Del Toro to helm The Hobbit!

[Alatar]

Woohoo! Ok, so its not certain, but I hope it turns out to be true.


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/con ... 87024a2b8e

Guillermo del Toro is in talks to direct back-to-back installments of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Hobbit," which is being co-financed by New Line and MGM.

Del Toro's name was on a short list of directors who could tackle the project, one of the most anticipated literary adaptations of the past decade. An ill-chosen director for "Hobbit" could put billions of dollars at stake for New Line and MGM and could turn off an audience that encompasses millions of passionate readers, Tolkien fans and obsessive geeks.

Few filmmakers have the cachet that del Toro has, as well as a deep love for the source material, an assured grasp of fantasy filmmaking and an understanding and command of geek culture as well as its respect. Del Toro has built that goodwill through such films as the Oscar-nominated "Pan's Labyrinth," "Hellboy," "Blade 2" (which was made by New Line) and "The Devil's Backbone."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I have mixed feelings about Del Toro. He is definitely a talented filmmaker, but in contrast to what this report says, he has not indicated an affinity with Tolkien's work. We'll see if it even turns out to be true.

[Teremia]

Del Toro!!!

His orcs will be awesome, but I'm not sure about his hobbits.

[Alatar]

Actually Voronwë, he has stated that he loved the Hobbit, but that he found The Lord of the Rings too "dense". Fortunately, its The Hobbit he's making, not Lord of the Rings, and they are very different animals. Based on his Pans Labyrinth I think he's more than capable of delivering The Hobbit on multiple levels.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Al, you know as well as I do that that is his revisionist take on the subject, once it became clear that he might be considered for the project. His original answer to the question of how much he was influenced by Tolkien (translated from Spanish) was:

Not at all. I could barely finish "The Hobbit". Curiously, that kind of fantasy, never called out to me. I think that fairy tales are in themselves a different genre. Heroic fantasy, in general, leaves me cold. I am more interested in Robert E. Howard's work of terror - his novels about the muscular Conan. Although there are two writers of fantasy that I think are sublime: Clark Ashton Smith and Lord Dunsany.

The more I think about it, the more distressed about this I get. The very last thing that I want is a version of The Hobbit transformed into a 'work of terror'.

[Teremia]

<hands V a calming cup of tea>

Now, now, let's not be distressed quite yet. Directors can do different sorts of work for different audiences.

Evidence: Cuarón.

If Del Toro is making a PG or PG-13 Hobbit, he will have to take a step or two back from horror.

And he IS a talented and creative director, and somebody with imagination!

A dull or saccharine Hobbit would be mighty depressing, so I think Del Toro is not a bad choice.

[Alatar]

Funnily enough, he has a lot in common with another director. Both have their roots in horror, both came to prominence with a dark fantasy. Del Toro's was Pans Labyrinth, while that other chap Peter Jackson's was Heavenly Creatures.

I remain optimistic.

Lets remember that the splatter-flick director of Braindead was nobody's first choice for a LotR director.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

From AICN:

When Guillermo and I talked about it, he spoke very heartfelt about how he had to adhere to what Peter had already established - but how he couldn't wait to expand that universe with the environments, creatures and most especially Smaug.

I fear that the result will be a return to PJ's Braindead past. There's a big difference between Heavenly Creatures and Pan's Labyrinth. HC is a dark fantasy with almost no actual violence. PL is a dark fantasy with way, way too much violence. I have a very hard time picturing someone who says that "heroic fantasy" leaves them cold making a version of The Hobbit that I will like. Particularly when what they are excited about is expanding the environments and creatures of the universe of Middle-earth.



I'm afraid you're going to have give me something a bit stronger, dear Teremia.

[Alatar]

But think of the fun we'll have arguing about it

Naturally, our opinions will be fully formed and our positions entrenched before the first draft of the script.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

*checks the first-aid kits*

[Primula Baggins]

<checks supplies of tea, medicinal whisky, and donuts>

[Voronwë the Faithful]

*And the life-rafts. Particularly for Primula and Ophelia.*

Oh, and Alatar, Del Toro eats babies; you heard it hear first.

[ToshoftheWuffingas]

Um, sorry about the whisky but I was bored.

[Primula Baggins]

<glare>

<breaks out the medicinal 20-year-old single malt>

I do think Alatar has a point. Heavenly Creatures is not as violent as Pan's Labyrinth, no, but the rest of PJ's films to that point are among the most violent ever made. I remember reading some of the same apprehensions about him on TORN and other places (and I shared them).

(And, of course, many people believe PJ delivered on that "promise"—though I of course am not one of them.)

We also must consider that del Toro would be starting with a Middle-earth that has already been designed down to many of the sets and some very important casting. He can't introduce a new "look" for the hobbits, for instance. I'm sure his imagination would flavor the elements of the story that hadn't been seen in LotR; but I'd rather it was his imagination than something more mundane.

Finally, keep in mind that the whole point of this enterprise, from the point of view of the people supplying the money, is to make something as similar as possible to the LotR films—to cash in on a guaranteed hit. Given that, I would rather have a director with a strong artistic imagination in the mix than a Chris Columbus type who would walk passively down the path laid out for him by PJ and the studio. Then we might end up with good films that still have a fresh flavor to them.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I'm not convinced. I think the two of them together are going to exacerbate their horror-flick-excess tendencies. A lot depends on who writes the script, of course. If someone who has a good understanding of Tolkien and is not someone that "heroic fantasy" leaves cold, maybe that will mitigate it some.

We'll see. I find that after reading The History of the Hobbit, and also the part of Shippey's Road to Middle-earth that deals with The Hobbit, I care a lot more than I thought I would.

[axordil]

On the other hand, V-man, there are parts of TH that are, or could be reasonably interpreted as being, as close to horror as the Paths of the Dead, Shelob's Lair, the first part of Moria, or the Watcher in the Water.

The goblin cave, the Riddle game, the spiders in Mirkwood, and some aspects of Bilbo and Smaug come to mind. There are probably more. If those aren't treated with sufficient tension, really, the movie turns into something trivial.

[Primula Baggins]

Well, we shall see. . . .

And won't it be fun, maybe in a teeth-gritting kind of way for some of us , to be back to collecting script rumors and set reports and spy photos and trying to construct what's actually being filmed from that? I did think that was fun with LotR. But my initial fears about PJ dispersed fairly fast when I read his series of "Twenty Questions" online interviews on AICN, and also as soon as I saw the kind of visual quality—sets, costumes, props—that was being brought to the table. He may or may not ever have "gotten" Tolkien in the various ways that most of us have; but he got that we cared about it and, much of the time, seemed to be trying to give us what we wanted.

My nightmare had been having a director who dismissed Tolkien's vision completely and imposed his own, as John Boorman might have done. I don't think del Toro will be able to do that, even if that is his impulse.

[Crucifer]

The thing about Del Toro is that he could, as Alatar said, deliver The Hobbit on so many different levels. The Hobbit directly turned into a film would be, I imagine, frightfully boring and childish in a bad way. On top of that, to attract a large audience, some of it will have to be sensationalized.

Del Toro can, and will, I hope, bring both the darkness and depth of moments such as "Riddles in the Dark" and "Queer Lodgings" to the film, while retaining the light-heartedness in, for example, the "Unexpected Party" and the moment when ***Spoiler***Bilbo [comes among the dwarves and taked off the newly acquired ring, surprising everyone, even the Grey Pilgrim himself./color] ***Spoiler***

That's if he gets the job of course.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

On the other hand, V-man, there are parts of TH that are, or could be reasonably interpreted as being, as close to horror as the Paths of the Dead, Shelob's Lair, the first part of Moria, or the Watcher in the Water.

The goblin cave, the Riddle game, the spiders in Mirkwood, and some aspects of Bilbo and Smaug come to mind. There are probably more. If those aren't treated with sufficient tension, really, the movie turns into something trivial.

No, no, no, no, no! Those scenes are not horror scenes. Those scenes need to be about Bilbo overcoming his fear and discovering his courage. I greatly fear that that will go the route that PJ went in the POTD in the extended edition of ROTK and that the human element will get buried beneath the spectacle.

[axordil]

Those scenes are not horror scenes. Those scenes need to be about Bilbo overcoming his fear and discovering his courage.

Good horror films, as opposed to slasher movies, are about exactly that, Voronwë: fear, and courage, and the balance and movement between them. If the threat to Bilbo is not palpable and visceral, why should we care if he discovers his courage? The growth in the character is in direct proportion to the scale of that it overcomes.