Three Films

So, it seems the rumors (or is that 'rumours'?) were true: Peter Jackson announced yesterday that, having just concluded principal photography on the two HOBBIT movies, he's now decided to go ahead and make it THREE films instead.

Obviously, this will involve new filming, new scripting, new everything. There's much speculation about where he cd break Bilbo's story into three pieces, but I don't think that's what they'll do. Consider: it's only four and a half months until the release date of the first film. Given all the special effects, scoring, editing, &c. they'll have to do, it's too late to change that one much. Besides which it's clear from hints Jackson has been dropping for a while that he really wants to film material from the Appendices (which for all events and purposes means Appendix B, supplemented by Appendix A). So I think the two HOBBIT films will remain pretty much as they are, and that the third film will be a 'bridge' spanning events from the years between Bilbo's return home and the Long-Expected party sixty years later. We know a lot about the events in these years, but since Tolkien chose not to write that story, any movie based on these materials will obviously contain less Tolkien, and more Jackson, than any of the other five. We'll see what they come up with.

Four and a half months to go . . .

--John R.

current reading: WHERE THEY STAND and MEMOIRS OF HECATE COUNTY

Two Peter Jackson (et al) interviews

So, now they've wrapped up principal photography on THE HOBBIT -- though of course this is far from meaning they've stopped filming, if the extensive rounds of pick-up filming that characterized the LotR film trilogy are anything to judge by. And there are various bits in the following interviews about Jackson & co. wanting to film more material from the appendices, apparently with the idea of lengthening the two movies rather than adding a third.

Here's the first link (courtesy Janice):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/15/peter-jackson-the-hobbit-director-48-fps-comic-con_n_1674177.html

And here's the second link (courtesy Steve B):

http://collider.com/peter-jackson-martin-freeman-the-hobbit-interview/180675

Despite the really, really annoying puffery about 3D (which is a nightmare to watch for anyone with really strong glasses, like mine) and Jackson's snooty dismissal of "guys who are in love with the technology of 1927", I found both of these interesting: there's still a ton of work to do, but we're getting into the final stages now, frenzied as those will no doubt be.

Oh, and don't forget to click on the link at the end of the first paragraph of the second piece: although the Comic-Con people are apparently incapable of spelling Tolkien's name right, there's some interesting point in the attached panel report -- such as the (to me) amusing declaration that they're adding a female character not in Tolkien because they want to stay true to the spirit of Tolkien (try parsing that one out) and Peter Jackson's quip when asked if he'll be doing any SILMARILLION movies someday: "I think the chances of me living past 100 are slim". That about sums it up.

Only about five months to go. Wow.

--John R

THE HOBBIT trailer considered

Here, courtesy of Richard West and Kristin Thompson, is a better link to a good site to see the new trailer on:

http://www.thehobbit.com/index.html#

Now that I've had a day or two to mull over things, and move beyond the don't-disturb-this-moment feeling, here's my take on this first trailer.

I've seen most of the little teaser mini making-of documentaries, which have done a great job of engaging the audience from the LotR films into this new project and laid a lot of the wilder rumors to rest. But this feels different: the first whiff of the real thing. They clearly want to do a lot in one short piece.

Foremost among them: to convey to fans of the LotR films that this is more of the same. That it's not just another Tolkien movie, but deeply and directly connected to the first. Thus we get to see McKellan's Gandalf, and Blanchett's Galadriel, and above all hear the sinister whispers of Serkis's Gollum. Even small details, like a glimpse of the shards of Narsil, are included -- something really not v. important for Bilbo's story, but no doubt included for the flashback to the moment between Aragorn and Boromir (and Aragorn and Arwen) in the first film: comfort food, so to speak, for the fans of the first film.

Just as important (or, for me, even more important) is establishing the new cast of this new story. We get to see a lot of Bilbo, and get used to the idea (after the initial shock, and some inner resistance) of seeing Freeman's face rather than Ian Holm's. And all thirteen dwarves are thrown at us in rapid succession, so that the full roster of Thorin & Company is presented right away.

Speaking of the dwarves, it looks like there'll be two contradictory things juxtaposed here. Their looks are quite silly (with the old silent-movie beards and moustachios), yet they turn into experienced killing machines in combat. There was some of that in the first films' Gimli; looks like there'll be even more of it here (To be fair, there was some of this in the original Tolkien too).

The exception is Thorin, whose look and behavior seems locked permanently in the serious battle-mode. In the book it comes as quite a shock when Thorin succumbs to dragon-sickness and becomes Bilbo's enemy. In later writings like THE QUEST OF EREBOR and THE 1960 HOBBIT, Tolkien anticipated those developments by including hints that Thorin was going bad, or at least had the potential, all along: anticipating the end result by drastically rewriting the character (and thus unfortunately losing the shock value of the original ending). I suspect that's what's going on here: Dark Thorin isn't the result of the character's going mad in the end but the essential character all along. I suspect he's this film's Boromir.

Which ties into an observation Janice made: this looks more like THE 1960 HOBBIT than it does THE HOBBIT itself.* There are no hints here of the whimsy of the original story, in which the dwarves bring highly impractical musical instruments along for the Unexpected Party, only to apparently abandon them forthwith, given that none of them are ever mentioned again. Jackson & Co. need not be borrowing directly from Tolkien's unfinished re-write, but they're clearly trying to achieve the same goal: recast THE HOBBIT into the style of LotR.

This ties into a point David Bratman made on his blog,** in which he suggested that Jackson is presenting THE HOBBIT as the prequel to LotR. So far as the films go, this is perfectly correct: most people who go see THE HOBBIT in theatres this time next year (and again the year after) are fans of the three-film Jackson trilogy and expect this movie to be just like the earlier films they know and love. That naturally imposes some audience expectations and means the films will probably be quite different from what they might have been like had they been made in chronological order.

---the biggest surprise: no dragon. To have a dragon and not show it is an exercise of restraint I'd not expected.

---the biggest twist: a brief tender moment between Galadriel and Gandalf.***

---the standout moment: the beautiful dwarf-song. Tolkien said Bilbo found it moving; Jackson has found a way to move the audience with it as well. Score One for Team Jackson.****

--John R.

.......................................

*Richard West made much the same point in an email today, in which he points out how Tolkien's book famously starts like WIND IN THE WILLOWS and ends more like NJAL'S SAGA, as C. S. Lewis observed long ago; here it's saga all the way through.

**http://calimac.livejournal.com/566380.html

***this is a good example of the kind of unanticipate-able element Jackson likes to throw into his films.

****it's clearly based on the king's song Aragorn sings at his coronation which, if I remember rightly, was Mortensen's own composition; hope he gets a royalty here!

THE HOBBIT trailor

So, as of seven o'clock tonight, the trailer for THE HOBBIT (part one) is up.

There are many places you can see it online; I watched it here:

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=85322

Analysis as to where they are and aren't faithful to the book can come later. For now, it's time to luxuriate in the feeling of seeing this: after years of delay, it's real, and it's coming. One year to go.

I so want to see this movie.

--John R.

More on the Hobbit Movie

So, rather belatedly on my part, here's a little more about del Toro's departure from the forthcoming HOBBIT film:*

http://j.mp/de8IrW

The most interesting thing in this, for me, was not about del Toro's decision (which was pretty well covered in the piece which I posted last week), but the news that Jackson had been intending to serve as Second Unit Director -- i.e., that he had volunteered to shoot some scenes while the main director was busy working on the most important shots with the main character(s). I've always suspected that, as a pretty hands-on person, at some point during the next two years he might not be able to restrain himself and wd just take over directing. Sounds like he's inching in that direction, but time will tell.

Also interesting was the reporter's trying to make the case against making THE HOBBIT as a two-parter, arguing that " only one film is needed . . . The Hobbit is a far shorter, simpler tale, and should be shot as a single movie." The same critic, Ben Child of THE GUARDIAN, had written more on this back in December: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/dec/11/hobbit-lord-of-the-rings

Personally I disagree: if they have the rights to make two movies, it's pretty clear they're going to make two, given the success of the LotR film trilogy. Better they make two adapting Tolkien's story than one of THE HOBBIT and one of whatever fanfiction they can cobble together from the LotR Appendices as a 'bridge' film. Plus, of course, from my point of view the more HOBBIT the better.

Most interesting of all, was the passing comment re. Jackson and LotR.

"This is the director who transformed The Lord of the Rings from an unfilmable white elephant of English literature into a blockbuster trilogy."

How soon they forget! The idea that LotR represented a classic of twentieth century literature, which some of us have been arguing for a long time, only won widespread acceptance within the last decade or so.

--John R.

........................

*thanks to Joan Marie Verba for posting the link to the MythSoc list (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mythsoc/message/21283)

HOBBIT film delayed?

So, just saw the headline that Guillermo del Toro has just quit as director of the forthcoming HOBBIT film(s) -- not from any falling out with Peter Jackson (he's staying on as part of the scriptwriter team) but because the studio, wh. is rumored to be in financial trouble (something that seems endemic to film studios these days), keeps delaying giving them the green light to start shooting. Here's the link to the version of the story I saw, no doubt one of many:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/31/director-guillermo-del-to_n_595195.html

Not much in the way of details at this point, but let's hope this is just a hiccup and does not derail the project altogether. Given the money involved, I find it hard to believe these films won't get made, but a lot of things that have been more-or-less decided cd come unglued at a time like this. So, here's hoping they get back on track sooner rather than later.

--John R.

Peter Jackson's HOBBIT

Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Peter Jackson's HOBBIT

So, after three years of back-and-forthness, the news is now official: Peter Jackson will be making a film of THE HOBBIT.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22312421/


Indeed, two films. New Line and MGM finally agreed to a split of the largess that is likely to result, and somehow New Line and Jackson have resolved their acrimonious dispute (no doubt more details on this will be forthcoming in good time). Production starts sometime in 2009, with the first part to hit theaters in 2010 and the second to follow a year later in 2011. Given the tradition set down by the LotR films, I strongly suspect their release dates will be the week before Christmas in each case.
What's not yet clear is whether Jackson will be directing or merely producing.

The news that it'll be two films is interesting, but not unexpected. And it raises the interesting question: where would the best place be to divide the story? This is obviously something I had to give a lot of thought to when we realized THE HISTORY OF THE HOBBIT wouldn't all fit into one volume. In the end, I went with ending Vol. I with their departure from Lake Town, so that all the scenes at the Lonely Mountain were gathered together in the second volume. But if I were Jackson, I'd place the break between the two films somewhat earlier, with Bilbo's first glimpse of The Lonely Mountain at the very beginning of Chapter X: "The Lonely Mountain! Bilbo had come far and through many adventures to see it, and now he did not like the look of it in the least" (THE ANNOTATED HOBBIT page 241). --For me, that strikes just the right sort of ominous note in switching gears between the journey out and the problem confronting the characters when they finally arrive.

Three years. A long time to wait, but it'll fly by quickly in a constant stream of speculation, news releases, teasers, and the like. Here's hoping they do a good job, keep to Tolkien's story, and in the end produce something as impressive as the LotR films. We'll hope, and we'll see.

--John R.


current reading: Philip Larkin, FURTHER REQUIREMENTS. (reviews, broadcasts, &c.)