Interesting how we seem to name directors whose forte picks up one aspect of TH: DelTorro with his understanding of perilous fairie/fantasy and Gilliam with his madcap whimsical humour. I did enjoy The Brothers Grimm.

But there's the question (with either one of these directors) of how will this film capture the flavour of a children's tale, if at all. And does it need a parodic touch?

This will probably anger some here - but I am used to that - I do feel that those who are expecting a childrens movie of THE HOBBIT are not facing the economic realities of the situation. A childrens movie has less than half the earnings potential of a film made on the same level as the LOTR films. You can scream, moan and cry all you want about what the HOBBIT really is as a book but the harsh and cold financial realities of the film business will rule out on this decision.

Hoepfully, there will be some lighter moments throughout the film that capture some of the more whimsical spirit of the book. I would think that the entrance of the Dwarves in Bag End is one such opportunity that would also make a great scene on the big screen.

It is interesting that many people have jumped on the Del Toro bandwagon because of his directorial work on PANS citing his handling of the fantasy elements. I liked PAN but felt that the fantasy portions were the weaker parts of the film. The far more interesting parts were the story of the Facists in Spain and the people on both sides of that struggle. The fantasy stuff almost seemed to get in the way at times.

Del Toro is a great talent and I look forward to what he can do with THE HOBBIT under the supervision of Jackson and with the cooperation of WETA and others from the earlier films.

Less than half? I dunno. A quality kids' movie is one of the surer bets in Hollywood -- check the all time charts and you'll find kid-friendly stuff like E.T., Star Wars, Shrek, Finding Nemo, and Harry Potter in the top 15 or so. It's a darker vision like Pan's or Hellboy which is probably less intrinsically marketable, looked at purely from that perspective. I wouldn't be surprised at a PG Hobbit, though with Del Toro on board PG-13 is probably more likely.

Mr. U - there is a middle ground with many of the films that you mentioned. E.T. is a great example of something which can appeal to both ends of the age demographic. I suspect that if they make the HOBBIT as a kids movie, word of mouth would get around rather quickly and they would lose much of the business that they took in for the first three Middle-earth films.

Maybe my estimate of one-half is too brutal - however, I think it would be less and no studio is going to kiss that potential revenue good-bye just to stay faithful to a perception.

*The Dark Elf bows to Bêthberry*

Hmmm...I would think that Peter Jackson has little interest in presenting The Hobbit as strictly a 'children's tale'. From what I could garner from the prelease information regarding the two movies that will be produced, one is The Hobbit and the other a prequel to LOTR. This indicates to me more of a continuing saga comprising 5 films; thus the necessity for conceptual continuity (if I may borrow a Frank Zappa phrase). If I am wrong regarding my understanding of the project, please direct me to a link that states otherwise.

I am not saying that a continuing saga concept in which The Hobbit is rendered in a more adult fashion (a la LOTR) is right or wrong; rather, that seems to be the general direction of the production. Therefore, my suggestion for Gilliam, who I think has the ability to direct movies with a fairy tale/fantasy ambiance that could embody the delightful childlike innocence of TH, yet with a more adult undercurrent stirring the dark waters of Mirkwood.

*Bethberry returns the bow to the Dark Elf*

You are right that Gilliam can capture whimsy and darkness. Yet I keep thinking of the naughty bits in The Brothers Grimm and wonder how much delight in that comedic touch would seep into a hobbit movie, willy-nilly almost. And he definitely leans towards ironic black comedy which is not how I would characterise Tolkien's humour. (Come to think of it, have we had any threads on Tolkien's humour?) Yet I could well be slighting Gilliam as his work does show a range of styles.

Sadly, though, Warner Brothers refused to consider him for the Harry Potter films, didn't they, even though Rowlings wanted him? And doesn't Warner now own New Line? Would that not bode well for him?

I would much prefer Gilliam's sense of humor to Tim Burton's (Charlie and the Chocolate Factory makes me cringe -- a horrid adaptation -- I like the first movie version with Gene Wilder), and I am unconvinced Del Torro has a sense of humor. But you are right, a thread defining Tolkien's humor is a great idea (as Treebeard opined, "There are Ents and Ents, you know; or there are Ents and there are things that look like Ents but ain’t, as you might say.").

Ahhh, it's such a muddled mess...MGM has a hand in it as well, as they still hold the movie rights to The Hobbit. In the end, it will probably be a director no one will agree on, and since Phillipa Boyens will write the script, be assured the movie itself will be as outrageous as LOTR in its rendering of the source material. Let's see, we can have Angelina Jolie as Bilbo's love interest (one can't make a Hollywood movie without a pronounced romance, right?), and Orlando Bloom will be Thranduil in this one (because, after all, he is Orlando Bloom), and if Tim Burton directs we'll have Johnny Depp as Smaug. Bah.

What I would like to see in one of these many interviews with DelToro is a sign that he has read Tolkien's essay on fantasy, On Fairie Stories and can thoughtfully comment on Tolkien's ideas.

Oh--the Brothers Cohen. Now there are two none would agree on. And as for romance, in Part Deux I'm sure something could be arranged for Galadriel at the White Council--perhaps it's a tempation to stray which could cloud her focus and vision and make her unable to see Saruman for his true intentions. Or, hey . . .

Yes, the Coen Brothers would be unnatural, as Samwise might say. Although I can see Javier Badem as Gollum offering a coin toss for Bilbo's life (one of my favorite scenes in No Country For Old Men).

Let's just hope the script is more conventional than the LotR travesty and sticks somewhat faithfully to the original story. I am already nearing physical illness thinking of how a 'prequel' to LotR might be presented.

Well, Gollem would need a bit more hair to recreate that atrocious coiffure, wouldn't he? That scene is the single most significant scene in the movie, particularly as its theme is replayed with Carla Jean at the end. I've googled for dialogue from that scene, but all I come up with are videos. Must be a new generation. The scene itself to me suggests the truth of Tolkien's observations on allegory and realism.

But such a scene, Badem as Gollem (do the names really rhyme?), now would that lead to a discussion of free will and fate in TH? We've had them concerning LotR, but not that I can remember on TH.

Won't it be interesting to see how Laketown is depicted in the movie and how/if the bridge is cut and thrown down.

You can get the script here. Good ol' internets has it all these days.

EDIT: Better version here.
Could you elaborate on this?

You has most interesting links, Mister U and better (or more) internets than me. Danke!

As for my thoughts about realism and allegory, I was not thinking so much of Tolkien's comments in the Foreword to LotR, but some of his observations in his Letters. Unfortunately I don't have them to hand now--packed away pending work on new library--so I canna quote and don't have them by memory. (I know, terribly failing that. What kind of fan am I that don't know the letters chapter and verse?)

The fascination of Chigurh I think lies in the dual nature of the character. He, as most of the film, is depicted with a specifically, intensely realised realism. But the character isn't just a hitman, a brutal human being. He is more, approaching the status almost of a Bergman-like Death personified--and this is not just in Chigurh's mind. How the character achieves both states is a fascinating part of the movie. And Tolkien talked about this kind of allegory in one of his letters, as I recall.

Yes, he was rather like the chess-playing reaper in The Seventh Seal. Strange movie, and without Chigurh (and Badem's portrayal), just a run-of-the-mill drug-deal-gone-bad chase movie. Not a very eucatastrophic ending either, eh Beth?

I wouldnt leave out Badem's hair style either--nor the very strange way that people pass by each other without connecting. (Are the only connections deaths?) That at least provided some difference from the run of the mill movie type.

But as for the definite lack of eucatastrophe, indeed, a very telling reason why the Cohen Brothers would be, as you said, "unnatural" to direct TH.

Now, to return to a movie StW suggested: if ET could appeal both to children and adults--as did Aladdin--why can not a movie of TH? Why would the producers/writers/director have to choose either the adult or the child frame of reference?

We want Peter Jackson!!! :D

PJ has already proven himself to be an exellent director with the LOTR trilogy
if any man is acctualy capable of filming "The Hobbit",then it is definitly Pete...:)

I dont think any other director can do the job...:smokin: