HOBBIT Thread - This Year's Real Holiday Turkey?

[AndyDursin]

Unbelievable...he's turned a story that could've been told in a 3-hour running time into 2 films...and now they're going to stretch it further out? Can you say CASH GRAB?

http://www.deadline.com/2012/07/the-hob ... -possible/

Peter Jackson first mentioned at Comic-Con two weeks ago that he was toying with what to do with all the extra footage he has shot for a two film adaptation of The Hobbit. Now, reports are hot and heavy that he’s actually going to turn his two films into a trilogy. When I spoke with Peter Jackson about The Hobbit in San Diego, he was very excited about the 125 pages of notes in an appendices that JRR Tolkien wrote and included in the final The Lord of the Rings novel Return of the King. I’m told now that the possibility is perhaps better than it was then that this might happen, but that it is by no means a certainty. There are internal discussions, and I have to say, they make me wince. There wasn’t a wasted second in LOTR, with the films building to a satisfying, nearly $1.2 billion worldwide gross and Oscar-winning conclusion. I read The Hobbit numerous times and I don’t think that Bilbo Baggins has three films in him.

Jackson told me that the notes written by Tolkien presaged his intention to update The Hobbit and give it more of the weight of Lord Of The Rings. Here’s what he said:

“That goes back to JRR Tolkien writing The Hobbit first, for children, and only after did he develop his mythology much more over the 16 or 17 years later when The Lord of the Rings came out, which is way more epic and mythic and serious. What people have to realize is we’ve adapted The Hobbit, plus taken this additional 125 pages of notes, that’s what you’d call them. Because Tolkien himself was planning the rewrite The Hobbit after The Lord of the Rings, to make it speak to the story of The Lord of the Rings much more. In the novel, Gandalf disappears for various patches of time. In 1936, when Tolkien was writing that book, he didn’t have a clue what Gandalf was doing. But later on, when he did The Lord of the Rings and he’d hit on this whole epic story, he was going to go back and revise The Hobbit and he wrote all these notes about how Gandalf disappears and was really investigating the possible return of Sauron, the villain from The Lord of the Rings. Sauron doesn’t appear at all in The Hobbit. Tolkien was retrospectively fitting The Hobbit to embrace that mythology. He never wrote that book, but there are 125 pages of notes published at the back of Return of the King in one of the later editions. It was called The Appendices, and they are essentially his expanded Hobbit notes. So we had the rights to those as well and were allowed to use them.” Said Jackson: “We haven’t just adapted The Hobbit; we’ve adapted that book plus great chunks of his appendices and woven it all together. The movie explains where Gandalf goes; the book never does. We’ve explained it using Tolkien’s own notes. That helped inform the tone of the movie, because it allowed us to pull in material he wrote in The Lord of the Rings era and incorporate it with The Hobbit.”

The prospect of The Hobbit being turned into a trilogy would be welcome to New Line and financier Warner Bros and MGM. The actors would get an extra payday, and have a lot of leverage. And after Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn split into two films and The Hunger Games announced its intention to do the same and tell a three-book tale in four films, it seems logical. But the fact is, Jackson has already turned a single book into two films here; can he squeeze out a third without boring his fans?

I don’t think anybody would say that the last Twilight Saga benefited creatively by splitting one absorbing tale into two films. Watching Bella give birth to her vampire child was excruciating, it went on and on and on. Werewolves fought vampires, none of them got hurt. Bella grew emaciated, turned skeleton skinny, then died and came back to life. Edward and Jacob stood around, brooding. All of this happened halfway through the last book by Stephenie Meyer, and readers got to see a cool ending with those creepy vampire characters played by Michael Sheen and Dakota Fanning. That doesn’t come until the finale. But the movie grossed over $700 million worldwide!

I’d like to think that Jackson would be immune to a blatant cash grab. But let’s face it: in Hollywood, at the end of the day, it’s always about squeezing out the most money possible, knowing fans will endure whatever slop gets served to them if they are addicted to the earlier films. You can see evidence of that in the last three Star Wars movies, which are now being served up again in glorious 3D. Let’s hope Jackson doesn’t spoil the return to Middle Earth. Lord of the Rings was a groundbreaking trilogy because it was fueled by three fully realized books by Tolkien. Jackson has already cut one book and a set of Tolkien notes into a double feature. As a fan of LOTR, I’m concerned.

[Monterey Jack]

Unbelievable...he's turned a story that could've been told in a 3-hour running time into 2 films...and now they're going to stretch it further out? Can you say CASH GRAB?

I don’t think anybody would say that the last Twilight Saga benefited creatively by splitting one absorbing tale into two films.

[Paul MacLean]

If he's basing it on notes by Tolkien himself, I can't really quarrel with Jackson embellishing the story. Tolkien made extensive notes in his "world building" of Middle Earth, some of which have been adapted into books by his son Christopher Tolkien.

How he uses this additional material is another story though. I've always felt Jackson lacked the essential insight and perception to adapt Tolkien's work. The films lacked much of the depth of the books, in favor of "cool" stuff like monsters and action and effects gimmickry (plus Jackson added a number of things found nowhere in the books -- some of which contradicted character behavior and Tolkien's intentions). I'm expecting more of the same (especially with the new films being shot in 3-D and at a more "talk show"-like frame rate).

[Eric W.]

I really don't care about even seeing this thing let alone if it's artificially bloated like this.

[mkaroly]

Three films may be pushing it. As Paul said, it all depends on how he uses the additional material.

[AndyDursin]

I guess my issue is -- is it going to make for a better film if Jackson shoots every last page of Tolkien's scribbled-down notes? Doesn't it stand to reason, at some point, that dramatically the best approach isn't to bloat out 3 movies for $$$ and just make the best FILM possible?

This looks like a total and complete cash grab. He's turned THE HOBBIT -- a book written more with children in mind -- into its own freaking TRILOGY for goodness sakes?? Ridiculous!!

[Paul MacLean]

One of my primary beefs with LOTR was the scenes Jackson invented. In the book, Faramir never took Frodo and Sam to Gondor, nor was he tempted by the desire to possess the ring (Jackson defended this alteration by basically saying "Tolkien was wrong -- everyone was tempted by the ring."). Nor did Aragorn fall off a cliff (and survive a fall of hundreds of feet!), nor did Denethor stuff his face with tomatoes while being serenaded my Pippin (or was it Merry -- the film never really made clear which was which!).

Traditionally, the best adaptations have left-out portions of the books on which they were based. Stanley Kubrick excised huge chunks of the original narrative of Lolita, yet Vladamir Nabakov considered Kubrick's version "a great film".

[Eric W.]

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35757

Shore's score got leaked. Probably won't last long.

[mkaroly]

Bought tickets to see it on opening night with friends. Looking forward to it. Glad that Shore's complete score for the film (or so they say) will be released on December 10.

[AndyDursin]

Sounds like the same music he wrote for the other trilogy. You LOTR fans can go crazy over it!! lol

[mkaroly]

Sounds like the same music he wrote for the other trilogy. You LOTR fans can go crazy over it!! lol

I will try to do my part!

[Paul MacLean]

Sounds like the same music he wrote for the other trilogy. You LOTR fans can go crazy over it!! lol

I'll never understand the veneration of Shore's LOTR scores. While they're certainly better music than 300 or the Bourne scores, they are not "classic" film scores (like Ben-Hur, Psycho, Star Wars, Dances With Wolves,etc.).

[mkaroly]

I'll never understand the veneration of Shore's LOTR scores. While they're certainly better music than 300 or the Bourne scores, they are not "classic" film scores (like Ben-Hur, Psycho, Star Wars, Dances With Wolves,etc.).

I can try to give you my perspective as to why I like them so much, though I am definitely not speaking for everyone. I look at Shore's films in three very general categories (which will lead me to why I love the LOTR scores).

I beacme a Howard Shore fan as a result of his scores for Cronenberg's films. His music really captures the cynicism, tragedy, horror, and coldness of Cronenberg's vision, especially in films like DEAD RINGERS and THE FLY, and I am moved by his music because it fits what I see on the screen. He has a Herrmann-esque quality in his music that I really enjoy. This is kind of a unique category because I feel it is foundational to all his other work in sound and style but Cronenberg is such a unique filmmaker, and Shore really saves his best work for him, that in some ways these scores stand apart from his work for other filmmakers.

He also composes music for films that capture the psychology of the characters, the darker tones of the films, and creates good dramatic tension. These are films like THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, SEVEN, PANIC ROOM, THE GAME, and COPLAND...his music fits really well into these environments. To me there is some cross-over back and forth with Cronenberg films in subject matter in this category, but again I think his music fits what is on screen and it is moving to me.

Finally, Shore is able to be light, humorous, and emotionally moving apart from any intensely heavy subject matter. These would be scores like BIG, ED WOOD, and MRS. DOUBTFIRE.

The reason I love the LOTR scores so much is because I feel those scores are, generally speaking, a solid synthesis of the best of everything he has ever done (especially in the last two categories above). On the one hand, the scores are heavily leitmotivic and I love how he mixes the different themes and develops them over the three film arc. I feel that his music fits the epic scope of what is on the screen, adds dramatic tension and atmpsphere, and effectively supports the action, the characters, and the visuals. I love how the score is put together and it reminds me of scenes and moments from the film when I listen to it in headphones...I don't even need to look at the track titles.

On the other hand, I find myself emotionally involved in the scores when I listen to them. I think he effectively creates exciting music full of dramatic tension (for example, the Khazad-Dum sequence) that has me tapping my toes. He effectively creates emotionally moving music as well...his theme for Gollum developed in TTT just slays me. I think he really captures the tragic nature of the character and that score in particular is full of those moments where I feel it. There is also the piece that is inspiring when Gandalf the White comes with the Riders of Rohan to Helm's Deep at the last second...great solo voice in the background along with the visuals give that entire sequence a religious quality that I find very artistic and moving. There is the Grey Havens stuff as well, or the music that underscores King Aragorn's paying honor to the Hobbits at the end of ROTK...it's moving to me and Shore got it.

He also composed light and humorous music, like the Hobbit theme, or music when Merry and Pippin were goofing around. There is a coldness to some of the music as well, but not as much since I don't think the films were cynical or sterile. In other words, Shore brought everything together for these films and I feel they work wonderfully and effectively on all levels. I cannot imagine any other composer being able to do the incredible job Shore did on these films. His sound, style, and perspectives come out clearly in the score and match the movies perfectly, IMO.

Like the original STAR WARS trilogy from Williams, I feel Shore's scores for LOTR are a story in music. Both sets of scores, for me, are independently good apart from the films they so effectively support. It was refreshing to hear Shore's score, see it performed live, and then return to it and reconnect with the characters and moods in later years. I am not a fan of everything Shore has done (I found THE AVIATOR and THE DEPARTED, for example, to be less than stellar and I never listen to them), but with the LOTR scores I feel he accomplished something great. That's why I like them. And I feel that one day the LOTR scores (and probably THE HOBBIT scores) will be elevated to the status of "classic" scores like the ones Paul mentioned above since all those scores were (arguably) high points in the composer's career that are a synthesis of their best writing.

Sorry that took so long to get to...hope it all makes sense.

[Paul MacLean]

I beacme a Howard Shore fan as a result of his scores for Cronenberg's films. His music really captures the cynicism, tragedy, horror, and coldness of Cronenberg's vision, especially in films like DEAD RINGERS and THE FLY, and I am moved by his music because it fits what I see on the screen. He has a Herrmann-esque quality in his music that I really enjoy.

I don't find him an especially interesting composer, but I agree, as a dramatist, Shore does do a decent job with dark, edgy, disturbing subjects. He certainly helped create an effective pall of doom and despair in the work of Cronenberg, as well as films like Silence of the Lambs, The Cell, etc.

[AndyDursin]

Yay, now here's my excuse not to see it. lol.

27 Animals Die During HOBBIT Production --

http://www.myfoxorlando.com/story/20133 ... nsafe-farm