Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Expectations for the second Hobbit movie

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Hobbit (Movie) > Expectations for the second Hobbit movie   << [1] [2]
I find this all very hard to believe, Uncle Wisey - Peter Jackson looks such a nice man. Surely he would not walk all over the Professor's grave like that (again)! :o
[quote="Gandalfs Beard":b3v8ih1z]I really don't see why they couldn't show the Necromancer Eldo. If the Witch King could essentially turn out to be a suit of Armour inhabited by a Shade, then I don't see an issue with presenting the Necromancer/Sauron in the same manner.[/quote:b3v8ih1z]

Perhaps, but that begs the question of why Sauron turned into a floating eyeball in time for [i:b3v8ih1z]The Lord of the Rings[/i:b3v8ih1z]. It raises continuity questions. I also think that showing the main villain is not always the best way to preserve a sense of menace, so I hope they leave completely or mostly offscreen.
Or, Eldo, bring the witch king back. Maybe when Gandalf's in Dol Guldur* he has his first(?) encounter with the witch king, and Gandalf figures out Sauron's back or something like that. It would flow with the trilogy if they did that!

* I'm a horrible speller :oops: I'm never sure if i'm spelling things right...
If I remember right Sauron lost his ability to have a physical form after the Last Alliance. So he has to be in spirit form when he's in Dol Guldur- as they portrayed this state as a giant eyeball in the LotR they will have to do the same here- perhaps in the top chamber of the tower but hidden from view.
I still think the whole idea is a bad one- the WC driving out the Necromancer is better left to the imagination- on screen it will either fall short of expectation or more likely look ridiculous.
I have this mental picture of a (slightly sad) Eye looking out a narrow window in a dark castle, Mr Tyrant. I'm thinking now a Rapunzel angle - very abstract - a very modern take, think you? We must bring The Hobbit into 21st Century - it's such an old tale now. Modernize, I say - and no half measures! I know Rapunzel is old too, but in a LotR context would give everything a Tolkien Liberal twist. :ugeek:
[quote="Tinuviel":1iyeoucf]Or, Eldo, bring the witch king back.[/quote:1iyeoucf] That could work, since they need an onscreen villain in addition to the main behind-the-scenes one. (If they must include this sequence they might as well do it right.) The Witch-king or another Nazgul fits the bill, though they could also have take the opportunity to show a human villain for the first time, as there would have been Easterlings in Sauron's service. [quote:1iyeoucf]* I'm a horrible speller :oops: I'm never sure if i'm spelling things right...[/quote:1iyeoucf] You spelled it right. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />
[quote="Eldorion":29xw30b1][quote="Gandalfs Beard":29xw30b1]I really don't see why they couldn't show the Necromancer Eldo. If the Witch King could essentially turn out to be a suit of Armour inhabited by a Shade, then I don't see an issue with presenting the Necromancer/Sauron in the same manner.[/quote:29xw30b1] Perhaps, but that begs the question of why Sauron turned into a floating eyeball in time for [i:29xw30b1]The Lord of the Rings[/i:29xw30b1]. It raises continuity questions. I also think that showing the main villain is not always the best way to preserve a sense of menace, so I hope they leave completely or mostly offscreen.[/quote:29xw30b1] Not really, The White Council having rumbled his disguise, Sauron would have just taken his gloves off so to speak. [b:29xw30b1]GB[/b:29xw30b1]
Fair enough, GB, though I think it'd be simpler if they hadn't introduced the whole 'he can not yet take physical form' idea. :roll: That said, I still hope they leave him offscreen or at most have one or two menacing shots, mostly in shadow. 8-)
I reckon the Witch-King will be the main protagonist for the WC. Is that not who they think the Necromancer is before Gandalf finds out otherwise? The hard part will be showing Saruman's early treachery- they can't over play it and in the LotR films they always gave him someone, an orc or Wormtongue to tell his evil schemes to for the audiences benefit, they don't have that for this one.
Saruman just needs to be shown as Arrogant and shifty. Then he can be shown to go off secretly to his tower to consult a Palantir (in which he sees The Necromancer/Sauron as the "Eye"Wink Smilie. That should be enough to give the audience a clue, without making it look like the rest of the White Council should have known about his treachery from the start. [b:r9mbu8gc]GB[/b:r9mbu8gc]
I personally would've loved to see more of the nice Saruman. Love the scene where he comes out of Orthanc, greeting Gandalf. He looks like such a nice guy when he says "old friend" :lol: I guess it'll never happen though, and of course it wouldn't fit with the story either :P
I don't think Saruman is totally corrupt at this stage- I think he's still in the process of being deceived. I suspect he has convinced himself, as he later tries to convince Gandalf, that what he is doing is in the long term for the best. That deceiving the Council is just an unpleasant thing he has to do along the way. Its this sort of insidious, corruption of the heart that seems to be what Tolkien is getting at with the whole LotR's story. I'll be disappointed, but not surprised, if PJ and coven reduce this to a blatant he's a bad guy thing-subtlety of characterization was not a strong point in their LotR films.
Hmm, I was under the impression that he'd already turned bad guy by this time. But then again, I don't really know much about the story of ME outside the LotR and the Hobbit. I have read a passage in the Silmarillion about this subject though, and as I said, I thought he'd already turned to mischiefs and evil :lol: But I only remember it vaguely, so you're probably right.
Saruman went through a gradual slide, but for a long time (perhaps even the whole time) he felt like he was doing the right thing. I think GB struck upon an important point here: Saruman can't be portrayed as too sinister, since he was able to deceive the Council. One possible way to depict this is for him to be very nice-seeming (if rather arrogant) to the Council but have a scene of him in private where he's more sinister.
Sure hope they'll portray him like that <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' /> And from what you guys have said, it would make more sense too. Edit: finished the sentence :P
Hey everyone, I'm new, it's great to see so many Tolkien enthusiasts (dare I say evangelists). [Spam finished] Expectations of the films??? Well I think the Witch-King idea is terrific as the antagonist (in a prospective Dol Guldur sub-plot). It would be especially intersting if the White Council is shown or Gandalf/Saruman talking over the dark power in Mirkwood and how they believe it's the witch-king, that is until Gandalf is captured and the witch-king could reveal the real power - Sauron (cue forboding music). How could this be revealed to Gandalf and establish Sauron as a real threat without a confusing carporial appearance? - The witch-king could show Gandalf a Palintir with the Great Eye appearing, maybe a couple if words from Sauron perhaps? I think this establishes two things: - Lotr showed the audience the palintir was dangerous and corrupting (eg. Sauron, Saruman, Denethor, Merry, Aragorn, etc.) therefore Sauron's presence captured in the palintir visage is ominous and adds credibility to his perpetual control of the dark forces, (without making Sauron seem like a cheesy suit of armour). - A palintir scene will add weight to Gandalf's berating of its use when Saruman reveals one to him in FotR, thus solidifying Saruman's corruption. OR, Somehow (without a Great Eye) PJ can encapsulate Sauron's evil in the Dol Guldur castle like a dark aura (swirling clouds, a beam of red light perhaps similar to Minas Morgul in RotK). Perhaps it can be said somewhere in the film (outside Tolkien canon, which is not hard for a filmic interpretation) that Sauron's evil/power was so great he cannot return to physical form and therefore grounded himself in these dark super-structures (Dol Guldur, Barad-Dur) that were capable of maintaing and manifesting that life-force. This would explain the need for the Mouth of Sauron, one who could interpret the word of Sauron from the palintir and ensure His orders were met. [end segue] And I certainly agree that the White Council get a special place in the film <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> Just a thought... Does anybody else have reservations about the obvious clash the Bilbo/Gollum ring scene will have in the Hobbit compared to the one in LotR? Seeing as how Ian Holm is not reprising the role of Bilbo. I'm extremely hesitant, this is why flash-backs and prequels don't work well together! Just my ramblings for now <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />
Hi there, and welcome <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' /> I prefer your second idea, Dol Guldur should be an evil place, and some visual effects that make us as the audience understand that Sauron lives there would be great. Regarding the flash back, I hope they don't do the scene the same way they did it in the trilogy, where Gollum screams just about the same moment as Bilbo finds the ring. This will not make much sense if they plan on including the whole "riddles in the dark" sequence, which of course they have to do (even I, the liberalist, would be pissed if they didn't).
I think Riddles in the Dark is too iconic a scene for even PJ and the Coven to leave out. Although I fully expect them to find a way of adding extra 'drama' to it somehow in their misguided way. As for the flashback. Well we all know in a few years time dvd and blueray will be superseeded by some ultra-hd, 3d version. And that when it does LotR will be released in the shiny new format. The sensible thing to do therefore would be (assuming TH has been made by then!) to insert scenes from TH film into the prologue of FotR. Solving any problems of how Bilbo looks and how the scenes play out. Oh and welcome to the forum Gorthaur. <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
Weclome, Gorthaur! <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> Odo and Petty might be evangelists, but we're all enthusiastic. :mrgreen: Your ideas are very interesting; I hope you don't mind me taking the opportunity to give some rambling comments of my own even though I don't wholly agree. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' /> [quote="Gorthaur":96y7yahg]until Gandalf is captured and the witch-king could reveal the real power - Sauron (cue forboding music).[/quote:96y7yahg] When was Gandalf captured? Or is this an idea for a scene that's not based on Tolkien's writing? [quote:96y7yahg]How could this be revealed to Gandalf and establish Sauron as a real threat without a confusing carporial appearance?[/quote:96y7yahg] Even if the White Council is included (and it really has almost nothing to do with the book [i:96y7yahg]Hobbit[/i:96y7yahg]), the Wise had already figured out that Sauron was (cf. the Tale of Years entry for T.A. 2850). I don't see why this needs to be changed for the films; it actually plays a role in the Council's decision to drive the Necromancer from Mirkwood. [quote:96y7yahg]- Lotr showed the audience the palintir was dangerous and corrupting (eg. Sauron, Saruman, Denethor, Merry, Aragorn, etc.) therefore Sauron's presence captured in the palintir visage is ominous and adds credibility to his perpetual control of the dark forces, (without making Sauron seem like a cheesy suit of armour).[/quote:96y7yahg] The Palantir isn't actually supposed to be dangerous and corrupting in and of itself. It's a tool that is (mis)used by Sauron, but for those that have the strength and right to use them (Denethor and Aragorn) it's also just a tool to be used. (It's interesting to note that while Denethor was led to despair he wasn't corrupted by Sauron via the Palantir, largely because Denethor's right to use a Palantir was greater than Sauron's, giving him more strength in their struggles.) Also, I really hope that they don't show Sauron as controlling every evil being in Middle-earth. The secondary world is too complex for that: there are plenty of malevolent beings that have little to no relation with demons such as Sauron. This was deliberate by Tolkien and I think it adds a lot to the world that it's not just Sauron vs. everyone else. [quote:96y7yahg]- A palintir scene will add weight to Gandalf's berating of its use when Saruman reveals one to him in FotR, thus solidifying Saruman's corruption.[/quote:96y7yahg] I'm afraid that a Palantir scene like the one you suggest would, coupled with the Palantir scene, make it odd that Gandalf didn't [i:96y7yahg]immediately[/i:96y7yahg] realize Saruman was corrupted. As it is right now Gandalf is worried because he doesn't known who is watching, but if he knew Sauron had a Palantir he would have to be very thick not to realize Saruman was in communication with Sauron. [quote:96y7yahg]Does anybody else have reservations about the obvious clash the Bilbo/Gollum ring scene will have in the Hobbit compared to the one in LotR? Seeing as how Ian Holm is not reprising the role of Bilbo.[/quote:96y7yahg] Not particularly. Christopher Nolan's Batman films ([i:96y7yahg]Batman Begins[/i:96y7yahg] and [i:96y7yahg]The Dark Knight[/i:96y7yahg]) got by fine despite changing actresses for one of the main roles (Rachel Dawes) between the two films. It's a bit jarring but not a huge issue. That sort of thing just happens sometimes with movies. I hope I don't seem really negative by disagreeing, but as a purist I don't see the need for lots of additions and changes to the story in the books. I'm sure that if you're not already familiar with purist debates this forum will give you a crash course. :lol: We manage to stay pretty friendly though, thankfully. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />
[quote="pettytyrant101":1nqobo19]The sensible thing to do therefore would be (assuming TH has been made by then!) to insert scenes from TH film into the prologue of FotR. Solving any problems of how Bilbo looks and how the scenes play out.[/quote:1nqobo19] Please, can we not encourage directors other than George Lucas to release digitally-edited 'improved' versions of their films? <img src='/images/smileys/sad.gif' border='0' alt='Sad Smilie' />
I don't know why you guys are even discussing this! Mr Tyrant and I have decided to not let the Movie go ahead. We, of course, plan to make it ourselves in due course - once we save up the money, that is. <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
[quote="Gorthaur":3tc14wb7]Hey everyone, I'm new, it's great to see so many Tolkien enthusiasts (dare I say evangelists). [Spam finished] Expectations of the films??? Well I think the Witch-King idea is terrific as the antagonist (in a prospective Dol Guldur sub-plot). It would be especially intersting if the White Council is shown or Gandalf/Saruman talking over the dark power in Mirkwood and how they believe it's the witch-king, that is until Gandalf is captured and the witch-king could reveal the real power - Sauron (cue forboding music). How could this be revealed to Gandalf and establish Sauron as a real threat without a confusing carporial appearance? - The witch-king could show Gandalf a Palintir with the Great Eye appearing, maybe a couple if words from Sauron perhaps? I think this establishes two things: - Lotr showed the audience the palintir was dangerous and corrupting (eg. Sauron, Saruman, Denethor, Merry, Aragorn, etc.) therefore Sauron's presence captured in the palintir visage is ominous and adds credibility to his perpetual control of the dark forces, (without making Sauron seem like a cheesy suit of armour). - A palintir scene will add weight to Gandalf's berating of its use when Saruman reveals one to him in FotR, thus solidifying Saruman's corruption. OR, Somehow (without a Great Eye) PJ can encapsulate Sauron's evil in the Dol Guldur castle like a dark aura (swirling clouds, a beam of red light perhaps similar to Minas Morgul in RotK). Perhaps it can be said somewhere in the film (outside Tolkien canon, which is not hard for a filmic interpretation) that Sauron's evil/power was so great he cannot return to physical form and therefore grounded himself in these dark super-structures (Dol Guldur, Barad-Dur) that were capable of maintaing and manifesting that life-force. This would explain the need for the Mouth of Sauron, one who could interpret the word of Sauron from the palintir and ensure His orders were met. [end segue] And I certainly agree that the White Council get a special place in the film <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> Just a thought... Does anybody else have reservations about the obvious clash the Bilbo/Gollum ring scene will have in the Hobbit compared to the one in LotR? Seeing as how Ian Holm is not reprising the role of Bilbo. I'm extremely hesitant, this is why flash-backs and prequels don't work well together! Just my ramblings for now <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />[/quote:3tc14wb7] WOOHOO! Another Tolkien "Liberal" White Council fan on the forum! :mrgreen: 8-) *dances with joy* [b:3tc14wb7]GB[/b:3tc14wb7]
  << [1] [2]