• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

MGM Annouces The Hobbit!

Status
Not open for further replies.
We all knew this was coming. I believe Jackson said he would do it, but didn't want to do it right away. I'm sure he will be on board though.
 
GDJustin said:
You're ****ing crazy if you believe that cutting the # of dwarves down will even cross their mind.

How the HELL do you write a script that makes each of the 13 dwarves distinct characters with a reason for being there? It's the major problem put forth by Boyens/Walsh when discussing a possible scripting of the book. And honestly, I think it would be impossible to do it with 13.
 
Memles said:
How the HELL do you write a script that makes each of the 13 dwarves distinct characters with a reason for being there? It's the major problem put forth by Boyens/Walsh when discussing a possible scripting of the book. And honestly, I think it would be impossible to do it with 13.
Yeah, you'd have to do a faithful adaptation of the book. Not going to happen. :(
 
will this movie spawn more fat girls being WAYYYYY too much into elves and medieval crap at your local college? Stay tuned
 
Memles said:
How the HELL do you write a script that makes each of the 13 dwarves distinct characters with a reason for being there? It's the major problem put forth by Boyens/Walsh when discussing a possible scripting of the book. And honestly, I think it would be impossible to do it with 13.

Who says they all have to be distinct or have a reason for being there? You have like 6 that do most of the talking/plotwork, and the other ones are just sorta there, with the occasional line, or hero moment, or whatever.

...kinda like the book, in fact ;)
 
J2 Cool said:
Anyway, I'd also expect the The Silmarillion to be made into films one day if they can at all create a screenplay or 4. I doubt they'd have any problem with taking the liberties to make a movie out of it.

As far as I know the movie rights for the Silmarillion still reside with Christopher Tolkien, and he has stated he has no interest in allowing a Silmarillion film to be made.
 
I hope they can pull this off. LOTR was great but it was kinda all down hill from there for me. By the time ROTK got finnished it just felt like way to many CG battle scenes. I hope they can keep The Hobbit on a smaller scale more personal.
 
Shouldn't Peter Jackson be the one saying, "Ok, I want to do The Hobbit, now"? What if he doesn't want to do it yet? Jackson is just too much a part of the the LOTR franchis to do without. I'll be excited when he says it's a go.

Anyway, I loooove The Hobbit, so I can't wait for this. I just really hope they lighten-up a lot; TH is nowhere near as dark as the LOTR trilogy, and I'm afraid they might try to make it so.
 
I love movies but I'm not sure I understand studio politics and who owns what... but the LOTR movies were New Line... these are MGM... The obvious question - is there a link between the two studios?
 
The magic of the Hobbit was it's mystery. The mystery of the Rings, the mystery of Gollum, and the mystery of the world they lived in.

LOTR has effectively killed all three of those. You already know what the ring does, you already know what Gollum looks like and you already know the world they live in.

I don't see why this even needs to be made. Maybe PJ is thinking the same thing.
 
ToxicAdam said:
I don't see why this even needs to be made.

200px-MillionDollarMan.JPG

**Money Money Money Money Moneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey**
 
MagicJackBauer said:
They need to do this soon. Ian Holm is getting old and I want a believable young Bilbo.

The CG youth techniques applied to Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart in the beginning of X3 leave me with no doubt that Ian Holm can play the role and be digitally de-aged. It's the only sane choice.
 
JayDubya said:
I love movies but I'm not sure I understand studio politics and who owns what... but the LOTR movies were New Line... these are MGM... The obvious question - is there a link between the two studios?

There's no link. MGM holds the rights to The Hobbit, while New Line bought the rights to LOTR after Jackson shopped it around to various studios when pitching the idea around a decade or so ago. I believe MGM's rights to it supercede LOTR getting made.
The Hobbit has been on the backburner as late because Sony bought MGM. While the news is good, I'm not getting too excited. If Jackson is on board, and that's the clincher for me, then it still be a good 5 years until it's in cinemas.
 
There's alot of stuff concerning Gandalf and Aragorn that goes on during The Hobbit but is never mentioned until later books. I can't remember right but i think when Gandalf disappears he gets up to something to do with Sauron in Mirkwood.

"In Mirkwood he was known as the Necromancer. Gandalf the Wizard stole into Dol Guldur and discovered the truth; eventually the White Council of Wizards and Elves combined to put forth their might and Sauron was driven out of Mirkwood."
Maybe this part of the story will be fully fleshed out.

I think Aragorn has some plot line with Gollum, also Saruman and even Legolas could potentially appear if they really pushed things. Maybe they are stretching it out to two movies because more of the story that happened during The Hobbit (but was never explained in that book) will be told.
 
medrew said:
There's no link.
Read the thread -- you're wrong. The legal situation is such that New Line owns the rights to make the movie, but MGM owns the rights to distribute it.
the full article said:
"The Hobbit" will be produced in partnership with New Line, which Sloan says shares the rights to the property with MGM.
 
I'm pretty sure this was the most predictable movie announcement of all time.

I mean, come on. Lord of the Rings did great. Hobbit is the best Tolkien book. It was only a matter of time.

The two film thing sounds weird.
 
Bloodwake said:
I'm pretty sure this was the most predictable movie announcement of all time.

I mean, come on. Lord of the Rings did great. Hobbit is the best Tolkien book. It was only a matter of time.

The two film thing sounds weird.

Oh please when this is about to come out you'll be like

HOBBIT BITCHES!#@$#@$@#
 
How old was Bilbo supposed to be anyway? Wasn't it about 40 or 50? I don't see any reason why Ian Holm can't play him again; the ring was supposed to slow down his aging right up to LOTR anyway ("You haven't aged a day!").
 
snaildog said:
How old was Bilbo supposed to be anyway? Wasn't it about 40 or 50? I don't see any reason why Ian Holm can't play him again; the ring was supposed to slow down his aging right up to LOTR anyway ("You haven't aged a day!").

The issue is, more than anything else, that Ian Holm is not quite spry enough to pull off the much more physical work required for the 50 year old Bilbo; he was able to pull off slowly deteriorating Bilbo well, but I'm not so sure about actually 50 year old Bilbo personally.
 
Fix The Scientist said:
There's alot of stuff concerning Gandalf and Aragorn that goes on during The Hobbit but is never mentioned until later books. I can't remember right but i think when Gandalf disappears he gets up to something to do with Sauron in Mirkwood.


Maybe this part of the story will be fully fleshed out.

I think Aragorn has some plot line with Gollum, also Saruman and even Legolas could potentially appear if they really pushed things. Maybe they are stretching it out to two movies because more of the story that happened during The Hobbit (but was never explained in that book) will be told.
I guess that could be cool... but I'd rather they limited it to the lighthearted goings-on of Bilbo and Co. The relative lack of doom 'n gloom in the book is one of the reasons I prefer it to LOTR.
 
snaildog said:
How old was Bilbo supposed to be anyway? Wasn't it about 40 or 50? I don't see any reason why Ian Holm can't play him again; the ring was supposed to slow down his aging right up to LOTR anyway ("You haven't aged a day!").

40 or 50 for a hobbit is a young age, though, as in the full-bloom of life.
 
Fix The Scientist said:
I think Aragorn has some plot line with Gollum, also Saruman and even Legolas could potentially appear if they really pushed things. Maybe they are stretching it out to two movies because more of the story that happened during The Hobbit (but was never explained in that book) will be told.

The Aragorn/Gollum stuff is after the Hobbit. Some time after the events of The Hobbit, Strider and Gandalf track Gollum to Mirkwood.
 
Yeah, I hope someone other than jackson is directing.

Glad I'm not alone....Can't stand the over use of music to set the tone and feeling in the LOTR trilogy. It's like every single scene has a musical track, drives me nuts, that said I still think the highly enjoyable so please don't lynch me :)
 
I think I must be the ONLY one ever to not be intersted in TLOTR...I remember seeing it as a school trip in Sophmore year, and was completely bored by it.

However, I agree with fans that anyone who served in the newer movies should reprise their roles....also Jackson should direct just for the sake of continuity.
 
As a big Tolkien fan, and big fan of the LOTR films this is not bad news. However, I would like to see Jackson focus on other parts of Tolkien mythology. There are so many stories which would make for great movies. Feanor's story, Beren, Turin etc.. There are so many amazing stories in "The Silmarillion", but the way its written its more like a "bible" rather than a novel, so the stories in it would be better done in like a 10-12 part HBO mini-series.

I would love to see that more.
 
well PJ has not been in talks with ANY of the studios about making The Hobbit!

but He would like to do it, but he has a very very tight schedule at the moment.

Its not a question about IF PJ will make this movie its more of a WHEN will he make this movie!
 
robertsan21 said:
well PJ has not been in talks with ANY of the studios about making The Hobbit!

but He would like to do it, but he has a very very tight schedule at the moment.

Its not a question about IF PJ will make this movie its more of a WHEN will he make this movie!
New Line(who we know now is 100% involved) has the filmed planned to start production July 2007.
 
Cheebs said:
What I don't get is why The Hobbit needs TWO films to tell the story?

It takes PJ 6 hours to jerk off, duh.

DarienA said:
They also announced a sequel to the Thomas Crown Affair.... why?!?!?!?

Perhaps because the first was a fun little caper, cheap to produce, better than the original, and better than any of Brosnan's Bond? Perhaps?
 
robertsan21 said:
well PJ has not been in talks with ANY of the studios about making The Hobbit!

but He would like to do it, but he has a very very tight schedule at the moment.

Its not a question about IF PJ will make this movie its more of a WHEN will he make this movie!

agreed. Peter Jackson is a household name and a reputable one. Attach his name to another Tolkien movie and the studios will be shovelling in the $$.
 
[nerd rant]Hopefully the elves of Mirkwood will be actual wood elves and not a bunch Legolas wannabes[/nerd rant]
 
Frankly I don't ever see this happening. The hobbit is so caught up in various legal bindings that it'll probably never be made everone wants. When you have something like this that is basically a SOLID money making machine everyone comes out of the wood work to get a piece of the action.

Also, Sony doesn't own MGM. Instead they only own about 20%, because, being a Japanese company they are bound by foreign ownership laws of domestic media companies. In fact recently, they actually lost the right to distribute MGM films on DVD etc. MGM didn't like the deal that Sony offered so they upped sticks and went to FOX!!!!!

There have been loads of rumours circulating that the other MGM investors/owners (various hedge funds and Wall St. firms) are just looking to whip MGM into shape to sell it for a decent price and make a nice profit.

It has to be said,that despite the grand tradition and standing the studio has, it was a bit of a joke for the last two decades....

At one point being owned by a Swiss Bank when the original owners couldn't make the repayments on the laod they took to buy it.

Another story has one MGM boss taking out a $200 million loan for film production from a large bank when they were going broke. Only to find that he forgot that the studio had a contract with the Sci-Fi Channel to make Stargate SG-1 and then had to put most of it into that!
 
Peter Jackson HAS to be attached to this with WETA doing the special effects. He/they knocked it out of th epar and saved New Line from bankruptcy (if LOTR failed...New Line was DEAD) and i'd love to see the rest of the saga on the big screen.
 
Busty said:
Frankly I don't ever see this happening. The hobbit is so caught up in various legal bindings that it'll probably never be made everone wants.
Wrong. New Line & MGM came to a deal. MGM distrubutes the film while New Line produces it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom