March 31, 2004

Hobbit Interpretation
David

How about a new discussion topic...

I have a question that I would like to hear other people's opinions on. If and when Peter Jackson films "The Hobbit," do you think he should film it as a strict rendering of the book as written by Tolkien, or do you think he should film it as a prequel to "Lord of the Rings," particularly the movie version of "Lord of the Rings"?

I know we have a lot of "Tolkien Purists" out there who obviously will argue strenuously that the book should be filmed word for word from the book; that the filmmakers shouldn't even bother making a screenplay--they should just carry the book around; and if any scenes or words do not come from the book, then they should never be filmed. However, I hope to see some good discussion on this question as whichever way Jackson views this project will have a great effect on casting, screenplay, directing, etc.

To film the book "as is" the movie will really be a mostly light-hearted youth-oriented movie with some scary stuff and a few hints at a larger history. (Dare I say, "Harry Potter"-esque??) The Ring is a strange artifact, but is given little notice other than as a stealth device. Gandalf makes vague references to a "Necromancer" being driven away by the "White Council." Just as the Battle of Five Armies begins, Bilbo is knocked out and the audience misses most of the action. Actors who are more capable and believable in comical roles would be cast as Bilbo and the dwarves (i.e. Bilbo would be portrayed more like Pippin). Overall, though, the movie follows a rather comical Hobbit on a rather lighthearted "walk through the woods."

To film a prequel to the movies "Lord of the Rings," this movie would have a much more mature tone. The relationship between Gandalf and the White Council and their struggles with Sauron would be shown more clearly. There would be a greater focus on the Ring. We would see the beginnigs of some effect on Bilbo other than just invisibility. Perhaps we would actually have scenes of Sauron rising power in Dol Guldor causing the Ring to want to leave Gollum. Plus scenes of the White Council meeting and expelling Sauron from Mirkwood. Heck, we could even throw in the "Unfinished Tales" scene where Gandalf meets Thorin in Bree and decides that he should help defeat Smaug as a prelude to the coming war to end the age (maybe even a glimpse of Gandalf's prediction of how the war might have turned out with Smaug in play--"Fire in Rivendell!"). Bilbo and Balin have talks about Balin's desire to re-inhabit Moria and Moria's history. Maybe Bilbo meets a young Aragorn at Rivendell. The entire battle of the Five Armies is shown. Actors capable of more serious drama are cast (Bilbo more as Frodo, struggling with his decisions, the Ring, and the quest). Overall, the movie takes on a serious tone and really sets up the history of the Ring and Sauron and the White Council as a prelude to "Lord of the Rings" and gives a much clearer idea of the importance of the Quest in Gandalf's larger struggle against Sauron.

So...which "The Hobbit" movie do you hope to see?

PS... and no matter which interpretation you take, how great would it be to have a bit of "The Fall of Gondolin" retold by Elrond when discussing Sting and Glamdring! And, for the true movie fans, we know that Elrond/Arwen's sword in the movie was intended to be the "daughter" of Glamdring...well at least the sword of the daughter of Glamdring's original owner, Turgon (Elrond's Great-Grandfather). So, there could be an interesting angle there...maybe better suited for an "Extended Hobbit" DVD