“I haven’t spoken to him directly about it [but] I’ve e-mailed him, and as far as I know the two films that they’re doing, one will be ‘The Hobbit’ and another will take place between the 60 years that happened between ‘The Hobbit’ and ‘The Lord of the Rings,’”
Read the full article for more details he gives. _________________ Facebook Twitter
As long as Frodo doesn't become one of the main characters in the second movie. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I would prefer the Hobbits in general to have a lesser role in the second movie. Let the other peoples of Middle Earth shine a bit.
The second film would be a good time to introduce characters such as Glorindel or Radaghast. IMO
As long as Frodo doesn't become one of the main characters in the second movie. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I would prefer the Hobbits in general to have a lesser role in the second movie. Let the other peoples of Middle Earth shine a bit.
The second film would be a good time to introduce characters such as Glorindel or Radaghast. IMO
^agreed with that
Maybe they could find a small part for Frodo at the end of the 2nd movie when Bilbo adopts him as his heir.
Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 700 Location: Aberdeen, WA
Posted: 01/13/2008, 07:12 Post subject:
In the article he says something about how he would really enjoy playing a small part, as sort of a "revisit" to his memories of working on the trilogy. _________________ Facebook Twitter
Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 57 Location: Mystic, CT, USA
Posted: 01/14/2008, 19:28 Post subject:
its always entertaining to read how people over react to articles such as this...someone on the mtv blog board jumped to conclusions and fumed about elijah wood playing Bilbo...huh???...anyway, i think frodo should be written in towards the end of the second movie...my wife and i were talking about that the other night...how it would be cool if they could wrap up the bridge with the birth or adoption or something to that effect...
Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 700 Location: Aberdeen, WA
Posted: 01/14/2008, 20:56 Post subject:
I think it would be neat if it was a similar transition to the end of Revenge of the Sith, with baby Luke being taken to his aunt and uncle by Obi Wan... except maybe when Frodo is a little older, obviously, and just leaving that as like the last few minutes of the second film. _________________ Facebook Twitter
Posted: 01/16/2008, 03:55 Post subject: I do not think this is right. My thoughts...
Please...Do not screw this up and please do not compare this to star wars. There is so much literary information that Tolkien and his son created that there is no need for Hollywood to create there own story. We do not need to see Frodo born, his story is over with. If you want to tell the story of the fall of Erabor and then follow that with the Hobbit then I think that would be great. Or even film "The Hobbit" first then follow that with another prequel. As I have said in another thread, I would most prefer that they film "Of the Rings of Power" and follow that with the "The Hobbit". But somebody informed me that New line does not have the rights. If anyone has more detail on that please let me know. Are there any avid readers of Tolkien out there who agrees with me? Or do you agree with this bridging the stories together idea? I just cannot come to terms with this.
For anybody who does not know the story of "of the Rings of power". The story begins after the fall of Numenor, it tells the story of when Sauron creates the rings including the one ring, and finally at the final battle where Isildur cuts the ring from the dark lords finger. The movie can end when Isildur dies, and the second can begin in the shire. These are my thoughts, Please respond. _________________ PFD
Joined: 27 Dec 2007 Posts: 19 Location: Kaohsiung, Taiwan
Posted: 01/16/2008, 05:04 Post subject: The Climax and Passing of the Third Age
I agree that the story of Frodo Baggins the Ring Bearer has already had its telling in the three Lord of the Rings films. I think the same thing about Legolas the Elf and Gimi the Dwarf. It would indeed tarnish these fine films and those fine performances if the film-makers go really money-grubbing cynical on us and do one of those awful Star Wars scenes where ghostly, smiling images of Yoda (Frodo), Obi-Wan (Legolas), and Darth-Vader-without-his-helmet (Gimli) appear shimmering in the background at the end of the second new movie to sort of give their implied "heavenly" blessings (and fanboy/girl box-office appeal) to whatever has gone before and whatever might possibly (for new viewers) come after.
I would like to respond to some of the other points raised in this post, but other threads already exist -- like plot-lines, characters, etc. -- for doing this. I hope we can continue this discussion there. _________________ "If it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't" -- Tweedledee
Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 700 Location: Aberdeen, WA
Posted: 01/16/2008, 08:17 Post subject: Re: I do not think this is right. My thoughts...
Woah, woah, woah. I wasn't comparing at all, and leaving a lighthearted transition of Frodo being taken in by Bilbo is not a bad idea at all. I think everyone needs to relax.
Obviously, these movies are going to be way better than the Star Wars prequels, so there's no need to fuss on them being screwed up. _________________ Facebook Twitter
Joined: 27 Dec 2007 Posts: 19 Location: Kaohsiung, Taiwan
Posted: 01/16/2008, 22:27 Post subject:
I do not wish to seem argumentative. I only want to make the point that J. R. R. Tolkien's words and thoughts belong in these films more than artificial cameo appearances by actors whose roles in other movies (which chronologically happen later in time) have no relation to the story that needs telling in The Hobbit and complementary "bridge" (or "merge") movie. I have a light enough heart, I suppose, but I have no desire to see an even-more-adolescent Frodo Baggins who has no function other than to look like the actor Elijah Wood.
As for what Peter Jackson cannot ruin if not supervised by a rigorous studio upper-management, I can only offer the scene in the extended DVD of Return of the King where the Steward Denethor falls on his butt before his living son Faramir while delusionally beholding the ghostly, grinning image of his dead son Sean Bean -- I mean, Boromir. Pure, unnecessary, Star-Wars cheese.
And, of course, we always have to endure Peter Jackson's own vanity cameos that typically detract from every scene in which he jarringly appears as his undisguised self. That sort of thing can quickly and easily have an audience whispering and conversing about fan-magazine gossip (Oh, look! There's Elijah Wood! I wonder when we'll get to see Orlando Bloom?") instead of suspending disbelief in order to invest in an already implausible story.
The film-makers have an important choice to make. They can produce one or two films at the childish level of Tolkien's original novel or they can go darker and more significant, as Tolkien himself did when he re-wrote the revised edition of The Hobbit so as to make it fit better as a subsidiary part of The Lord of the Rings. Great and immortal fantasy -- like that produced by the Brothers Grimm -- helps us confront the ugly and horrific terrors of life in cathartic ways that teach as well as entertain. I sincerely hope that the film-makers understand this and don't go all Harry Potter or Pirates of the Carribean on us. I wish I could say that I had confidence in them not to do this, but after King Kong with Jack Black (among other wastes of good screen time), I just don't know ... _________________ "If it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't" -- Tweedledee
Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 700 Location: Aberdeen, WA
Posted: 01/17/2008, 08:24 Post subject:
So, basically, my idea of just showing a brief cameo of Frodo being taken in by Bilbo would be a more accurate event than giving him a bigger part that is made up. I still don't think that is cheesy. It was written in Tolkien's notes.
As for Sean Bean, aside from the scene you described, I thought he didn't do so bad. That scene is just one of those things... welcome to Hollywood.
But, like I said, these movies are going to be done really well. The film-makers involved know what it would do to create two prequels that don't flow well with the trilogy. It would be like running full speed into some water... you just suddenly slow down to a slow motion movie.
I am just defending my pride. I don't like the Star Wars prequels, I just thought a five second scene of Frodo would be better than giving him a full length part. _________________ Facebook Twitter
Posted: 01/19/2008, 02:15 Post subject: Re: The Climax and Passing of the Third Age
TheMisfortuneTeller wrote:
I agree that the story of Frodo Baggins the Ring Bearer has already had its telling in the three Lord of the Rings films. I think the same thing about Legolas the Elf and Gimi the Dwarf. It would indeed tarnish these fine films and those fine performances if the film-makers go really money-grubbing cynical on us and do one of those awful Star Wars scenes where ghostly, smiling images of Yoda (Frodo), Obi-Wan (Legolas), and Darth-Vader-without-his-helmet (Gimli) appear shimmering in the background at the end of the second new movie to sort of give their implied "heavenly" blessings (and fanboy/girl box-office appeal) to whatever has gone before and whatever might possibly (for new viewers) come after.
I would like to respond to some of the other points raised in this post, but other threads already exist -- like plot-lines, characters, etc. -- for doing this. I hope we can continue this discussion there.
I second this opinion. Let it be a story without old characters from the movies. If it suits the story to let, for example, Aragon (Viggo) to have some scenes, I don't mind. But please do not look for how to make old characters reappear. Story first, then actors, that is what I believe in very much.
I am very sure of the fact that Frodo, Sam and others will distract the viewer from an intriguing story. The world of Middle-Earth consists of so much more than only what we have seen so far in the three movies.
Joined: 20 Dec 2007 Posts: 700 Location: Aberdeen, WA
Posted: 01/19/2008, 06:03 Post subject:
As for a sort of cliffhanger ending, we could take from Tolkien's writings and put this in.
Wikipedia.org wrote:
Frodo, a Hobbit, is introduced in The Fellowship of the Ring as the son of Drogo Baggins and Primula Brandybuck. At the age of twelve, Frodo lost both his parents in a boating accident, and was taken in by his mother's family, the Brandybuck clan. At twenty-one, Frodo was adopted by Bilbo Baggins, whom he thought of as his uncle (though Frodo was actually his first and second cousin once removed). The childless Bilbo chose Frodo as his adoptive heir, and brought him to live with him at Bag End. The two shared the same birthday (September 22). During the next twelve years, Bilbo taught Frodo a bit of Elvish, and they often took long walking trips together.
That would work well as a similar sequence to the part in ROTK where Smeagol has a flashback of him killing Deagol.
It's there, the characters existed in between both stories, and they have snippets in Tolkien's letters. They did stuff like this in the movies already, and unless they change a lot, it should work again.
Still, people keep thinking that thought of having characters, who do live within the timeline, return for minor roles... as in maybe a minute or two of screentime... means they will be given major roles. It would suck to have them create roles for them, sort of like what they did with Haldir and the elves who went to the battle at Helm's Deep, but I think the producers know that. _________________ Facebook Twitter
A die hard of the books, i see no reason to add in characters who aren't there in the text. But then on the other hand i can understand why, from a marketing perspective, the producers may want to have some familiar faces appearing in these two films. Fans who have not read the books will be looking for some form of familiarity to make the Hobbit relevant to them.
And as you said, i see no reason why brief cameos shouldn't be allowed. With Legolas for example, while he wasn't named in the text it's likely that he was at his father's side, and possibly fought at the battle of the five armies. No way will the production team pass up on a chance to have Legolas doing more superhuman killing (though i hope he'd be more grounded this time).
Gandalf could even spot Aragorn for a second in the woods, if they decided to do so. It's not in the book of course, but we do know that the Rangers patrolled the areas around the shire... so a brief cameo could be plausible.
With regard to Elijah Wood though, i feel he may be out of luck. Correct me if i'm wrong, but i fail to see how a man who has aged almost 10 years since playing Frodo could now play a younger version of that character. Frodo may appear, but unless Elijah narrates parts of the story ala Galadriel i doubt he'll be in it.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
