Inching closer to The Hobbit film

[Sauron the White]

davem

My point with you was NOT in discusssing a non-existant movie that has not yet even gottene the green light. It seems the height of folly to argue about the merits of a Jackson helmed HOBBIT when we do not have such a product to look at. You seem bent on
1- strictly defining what YOU think the HOBBIT is and anyone who thinks otherwise is plainly an idiot
2- telling us what a Jackson HOBBIT will look like and judging this non-existant film to be trash
3- judging the motivations and thoughts of people who want to see a HOBBIT film as if they all had exactly the same beliefs

That is foolish.

Here is what you did say

We'll see who's proved right. The book can be read & enjoyed by anyone from five upwards. It is fun, moving, scary (as opposed to terrifying), exciting (as opposed to violent).

Proved right about what? My point with you was to take you to task for your continued misuse of the term "thud and blunder". Your continued use of gross exaggeration and misrepresentation of the Jackson films for your own biased purposes is what I am complaining about. You use it for the purpose of mocking the Jackson films and throwing dirt upon them. If you read the excerpt I citied and the entire Anderson article you will soon see that it DOES NOT apply to the Jackson films. Check that - a person with an open mind using rational thought would soon see that fact - a biased person with their mind already firmly made up is probably hopeless.

Face it - the 'fans' who are screaming for a Hobbit movie are screaming for another LotR, with the action & violence, I've lost count of the number of articles, message boards & discussion fora where those demanding a Hobbit movie have neither read, nor care to read, The Hobbit, are demanding that Aragorn & Legolas are brought back, think TH is a sequel to LotR, & would go absolutely MENTAL!!!! if they turned up to the cinema to see 'PJ's return to M-e' & found themselves watching a 'U' movie.

Again, you like to judge people and tell them what thoughts are in their head and what motivates their actions and beliefs. Some power you have. I would imagine that there are quite a variety of people who want the HOBBIT made and they have differing and varied things they want to see in it. That tends to be the way of human nature. Could you please identify what a U movie is? I googled it and found nothing that would help me understand your comment.

Will it be a kiddie movie? Who knows? Lets have that discussion when it comes out. I suspect - if Jackson helms it - that it will have elements from the book combined with the sense of Middle-earth that he captured in the LOTR films to give a sense of continuity to the films. Is it a sequel? I always thought it was a PREQUEL as the cover to the HOBBIT indicated for many years.

I've said this before - if a Hobbit movie contained material that made it unsuitable for young children to watch it would be the biggest slap in the face imaginable to Tolkien, who wrote the book for his own young children - but if a Hobbit movie does turn out to be suitable for such an audience the fanboys who are currently most vociferous in demanding a PJ Hobbit will whine about being presented with a kid's movie.

Again, you strictly define in your mind what the HOBBIT is and then argue from that very limited definition. I have never thought of the book as something for a five year old as you indicate in your post but more along the lines of THE WIZARD OF OZ. A tale for older kids to read and has enough interesting material in it to appeal to older readers also.

It seems to me that when you argue against a Jackson filmed HOBBIT, you very carefully craft your position so that you can jump up later and say "I told you so" irregardless of the eventual quality of that film.

The Poul Anderson excerpt you gave is much more in PJ's line.

You make a judgment and offer nothing to support this.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I have never thought of the book as something for a five year old as you indicate in your post but more along the lines of THE WIZARD OF OZ. A tale for older kids to read and has enough interesting material in it to appeal to older readers also.

Just a question here: how old were Tolkien's boys when he recited The Hobbit to them as a bedtime--rather, evening tea time--story? In Carpenter I can find this:

Originally Posted by Enter Mr. Baggins

In 1937, shortly after the book was published, Christopher Tolkien recorded (in his letter to Father Christmas) this account of the book's origin: 'Daddy wrote it ages ago, and read it to John, Michael and me in our Winter "Reads" after tea in the evening; but the ending chapters were rather roughly done, and not typed out at all; he finished it about a year ago.' And writing to his publishers during the same year, Tolkien declared: 'My eldest boy was thirteen when he heard the serial. It did not appeal to the younger ones who had to grow up to it successively.'

Of course, children in those days were so much more innocent--naive?--than they are today.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

PJ would probably be safer doing The Hobbit then LOTR.
It would give him scope for the positives of the films (scenery,
movie character selection, etc.) while there are sufficient
"dramatic" scenes/characters in TH such as the trolls,
giant spiders, Battle of Five Armies, Beorn (probably
shown dismembering the orc and warg ) that he
might not even have to resort to dwarf tossing (although
one can picture a PJ changed dwarf meeting with Beorn ).

And it does seem obvious, with all the $$$$$ to be made, that
there will be a (probably two-part) Hobbit made.

[Folwren]

Davem's probably right, you know, STW. The Hobbit isn't going to be fit for kids as well as older people to watch. It'll be too violent (Beorn tearing apart and orc and warg limb by limb, as Tuor puts it) and too scary. Once more, my family and I will gather in the fireplace room to watch it, having to hold the remote control in hand ready to fast forward the parts that are gross and that my Mom doesn't want to see.

...That doesn't mean I won't enjoy it, but I do wish we didn't have to see unacceptable stuff, too.

-- Folwren

[Sauron the White]

Middle-earth for children. For 33 years I taught public school. The last 23 as a high school teacher of 17 and 18 year olds. However, my degree and certification was for all grades. I distinctly recall taking two courses in Childrens Literature for my masters degree. I even had a hand in forming some childrens books of my own when I created a series of characters and the basic plot of a book called ODDKINS written by Dean Koontz. So I am not a virgin in the world of what children read and what appeals to them.

I have a grandson who will be six in a few weeks. He has already seen all three of the LOTR films- each and every scene without censorship - and (as of this writing) has not decapitated any of his fellow first graders at school attempting to emulate the Mouth of Sauron scene or, his personal favorite, Aragorn dispatching Lurtz in FOTR. He does very well at school and seems normal. Because some nameless person in the family indoctrinated him into the world of Middle-earth when he was just four, it is his favorite thing in the world.

I see nothing in the HOBBIT which would preclude anyone his age from seeing a film done in the style of LOTR. Jackson could make THE HOBBIT with every scene as JRRT wrote it, then adapting it to fit into the style of LOTR, and even stretching out the Battle of the Five Armies making it the Helms Deep of the piece. I see nothing there that kids could not see. Let us remember that these are the children of the 21st century not the kiddies of pre WWII times.

The budget on this film will be at least $100 million dollars US and probably closer to double that once all is said and done. No studio that I am aware of will allow that kind of money to be spent on a kiddie film aimed at ages 5 through 9. Not a one. And besides, kids at that age today would have little interest in seeing a dumbed down, sanitaized movie that harkens back to the decade of the Great Depression. It simply is not going to happen.

[Folwren]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

I see nothing in the HOBBIT which would preclude anyone his age from seeing a film done in the style of LOTR. Jackson could make THE HOBBIT with every scene as JRRT wrote it, then adapting it to fit into the style of LOTR, and even stretching out the Battle of the Five Armies making it the Helms Deep of the piece. I see nothing there that kids could not see. Let us remember that these are the children of the 21st century not the kiddies of pre WWII times.

Okay, forget the kids. What about me and other people like me? I'm nineteen and I still hide my eyes during battle scenes when they do close ups of people getting hacked to pieces and arrows going through orcses eyes. In theater I rolled up in a ball with my arms clasped about my ears and my eyes tight shut as the captain in Osgiliath was killed with a spear through his chest. It's disgusting, and while I accepted it for LotR because it was meant for adults, I don't think it'll be nice to watch it in The Hobbit.

And besides, kids at that age today would have little interest in seeing a dumbed down, sanitaized movie that harkens back to the decade of the Great Depression. It simply is not going to happen.

We're not asking it to be dumbed down. We're asking the opposite. There are other things beside violence and 'dumbed down' humor relief that makes movies good, and that's what I believe davem is saying.

[Sauron the White]

from Folwren

Okay, forget the kids. What about me and other people like me? I'm nineteen and I still hide my eyes during battle scenes when they do close ups of people getting hacked to pieces and arrows going through orcses eyes. In theater I rolled up in a ball with my arms clasped about my ears and my eyes tight shut as the captain in Osgiliath was killed with a spear through his chest.

That was your honest reaction and you are entitled to it. I do have an sincere and serious question for you. Do you think that your reaction is typical of todays filmgoer? I am not trying to cast any doubts as to your intestinal fortitude but I saw the movie a dozen times in the theater and never once saw anybody around me who had that severe of a reaction to anything in the film.

If Tolkien wrote it, or wrote about it, or wrote scenes in which that type of thing very likely did take place (like carnage at Helms Deep which may not have been as specific in the books but which most certainly was part of it) it would seem fair game for inclusion by a filmmaker.

While I certainly am not a subscriber to magazines like Fangoria or other blood-and-guts valentines to sadism, I do see nothing wrong with a somewhat realistic portrayal of battlefield violence. In fact, I remember from my youth in the Fifties -- a time which was sanitaized to protect us little ones - when a person would get shot, there was no wound, no blood, no real effects at all. You can make a case that type of thing is far more harmful to ideas about real violence than a realistic portrayal is.

I guess if JRRT wrote it in THE HOBBIT, then its fair game for a filmmaker.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

The budget on this film will be at least $100 million dollars US and probably closer to double that once all is said and done. No studio that I am aware of will allow that kind of money to be spent on a kiddie film aimed at ages 5 through 9. Not a one. And besides, kids at that age today would have little interest in seeing a dumbed down, sanitaized movie that harkens back to the decade of the Great Depression. It simply is not going to happen.

Well, they don't have to make the movie, do they? You seem to be implying that the movie has to be made, & that the best has to be made of a bad job: The Hobbit movie must be made, but, tragically, it can't be made for children, & the tale must be re-written to include dwarf tossing jokes, beheadings & inhabitants of Esgaroth being turned into human torches by Smaug (& then running three laps around the Long Lake, climbing the Lonely Mountain & hurling themselves from the summit, no doubt ...)

If they don't want to make the Hobbit movie suitable for the same audience as the book they can leave it alone & make something else.

[Sauron the White]

Perhaps what places me in a different category than some others is that I try to deal with reality. I am not attempting to predict the future but simply speculate on - what for the moment - appears to be the inevitable, a HOBBIT film. It looks like a deal will come soon, and if not, will then more than likely come a few tears later. But come it will.

I also accept the reality of the business aspect of movie making complete with its financial budgets and expectations of return of investment. I also understand what a target audience is.

Another difference is that I do not climb the five-hundred steps each day to better see the lowly world from my Ivory Tower in the Sky.