Good things come to those who wait...and that means not until 2010. Not until then will you find out if 'The Hobbit' will ever follow in the footsteps of its predecessor, "Lord of The Rings," which went on to be one of the biggest successes in movie history.
This week, it was reported that Director Peter Jackson will be at the head of the movie, based on the J.R.R. Tolkien's book. He not only directed the trilogy, which has tallied more than 90 something awards in all and more than a billion in box office totals, he also directed the very good remake of "King Kong."
Based on his track record, I like what I see.
The story is about Bilbo Baggins' adventure outside of his warm and friendly Shire to darker, more dangerous territory.
Will this be the hit that 'Rings' was? Should they even bother if it doesn't have the action found in 'Rings'? What should we look for?
It's hard to say what Jackson as Executive Producer for these two (yes, two) movies is going to mean. He could just have his name in the credits, Theoretically he could hire a patsy as a director and seize control sort of like Lawrence Kasdan on Return of the Jedi, but who knows? Outside of Lord of the Rings, I haven't been that impressed with Peter Jackson's work.
Here is the "official" blog for the upcoming movies: http://www.thehobbitblog.com/
This part has me especially worried: MGM and New Line will co-finance and co-distribute two films, “The Hobbit” and a sequel to “The Hobbit.”
....SEQUEL to The Hobbit? What could that possibly include? The Hobbit is a short book, and arguably a children's book. There's nowhere near enough content in The Hobbit to split in in to TWO movies. I suppose they could take creative license and include some of the behind the scenes events which take place in The Hobbit to lead up to the events in Lord of the Rings, but deviating from the source material that much is a recipe for disaster.
I guess they could always include parts from The Silmarillion or Tolkien's other works, but most of them are so complex that I don't know how your average moviegoer would be able to digest a lot of what is going on. ...That is of course unless they're handing out complimentary pre-movie study material or something ridiculous like that.
And last, but not least, who is going to play Bilbo? Ian Holm is old as dirt and would never be able to pull off young the young hobbit.
Tolkien fans can rest assured that Peter Jackson will do this prequel justice. Jackson already knows how to take the Tolkien epics and make them into enjoyable movies.
As for the question "Should they even bother if it doesn't have the action found in 'Rings'?" well, Mike, I think you need to go back and re-read The Hobbit. This story has a rampaging dragon, evil trolls and some killer spiders. Oh, and a large battle scene with armies numbering in the thousands.
Plus, the audiences will get to see the first time a hobbit meets Gollum. We likes him, now don't we my precious? Yes, Gollum, we likes him.
MITCHELL RESPONDS: I have never read "The Hobbit," but I have read "Rings." What I noticed in Jackson's movies, is that he emphasizes the enormity of the action. He tends to play down the drama of the Hobbits in the "The Two Towers."
This movie would almost be entirely dependent on hobbits for action. I think he'll succeed.
The hobbit is a children’s story. They are going to have to make it something it not be. We should have faith in Jackson, however. He was pretty good at staying close to the source in Lord of the Rings.
There something that tells me that this movie wont’ be as good.. There is no Aaragon or Gibli. It lacks diversity. I’m not excited about watching hobbits.
I can't wait so long. But it will be a great event for all fans! Just imagine.