Greetings everyone!

I've red that they are thinking about making 2 movies based on the book. This is great news indeed! I always had the impression that the Hobbit, compared to Lord of the Rings, was a story for kids (awesome still, yet with a lot less dark main theme or central idea). Maybe because I was a kid when I first red it or maybe it was indeed Tolkien's intension to be so, it doesn't really matter.
What's important however is that Tolkien wrote it and that fact alone can make it extremely challenging for anyone to attempt filming a movie that is an adoptation of the book.
Yet I think that since Jackson & co managed to create a movie trilogy for the LotR, one can rest assured that a Hobbit movie (in 2 parts) is coming for us and that it's gonna be really good.
I'm curious though of what actually the 2 movies will be about.
a) 1st movie the Hobbit (whole) and 2nd movie a "bridge" to LotR?
b) 1st movie 1st half of the Hobbit and 2nd movie 2nd half?
I definetely wish it's the latter.
What do you guys think?

Hi Bofur! It's pretty clear that the bridge movie as it was originally conceived (a separate story from The Hobbit) is not going to be happening. In fact I think that's been the case for about a year now. Instead the two films will both cover The Hobbit, plus the storyline of the White Council.

Also, The Hobbit is most certainly a children's book, though the filmmakers want to make it more like LOTR (more mature and darker, I would imagine) in that respect.

Thank you Eldorion! This forum is awesome btw.
I agree 100%. It is a children's book. A great many details that are found both in the Hobbit and the LotR highlight this. Gandalf appears less wise, Thorin is presented as noble yet flawed Dwarf lord and the 12 Dwarves that accompany him are depicted as a comical bunch of unarmed bodyguards (at least for the better part of their journey). Noble Balin who leads the tragic -and as it proved short lived- expedition for the retaking and re-colonization of Khazad Dum, appears as a mere second-in-command of the company; Some of the elves of Rivendel appear to be children and that is one of the few hints that the reader gets of their existance during the third age.
And so on.
The fact that they are even remotely thinking about including the background story of the White Council's assault at Dol Guldur in the films proves the intent of focusing in the darker and more mature-audience-friendly side of the story.
I really hope they don't mess it up. Especially when it comes to Saruman's double -or should I say triple-play.

Define 'children's book', please. .

I would rather not write a lecture on how The Hobbit is not a 'children's book' when I have the wrong definition.

... Thanks?

Well The Hobbit was written for children (Tolkien's children, specifically) and published with the children's market in mind. It has a lighter tone and feel (in some places) than some of the other Middle-earth writings, and it only mentions the deeper themes present in Tolkien. I don't really see why it shouldn't be considered a children's book.

That's not to say, however, that it can't be read and enjoyed by adults too. I think there are other children's books as well that have appealed to adults and children alike - including The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe and the first few Harry Potter books.

Your point is valid Eldorion, but even Tolkien disliked the appellation "children's" book. Yes he wrote a book for kids, but he didn't think a book should be written as if it were a "kids" book. He wrote the Hobbit with this principle in mind. So I always try to remember to put "children's" or "kid's" in quotes when referring to the Hobbit (or Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter too for that matter). I think referring to the Hobbit as a "children's" book without quotes is akin to calling LotR a Trilogy .

GB

I've never heard that Tolkien was opposed to calling The Hobbit a children's book, do you recall where you read it? And even though it is not as childish as many other books aimed at children - it's certainly no picture book! - it is still distinctly more childish than The Lord of the Rings (not to say that that is a bad thing, though I recognize that the word "childish" may carry connotations like that for some people).

I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't count as a children's book, unlike LOTR as a trilogy which is simply factually incorrect (as you probably recall that's a pet peeve of mine ).

It am not a 100% certain, but it may have been mentioned in Carpenter's biography, which I re-read last year. But I have read it in more than one place, possibly in a Lewis bio, or some articles.

I think there may also have been some discussion about how Tolkien felt about "children's" "fairy books" in the biographical notes accompanying Roverandom (which is an adorable book that more definitively fits the term "children's book"). But apparently, if I recall the notes correctly, Tolkien felt a little ashamed of writing "down" to his kids, and resolved not to do that in The Hobbit.

I'm positive that there is also some discussion of how he felt about describing "fairy stories" as "children's books" in his excellent essay On Fairy Stories. So I am fairly certain that he would have bristled at The Hobbit being called a "children's book". If you can't find a copy of On Fairy Stories, PM Beren, he might be able to help you out.

GB

Gah, I was on vacation so I couldn't respond so quickly to you, Eldorion, but yes, GB covered it rather well, which is oddly exactly what I was thinking .

So... Thanks!

First, my apologies for taking so long to respond.

Second, unfortunately I don't have Roverandom and I couldn't find a reference to the tone of The Hobbit (as opposed to that of LOTR) in the index of Carpenter's biography. I did, however, find numerous references to it in the index of The Letters. For instance, in Letter 215 Tolkien states:



Various forms of this appear in a number of other letters, and in most of them Tolkien expresses his regret with the extent to which he aimed The Hobbit at children (or at least, that he did so in the normal way of the time). However, regardless of his later regrets, it's fairly certain that The Hobbit is in fact a book for children, whereas Tolkien's other writings are not. However, regardless of the label (or lack thereof) "children's book", his writings can still be read and enjoyed by people of many different ages.