There’s been a lot of speculation thus far regarding a film version of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit, the precursor to the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. For awhile, it seemed as though the movie might never be made. (A lawsuit filed by Peter Jackson’s Wingnut Films against New Line Cinema has yet to be settled.)
Now it looks as though the project is once again on track, and so far, the news is promising.
Just to get everyone up to speed:
Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema are back on speaking terms, and as of right now, there WILL be a film adaptation of The Hobbit in the not-so-distant future (The studio’s option to produce a film based on The Hobbit expires in 2009.), with Peter Jackson serving as Executive Producer this time out and with Weta Workshop likely once again producing the make-up and creature effects, costumes, and sets for the film.
Currently, plans are to release two films, although it has yet to be determined whether the studio intends to split The Hobbit into two parts, a la Kill Bill, or the upcoming final installment in the Harry Potter series of films, or produce The Hobbit as a stand alone film with an as-yet-untitled companion piece to follow. (The writers in that case would likely draw and expand upon pre-existing supplementary material penned by Tolkien, thus creating a narrative bridge between The Hobbit and The Lord Of The Rings.)
The latest news is that Guillermo Del Toro, perhaps best known for the recent Pan’s Labyrinth (he wrote the screenplay for that one in addition to directing), as well as The Devil’s Backbone, Hellboy, and Blade II, will be taking over directorial duties this time around.
I, for one, welcome the news, and I have faith that Del Toro can pull it off. Like many others, I believe that Guillermo Del Toro is the next, natural choice to succeed Peter Jackson as helmer.
Actors Sir Ian McKellen and Hugo Weaving have both expressed interest in reprising their roles of Gandalf and Elrond respectively.
-
A bit of background: I’m a big fan of Peter Jackson’s The Lord Of The Rings trilogy.
I love The Fellowship Of The Ring. Basically, if it’s on, I’ll watch it, and frankly, I never get tired of it. (I love the Bakshi animated The Lord Of The Rings as well; if you haven’t seen it or even heard of it before, it was released in the late 70s and is worth checking out if, like me, you’re a fan of the source material.)
The Return Of The King, to me, is a close second; I have absolutely no problems with the length of the film, and the ending, or endings as some might say.
My third favorite The Lord Of The Rings film, The Two Towers, is still loads of fun to watch but just doesn’t hold up when compared to the other two, as a film, individually on its own merits and also, in terms of the quality of the adaptation.
Overall, I think Peter Jackson did a bang-up job of bringing the material to the big screen. He wisely left out the bits that wouldn’t translate well to film (Tom Bombadil) and succeeded in making The Lord Of The Rings cool again and accessible to a whole new generation of fans.
There’s a reason – many, actually – why Tolkien’s The Lord Of The Rings has endured for as long as it has, why “Frodo Lives” in the hearts and minds of legions of Tolkien’s fans worldwide, why The Lord Of The Rings is a literary classic.
But as regular readers of this site know all too well, I firmly believe that adaptations of pre-existing works need not follow the source material exactly, so long as the character of the piece is retained; after all, what works well in one medium may not translate well, or at all, to another.
Given Peter Jackson’s stellar track record, I, like many others, was extremely disappointed when New Line Cinema announced that Jackson would no longer be involved in the making of subsequent films. But now, with Guillermo Del Toro slated to direct and Peter Jackson once again attached to the project, I am genuinely looking forward to seeing The Hobbit adapted for the big screen.
Tags: Hobbit Movie Adaptation, The Hobbit
You might also like
 |
 |
|
 |
I agree with you that LOTR were fantastic adaptations for the medium, but why didn’t King Kong work out?
You know, I watched Peter Jackson’s King Kong awhile back and wasn’t terribly impressed.
I’ve never seen the original, but I think if I did, I’d probably come to the conclusion that I like the newer one better. Sacrilege, I know, but I know what I like, and I’m pretty sure I’d prefer the Peter Jackson version which, I’m guessing, has snazzier effects, crazier action, and more importantly, the sort of pacing I’m accustomed to being a modern film enthusiast.
What do you think about Del Toro coming on board to possibly direct?