What are your hopes (and fears) for the Hobbit films

[Voronwë the Faithful]

My hopes are that they manage to maintain the core story of Bilbo's journey (both literally and figuratively), and The Hobbit's unique idiosyncratic charm, even while emphasizing the darker, epic backstory.

My fears are that the films become bloated with an over-emphasis on action and other battles, and/or that certain aspects (talking animals, singling Elves) just come across as silly.

(Okay, I probably have a lot more hopes and fears, but that's a enough to start for now.)

[Lalaith]

I hope they do not make the Elves silly or quite so effeminate. I am looking forward to some really creepy spiders in Mirkwood and an awesome Smaug. I think they'll probably handle the special effects well.

I hope they are able to connect the characters from LotR in a good way to this movie, and that they don't take too many liberties with trying to do that.

I hope they don't make all of the dwarves bumbling fools either.

[Primula Baggins]

I hope that the films won't be subject to the excesses either PJ or GdT sometimes indulge in when able. PJ's have been discussed at some length. To me, GdT's weakness is a tendency to pile on inventive, kinetic visual richness until it becomes hard to discern the story, or care about the characters. At least, that was what I took away from Hellboy II, which was visually gorgeous and, for me, empty at the core—a disappointment because I had liked the first Hellboy for the story and characters. The visual invention in that one was a spice, not the whole stew.

I guess that was more of a fear.

I have lots of hopes, but the one I'll mention now is that once again we can enjoy the detailed sets, costumes, and props that gave such a foundation of reality to the LotR films. And two more Howard Shore scores!

[Pearly Di]

What you all said.

I'm going to try and ignore all the coming hype!

What will be, will be.

I've always cared more about LotR than TH, although obviously I don't want GDT to mess TH up.

Oh, and I would prefer a one-shot Hobbit.

[WampusCat]

My hope is another total immersion in Middle-Earth, at least for a few hours. I hope to see settings and characters come to life in a way that resonates with my imagination but surpasses it.

I fear that the sillier aspects of the story will be emphasized (tra la la), or even added to (dwarf tossing and ale belching, anyone?).

My desperate but unrealistic wish: that Ian Holm could be put into an age-regression machine and allowed to recreate Bilbo. He was so perfect in the role, which makes me fear for his replacement.

[Alatar]

I've always felt The Hobbit would be best if the White Council material was included, for a couple of reasons.

You have the unusual task of showing the Hobbit after LotR, therefore, the expectations are different. And all the fanboys in the world yelling "Let the Hobbit be the Hobbit" are wasting their breath. Its not gonna happen. It has to "feel" like LotR, and that means kick-ass Gandalf, Epic battles and LotR Style Elves. Which means, in essence, White Council and Dol Guldor are needed.

The beauty of this is that it allows the Hobbit to remain pretty much The Hobbit, but as counterpoint. The "human story" set against the epic backdrop. Otherwise, you're left with the unenviable task of ramping up The Hobbit plotline to be more Epic, which its really not set up to be.

Now personally, I could see that working in a 3.5 Hour Single movie, so I suppose I'm hoping for 2 x 2Hr movies, or something similar.

My fears are much the same as others. Bumbling Dwarves could kill this. Thorin in particular has to have gravitas. Gimli was fine in FotR, most of the time, but the audiences hooked on his humour moments, so PJ ramped them up at the expense of his character, much as he did with Legolas' Orli-moments. He can't do that with Thorin.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Well said, Al.

And I don't think that we need to worry about GdT Gimli-izing Thorin. He has made enough statements to convince me that he understands the importance of the character.

I expect that Bombur will be the butt of one (or more) too many jokes, however.

I don't think we will get three-hour films (with three and a half hour extended editions). Probably more like 2/2.5. And I think that is about right. I do think they could have done justice to The Hobbit in one long film, but I far prefer the idea of using two films to really squeeze as much out of the story as possible than doing it in one, and than proceeding with a potentially disastrous "bridge" film.

[Elentári]

What Al said

[Pearly Di]

Yeah, what Al said.



If it has to be two movies - grumble - then two hours each is the way to go.

[Primula Baggins]

I predict that they'll run nearly three hours each, for better or for worse. The length of the LotR films could be seen as an essential part of the "epic experience" they give to viewers. A two-hour movie has a whole different feel. You drop in and see a two-hour movie, or slip in a DVD; you "visit" LotR. It's "appointment cinema."

I'm not saying this constitutes a good argument for length, or that length for its own sake is a good thing. But I think it's the argument that will win.

[Pearly Di]

I predict that they'll run nearly three hours each, for better or for worse. The length of the LotR films could be seen as an essential part of the "epic experience" they give to viewers. A two-hour movie has a whole different feel. You drop in and see a two-hour movie, or slip in a DVD; you "visit" LotR. It's "appointment cinema."

I'm not saying this constitutes a good argument for length, or that length for its own sake is a good thing. But I think it's the argument that will win.

Unfortunately, you may be right, Prim.

Bah.

Three hours was really fine for LotR, but here I'm just seeing an excuse for Pirates of the Caribbean or King Kong type bloatedness.

*blows a raspberry*

[sauronsfinger]

The fears expressed by some here.... making the Elves looks silly.... talking animals .... can be eliminated altogher by simply making the world of THE HOBBIT consistent with the world of LORD OF THE RINGS as alread seen on the screen in the first three films. In those films there were no talking animals, let alone serving animals and the Elves were beings of great dginity and stature.

I too want lots of White Council material and to see the enitre Dol Guldur episode.

[Frelga]

I fear that all you gloomies are right, and the lightness and whimsy of The Hobbit will be sacrificed to twisting the story into a Grim Epic with Big Battles. Phooey to that. I want my tra-la-la-ly, and I want it from the same Elves we'll see kick goblin butt.

And Thorin is a lot more like PJ!Gimli than PJ!Gimli is like Gimli.

The point of The Hobbit - and it will take an apt hand indeed to convey it on film - is that it is the story of the innocent observer. Bilbo knows little of the dark sides of the world and therefore he tends to not notice or downplay them. Even Frodo knew more about it, having learned from Bilbo. And unlike Frodo, Bilbo remains an innocent to the end, true to himself and his hobbithood.

So Bilbo sees Elves as all tra-la-la-ly, when really, that's not all they are. But they are, also, that.

If they can capture that, I'll be thrilled. But I'll settle for the Epic with Big Battles, as long as they don't make it too Grim.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

And Thorin is a lot more like PJ!Gimli than PJ!Gimli is like Gimli.

How so, Frelga?

[N.E. Brigand]

Let The Hobbit be The Hobbit!

*gasp* --can't... breathe-- *passes out*

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Oh my! Is there a doctor in the house?

Somehow, I think your fears outweigh your hopes, N.E.B.

[Frelga]

And Thorin is a lot more like PJ!Gimli than PJ!Gimli is like Gimli.

How so, Frelga?

The dwarves do provide comic relief in the Hobbit. They are quarrelsome, selfish, even cowardly (unless roused). Gimli is more the heroic type, although we do see glimpses in Thorin of the Grim Hero Dude (tm).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The Dwarves in general, yes, but I can't think of any instances in which Thorin himself does (although it has been a couple of years since I read The Hobbit). Can you point to any?

[Frelga]

Well, he enters the story by falling over Bilbo's doorstep, doesn't he?

[N.E. Brigand]

The Dwarves in general, yes, but I can't think of any instances in which Thorin himself does [provide comic relief]... Can you point to any?

From "An Unexpected Party":

This was Thorin’s style. He was an important dwarf. If he had been allowed, he would probably have gone on like this until he was out of breath, without telling any one there anything that was not known already.

From "Inside Information":

You are familiar with Thorin’s style on important occasions, so I will not give you any more of it, though he went on a good deal longer than this.