MTV Interview with Guillermo

[Alatar]

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2008/10/07/ho ... -del-toro/

“The reality is that we stopped talking the first movie and second movie, and we just started taking about the movie - the two episodes, or two parts, as if they were a single piece of narrative,” he said of scriptwriting meetings between “Lord of the Rings” director Peter Jackson, his filmmaking team of Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, and del Toro himself.

“We don’t even call it the bridge movie, we just call it ‘The Movie.’ And this is great. When we found what reverberated, and we found it in one of our virtual meetings - we understood. It’s a movie.”

Intended or not, the methodology ties in nicely with the material, since Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” story, popularized in three separate volumes, was similarly intended to be one large, single volume work.

Practically, the division (or lack thereof) means little in so far as solving the narrative riddles of the second episode. (What will the second episode contain? What characters will return, etc?) Well, except for the very end that is, which will lead right into “The Fellowship of the Ring,” del Toro revealed.

“We all agree that if we do our job right, it should all feel like a continuous journey. That’s what we’re striving for,” Del Toro said. “You should see a movie that’s five pictures long. If we do our job right, you put in ‘The Hobbit’ and you wind up watching the entire Pentology!”

[Alatar]

More here:

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles ... tory.jhtml

"Things happen almost magically, with pure synchronicity. It's like, things that I'm thinking about, I get an e-mail ... or I get Philippa, for example, to answer that," del Toro said. "When we're meeting, when the four of us are in the conference, the things that I'm thinking, we answer them."

Del Toro has found the collaboration so helpful, he said, that while he was originally concentrating on film two as Jackson and others concentrated on film one, they are all now working simultaneously on each episode.

It's working so well that the overall script for "The Hobbit" will hopefully be done "by the change of the year," del Toro said. "And then a budget in the very near future."

[Alatar]

So, what do we make of this:

As for the end of the first episode, the movie everyone assumed will follow the events of the novel fairly accurately? Where in the text will it finish?

“We are finding out,” GDT quipped. “I think Smaug dies in the first movie. So draw your own conclusions.”

Is he suggesting that the Battle of Five Armies will push out to Film 2? Are we looking at "Hobbit and a Half"?

[WampusCat]

That would make sense, I think. It leaves plenty of action in the first movie and a satisfying conclusion, while leaving a big kickoff for the second.

I'll regret losing the Arkenstone from the first part, though. That gave the story a lot more depth, I thought.

[Alatar]

Not sure what put this in my head, but I just realised we have more than one reason to believe the Hobbit will extend into a second movie. Yes, Guillermo mentioned that the death of Smaug will be in Film 1, but also a few months back he mentioned this when discussing the possibility of Ian Holm as Bilbo (bolding mine):

Bilbo is an incredibly dificult and taxing part to cast, physically exhausting- appearing in every scene of the HOBBIT film and a large portion of the second

Interesting, no? We got a heads up on this quite a while ago but missed the significance. I think its safe to say that since the Appendices contain very little about Bilbo post-Hobbit, we have to believe that this "large portion of the second" movie, has to be the final chapters of The Hobbit, unless we're looking at a completely invented return journey adventure.

[Primula Baggins]

Excellent catch, Alatar!

[kams]

Gut reaction: I'm a now little uneasy about the Hobbit being two movies. Where would the clifhanger be? Why would theater-goers come back for more? Is there enough there for two feature-length films?

I could be convinved of course, but I was warming to the idea of a "bridge" movie that would bring to the big screen a wider variety of Tolkien's writings.

[Primula Baggins]

Unfortunately, since they only have the rights to LotR itself, they can't bring anything else to the screen. If it's not in the Appendices, they can't touch it.

I wonder if they'll weave some of the "bridge" story threads into both films?

[Alatar]

Thats my feeling Prim. There's more than enough subject matter in the White Council/Dol Guldor Material to pad out The Hobbit to 2 films, and if we're looking at adding in some of the Post-Hobbit material also, I think its far more plausible than a wholly invented Bridge Movie.

[Primula Baggins]

The casting for the first film will provide some substantial clues.

[Holbytla]

I can see there being enough material between an Unexpected Party and LOTR for two movies, but I am a bit skeptical about having the 2nd one start at the death of Smaug/Battle of Five Armies or beyond. Although I can probably guess what is in store.

Sauron returning to Mordor
Elrond telling Aragorn who he really is
Gollum searching for the ring
White Council meeting
Aragorn and Arwen in Lórien
Moria being populated

My guess is that the Eye bursting into flames atop Barad Dur will be the climax of the 2nd film.

Although all of that flies in the face of Bilbo being in most of the second movie.

Maybe the Battle of Five Armies will be tied in with Sauron regaining Mordor, and we know how PJ loves battle scenes..

[Frelga]

My guess is that the Eye bursting into flames atop Barad Dur will be the climax of the 2nd film.

I like that!

There's also the adoption of Frodo.

It still sounds like the "greatest hits" movie rather than a coherent story. But I am prepared to be pleasantly surprised.

[Dave_LF]

Movie 1 could be essentially canon and the climax could be the death of Smaug. Movie 2 could focus primarily on Gandalf's business with Dol Guldur, leading into his just-in-time arrival at the battle of five armies. I don't think I like the idea, but I don't know how else you'd do it.

[Alatar]

My guess is that the Eye bursting into flames atop Barad Dur will be the climax of the 2nd film.

Actually, that can't happen as we see Barad-dûr being built at the start of Fellowship!

[Inanna]

Can anything from Unfinished Tales can be used?

I don't know what to think about two Hobbit movies.... I just don't.

[yovargas]

I think dropping the war into the 2nd movie would likely be a really good thing. That final Battle is really a pretty distinct and separate thing from everything that happened before. I like it.

[Frelga]

My guess is that the Eye bursting into flames atop Barad Dur will be the climax of the 2nd film.

Actually, that can't happen as we see Barad-dûr being built at the start of Fellowship!

We do? I can't recall that.

[Primula Baggins]

Yes, we see it in a partly built state while Gollum is being tortured, I believe. But that's a flashback of some years, isn't it?

[Frelga]

OH! That! I never figured it out.

Right, because the foundations of Barad-dûr endured, makes sense. But I think it can fit into the timeline of the second movie, whatever it ends up being. They could have this anti-beacon moment, with the orc fires spreading in Mordor, culminating with the Eye coming online.

[Holbytla]

I always assumed I was seeing something that happened beforehand like a flashback rather than something current.

In any case I have to believe we will see Sauron returning to Mordor in some fashion.

Thinking on this some more makes me remember that PJ didn't exactly stick to the tale of years with regards to events. Like the younger hobbits for instance and the lack of years spanning between Bilbo and Frodo leaving. I guess we are dealing with PJ's tale of years so it is anyone's guess what that means.

We are also leaving out the inevitable inventions of story that are bound to take place. And you can bet if Viggo and Liv reprise their roles, there will loads of Aragorn/Arwen.