Sadly, it doesn’t look like he’ll be directing, that honor instead going to (deep breath) Sam Raimi. So yes, brittonlj, I suppose in an “Evil Dead” sense, the Tolkien franchise will be getting its own “zombie season”.
Here’s the article, if y’all are interested:
http://www.scifi.com/scifiwire/index.php?category=0&id=46618
—GR
As a projectionist who had to watch Spiderman 3 about 5 million times this summer, I can’t say I’m thrilled with this news (though I hear the E.D. movies are great). I’m not really thrilled to hear they’ve decided to make The Hobbit in the first place. I could never bring myself to hate PJ’s LOTR films, but I was never able to love them either. sigh
– Glimfeather, back on the boards for Christmastime
By the way, GR, I love your name.
“Foul! No repetitions!”
Wow I was expecting a little more excitement for this.I guess that why this is a scifi forum . Although 2 Hobbit films ? That is a little much. The book isn’t that big. Hopefully Peter Jackson directs. After Spiderman 3 I can’t trust sam Raimi, S3 scarred me. I could do a college theisis on how bad that movie was.
I’ll co-author it with you.
And I do love fantasy, as well as sci-fi. I just couldn’t muster up the enthusiasm for the LOTR movies that everyone else had. But I love, adore, and otherwise hold the books close to my heart (maybe that’s the reason for the aforementioned lack of enthusiasm for the movies).
Huh. What bothered you about it? I had only one complaint about the whole series (Faramir.)
I’m excited that P.J. is involved with The Hobbit. And who knows he may yet end up directing the movies. The only thing about the original trilogy was the Elves showing up for the Battle of Helms Deep. That was an important victory for Man in Two Towers morale wise for men and I thought it was diminished by bringing in the Elves to help.
Huh, indeed. It was never anything I could put my finger on, which is why I just chalked it up to liking the books too much to be satisfied with a movie version. While I couldn’t work up glowing enthusiasm for them, neither could I come to completely hate them (some ardent book-LOTR friends of mine tried very hard to get me to, though). Roger Ebert voiced some of my feelings in his review of the first film (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20011219/REVIEWS/112190301/1023), though later he joined the bandwagon of critics rushing to be the first to call the series Oscar-worthy.
If I had to sum up my feelings, I’d say that the movies felt to me less like a faithful interpretation of one of the first stories of the modern fantasy era, and more like a retread of all the derivative sword-and-sorcery, thud-and-blunder, D&D stuff that Tolkein’s work inspired in later years. Instead of peeling back all those accumulated layers of tripe to get at the core of what made the original great, they just made an exciting action-adventure-fantasy flick that happened to be based on really good material. Not that it wasn’t fantastic to watch, even moving at times, but it just seemed like it was missing something important at its heart.
I don’t really hold it against people who love the films. Maybe I’ll get pissier about it as the years go by. If I had to really pick, I’d point out that the final film won all kinds of Oscars, especially SFX, art direction, sound, makeup, and costumes, but none in Cinematography or Acting. Granted, I think Ian McKellen and maybe Sean Astin should have taken something home, but I think that it’s saying something that two very important elements of what should make a great film were apparently not notable enough in this work to be honored (and before anyone says that the vistas were stunning, I’d say that it’s not hard to get good shots when you’re filming in New Zealand; just point the camera somewhere…you really can’t miss).
But that’s what bothered me, with a great big “FWIW”.
Oh yeah, and Faramir was annoying too.
Fair point. The books were very much about the diminishment of the Elves and the rise of Humans and Hobbits, so that could be seen as detrimental. It felt to me as a last gesture sort of thing, and since it wasn’t the calvary moment, I was OK with it. (Plus, they looked cool.)
Well, yeah, OK. Fair point again. It was certainly informed by the D&D re-interpretations of the original. But it’s not surprising that they went back to that well themselves. (That’s how culture works, which is why current copyright laws are insane.)
Anyhoo (as Larry would say) the fact that it was fantastic to watch is surely the point they were (rightly, as filmakers!) aiming for. Just as the fact that LotR felt like a forgotten tome of ancient wisdom was surely what JRRT was aiming for. Different strokes for different, er, mediums.
I agree that they did look cool with the Elves coming to renew their past agreement to fight along side Men. Haldir was a standout.
The only thing that annoyed me about Faramir was all the drool that made my popcorn soggy. But hey your mileage may very from this chick’s. 
Yeah, I suspect my complaint was a bit different…
I’m a big fan of the movies, but I thought they got progressively less enjoyable (to me) as the series went on.
I think The Fellowship of the Ring is about as perfect a movie as could have been made of that book. The decision to leave out Tom Bombadil was spot on, as was the decision to quicken up the departure from the Shire. My only complaints about the film are relatively minor ones. I don’t like that Saruman was so quickly revealed to have turned, and I don’t like that he was such a willing servant of Sauron. Saruman’s betrayal should have come later, after first establishing more strongly that the Elves and Gandalf are pinning a great deal of hope on his counsel. It adds to the sense of despair creeping on on the Elves and Men. On the same note, Saruman shouldn’t have been such a willing servant of Sauron. His weakness was not fear and despair; it was pride. He truly thought he could capture the ring and master it, and defeat Sauron. His use of the palantir should not have been to take orders from Sauron, it should have been an opportunity to show how Sauron works. Saruman thought he was spying on the plans of Sauron (as did Denethor), but in fact Sauron was twisting Saruman to his needs. OTOH, as filmed, it works. My fanboy self just didn’t find it quite as satisfying as it could have been.
The Two Towers was always going to be the weak link. Aside from Helm’s Deep and the battle between Faramir’s men and the Southron(?) men, there’s not a ton of action. Unfortunately, I think Jacksom (and Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens) tried too hard to fill it with excitement and tension that was unnecessary (Aragorn disappearing off the cliff in particular). I don’t like Faramir’s characterization in the film - the whole point of his character is that he’s so different from his brother and father that he lets the Ring pass. I also don’t like the way Merry and Pippen had to trick Treebeard into assaulting Isengard - again, it weakens the characters to me.
The Return of the King was the weakest. The battles were pretty exciting, but there’s an awful lot of really deep emotion missing from the film. Denethor, in particular, was just completely misused. He should have been much more sympathetic; his downfall was his love of the city and a bit too much pride, not being a complete jerk. I was happy to see him burn in the film; in the book it was much more tragic. And of course, not filming [i]The Scouring of the Shire[i] was one of the biggest travesties of the series. One of the major themes of the book is small unimportant people doing important things, and the scouring of the Shire is essential to completing that theme. It allows Merry and Pippen to step out from Frodo’s shadow, and it also shows how pervasive evil was in their world. Even the Shire was no haven from it.
So, I’m cautiously optimistic about The Hobbit. It’s more of a straight-up adventure story than The Lord of the Rings, which I think will play to Jackson & Co’s strengths. As long as the pare down the unecessary parts, but don’t feel the need to add too much, I think it’ll be OK. The Battle of Five Armies should be pretty cool to look at!
“Spider-Man swinging to Middle Earth?”
http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/blog/article/11175/spider-man-swinging-to-middle-earth.html
Tobey Maguire has reportedly signed on to star in The Lord of the Rings prequel, The Hobbit.
He does have Hobbit qualities…
When Robert Downey Jr. took the stage at the Golden Globes this weekend, he was wearing a rather famous beard, recognizable and beloved to geeks worldwide. Yep - for some reason, he’d come looking just like Iron Man’s alter ego, Tony Stark. And this wasn’t a glue-on, this was something he’d cultivated over recent weeks in order, one would assume, to get his Stark on again, and soon.
But why? Are there Iron Man 2 reshoots going on? Or does Stark have a cameo in the currently-shooting Thor movie?
There’s a pretty solid run-down of most possibilities at CHUD. Devin says that he’s heard talk from numerous sources that Iron Man 2 reshoots are on the cards, so immediately that sounds like a ready-made explanation. Of course, he also reminds us that Thor will be hitting screens in the run-up to The Avengers, so some kind of Tony Stark cameo would make perfect sense.
Another possibility is that both of these possibilities are going to come true. But that’s still not all.
There’s a chance that Downey’s beard is there for some ancillary filming. Commercials that feature the character, say, or inserts for a video game. Neither of these is off the map, I’d say, if still less likely than the reshoot explanation.
Last we heard about a 3-D version of the Star Wars saga, George Lucas mentioned back in August 2008 that he had put LucasFilm to work on developing the technology to make it happen. At that point, he said that the technology worked great, but it wasn’t very practical. Now we have word that Lucas was wowed by Avatar’s 3-D tech, and that it may be just the push LucasFilm needed to adapt Star Wars.
This doesn’t mean that LucasFilm will lift Avatar’s tech directly, but they’ll likely get a few ideas for making their own tech more usable from James Cameron and crew’s many years of effort. (I’m sure this will all go down well with the Avatar haters.)
It was inevitable that Lucas would finally figure out a simple method to convert his cash cow franchise to 3-D. I had always figured that we’d see 3-D Star Wars sometime this next decade, and this news solidifies that timeline even further.
Honestly, it’s not the move to 3-D that worries me, it’s the potential for Lucas to go in and edit even more of the original trilogy. We could see edits that drastically change the tone of scenes like the infamous Han/Greedo shootout, or perhaps even another change like Hayden Christensen replacing Sebastian Shaw in Return of the Jedi. I’m just hoping that Lucas has grown tired of the constant re-edits.
As for the 3-D conversion itself, I actually have no problem with Lucas updating the series to utilize the latest theatrical technology. It’s a money-grab for sure given the higher ticket prices for 3-D theaters — but it’s an awesome money-grab. The only problem is that they’ll likely see the best results converting Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith since they were shot entirely digitally.
3-D probably won’t be the end of Star Wars theatrical re-releases either, but I suppose if there’s one film series that every generation needs to revisit in theaters, it’s this one.
Not long ago there was rumor that Tobey Maguire was high in the running for the pivotal role of Bilbo Baggins in the two Hobbit films. At the time that seemed absurd, given that he had a new Spider-Man film to worry about. Once Sony canned Spidey 4 and Maguire’s job playing Peter Parker, it was almost inevitable that the ‘Tobey as Bilbo’ rumors would start all over again.
Indeed, it didn’t take much. Just a mention in The Sun, that UK tabloid famous for just making up ‘credible’ rumors. OK, more than a mention. There was also the gigantic headline ‘Tobey Maguire Bags Bilbo Role in The Hobbit.’ Fortunately, Harry at AICN emailed Peter Jackson and Guillermo Del Toro, who both responded in the negative. “It ain’t true,” said Del Toro, while Jackson added, “We are currently auditioning for Bilbo, and a month or two away from any announcements.”
So, for the last time, or at least until Jackson & Co. do a complete 180-degree turnaround to announce that Maguire has been cast (don’t hold your breath) this one isn’t happening.
Bruce Campbell, in a letter to Quint, has announced that he will be re-teaming with Dark Horse Studios on a sequel to the low budget horror comedy My Name is Bruce. According to Campbell, the sequel will be titled Bruce Vs. Frankenstein, will begin principal photography this fall in Oregon.
The sequel was originally said to be titled “My Name is Still Bruce”. Dark Horse Entertainment head Mike Richardson had previously given the following premise for the sequel:
“We have an idea where [Bruce] is going to visit a country in Europe and he thinks he’s got an all-expense-paid stay there,” he explains. “They put him up in a big castle and he thinks there are groupies running around, but they’re not really groupies, they’re minions. It’s Bruce and he’s going to play the same clueless character.”
The 2007 feature told the story of a teenager who kidnaps his hero, over-the-hill B-movie star, Bruce Campbell (playing himself), to save his small mining town after four kids disturb a demon who’s been guarding the souls of 100 workers killed in a cave-in.
Heres the trailer for My name is Bruce-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfROegSomiw&feature=player_embedded
This is very sad news…
just saw this myself…very dissapointing…he really wouldve added the awesome
Will the director of ‘District 9’ take over the mantle of director now that Del Toro has walked away from ‘The Hobbit’?-
http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/06/18/rumor-will-neill-blomkamp-direct-the-hobbit/
I’d rather Blomkamp kept going on his current Sci-Fi project. TORN will prolly be the first to find out who will be directing The Hobbit movies so I’ll just wait for the newsletter from them. 
http://www.heatvisionblog.com/2010/06/peter-jackson-directing-hobbit-movies.html#more
if true—sweet!
““Out of 450 people surveyed, 450 don’t want 3D for ‘The Hobbit,’ ” a later post on the Web site said.”
Interesting. I dunno how I would have voted…