Why Smaug's Death Needs to Wait for the 2nd Film

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As has been discussed elsewhere, the indications from GdT are that the filmmakers are moving away from the idea of one Hobbit film and one "bridge" film, and more towards the idea of two Hobbit films, filled in with other information to a greater or lesser extent. It is unclear exactly how that will work, and in fact GdT has indicated that it continues to be a very fluid process. However, he continues to maintain that the second film will flow into the LOTR films, so that the five films tell one full story.

At one point, GdT indicated that the first film would end at some point after Smaug's death (but presumably not much after it). I have not seen any indication that he has backed away from that comment. However, I strongly believe that for a number of reasons it makes more sense to end the first film before Smaug's death. I believe this is true both from the point of view of making two films that both can stand on their own as well as being part of the full series, and from the point of view of adapting Tolkien work.

First of all, Smaug's death is NOT an important climax in the story of the Hobbit. It is, instead, an anti-climax. The two important climaxes of the story are Bilbo's first confrontation with Smaug, and his decision to steal the Arkenstone in order to try to broker a peaceful settlement of the impasse between the Dwarves and the others. To end the first film with Smaug's death (or soon after) would change that, making Smaug's death the climax of the film. Moreover, it would be virtually impossible to have a heretofore unknown and essentially unimportant character, Bard, be the one to kill Smaug as the climax of the film. That would make no sense at all. Far better to have the first film be all about Bilbo's growth from the comical, soft reluctant anti-hero that we see in the beginning to the brave leader of the expedition who confronts the ultimate evil (the Necromancer is a distant abstraction in the the Hobbit, and he should be no more than that in the first film).

Secondly, the second film needs to have a coherent structure. It can't just be the end of The Hobbit with a bunch of other stuff thrown in. Having Smaug's death towards the beginning of the second film achieves a couple of things. First of all, having a greater portion of the story from The Hobbit in the second film helps to make it that coherent story. More importantly, the filmmakers can use Smaug's anti-climatic demise at the hands of the minor character Bard to help facilitate the transition so that the Necromancer/Sauron becomes the evil focus of the second film (in contrast to the first film). This will enable the filmmakers to add material regarding the White Council (and perhaps even Aragorn) opposing the Necromancer/Sauron to the main storyline, so that the political intrigue involving the Arkenstone gives way to a major battle between the forces of good and the forces of evil that becomes in essence a prequel to the War of the Ring. Unless the battle of five armies is played down majorly, anything that takes place after it in the second film will seem anti-climatic. There simply cannot be a lot of material following the battle. Perhaps as much as was in ROTK following the destruction of the Ring, serving as a bridge to the LOTR films (perhaps ending with Frodo moving in with Bilbo). But no more than that. And I think that will be hard to do if Smaug has already been killed in the first film.

[Alatar]

I agree with you V. In fact I feel the ideal ending for the first part of the Hobbit should come even earlier. I'd love to see it finish with Bilbo escaping the Elvenkings halls, no longer the comic bungler but the rescuer of the Dwarves, as his barrel comes round a bend in the river and suddenly he sees before him the Lonely Mountain.

This gives us the Unexpected Party, the Trolls, Rivendell, Goblin Town, Gollum, the Wargs, Beorn, Mirkwood, the Spiders, and the Elvenkings halls all in one movie, even assuming we see nothing of Gandalfs journey. Part 2 sees Lake Town, the discovery of the Hidden Door, Conversations with Smaug, Smaugs Death, the Arkenstone and the Battle of 5 Armies for Film 2. Again, without referring to White Council material. Add in the White Council, Dol Guldor, and a few LotR Links, and there's your Five Film treatment.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I think that works for me, Al. I posted my initial message over at TORN, too. You should post there, so that GdT might see it. I don't know whether he is influenced by what he reads there, but I wouldn't put it past him. He seems like a pretty open individual.

[vison]

Keep up the good work, guys.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

To be more clear, what I am suggesting is that the first film end after Bilbo's FIRST confrontation with Smaug, when he steals the cup, not after their second confrontation when they converse and Bilbo discovers Smaug's weak spot, which allows Smaug to be killed. Tolkien describes that first confrontation as "the bravest thing he ever did. The tremendous things that happened afterward were as nothing compared to it. He fought the real battle in the tunnel alone, before he ever saw the vast danger that lay in wait." Whether GdT can capture this I don't know; he will need to be a better filmmaker than PJ to do it, but I think it can be done. I would in fact end the first film with the vast rumbling that terrifies Bilbo and the Dwarves when Smaug discovers the missing cup that Bilbo steals during the first confrontation. That would be the perfect cliffhanger to build tension for the next film.

But Al's suggestion works for me too.

[Holbytla]

I would agree that the death of Smaug is not climatic when viewed from the perspective of Bilbo and the dwarves.
However I can also see them telling part of the story from the Dale and Lakemen perspective. If that is the case, then I think the death of Smaug is indeed climatic and could be used as a climax to film one.

Who is to say that Bard and the Lakemen won't have a sizeable role in this film? Heck it is conceivable that Bard and the Lakemen are one of the stimuli for getting the whole party started in the first place. Sure there are the dwarves and their reasonings, but they could easily have the Lakemen convince Gandalf or whomever that they need help in getting rid of Smaug.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if Bard and company make an early appearance in film one.

[WampusCat]

I wouldn't be surprised if Bard is someone else entirely.

Hmmm. Know any wandering warriors who fought under pseudonyms in various kingdoms?

Then again, it was an arrow that brought down the dragon. Know any ... hmmmm ... really good archers?

[vison]

I am allowing myself to look forward to Beorn.

A picture of Robbie Coltrane inevitably pops into my head, but I'm not saying it SHOULD be Coltrane, only someone that looks like that.

[eborr]

I get the sense of great discussion as per the best days of TORC brewing


bring it on -

problem for me is that I never cared greatly for the Hobbit as a book - so I cannot get too upset if there is a cavalier approach to to the source text however I think del Toro is such a great movie maker - and that what really excites me about the Hobbit films

- on the subject of Beorn - I cannot see the director using anyone else that Ron Perlman for that part.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

eborr, I agree that Ron Perlman would be a good fit for Beorn.

I actually think that The Hobbit if done correctly could work better as a film than a book. As GdT has pointed out, there's a lot more there than first meets the eye.

[Primula Baggins]

I fully expect to get more pleasure and excitement from the film than I do from the book.

I only hope that I also feel I've just seen The Hobbit. I like GdT's work that I've seen, but there's a rococo clockwork feel to his visual imagination that feels very unlike Tolkien to me—the less natural something is, the more distorted, the more it seems to delight del Toro.

I emphasize that this works in the other places I have seen it. I just hope he makes different choices for Tolkien. And most of the time I feel sure he will.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Prim, the statements that I have seen him make are fairly encouraging in that front -- for the most part. But there have been enough comments that he has made to the effect of his making it his own that give me pause.

Only time will tell.

[Primula Baggins]

He could certainly deviate from PJ's vision in a fair number of ways that would not bother me a bit. If his sense of humor is more subtle and sophisticated, for example. Or if he doesn't go in for the heavy color grading that makes long sections of LotR feel almost monochromatic.

I still like PJ's films very much. But as we come closer to having new ones I do think about what I would like to see done differently.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

That is really the question that I had, Prim. To the extent that he was talking about making it his own as compared to following PJ's lead, I completely support him. To the extent that he was talking about making it his own as opposed to being true to Tolkien, well, I don't think I really need to finish the sentence.

[Primula Baggins]

No, you don't.

I'm looking forward to when we start getting some actual news—casting especially. That was when it got really . . . interesting . . . with PJ's films.

[Holbytla]

I watched ROTK the other night for the first time in probably years. My reaction was pretty much the same as it had been. Uneven. The deviations don't irk as much maybe, but I still can't embrace many of them. Not because they were deviations, but because they didn't work for me. Gimli and Denethor are the most glaring examples as far as characters go.

With regards to the Hobbit I am more concerned with characters than I am with actors. Unless the choices are terrible, the writers and director will be shaping the characters more than the actor. Well unless the actor is given free reign which I doubt.

[Primula Baggins]

Yes, but we won't know anything about the writing and direction until much closer to the time. As minimal as it is, casting is at least hard information; we can at least start overanalyzing at that point, because there are actual facts to overanalyze.

Of course "Who is Bilbo?" is a huge question. But another point that will provide a lot of grist for the mill will be, what LotR actors are contacted and asked to return? That will begin to give us an idea of what "additional material" we might be likely to see. Think of the snits we can have!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Yes, but we won't know anything about the writing and direction until much closer to the time.

I don't know about that, Prim. I think GdT is chomping at the bit to talk about these films. I think we will learn quite a bit once the screenplays are finished. For instance, the answer to the question that is the subject of this thread: where the first film ends. And to what extent the second film is part two of the Hobbit, and to what extent it is a bridge to LOTR. What is being left out, and what is being added. I agree that some of these questions will be partially answered based on which LOTR actors are asked to return, but I think we will get more precise answers from GdT. He seems to really love to talk about his work.

[Primula Baggins]

That's true, Voronwë—and I really appreciate it!

However, what GdT thinks about things and about the script and his approach to directing, etc., will be lots of fun to talk about but are really not hard information. That's why I singled out casting: it's factual. Bilbo will be played by [some actor I love/dislike/know nothing about] and will not be played by [my favorite guy for the role, whoever that is by then]. I will be [happy/sad/confused] and certain that the films will be [a disaster/boring/a masterpiece].

Wow, I guess we don't have to talk about casting now, do we?

[Holbytla]

I guess I was speaking more towrds post movie release.
I am sure there will be even more talk about the actor choices for the Hobbit than there was for LOTR. Mostly because of the reprising roles thing.

The two biggest pre-movie snit producing moments I remember are AATHD and RSWD.

Possiblities for the Hobbut are Bard, Legolas, Beorn and 13 Giml types.
Man if I have to endure Gimli times 13 I will scream in the theater and throw things.