Hellboy II and the Hobbit - Aesthetic comparisons!

[Alatar]

So, if anyone's seen Hellboy II yet, is there anything that excites or worries you for the Hobbit?

[sauronsfinger]

[Moved this and the next several posts from the Cottage - VtF]

Did anyone else see HELLBOY 2? I caught it yesterday and really came away from it yawning saying "no big deal". It pales in comparison to Del Toro's really good film PANS LABRYNITH.

HELL2 is a comic book movie which has characters you do not care about, action galore, and a plot that is terribly predictable.

There is lots of neat eye candy to look at, but I am afraid that I greatly prefer Jacksons visual effects department to the one that Del Toro favors.

[axordil]

I suspect since Jackson is producing The Hobbit, the main SFX will almost certainly come from WETA and its ilk.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yes, but GdT has already talked about bringing his own people in, and about relying more on animatronics rather than CGI (which I think will be a mistake).

(There is a thread in the Hobbit movie forum for discussion about Hellboy as it relates to the prospects for the Hobbit movies. Do you mind, sf, if I move this discussion into that thread?)

[sauronsfinger]

sounds good Voronwë - I did not realize the other thread was already there.

[yovargas]

Pretty much what that guy said. Except I think GdT's art designs are really great and at least on par with what was in LOTR. (I'm just talking design though; overall, LOTR was incomparably more beautiful, of course.)

[Primula Baggins]

I'd've liked to see GdT's take on Orthanc and the "engines" below it. He's good at half-mechanical grotesquerie. Not that the existing version wasn't also good.

[eborr]

I think there is an interesting discussion to be had on animatronics/miniatures versus CGI in general.

[sauronsfinger]

Agreed. Some of the problem I have with the Del Toro look is that I find the WETA approach to look far more realistic. It looks like it belongs in the world you are looking at rather than something which was obviously created by the SFX department. So much of what was in GOLDEN ARMY had the very cool look, but it simply did not look real. Even the way the creatures move is far less smooth and natural than most of the things (wargs a big exception) in the LOTR films.

I would hope that Del Toro does not redesign any architecture that we have already seen - Rivendell, Shire, Orthanc - but spreads his wings on new things that are in HOBBIT but were not in LOTR.

He also has said he will redesign the wargs and I think this is a good idea and logically possible since they can be a variation or different breeed than the hyena like creatures we saw in TTT.

[vison]

A friend of mine posted this elsewhere:

I snaffled the publication in question and found it was something called SFX Collection, a magazine devoted to sci-fi and fantasy films. And the lead article was about the Hobbit films.

Well I had to buy it, and I found that the magazine took the line of assessing these genres of film directly in relation to the books they are based on. For example, there was a list of the best and worst adaptations, and the best was seen to be 2001 A Space Oddyssey, but the second best was regarded as The Fellowship of the Ring, being that part of the trilogy that stayed most faithful to the book it was based on.

So I turned to the article on the Hobbit films with some hope, and to my joy I found it reproduced many of Alan Lee's wonderful illustrations of the Hobbit, some of which I had never seen as they come from a NEW illustrated version published by Harper Collins.
It was worth buying the magazine just for those pictures!

When I read the accompanying article, I found that the writer, who glories in the Hobbitish name of Rhian Drinkwater, took a very optimistic view of the adaptation of The Hobbit.

First pointing out that the Hobbit 'often seen as the younger, less-developed sibling of the darker, more complex Lord of The Rings' only made it to the screen because of the success of the trilogy, Rhian assures us that although Peter Jackson is not making the new film, 'fans...are even more delighted to hear that another fantasy master (Del Toro) is taking the reins (albeit with Jackson still around as a back-seat driver)'. With Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens on board too.

I am afraid I had not noticed everyone being delighted that Del Toro was making the film, but I let that go and read on;
'Speculation is rife as to what (Del Toro) has planned and how exactly he will bring the story of the original Baggins to the silver screen.'

Apparently, according to Rhian, with Jackson et all on board 'the Hobbit will follow a similar path to the earlier Lord of The Rings'

Phew! That sounds heartening. But the article then nods to the problem that Jackson had too - how to adapt faithfully. What to leave out, what to emphasise. Rhian says that the Sackville-Bagginses auction of Bilbo's belongings will probably be left out, as it is an anti-climax after all the adventures. It goes on;

'Another likely candidate for change seems to be the sheer number of dwarves who accompany Bilbo on his quest. In the book there are 13 of them, and apart from a few with individual traits (Thorin is the leader, Bombur is the fat one) they're pretty much interchangeable. How many people can remember which hobbit was which out of Merry and Pippin in The Fellowship?'

WHAT???? Very bad example, Rhian! Merry and Pippin's different characters are well established from the very beginning. But I take her point that the Dwarf-group might be scaled down.

What might be scaled up, the article suggests, are the Men of Dale, and their leader Bard, who actually kills Smaug, but not onstage. Tolkien does not give them much spotlight, but apparently they are slated for greater attention on film, and Bard may become a 'more heroic, king-in-waiting character akin to Aragorn.'

Played by ....? :

Urged by the film's backers, Arwen's role was upped in the trilogy, but as there are no women in The Hobbit
'Del Toro will have to decide between sticking to an all-male cast or introducing some newly created female characters. Our bet is on an all-male film - brand new characters wouldn't go down well with the hardcore fans, and would require some convoluted re-writing to include them. As Dwarf women are indistinguishable from dwarf men, it seems unlikely that we'll be seeing much of them.'

So the opinion of the hard-core fans (that is us, by the way) matters Giving Arwen more prominence could be done without wrecking the story, but creating a character can't.

The article notes that Andy Serkis has been brought on board for the new film, but also points out that in The Hobbit Gollum has a very small part, and it has already had much of that told in the Return of the King. Which in fact is inaccurate, as it shows Gollum screaming over the loss of his precious at the same time as Bilbo finds it, where in fact Gollum did not realise that he had lost it until some time later in the book.

Expanding Gollum's role once again would put a strain on the film's truth to the book. But the article suggests that the film might show how Gollum came to be caught and tortured by Sauron.

The article says;
'It seems likely that the darker, soul-entrancing effects of the Ring, seen draining Frodo in the film trilogy, will be repeated with Bilbo in the Hobbit, though there are no indications of any such effects in the book itself. Aside from Bilbo's original desire to keep it secret, there are no real indications of any dark side to the Ring in the novel but would add some darkness and character to the lighter tale in the series.'

It's news to me that The Hobbit is light, but I see what the author means here. The Hobbit is lacking in moral message, gravitas if you like. It is after all a kiddies tale.

The article breezily asserts;
'All in all, it should be a fairly straightforward adaption of a straightforward narrative....'

That simple????

The article does suggest that Gandalf's fight with the Necromancer (in Unfinished Tales) might be included, as it happens in the same time frame.

Rhian then says;
'The really interesting developments, plot-wise, should come with the second film. ' Which will be set in the 50 years or so between The Hobbit and the Fellowship.
'Del Toro is opposed to it being a 'bridge movie', insisting that it will be a valid fifth volume in its own right. ''It will be about the transition from the golden years to the rise of Sauron'' he said recently. ''It's essentially the beginning of civil war and uprisings. It's a very interesting time''

He also told TheOneRing.com that the second film is not a 'tag-on' or a 'filler', ''it's an integral part of telling the story of those 50 years of history lost in the narrative. There will be certain things that we see from the first movie but from a different point of view, but it will feel like a volume, in the five volumes of the entire story. It will not feel like a bridge. I've been hearing it called a 'bridge-film', it's not, its an integral chapter of the story and I think we're all on the same page''

Very tricksy, Mr DT. The fact is it is a missing volume that will be cooked up. It is NOT just the telling of part of the story, but the inventing of a missing passage. It could be created in such a way as to change subtly the meaning of what comes after.

The writer then speculates;
'It seems the storyline will be written by the usual team, probably drawing on Tolkien's other writings about the Middle-earth of the time. Our bet is that they'll take the opportunity to tell more of the tales of man. How is Gondor faring without its kings? How do they get to that point we see in Fellowship, with Boromir resentful of Middle Earth that they seem to be alone to guard against the forces of Mordor? What is Aragorn up to for all this time, apart from falling in love with Elrond's daughter?'

Wow it would be nice to think they would deal with Denethor and his growing sons, and the way that deadly menage a trois came into being. Would we even see Bor back on screen? Nah, too good go be true....although inkling prequels on Boromir are so common they must guess he is a popular figure.

Then the article deals with Del Toro's style. He has got Alan Lee and John Howe on board and says he is happy with Jackson's 'look and feel'. But he wants the Middle Earth of The Hobbit to be painted with a 'more golden palette', and the Elves of Mirkwood to be different. But Del Toro ominously stresses that his forte is not fantasy, but horror, and he plans to make sequences such as the spiders of Mirkwood attacking Bilbo into a nightmare of extended horror.

Little kids and arachnophobes be warned!

The article is overwhelmingly optimistic, and ends;
'With so many talented film-makers involved, it seems hopeful that we won't be able to see the joins between the two men's visions...the final chapters in the Tird Age of Middle Earth are definitely not to be missed.'

Whatever.

One thing in the article that did give me cause for hope, it singles out five events in the Hobbit that are epic and dramatic, and might make cinema of a kind to equal the set pieces of Helm's Deep or the seige of Minas Tirith. They are;

Smaug. 'He is big, he's a dragon and he wears armour of diamonds. And in contrast to the Balrog, he has a distinct, arrogant personality, exchanging riddles and insults with Biblo. We can't wait to see what Weta do with Smaug.'

I hope they do as well as Alan Lee's illustration, which shows a Smaug slightly reminiscent of the Alien in Alien, only in gold. Certainly the dialogue between hobbit and dragon could sparkle, if the scriptwriting does not kill it.

The Palace of the Elven King;
'With all the Elvish desigh we've seen so far revolving round elegant structures and wood, we can't wait to see a vision of their world in which they live in carved rock. Like dwarves!'

The spiders of Mirkwood; 'Creepy, terrifying, hungry..smaller than Shelob and able to talk with the heroes. This is a chance for Del Toro to inject some terrifying atmosphere into the hobbit's tale.'

The Battle of the Five Armies; 'This is where The Hobbit gets to show its fighting muscle alongside the great battles in The Lord of The Rings. Dwarves, men elves and eagles all fighting against an army of goblins and wargs. If done well, it could be brilliant. It'll be a challenge to distinguish it from the battle of Helm's Deep.''

The only problem there is Bilbo gets knocked out early on and misses the battle. So the hero is absent, and it is not easy to maintain the drama in that situation.

Riddles in the Dark; 'One of the most iconic chapter titles in history, but a tricky one to make truly cinematic. We get to see Gollum, consumed by The Ring but not yet tortured by the loss of it, in a battle of words with our jolly hobbit friend. And all the while, the Ring is sitting there, waiting in Bilbo's pocket, having made its break from Gollum - realistically the most important event in the story.'

Making that scene work will once again depend on not special effects but on script. In fact, reading this article it strikes me that the characters in The Hobbit are much wittier and reliant on words than in Lord of The Rings, where there are big speeches, but rarely does anyone have to use their verbal wit to save their own lives.

Anyway, that is the article and I thought some of you might be interested in it. I found the new illustrations of Alan Lee utterly magic, and witty too, the Goblin King, complete with goblin infant at his feet, is a masterpiece somewhere between Bosch and Dante with a bit of Giles thrown in. They made me get hungry all over again for these amazing, endlessly fascinating and inspiring books.

[Alatar]

Interesting Vison, but the source article is already a little out of date. GdT has already answered some of those issues.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I had the same thought, Al.

Plus,

The Hobbit is lacking in moral message

[vison]

I agree with that part, Voronwë. At least in comparison to LOTR.

However, I had no clue about the magazine or the article and so found it quite interesting.

[Primula Baggins]

I did, too. There are details in there I hadn't seen mentioned before.

The idea that Film 2 might contain events we've already seen (in flashback, I assume), but from a different perspective, is tantalizing. That would be one way to reduce the need to extrapolate or even invent story material, and it could still be illuminating.