Sir Ian McKellen has confirmed the production window that producer Peter Jackson and director Guillermo del Toro have been striving to maintain in regards to The Hobbit and its sequel.The actor who's set to reprise his role as Gandalf has confirmed via his official website that production on the J.R.R. Tolkien novel will begin in June and will be shot shot simultaneously.
THE HOBBIT's, two films, start shooting in New Zealand in June. Filming will take over a year. Casting in Los Angeles, New York City and London has started. The script too proceeds. The first draft is crammed with old and new friends, again on a quest in Middle Earth.
Check out regular updates from the actor here.
While we still have no official announcement on who will be playing Bilbo Baggins, the current confirmed cast stands at Andy Serkis, Ian McKellen and Hugo Weaving. Other stars from the original Lord of the Rings trilogy are expected to return as well and Del Toro has said he plans to bring in his Hellboy stars Doug Jones and Ron Perlman. The script is being written by Jackson, Del Toro, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens.
Calibur, you are late to the party my friend. They have been planning the two movies since they announced it. They are going to include things from the appendix to fill up two movies. It's a safe bet you won't see Smaug until the 2nd movie.
Sir Ian confirmed started date for spring time originally so I'll hold off until Del Toro starts shooting. Still sounds like the studio is screwing with them otherwise I think they would have started shooting by now.
They are doing 2 films because they understand that it is better to do the story justice by focusing on the story rather than cramming it into one film built on special effects, thus pushing out aspects of story development.
So when do we get the first 2011 or 2012?
I've said it before, I love the LOTR trilogy but as time goes by I'm becoming more cautious as to my expectations for the Hobbit. Can it live up to the standards of LOTR or even surpass it. For some reason, maybe unfounded, I have a bad feeling.
I think they should cast Ian Holm to play Bilbo Baggins again. With this new digital masking technique everybody is using -- in such films as X-Men 3 and the upcoming Tron Legacy -- to make actors look younger, I'm sure they could do a great job of it. Just for the sake of continuity it's the best thing. With all of the special effects these guys can and have pulled off, It would be just plain lazy of Jackson and Del Toro to ignore this technique.
You would probably be wise to do that wise...he he
Seriously though, just from a novel stand point the LOTR was a much bigger and epic story than the Hobbit was so it would probably be a safe bet to say the Hobbit won't be better. It will still be cool to visit old friends once again and see what Jacksons special effects crew can do with Smaug.
Ian Holm is 78 years old. While they could no doubt shave several decades off him in digital rendering, can the actor himself commit to physical demands of the picture? It's been awhile since I've read the Hobbit, but Bilbo isn't just sitting around the whole time as I recall.
Wiseguy, I'm not expecting The Hobbit movies to surpass LOTR...LOTR is simply more epic and so much larger than The Hobbit...but The Hobbit is a good yarn and I'm thinking it will be enjoyable...as long Del Toro keeps Jackson's vision...I would hate to have these turn out like Hellboy & the Golden Army...I'm still groaning from that one. I think you'll enjoy it fine also as long as you don't go in looking for LOTR again, because I'm predicting now that it's just not going to happen.
And that's what body doubles are for, WhiteKnight. I'm kind of with wallyrus on Ian Holm as Bilbo. I doubt they will, but they should.
I'm wondering who Doug Jones and Ron Perlman are going to be. I could see Ron Perlman playing Beorn, the guy who could turn into a bear. That would be good casting. Maybe Doug Jones for the Goblin king or chief or what have you they encounter in the Misty Mountains?
I think the real reason it is being broken up into two films, is that the studio would like the profit from two films verses one. I would assume, based on the profit from the trilogy, the risk of a flop is very low for two Hobbit films.
Personally, I think I would rather they just make the Hobbit itself as one long film. I like how the story flowed from the book, I don't know if cutting scenes fromt he appedixes into the regular Hobbit scenes will work. Also what exactly are they going to use as the climax of the first movie?
I'll withhold final judgement till I watch the films of course, but I am weary of what they are doing.
Bilbo was in his fifties in the book, so it's not like he was a young hobbit anyway. I'm thinking they'll probably recast though.
My main question is are they still going to do all the side stuff with the White Council and the Necromancer? Christopher Lee has repeatedly stated that he doesn't feel comfortable flying to New Zealand at his age, and Saruman is the head of the Council, so where does that leave them?
Oh, and the climax of the first movie could be when the dwarves get captured by the wood elves. Simple.
LOGIN
REGISTER
RSS
HOME
why two films? oh well at least its being done