The Hobbit is not Lord of the Rings.
That is important to keep in mind when making a Hobbit movie in the wake of cinematic success like Jackson's LotR. It's so important, I think I'll say it again...in bold!
The Hobbit is not Lord of the Rings.
To that end I am glad that Jackson is involved, but not directing it. This is a different story, different characters and a completley different feel.
But for Del Toro, I'm not sure where he'll go with this. I submit two of his films for thought, Hellboy and Pan's Labrinth. Both show that he can tackle action and monsters. But Hellboy showes he can use humor and make a sort of offbeat funny adventure/action. Labrinth shows his deeper themes and darker side. What I want to know is what he will bring to Hobbit?
Will he make it thematically in sync with LotR? Or employ much more of the lighthearted approch that makes this much more of a children's book?
Just a for instance, to get the ball rolling, the spiders?
I find Bilbo singing "Attercop Attercop" to a mini-version of Shelob hard to swallow. How will he do it?

Great point--especially the illustration about the spiders.

The Hobbit is not the same story as Lord of the Rings, but it IS the same world. That part is locked in by keeping Bilbo, Gandalf, Gollum, and Elrond in both books. But the tone of each is vastly different.

I had thought of that in regard to the dragons. We don't really know much about what happens in the Silmarillion because it is written in that distant, elevated style. We don't know exactly how different characters felt, moment by moment, the way we know how Bilbo experiences things. So Glaurung seems really noble and black and wicked and closer to Mordor as opposed to Smaug, who lives in the suburbs of evil. Glaurung would be too evil and wise to be outsmarted by a hobbit. Or maybe not. In Lord of the Rings we do not laugh at evil characters because we are too tired and worried about what will happen. The only events I can think of are when Eowyn says, "I am not a man" to the witch king--that gives him a shock--and when the orcs kill each other fighting over Frodo's dwarf mail after Shelob bites him. Otherwise we don't laugh at evil characters.

Maybe that will be a theme. If I were a director, sitting with my notes, trying to lay out the vision conceptually, one theme to explore would be the idea of sophistication vs. naivete--or the great city vs. the suburbs or the country. Because SO MUCH of the Hobbit has to do with Bilbo's lack of experience and how everything is wild and new to him. But I don't think you can depict that very easily in a film. I mean, you could have it be exactly the same world--except maybe the Dark Lord has been sleeping in the world of the Hobbit, and we know that more evil things are at work more actively in the LOTR--but you could have it be basically the same world, but show it through the eyes of somebody who has no experience. That would give you an excuse to make it more cartoonish or homespun or stylised like a storybook. But I don't know if the audience could be made to understand that this is what is going on. So if I were a director, I would consider that option but lament the difficulty in pulling it off. Another way of getting around the differences in tone is to exploit the idea of darker evil polluting certain areas more. Gondor is closer to Mordor. Those people are used to seeing and dealing with more dangers, so more heroes are made because they've got those constant threats. Eagles are noble and see a lot of the world, so they belong to the part of the world that is more dangerous and intense. We encounter them, because they help out--like Gandalf needs to call in the reserves to help out--but they belong to the more dangerous, noble world. The Shire is a protected place. Hobbits do not encounter many dangers at all, so they don't practice the arts of fighting and defending and such. They know that the Old Forest is creepy and dangerous, but most people just stay away from it.

I have to go for now, but I was also thinking about Beorn and Tom Bombadill. Since they didn't use Tom in the LOTR movies, he's fair game to be used in the Hobbit movie #2 maybe. It COULD be that there's a whole legion of people who are protecting the outer areas and keeping them relatively safe. We have the Rangers, and elves are always patrolling and protecting. Tom Bombadil seems to be cozy and happy and safe, and he probably is, but he also kind of chews out Old Man Willow and makes him cough up the hobbit he has grabbed, so we know that he has a lot of power. He has a lot of knowledge of older times.

Anyway, it could be the same world, but the evil creatures could be a bit less evil because of the decreased activity of Sauron and the vigilance of those who protect against evil encroachment. All of that--the story of those who protect--could make up the matter of the second Hobbit movie.

I think it would be best (or at least, closest to the book) if it were more of a faerie tale. LOTR is classified to the public as Action/Adventure. The Hobbit would be more of a Faerie/Adventure. Of course, a faerie tale is usually an adventure story.
I think I agree with you, Show, about PJ. It's good to have a different style for the Hobbit. Rayner Unwin, in his exclusive review of The Hobbit, says, "[The Hobbit] should appeal to all children between the ages of 5 and 9." (http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/press/ima ... review.jpg) This is something to consider. Between 5 and 9 seems quite young for the book in today's age, but back then (1936) I suppose it was acceptable. So, to adapt it to this age, we could say 8 to 12? I don't know. But still, it almost seems to me that The Hobbit should be PG. Of course, there are frightening images and intense action, so I suppose PG-13 would be fitting. But I think the feel of the story should be of a children's story. It should be innocent and, well, small. But the fact that it's small makes it big. There's something Tolkienish .

Some of Del Toro's work reminds me a bit of Terry Gilliam at his best. So that leads me to consider the approach Gilliam sometimes takes. Take Time Bandits for example. It is the closest in style, tone, and content to what one would expect from a Hobbit film. A gang of "rogue" dwarves out to commit burglaries across time--an innocent lad suffering the oppressive boredom of suburbia and longing to escape--the wisdom and kindness of Agamemnon--and the evil sneering Demon who can't seem to get a break. Time Bandits seems to contain the necessary elements to keep the film edgy and "realistic" enough for adults, the innocence and wonder of a child (hobbit) at the magical aspects of the world, and a sense of humour to bind these elements together.

My hope is that Jackson and Del Toro will take a similar approach to the Hobbit, thus insuring the integrity of the world of LOTR in a story suitable for youngsters. It occurs to me in retrospect, that Time Bandits was likely modelled on the Hobbit (the book), so it seems fitting that the Hobbit (the movie) should be modelled on Time Bandits.

Gandalfs Beard

Hi Guys,
i'm new to this sort of thing, but here we go!
I was jus wondering with everyones thoughts on the look of The hobbit movie. And in particular wot u think the people in Laketown should be like or the place should look like? Its based on a Lake right, so themes of lakes, river folk, saxon era?
Just tryin to get some feedback, for a project i'm doing, there doesnt seem to be a lot of images i have found yet, anyone know of a good website?
Woulkd much appreciate your thoughts and help,

I wondered if the dwarves would be German-ish--because of their love of making things. Maybe too much like Snow White or Pinnochio movies, though. Lederhosen and decorative beer steins and such.

And yes, the Laketown folk are "men" but it's a culture that hasn't been determined yet. I picture them being like the Rohirrim, but of course they won't because there won't be the horse element.

If Gimli is any indication, it seems that the Dwarves are "Scottish" . But we'll see how much free reign Del Toro will have. I have no doubt that he was picked for his own stunning sense of vision, but Jackson will want to maintain aesthetic consistency. I suspect that Del Toro will have a fair bit of freedom to deal with anything that hasn't already been established.

Gandalfs Beard

I think Tolkien might have drawn this, but I'm not sure: http://www.tsome.com/ScenesFromME/Laket ... _color.jpg

Beyond just general pictures of laketown, no pictures that I have seen go into much detail...it'll be cool to see what they do.

Ya he drew that. I love that pic it was on an original illustrations calander I had 3 years ago but i kept all the pictures and that one in particular is up in my cubicle at work! but i think that DT will remain true to what PJ had in LOTR with gimli and the other dwarves at the council of Elrond scene in FOTR. I hope so anyways Gimli always came across to me as a mixture of scottish and german.

We know from the History of Middle Earth (that's the title for the series of books showing all of Tolkien's rough drafts as he wrote the LOTR, yes?)--we know from this that Tolkien wrote The Hobbit after he had started what would become The Silmarillion but before he wrote the LOTR, and that he really had little notion what the LOTR would become when he wrote The Hobbit. He has many of the same characters present in both works, and so, since LOTR grew to become a much more serious world, he had to backpedal a bit and deal with the inconsistencies later.

For example, in The Hobbit, the Wood-elves are not very sympathetic characters. We could explain this by saying that no elves would seem very sympathetic to dwarves, and since we are traveling with dwarves, that's the kind of treatment we'll get--we'll see the most hostile side of the elves. The book The Battle for Middle-Earth points out that the Wood-elves of Mirkwood in The Hobbit are "somewhat indolent and greedy. They love gold and jewels but have not bothered to learn about the artistry of working them into useful objects; in this regard they come off poorly next to the Dwarves." (p. 30) In a footnote on the same page he says that the king of the Wood-elves "is not himself a Wood-elf, but a much loftier Grey-elf, one of the Sindar. His ill-considered imprisonment of Thorin and the other Dwarves makes a rather negative impression on the reader (a fact that will require a bit of rehabilitative dialogue at the Council of Elrond) but in fact the Elvenking's reliability as an ally against the power of Mordor was considerable. His success in preventing Sauron from encroaching upon the Wood-elves in Mirkwood is not as clear in The Hobbit as it will become later. In particular, we will learn that Thranduil is the father of Legolas."

I really do think that the second Hobbit movie will deal with filling in background issues that will bridge the inconsistencies between The Hobbit and the LOTR. So LOTS of what is talked about at the Council of Elrond will be there as will be the actions of anyone who has been quietly at work keeping the evil forces at bay. So maybe we will finally get Tom Bombadill as well as more about the Rangers and the elves in Stealthy Special Forces mode.