about a Hobbit film being just like the LOtR film in style? That I was not saying Jackson's LotR offered nothing new?


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 22, 2004)

Nóm said:


> Do you see my point about a Hobbit film being just like the LOtR film in style? That I was not saying Jackson's LotR offered nothing new?



I would imagine that if PJ made a Hobbit film it would indeed bear the PJ style, so I'd agree you there. Being neither a purist nor a film fanatic, I do worry about Jackson going over the top with his version of The Hobbit.

(Thankfully, he didn't pursue the idea of having Aragorn in a knock-down drag-out with Sauron at the moment Frodo was holding the Ring over the abyss in Mount Doom! 

They'd gotten as far as actually storyboarding it, finally saw the error of their ways and let it go. But they still saw fit to include the rough draft in the Appendices section of ROTK. 

I must say, I would have been totally incensed, and would have felt totally betrayed had they done that. 

My one serious and intense annoyance with how they did the films was in their actually changing the _essential nature of the characters_ from the way Tolkien had created them: Gimli as a comic buffoon; Aragorn weighed down with uncertainty; Faramir willing to bring the Ring to his father; Frodo almost dropping off the Ring with the Nazgûl Lord; Frodo telling Sam to "go home." 

But having Sauron actually appear to do battle with Aragorn would have been inexcusable for a number of reasons.)

Barley


----------



## baragund (Dec 22, 2004)

I firmly believe that New Line will produce a film version of The Hobbit, and it will most likely be made by Mr. Jackson and his colleagues who made the LOTR films. LOTR was such a commercial success that New Line will do whatever is necessary (acquiring film rights, reconciling with the Tolkien estate, etc.) to continue that success.

About 80% of me relishes the idea of a new movie version of The Hobbit. _Something_ must be done to mitigate the heap of excrement that was the 1980s animated version of The Hobbit! I just hope the filmmakers put some serious effort into capturing the light-hearted and whimsical nature of the book: the merry and happy-go-lucky nature of the Elves (remember the woodland Elves getting blotto on the wine of Dorwinion before Bilbo and the Dwarves make their escape?), the somewhat inept nature of the Dwarves (the images in my mind of the Dwarves when I read The Hobbit for the first time were rather similar to Disney's depiction of the dwarfs in the Snow White movie), the naive innocence and fussiness of Bilbo. The other 20% of me fears it will become a butcher job and it will be simply cashing in on the success of the LOTR movies. Think of the sequals to, say, Jurassic Park and you get my meaning.

It's going to be hard to do given what's been stamped into the imagination of the pop culture, but it can be done with careful consideration and planning.


----------



## Fundin Snowarm (Dec 23, 2004)

I say Yes without a doubt there should be a film version of The Hobbit, I also think that it should be made by New Line and the PJ, I feel so strongly that it should be made that I have written a letter to PJ himself, with an excerpt from my screenplay adaptation of The Hobbit. I have written a complete adaptation that remains true to the novel, but also fits in perfectly with PJ's LOTR universe.


----------



## Kelonus (Dec 23, 2004)

The Hobbit should be made. Fundin, hopefully you adaptation would be accepted. I hope it stays true to the book. We all have works we have done that should be noticed. Whether a big story or not.


----------



## baragund (Dec 23, 2004)

Fundin, you _really_ wrote an entire screenplay of The Hobbit?? Wow, that's great!!  Can you share it with us? If you're concerned about copywrite stuff or people ripping you off, can you at least describe how you reconciled Mr. Jackson's view of Elves and Dwarves with how they are portrayed in the book?

I'm picturing in my mind an image of the solumn lantern-bearing procession of Elves in the movie version of FOTR, and then I imagine the image of the happy-go-lucky Elves singing silly songs in the trees when Thorin and company first enter the grounds around Rivendell... and my mind short-circuits!


----------



## Fundin Snowarm (Dec 23, 2004)

Before I start sharing everything all over the Net, I would really like to explore all my options with getting industry people to look at it. Not to sound egotistical, but I think it really is good. I remained faithful to the book and at the same time remained faithful to the movies as well. I will admit to changes/expansions/deletions, but it is an adaptaion, lets just say it has a unique interpretation that I believe would be well received by the different factions of Tolkien fans.


----------



## Morgul Agent (Dec 24, 2004)

I'm definitely voting Yes. I'm a huge fan of the movies, despite the flaws.

But if we do get a movie, and it is done by PJ and crew, we DO have to expect those irritating changes (That PJ and Boyens seem to think are 'essential'). For example, I heard them say that we probably WOULD see Arwen in Rivendell, and Legolas in Mirkwood, etc. I also read that the other hobbit actors might play their ancestors (i.e. other Tooks, Brandybucks, or Baggins)...


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 24, 2004)

Morgul Agent said:


> I'm definitely voting Yes. I'm a huge fan of the movies, despite the flaws.
> 
> But if we do get a movie, and it is done by PJ and crew, we DO have to expect those irritating changes (That PJ and Boyens seem to think are 'essential'). For example, I heard them say that we probably WOULD see Arwen in Rivendell, and Legolas in Mirkwood, etc. I also read that the other hobbit actors might play their ancestors (i.e. other Tooks, Brandybucks, or Baggins)...



I heard that Gandalf and Thorin are going to do a tap dance/softshoe on top of an inn table, and the Ringwraiths will do a Rockettes/panto routine, complete with high kicks...

Barley


----------



## Eledhwen (Dec 24, 2004)

Morgul Agent said:


> I heard them say that we probably WOULD see Arwen in Rivendell, and Legolas in Mirkwood, etc. I also read that the other hobbit actors might play their ancestors (i.e. other Tooks, Brandybucks, or Baggins)...


Legolas in Mirkwood is sound; he probably was there at the time. Arwen, though, was probably in Lothlorien; but if they add the White Council that Gandalf left Bilbo and Thorin to attend, and the subsequent cleansing of Dol Guldur, then you could shoehorn Galadriel, Celeborn and Arwen into the storyline without inventing events that never took place.


----------



## treebeardgarden (Dec 26, 2004)

I think they should make the Hobbit as a film. It will bear little semblance to the JRR book as with the other films. It will be a financial success. Probably made by Mr Jackson and Co.

The way I cope with the changes is to think of them as completely different entities. As such they are both excellent. However I would not want Mr Jackson to be true to the books. I feel this would detract from the books and a lot of younger people who might read the books because of the film never would because they would be to much the same.
Lastly if it encourages discussions like this and other threads on the Forum all the better.


----------



## Narsil (Dec 26, 2004)

baragund said:


> I just hope the filmmakers put some serious effort into capturing the light-hearted and whimsical nature of the book: the merry and happy-go-lucky nature of the Elves (remember the woodland Elves getting blotto on the wine of Dorwinion before Bilbo and the Dwarves make their escape?), the somewhat inept nature of the Dwarves (the images in my mind of the Dwarves when I read The Hobbit for the first time were rather similar to Disney's depiction of the dwarfs in the Snow White movie), the naive innocence and fussiness of Bilbo. The other 20% of me fears it will become a butcher job and it will be simply cashing in on the success of the LOTR movies.



The idea of the Dwarves of ME being depicted like the Dwarves in Disney's _Snow White_ make me... ill.  I can hear Professor Tolkien turning in his grave...  What's next? The Elves in Mirkwood being depicted in a version of _The Elves and the Shoemaker?_  

Actually, I get what you are trying to convey..that the Hobbit needs to be a bit more lighthearted and less serious than LOTR and to a certain degree I agree with you. But I'd like to see Middle Earth brought to life in the same manner as in LOTR. I think Jackson could do it if he stays the course and treats the Hobbit as a separate storyline with the same setting and atmosphere as LOTR. 

Fact is, the two stories do "link" up. I don't see anything wrong with tying them together. Legolas is the son of Thranduil, the King of the Elves of Mirkwood....It's entirely possible that he could be in Mirkwood and thus make an appearance in the movie. Galadriel was part of the White Council and could be incorporated in _The Hobbit_ as well. Elrond would be there and of course, Gandalf. I don't see a problem here. 

I just don't think that you can dramatically depart from the feeling and atmpsphere of the previous movies in the making of _The Hobbit_. I definitely don't want a children's movie or a Middle Earth version of _The Goonies_. Make it serious in tone but lighthearted in some respects. With care, it could be done. 

If Jackson can keep his wife and buddy writers from fiddling with the characters and introducing crazy plotlines and love interests it should work. In any case, I'd like to see the movie happen. It would make for a really beautiful movie and open up some new and exciting aspects of Middle Earth. I think LOTR and _The Hobbit_ could compliment each other perfectly if it's done right.


----------



## treebeardgarden (Dec 29, 2004)

Narsil posts
The idea of the Dwarves of ME being depicted like the Dwarves in Disney's _Snow White_ make me... ill. 
I agree whole heartedly. more to the point we all know what JRRT thought of disney and his creations.


----------



## baragund (Dec 30, 2004)

Narsil said:


> The idea of the Dwarves of ME being depicted like the Dwarves in Disney's _Snow White_ make me... ill.  I can hear Professor Tolkien turning in his grave...  What's next? The Elves in Mirkwood being depicted in a version of _The Elves and the Shoemaker?_



Yeah, I probably could have expressed that thought a little better  . The thing is, I was about 12 the first time I read _The Hobbit_, the only images of mythical Dwarves I had in my mind at the time were Disney's dwarfs from the Snow White movie, Tolkien described them with similarly colored hoods and cloaks, and Tolkien's Dwarves were similarly bumbling and rather incompetent.

There is another thread in "The Hobbit" section of our forum that discusses "The Dwarves Lack of Vigilance". I recommend you check out that discussion because it talks about how the portrayal of Dwarves evolved from _The Hobbit_ to _LOTR_ to _The Silmarillion_.

Perhaps the reason Mr. Jackson made his rendition of Gimli to be the comic relief of the LOTR movies is he's trying to set things up for how he portrays Thorin and company in his interpretation of _The Hobbit_.


----------



## Eledhwen (Jan 3, 2005)

baragund said:


> Perhaps the reason Mr. Jackson made his rendition of Gimli to be the comic relief of the LOTR movies is he's trying to set things up for how he portrays Thorin and company in his interpretation of _The Hobbit_.


Heaven forbid! Thorin was always one of the greats among Dwarfdom, and received the appellation 'Oakenshield' because of his bravery at the Moria Gate battle against Azog, where he used an oaken branch as a makeshift shield. The only comic moment with Thorin is when he falls through Bilbo's door, and even then he controls his contempt and fury with difficulty. If any dwarf supplies comic relief, it's Bombur.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jan 3, 2005)

baragund said:


> Perhaps the reason Mr. Jackson made his rendition of Gimli to be the comic relief of the LOTR movies is he's trying to set things up for how he portrays Thorin and company in his interpretation of _The Hobbit_.



What a horrifying thought! If that turns out to be the case, I'll not see it. That every single dwarf in the Company, and in all the Dwarf armies turning out to be Jacksonesque clowns and buffoons would just be too much! As the Gimli of the book said, "A merry troop of fools we shall look!"

Barley


----------



## Palando (Jan 15, 2005)

As long as Peter Jackson is involved, then I am all for it.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jan 15, 2005)

Palando said:


> As long as Peter Jackson is involved, then I am all for it.



My kinda guy! 

Barley


----------



## Eledhwen (Jan 15, 2005)

Palando said:


> As long as Peter Jackson is involved, then I am all for it.


As a finale we'd have Bilbo's trolls climbing the empire state building being buzzed by eagles.


----------



## Narsil (Jan 22, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> What a horrifying thought! If that turns out to be the case, I'll not see it. That every single dwarf in the Company, and in all the Dwarf armies turning out to be Jacksonesque clowns and buffoons would just be too much! As the Gimli of the book said, "A merry troop of fools we shall look!"
> 
> Barley



I agree 100% It would truly be tragic if Jackson went with this route. Unfortunately his treatment of Gimli at times in LOTR isn't very reassuring. I suppose it depends on whether he decides to make _The Hobbit_ in the vein of LOTR or make it more "childish". I would like to see it portrayed seriously, as LOTR was. 

Now that he'd be dealing with many Dwarves instead of one it will be a challenge for PJ to get a handle on just what Dwarves are all about and I really do hope that he uses Tolkien as a reference for this. I want to see them portrayed as noble, brave and industrious..not as bumbling fools singing "Heigh Ho, Heigh Ho it's off to kill Smaug we go!"


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jan 23, 2005)

Narsil said:


> ...his treatment of Gimli at times in LOTR isn't very reassuring.



To say nothing of some of the tinkering he did with some of the other characters.

However, we don't have too much to worry about methinks: PJ has at least two movies lined up (_King Kong_ and _The Lovely Bones_) before he can even _think_ about doing _The Hobbit,_ to say nothing about the rights to the story that still plague the whole legal situation. By the time he gets around to it, _if he does,_ who knows where Ian McKellen will be, or how he will feel about resurrecting Gandalf? I think we have an open question before us, and will have for quite some time.

Barley


----------



## Narsil (Jan 24, 2005)

Barliman Butterbur said:


> PJ has at least two movies lined up (_King Kong_ and _The Lovely Bones_) before he can even _think_ about doing _The Hobbit,_ to say nothing about the rights to the story that still plague the whole legal situation. By the time he gets around to it, _if he does,_ who knows where Ian McKellen will be, or how he will feel about resurrecting Gandalf? I think we have an open question before us, and will have for quite some time.
> 
> Barley



Well, all reservations aside that's a total bummer because next December I'll be lost without some form of LOTR big screen entertainment to look forward to and I was hoping that they'd get working on _The Hobbit_ ASAP...especially since I _really_ want Ian McKellen to be Gandalf!


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Jan 25, 2005)

Narsil said:


> Well, all reservations aside that's a total bummer because next December I'll be lost without some form of LOTR big screen entertainment to look forward to and I was hoping that they'd get working on _The Hobbit_ ASAP...especially since I _really_ want Ian McKellen to be Gandalf!



By next December the DVD wars may be settled, and if the HD DVD format wins out (which is backed by New Line), they may be offering HD DVDs of the LOTR trilogy! Of course — you'll need to invest in a HDTV and HD DVD player...start saving your cans and bottles now!

Barley


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 5, 2005)

joxy said:


> That's an intriguing combination of ideas:
> The title is reminiscent of Gormenghast,
> we all know about hosts of the dead,
> the pale horse is ridden by Death at the Apocalypse,
> and H Potter could see the carriage horses only after he had seen death!


You what? 



Barliman Butterbur said:


> By next December the DVD wars may be settled, and if the HD DVD format wins out (which is backed by New Line), they may be offering HD DVDs of the LOTR trilogy! Of course — you'll need to invest in a HDTV and HD DVD player...start saving your cans and bottles now!


What's that all about? I've not heard of these things...


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Feb 5, 2005)

CraigSmith said:


> You what?
> 
> 
> What's that [the DVD wars] all about? I've not heard of these things...



Go here, and you'll learn all about it! 

Barley


----------



## Eledhwen (Feb 6, 2005)

I think they should look at the Harry Potter directors for one to do The Hobbit, and I look forward to the next HP film with that in mind. It will have water scenes and dragons among the usual HP stuff. However, I will want to be reassured that there will be enough Mirk in Mirkwood. To date, the forests on Harry Potter have been a bit tame in themselves; though their fauna have been scary enough (though I'd sack whoever designed the werewolf.


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 6, 2005)

Just had a quick look at that dvd stuff, thanks. Seems fairly reasonable - just a natural progression. They'll keep producing normal dvds until the format's phased out, so I'm not bothered - by the time that happens the new format will be affordable.

I'm not so sure about HP directors. Well, maybe the guy who did the last one, but it was Chris Columbus who did the first two and they were very short of what they could have been. Mike Newell's doing GoF, but I don't know anything about him.


----------



## no1liz (Feb 7, 2005)

CraigSmith said:


> . Mike Newell's doing GoF, but I don't know anything about him.


 
He directed "Notting Hill" & "Love Actually" Liz in Aberdeen


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 7, 2005)

Ah, ok. I've seen Love Actually - brilliantly funny film, but romantic comedies are much removed from fantasy epics. I'll wait until I see GoF before passing judgement on him.

Aberdeen, eh? That's where I live too. Are you at uni or still at school, if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## no1liz (Feb 7, 2005)

Well, how to answer that. Sufficent to say I left school many, many, many, years ago. I remember watching the first episode of Star Trek, and I was one of those who wrote in protest when it was going to be cancelled after the first season. But, I have recently joined the OU. I start Tuesday night at the college at the Gallowgate. Liz in Aberdeen


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 7, 2005)

Haha, ok. I guess I'm so used to talking to younger people on here I forget it's not exclusively teenagers. Rather remiss of me...

I'm a student up at Kings College doing first year history just now. So needless to say I spend far too much time in pubs and clubs. Although I avoid the 'cool' places such as Liquid and Tiger Tiger like the plague


----------



## no1liz (Feb 7, 2005)

This is embarressing. Are these pubs in Aberdeen? It has been years since I have been downtown on a Saturday night. Liz


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 7, 2005)

Ach, you're not missing much. They're the *cool* clubs with all the irritating repetitive music that's in the charts these days, stuff that really gets on my nerves. I much prefer the rock clubs like Exodus and Moshulu. Tiger Tiger's down by the harbour next door to the Vue cinema, and Liquid's somewhere off Union Street, can't remember which street. In my opinion, the best pub, though, is The Bobbin on King Street, next to the Tesco and Esso petrol station, infact it's so good that on Monday night's it's only £1 a pint!  But I've got too much work for a tutorial tomorrow to do  So I should really stop procrastinating on here...

Back on topic, I think if they make the film, it'll be PJ directing. New Line say they only want him, and seeing as he's done LOTR, he's the obvious candidate. Even if it will be a long time till he's available.


----------



## Eledhwen (Feb 7, 2005)

CraigSmith said:


> Mike Newell's doing GoF, but I don't know anything about him.


That's what I'm looking forward to. The HP films have got better as they went along. They started with the Voldemort animated Swimming cap, through a dodgy baselisk to a pretty good third film. The filming of The Hobbit depends on a believable Smaug, just as TTT needed a believable Gollum; and GoF has a dragon.

I actually don't think Peter Jackson would be the best man for The Hobbit. He is over-enamoured with OTT sized monsters, and I'm not sure I'd be happy with what he leaves out or, more to the point, what he invents!


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 7, 2005)

I think the increase in quality with the HP films as been down to two main reasons - a) Child actors are learning to act, and b) they got rid of Chris Columbus. Now the kids can actually act, we'll see what Newell can do with it  GoF is my second favourite HP book (behind OotP), but it's going to be a tough job cutting it down to just one film.

I've been perfectly happy with the adaptations of LOTR from Jackson, so I'd have no problem with him doing TH. However, I do believe it will need to be a more 'innocent' film to capture the essence of Tolkien's work.


----------



## no1liz (Feb 8, 2005)

Hi Wolfshead, I love your picture, it looks like me when I get up in the morning, only I'm not that cheerful. I actually know of the Bobbin, it's next to my doctor's office. I just looked up Mike Newell on the IMDB. He directed a film way back in 1992, you may not have seen it. It was about Irish travellers, (a subject dear to my heart, sort of being one of the Scottish variety.) Anyway the film was called "Into the West." and it is just about the best film I've ever seen that features children. It came out about the same time as the "Home Alone" films and if you want a measure of how to judge a good film to a bad film with child actors, watch them back to back. So my hopes about "The Order of the Pheonix" have just been raised immeasurbly. Liz in Aberdeen.


----------



## Wolfshead (Feb 8, 2005)

Cheers - it's Iron Maiden's mascot, Eddie, from the Powerslave album 

Just looked Newell up as well and the only film I've seen is Four Weddings And A Funeral. It was good, though. If he's good with child actors, that's a positive thing as some of the Potter ones are still a bit unpolished - it bodes well for GoF


----------

