There and Back Again: A Hobbit's Thread

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Saw this when I first logged in. Peter Jackson's posting a video blog of production work on The Hobbit as an ongoing series. Here's the first video (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/video/video.php?v=10150223186041807&oid=141884481557&comments) (it's on Facebook, not sure if it's been hosted elsewhere). A lot of nostalgia, some sneak peaks, and much anticipation. Who knows what else we'll see as the blog progresses.

So, NPF, what are your thoughts on all this?

[Marc v4.0]

About damn time!

[Locke cole]

This should be interesting. The 12 Dwarves are fun characters. I wonder if they'll show the riddle contest in full.

[russianreversal]

Haha doing the whole thing in 48fps (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/12/the-hobbit-48-frames-peter-jackson/). Post is going to love that I bet.

[phil_]

Haha doing the whole thing in 48fps (http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/04/12/the-hobbit-48-frames-peter-jackson/). Post is going to love that I bet.My theater's projectors are from the seventies. Guess we're not getting the Hobbit.

[russianreversal]

My theater's projectors are from the seventies. Guess we're not getting the Hobbit. Yeah it's great and all that they want to promote this, but seriously this just kinda screws over anyone who isn't fortunate enough to live near a properly equipped theatre.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Same qualifier as the Lord of the Rings films: If it's got Bombadil in it it'll be awesome. If it doesn't it will be terrible.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Same qualifier as the Lord of the Rings films: If it's got Bombadil in it it'll be awesome. If it doesn't it will be terrible.

...Bombadil wasn't in the book, why would he be in this?

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Hmm. On the one hand, we lack this:

http://i520.photobucket.com/albums/w328/ArtificalIntelligence/tom-bombadil.jpg

On the other hand, we have this:

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w68/fuentes_016/smaug.jpg

I think we'll be fine.

EDIT: Can't forget this guy either. Point being, there's more than enough awesome to go around.

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/IamtheMetatron/hague_beorn.jpg

[Azisien]

Pretty damn excited. I preferred Hobbit to the whole trilogy.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

...Bombadil wasn't in the book, why would he be in this?

Because he's Tom Fucking Bombadil?
Tom Bombadil willl just show up like halfway throw and be like "This story is shit, this source material is shit, let's just have a party" and all the goblins and all the hobbits will party down and Sauron will provide the strobe lighting with his giant eye beam. Why? Because he's Tom Fucking Bombadil.
And like Gollum will start the riddle game and Tom's riddle will be:
Q:Whose the baddest mofo in all of Middle-Earth? Whose gets the bitches, who rocks the clocks, who rides the dragons?"
A:Tom Fucking Bombadil

Putting Tom into your movie is like putting a Christopher Walken cameo into your movie. You don't know what you're going to get but your movie will be drastically improved.

[Magus]

Don't touch that motherfucker's lilies is all I can say.

Can someone explain the 48 fps thing and why it can't be modified somehow to play on older projectors? Or would it be like watching it in slow motion? I mean they modify that crap to play on a DVD somehow. Seems something could be done.

[Fifthfiend]

Same qualifier as the Lord of the Rings films: If it's got Bombadil in it it'll be awesome. If it doesn't it will be terrible.

FUCK beaten to the Bombadil-trolling

Putting Tom into your movie is like putting a Christopher Walken cameo into your movie. You don't know what you're going to get but your movie will be drastically improved.

Oh god Walken as Bombadil

It's meant to beeeeeeeeee

[Aerozord]

Long as its atleast as entertaining as this (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/411279) I'll be satisfied.

Plus it already fulfills the McBarreled one's criteria.

[mauve]

On the one hand, I'm excited because The Hobbit was my favorite book when I was a kid--hell, pretty sure I could quote the first few pages from memory at one point. I look forward to seeing how they'll handle the multiple giant spider (ctrl+c / ctrl+v Shelob?), the sentient trolls, wargs (or just wolves?) that can talk, and Beorn (Beorn damn well better be in this!!). And Smaug, of course!

On the other hand, I vaguely remember seeing photos of the cast in Entertainment Weekly a few months ago, and noticing the dwarves were all muscular hot guys, which is a little worrying. I'm sure they'll do makeup and stuff to make them look Tolkien-Dwarfy, but... I keep having nightmares of "The Adventures of Bilbo and a Bunch of Mini Aragorns and Legolases (Legoli?) So More Preteen Girls Will Come Buy Tickets To Our Movie." That would make me sad.

[Krylo]

Because he's Tom Fucking Bombadil?
Tom Bombadil willl just show up like halfway throw and be like "This story is shit, this source material is shit, let's just have a party" and all the goblins and all the hobbits will party down and Sauron will provide the strobe lighting with his giant eye beam. Why? Because he's Tom Fucking Bombadil.
And like Gollum will start the riddle game and Tom's riddle will be:
Q:Whose the baddest mofo in all of Middle-Earth? Whose gets the bitches, who rocks the clocks, who rides the dragons?"
A:Tom Fucking Bombadil

Putting Tom into your movie is like putting a Christopher Walken cameo into your movie. You don't know what you're going to get but your movie will be drastically improved.
OTOH;
LotR trilogy: had Bombadil. Was shit.
The Hobbit: didn't have Bombadil. Was fantastic.

Now I'm not saying there's some kind of correlation here or anything. I'm just pointing out a fact. And maybe winking, and nudging a bit, and gesturing 'hey look over there'.

[Locke cole]

Tom Bombadil was only in the first book, though.

For some reason, I always imagined him as really young-looking. Peter Pan-esque.

[Krylo]

When I say the trilogy I mean the first book and half of the second book, because that's when I quit because fuck that.

[Archbio]

SMB. We've been over this. If Peter Jackson ever puts Tom Bombadil in a movie, he'll focus on his CGI slit nostrils.

And at one point his prancing and dancing will be in slow motion.

It's inevitable.

[phil_]

Can someone explain the 48 fps thing and why it can't be modified somehow to play on older projectors?The speed at which the motors pull the film through the projector and the rate at which the projector light blinks can't be changed. I had this long post written up about how projectors work, but I think this gets the idea across.

[RickZarber]

That video made me giddy as a schoolgirl. Takes me back to 1999, excitedly scouring the web for those first production photos of LotR...


As for the frame rate: in any case, The Hobbit will only be projected at 48fps digitally, so any theater still without digital projectors is not going to be showing it at that frame rate. (Current digital projectors should be able to project 48fps with a firmware update.) The big question is whether they'll have a 2:1 pull-down 24fps actual-film version for theaters that are not digitally equipped. On the one had, I imagine they'd have to hate money not to, on the other, there's the question of whether the film will still look presentable at a standard frame rate. (It'll look off either way, what with lacking the motion blur that our brains usually connote with cinema, but there could be additional jitter.) So we'll see. (The DVD release won't be as much a problem, as converting 24p to 30i and 48p to 30i only requires a mathematical change in the pull-down. The bigger question is the eventual Blu-ray release. I have no idea if BD players and HD HT sets are equipped for 48p...)

All that said, PJ did mention that the faster frame rate did reduce eye strain when viewing 3D video, so as a guy who gets headaches from 3D, I'm all for that. Maybe by the time the Ultimate Collector's Edition Blu-rays come out in 2014 or whenever, autostereoscopic televisions will have become standard...

Beorn damn well better be in this!!
Beorn is being played by Swedish actor Mikael Persbrandt!

RE: Christopher Walken as Tom Bombadil,
Yes. Man, I want to try to record an impression of that, but it's late, and I don't have all my drivers installed yet. Maybe later...

[Amake]

Legolases (Legoli?) I think it should be Legolice.

As to the 48 frames issue, I think I should be able to take a movie and change its frame rate and playing speed in Windows Movie Maker, not to mention someone who knows anything about video editing. In worst case I imagine you'd have to play the film at its original, high speed while recording it with an entirely different, regular speed video capture program. Shouldn't be any problem with the resources this movie has.

Soo are they still going to call the sequel "The Hobbit 2"?


Beorn is being played by Swedish actor Mikael Persbrandt!
Ooh, interesting choice. Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAN6MvS91sg) is a sample of his regular character Gunwald, a cop whose name means "War unbound". Even for those of you who don't understand a word he says, you will notice he's frequently looking and sounding like he's exploding. I can easily imagine him pulling off a Beorn that makes you worried he might tear your face off if you look at him wrong. Which may or may not a constant worry with Beorn in the book.

[Archbio]

The Hobbit 2: the Herebbit.
The Hobbit 2: 2 Fat 2 Furry-ous (feet)
The Hobbits
Back and Here Again

[RickZarber]

BTW, there are versions of the video blog up on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsT3qgrK6OQ) now, if anyone can't watch the original Facebook posting for whatever reason.Soo are they still going to call the sequel "The Hobbit 2"?Well, there's not really going to be a Hobbit sequel any more. It'll be The Hobbit Parts One and Two, similar to how they're doing the final Harry Potter movie (rather than one Hobbit movie and one Hobbit/LotR "bridge" movie, as originally announced).

No idea if these'll end up being used, but New Line Cinemas did register the titles "The Hobbit: (An/The) Unexpected Journey" and "The Hobbit: There and Back Again" a month or so ago.

[Magus]

Yeah, I figured there were ways to convert it to a different frame-rate. So it might not look as nice as the 48 fps version but they will do something to make it playable in older theaters.

The lack of motion blur is somewhat odd, though. I always disliked how "fake" video looked (paradoxically?) so if this is what's happening...but on the other hand it's going to be clearer and more defined. I dunno how it'll look.

[Aerozord]

people like their fake, its why they digitally add in lens flare despite that being corrected decades ago

[RickZarber]

Peter Jackson has been blogging quite a bit over the holiday. Today he took the time to answer concerns (http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-jackson/your-comments-on-48-fps/10150235459531558) about the 48fps issue:The news about us filming The Hobbit at 48 frames per second generated a lot of comments. Of course, it's impossible to show you what 48 fps actually looks like outside of a movie cinema, but there were several interesting and insightful questions raised.

We will be completing a "normal" 24 frames per second version—in both digital and 35mm film prints. If we are able to get the Hobbit projected at 48 fps in selected cinemas, there will still be normal-looking 24 fps versions available in cinemas everywhere.

Converting a film shot at 48 fps down to 24 fps is not a hugely difficult process, but it requires testing to achieve the best results. Some of this involves digital processes during post-production. We are also shooting the film a slightly different way, which is a question several of you asked. Normally you shoot a movie with a 180-degree shutter angle. Changing the shutter angle affects the amount of motion blur captured during movement. Reducing the shutter angle gives you the stroby (or jerky) "Saving Private Ryan" look.

However, we're going the other way, shooting at 48 fps with a 270 degree shutter angle. This gives the 48 fps a lovely silky look, and creates a very pleasing look at 24 fps as well. In fact, our DP, Andrew Lesnie, and I prefer the look of 24 fps when it comes from a 48 fps master.

I'm still curious as to which master they'll use for the eventual blu-ray release, but I guess that's not an issue they have to worry about for another few years...

There's also been some good and bad news over the holiday: First, he confirmed that Ian Holm will be returning to play Older Bilbo. And Sunday it was announced (http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-jackson/fili/10150233459761558) that Rob Kazinsky, who was to play the role of Fili, had to leave the film for personal reasons. (Kazinsky cited health issues on his Twitter.) So now they are one Dwarf short. Luckily, they hadn't shot any footage with the Dwarves yet, so they don't need to do any reshoots, and they're still filming Bilbo-only scenes, so they have time to recast. (PJ must be used to this by now. Both Viggo Mortensen on LOTR and Mark Wahlberg on Lovely Bones were replacement castings that occurred at the last minute.)

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Speaking as an art student with zero familiarity with film, scaling down from 48 fps to 24 doesn't seem too different in concept than scaling from a larger image size to a smaller with the same ratio (like a 1024x1024 image going down to 512x512). It's not a perfect analogy, but it's the first way my brain could process the thought.

I'm guessing Blu-ray might just use the 48 fps master, since it's the nicer looking of the two and since it sounds like the frame rate issue is mostly limited to issues with physical movie projectors. Since Blu-ray's all digital to begin with, it doesn't have a problem.

[rpgdemon]

And there's no reason that the Bluray couldn't be both, really. I'd imagine there's enough space on the disc for it, considering that it would literally be the same frames again.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

This is like Metropolis all over again which is a pain in the ass to watch these days without it seeming weirdly paced/music disjointed. Though that one is a case of we don't even know what frame rate it is supposed to be at.

[rpgdemon]

Another thing: I question why they can't show 24 vs 48 FPS outside a theatre. It's not like projectors are the only things that have a framerate, and all other movies are magically frameless.

[RickZarber]

Speaking as an art student with zero familiarity with film, scaling down from 48 fps to 24 doesn't seem too different in concept than scaling from a larger image size to a smaller with the same ratio (like a 1024x1024 image going down to 512x512). It's not a perfect analogy, but it's the first way my brain could process the thought.Yeah, sort of! Just instead of using digital processing to eliminate pixels, it's eliminating half of the frames.I'm guessing Blu-ray might just use the 48 fps master, since it's the nicer looking of the two and since it sounds like the frame rate issue is mostly limited to issues with physical movie projectors. Since Blu-ray's all digital to begin with, it doesn't have a problem.Yeah, presuming non-3D HD home theaters are capable of projecting 48fps. 3D HDTVs already do that, with half of the frames for one eye, and the other half for the other. It's probably just a matter of a firmware update to project that framerate without the 3D glasses synchronization in effect. (How it will work for the 3DBD is another matter entirely.) But yeah, as for non-3D systems, I wonder how it'll work.And there's no reason that the Bluray couldn't be both, really. I'd imagine there's enough space on the disc for it, considering that it would literally be the same frames again.Well, if the Hobbit movies are ~180min films like the TE LOTR films were, maybe not! Not if you want a good bitrate on your Blu-ray. And since it sounds like the 24fps master will include digitally extrapolated frames, rather than just half of the 48fps frames, it would actually be about 3x the data of a normal film! So I would imagine it will be one or the other.This is like Metropolis all over again which is a pain in the ass to watch these days without it seeming weirdly paced/music disjointed. Though that one is a case of we don't even know what frame rate it is supposed to be at.Hm, yeah... I wonder what this process will mean for the soundtrack guys? Will the 24fps master require miniscule tweaks to some of the timings in the score/SFX?Another thing: I question why they can't show 24 vs 48 FPS outside a theatre. It's not like projectors are the only things that have a framerate, and all other movies are magically frameless.How do you mean?

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Well for Metropolis there are multiple soundtracks depending on which framerate version you are watching but being a silent movie they don't have to sync up speech and such so its less of a problem. If they release Hobbit on multiple frame rates the sound guys will probably have to do double the work?

[RickZarber]

Well, since the length of the movie will be the same, maybe not double, but I wonder if there won't be slight adjustments necessary to compensate for the extrapolation process.

Metropolis, of course, is much more complicated. (Here's a link explaining things (http://www.dvdtalk.com/dvdsavant/s3200frame.html), for those of you who don't know what Smarty's talking about.)

[rpgdemon]

What I mean is this: They -can- show video demonstration of the 48 FPS and 24 FPS movies, on a computer screen. At bare minimum, computer monitors refresh at 60 hz, which is 12 hz more than they need. Twelve whole huzz.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Production Diary 2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyZJMABGweI) and Diary 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3V3-KdAWYs) are up.

Got some Dorfs (http://screenrant.com/the-hobbit-images-balin-and-dwalin-sandy-123816/) Here (http://screenrant.com/hobbit-image-richard-armitage-thorin-oakenshield-sandy-124139/) as well.

EDIT: Actor Confirmation (http://screenrant.com/luke-evans-hobbit-smaug-voice-benedict-cumberbatch-sandy-119933/) for Smaug and the Necromancer

Benedict Timothy Carlton Cumberbatch (born 19 July 1976) is an English film, television, and theatre actor. His most acclaimed roles include: Stephen Hawking in the BBC drama Hawking (2004); William Pitt in the historical film Amazing Grace (2006); the protagonist Stephen Ezard in the miniseries thriller The Last Enemy (2008); Paul Marshall in Atonement (2007); Bernard in Small Island (2009); and Sherlock Holmes in the modern BBC adaptation series Sherlock (2010). He will also be the voices of both Smaug the Dragon and the Necromancer in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

[RickZarber]

DWARVES!

http://www.darkhorizons.com/assets/0015/3610/dwarf.jpg (http://www.darkhorizons.com/assets/0015/3612/HBT-DWF-007.jpg)

(click for hi-res)

[stefan]

DWARVES!

http://www.darkhorizons.com/assets/0015/3610/dwarf.jpg (http://www.darkhorizons.com/assets/0015/3612/HBT-DWF-007.jpg)

(click for hi-res)

hold the fucking phone, does the third dwarf from the right have a piece of an axe sticking out of his head?

[Shyria Dracnoir]

hold the fucking phone, does the third dwarf from the right have a piece of an axe sticking out of his head?

That he does. And you know he's a real dorf because he does not give a fuck about it.

[Archbio]

Don't trust the dwarf on the far right! He's a vampire. Or a junkie... I forget which.

[Arcanum]

Thread necromancy go! Why you ask? Because of this beauty:

G0k3kHtyoqc

Bask in its glory, and the knowledge that it will be in theaters in a year.

[Azisien]

Fuck yeah this is a good week for movie trailers. 2012 is shaping up to be incredible.

[Kim]

I like that they kept the singing.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

I like that they kept the singing.

I genuinely don't understand how you could make a movie about The Hobbit without singing.

[Kim]

I genuinely don't understand how you could make a movie about The Hobbit without singing.

Me either, but that doesn't mean Hollywood wouldn't try. I am glad that they didn't try.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Me either, but that doesn't mean Hollywood wouldn't try. I am glad that they didn't try.

I don't mean to say that they wouldn't try, just that it's... like, it's incomprehensible.

Like if someone had in the early stages of production for Lord of the Rings said "Swords are oldschool. Lets give Frodo a deagle and Aragon can have a good ole American M16."

[Kim]

I point you in the direction of the modernized version of Romeo and Juliet.

[Magus]

Fuck yeah this is a good week for movie trailers. 2012 is shaping up to be incredible.

Fitting for the last year ever!

Those are some crazy ass dwarves. Even crazier than I remember from the book.

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

I point you in the direction of the modernized version of Romeo and Juliet.

Fuck, you're right.

[Azisien]

This is Peter Jackson, not Hollywood! I mean it kind of is, but that's also being kind of general about it. He's already proven, in great 12 hour extended detail, that he can bring Tolkien's shit to life.

I hope Legolas kills every single spider.

[RickZarber]

I've watched this like 8 times already and frame-by-frame'd it twice now. I cannot stop.

...

help

[mauve]

Thread necromancy go! Why you ask? Because of this beauty:

G0k3kHtyoqc

Bask in its glory, and the knowledge that it will be in theaters in a year.

EFF. YES.

Granted, I don't really remember Galadriel being in The Hobbit and so I am somewhat confused, but THAT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE OVERALL THIS LOOKS LIKE IT JUST MIGHT BE AWESOME AND THAT IS THE GREATEST THING!!!!!!!!!!!

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Got chills at the end with Bilbo running into Gollum and the ring for the first time.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Yep, this is looking pretty excellent.

No Smaug though yet. I want to see Smaug.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Sadly, I think a lot of the info on him is going to be a long time coming. They're still doing primary shooting work and an effects-heavy critter like him is almost certainly going to need a lot of post-production work (and even before that they have to get all the dialogue recorded plus whatever motion capture work they were doing with the actor). Besides, they're stretching this out along two films (An Unexpected Journey and There and Back Again)so they need a big obvious draw to keep people interested in the second. Makes sense they wouldn't reveal too much until then, though I'm certain there's something lurking in all that concept art they blur out of the blog videos.

Still, maybe we'll luck out and get something like a post-credits teaser.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

I still find it oddly funny that they're having these two guys

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k50/augustopodrido/sherlock-bbc.jpg

as these two guys

http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh207/GargoyleDragon/Fantasy/smaug.jpghttp://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/k616/thanhhaiprof/550w_movies_the_hobbit_unexpected_j.jpg

[Yrcrazypa]

Do want.

[Magus]

EFF. YES.

Granted, I don't really remember Galadriel being in The Hobbit and so I am somewhat confused, but THAT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE OVERALL THIS LOOKS LIKE IT JUST MIGHT BE AWESOME AND THAT IS THE GREATEST THING!!!!!!!!!!!

Apparently to make it into two movies they're adding in things like Gandalf scouring Dol Guldur with Aragorn and Radagast (I think Radagast was in on that shenanigans, wasn't he?). Not surprised they'd stick some stuff with Galadriel into it. Apparently she's visiting Elrond for whatever holiday elves celebrate (Elfmas?) Also we should get to actually see the battle of the Five Armies in the second movie.

Even with the ending scene there this movie still looks quite a bit more lighthearted than the original trilogy, or at least the last 7 and a half hours of the original trilogy. The dinner scene with the dwarves should be pretty funny, as well as the trolls. Just Bilbo running around like a dork is enough to make me chuckle.

[Kim]

http://i.imgur.com/e9WwU.jpg

[Arcanum]

Part of me (the part that desperately tries to reason that the world isn't full of complete morons) really hopes that person is trolling.

[Geminex]

Pfft.
Mind you, the guy underneath is almost as good. 309 views, 9846 likes, clearly this means that people are just mindless sheeple, rather than implying that the view counter is broken.

[Kim]

Part of me (the part that desperately tries to reason that the world isn't full of complete morons) really hopes that person is trolling.

Man, I don't see why anyone ever bothers caring if the person's trolling or not when the things they're saying are just plain dumb. Either way you just gotta laugh at 'em. If they aren't a troll, you get to laugh at a dummy for being a dummy. If they are a troll, everyone having a good laugh at their expense and mocking them was probably not what they were hoping for. Win-Win situation.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Unfortunately he's not a troll, just a completely ignorant fool. There's a few more comments on that video by him. All of them make me want to slam my head into unconsciousness.

EDIT; There again, it's no worse than the rest of the comments on that video. I really should know better than to read youtube commenters, it's just fucking depressing.

[Magus]

Unfortunately he's not a troll, just a completely ignorant fool. There's a few more comments on that video by him. All of them make me want to slam my head into unconsciousness.

EDIT; There again, it's no worse than the rest of the comments on that video. I really should know better than to read youtube commenters, it's just fucking depressing.

Any of the comments regarding the new Batman movie have been causing the same reaction in me over the past 9 months, since pretty much all of the people who bother to state their opinions on the internet unequivocally hate everything.

[RickZarber]

Apparently to make it into two movies they're adding in things like Gandalf scouring Dol Guldur with Aragorn and Radagast (I think Radagast was in on that shenanigans, wasn't he?). Not surprised they'd stick some stuff with Galadriel into it. Apparently she's visiting Elrond for whatever holiday elves celebrate (Elfmas?)
Aragorn was 10 years old during the events of The Hobbit, so I don't think we'll see him doing much of anything in these movies, if he even shows up at all; who knows, maybe we'll see him as young Estel with his mother in Rivendell.

The scenes of Gandalf stalking about we see in the trailer are, in my best guess, flashback scenes of Gandalf scouting Dol Guldur 91 years ago and coming across Thráin (whom I believe is the person that Gandalf is fighting near the end of the trailer--if you pause you can see Dwarvish clothing and prosthetics/hair).

Radagast isn't likely to show up until the Council scenes with Saruman. And I assume Galadriel is in Rivendell in the first movie to first bring up the idea of the White Council. Perhaps that tender scene they appear to share could even be when she asks Gandalf to head the council (I don't believe it to be a romantic scene as some have speculated; likely she is just expressing concern over the weight of responsibility he is bearing). But yes, in the second movie, we will totally get to see the White Council convene and then go kick Sauron out of Mirkwood.
No Smaug though yet. I want to see Smaug.
I seriously doubt we'll see Smaug at all until the second movie actually comes out. Like what they did with Gollum in LOTR; we heard his voice in the first trailer, saw his silhouette and a close up of his eyes in the first movie, and got a quick glimpse of his back in the teaser to the second movie, but that was it--they never showed all of him in any promotional material until after Two Towers had been released. It stands to reason that they'll treat Smaug the same way.

Anyway I was surprised we didn't see a single goblin! One quick shot of what could possibly be Goblintown (during the close-up on Dwalin), but that's it! Also, I noticed two Mirkwood shots (Gloín's CU, and that shot of the Ring at the very end), so I wonder if that means the first movie will go as far as the Spiders, or if it's the sole second movie stuff that ended up in this trailer....

[MFD]

I figure "Riddles in the Dark" is the breaking point for the movie.

EDIT: He has to be a troll. The trailer does everything in its power to link The Hobbit with Lord of the Rings. You have the frame of Bilbo telling the story to Frodo at the beginning, and then IN CASE YOU FORGOT there's the FUCKING RING at the fucking end with GOLLUM

I'VE GONE CROSSEYED.

Also! Singing! Talking! Walking! Best trailer ever!

[RickZarber]

So if the trailer wasn't enough, Peter Jackson has given us 12 minutes of Behind the Scenes for Christmas!

Production Video 5 (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10150554790416807)

HOBBITON!

[Magus]

Aragorn was 10 years old during the events of The Hobbit, so I don't think we'll see him doing much of anything in these movies, if he even shows up at all; who knows, maybe we'll see him as young Estel with his mother in Rivendell.

The scenes of Gandalf stalking about we see in the trailer are, in my best guess, flashback scenes of Gandalf scouting Dol Guldur 91 years ago and coming across Thráin (whom I believe is the person that Gandalf is fighting near the end of the trailer--if you pause you can see Dwarvish clothing and prosthetics/hair).

Radagast isn't likely to show up until the Council scenes with Saruman. And I assume Galadriel is in Rivendell in the first movie to first bring up the idea of the White Council. Perhaps that tender scene they appear to share could even be when she asks Gandalf to head the council (I don't believe it to be a romantic scene as some have speculated; likely she is just expressing concern over the weight of responsibility he is bearing). But yes, in the second movie, we will totally get to see the White Council convene and then go kick Sauron out of Mirkwood.

I seriously doubt we'll see Smaug at all until the second movie actually comes out. Like what they did with Gollum in LOTR; we heard his voice in the first trailer, saw his silhouette and a close up of his eyes in the first movie, and got a quick glimpse of his back in the teaser to the second movie, but that was it--they never showed all of him in any promotional material until after Two Towers had been released. It stands to reason that they'll treat Smaug the same way.

Anyway I was surprised we didn't see a single goblin! One quick shot of what could possibly be Goblintown (during the close-up on Dwalin), but that's it! Also, I noticed two Mirkwood shots (Gloín's CU, and that shot of the Ring at the very end), so I wonder if that means the first movie will go as far as the Spiders, or if it's the sole second movie stuff that ended up in this trailer....

I've heard someone involved (Jackson, maybe) say that when they were trying to figure out how to split the plot in half they said they would end the first movie with an event "that changes Bilbo's relationship with the dwarves". This is of course super-vague and could apply to multiple spots in the plot. Initially I thought it was when he steals the super-gem from the gold pile after they kill Smaug even though it was basically half the reason Thorin went on the whole damn quest, but it seems like the part where he saves them from the Elves would be fitting, since up 'til then they had been mostly saving him. Plus if the super gem part were the ending it wouldn't leave much for the second movie, though I guess if they did it similar to Helm's Deep the Battle of the Five Armies could fill in a whole hour of the plot.

Also, yeah, Aragorn would be 10 years old and I was thinking about that. I think I was considering the plot from back when they were going to make the entire first movie based on The Hobbit and then connect it to the trilogy with the second movie's events. But they've since then abandoned that tack and are creating two movies based on The Hobbit's events so I'm not sure if they're still going to try and fill in events between the end of the Hobbit and the original trilogy or not. I'd assume not, so we can probably just forget about Aragorn being in this entirely. He certainly wouldn't be played by Viggo Mortenson if they had him in it, as even if they compressed time a bit and made him like, 16 or something he'd still have to be played by a much younger actor.

I think that part with Galadriel isn't so much affection (or if affection it's fairly platonic), but probably her commenting on the fact that he looks much older than the last time they met, or maybe the first time they met (since Gandalf does slowly, very slowly, age, he was probably much younger looking, probably middle-aged, when he first came to Middle Earth, whereas the Elves are pretty ageless seeming in comparison).

[Locke cole]

It's probably going to be the Elf rescue thing, yeah. By the way, super-gem? I thought that what he grabbed was the shirt of Mythril.

[Magus]

Nah, that's way at the beginning, in the troll cave. The super-gem is actually like a giant orb or something, or a giant diamond, I forget exactly, but basically it was the greatest treasure of the Lonely Mountain dwarves and Thorin specifically said when they went into the cave that they could each have whatever they wanted of the horde BUT it. Unfortunately, Bilbo couldn't help himself. He later uses it to force Thorin to make peace with the humans, because he gives it to Bard and Bard uses it as a bargaining chip to allow him and the elves into the cave to take their share of the treasure. Which was kind of a dick move but Bilbo didn't want them fighting each other. Never did figure why the elf king thought he should get part of the treasure, at least Bard shot the dragon...elves are always doing dickish things though so no surprise.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Guys, I heardtomake it into twomovies the first movie is just some dudes in the forest having a singoff.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Never did figure why the elf king thought he should get part of the treasure, at least Bard shot the dragon...elves are always doing dickish things though so no surprise[/spoiler].

If you read the book, the elves were sending a bunch of supplies and elfpower into rebuilding Laketown and taking care of the refugees since the town was one of their primary trade partners and well, not doing so would be dickish, so they wanted to recoup the costs there.

[Magus]

If you read the book, the elves were sending a bunch of supplies and elfpower into rebuilding Laketown and taking care of the refugees since the town was one of their primary trade partners and well, not doing so would be dickish, so they wanted to recoup the costs there.

Pssh, that's a pretty roundabout explanation for why they deserve some dwarf gold. Scheming elves, with their trickeries!

^Basically a Thorin impression

[Locke cole]

Odd. I could have sworn that Bilbo got the Mythril coat in the hoard, and only got Sting from the trolls. Not that he called it Sting until he fought those spiders.

[greed]

Guys, I heardtomake it into twomovies the first movie is just some dudes in the forest having a singoff.

If one of the dudes is Bombadil this would be no problem.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Odd. I could have sworn that Bilbo got the Mythril coat in the hoard, and only got Sting from the trolls. Not that he called it Sting until he fought those spiders.

Nah they found a whole bunch of stuff in the troll cave. Gandalf got Glamdring, Thorin got Orcrist, I think the other dwarves probably picked up some weapons and armout pieces too, and Bilbo got Sting and the mail.

The only thing Bilbo initially took from the other horde was the Arkenstone, because that was what made him a real thief at last.

EDIT; Whelp, actually, seems I was wrong, you were right Locke, the mail was from the dragon horde, I just checked again myself. Could have sworn he had it earlier than that.

[Locke cole]

Oh yeah, now that I hear the name, I actually do remember the Arkenstone.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Yeah, Thorin gave Bilbo the mail as a gift from the hoard while they were poking around wondering why Smaug hadn't been back for almost a week (on account of being dead). Bilbo wandered off and found the Arkenstone then as well.

[Magus]

Arkenstone, Super-Gem, big diff. Guess he did get that mail from the dragon hoard, though, so thank you people who have read it more recently than me.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Man, I've read the Hobbit all the way through many more times than I've attempted to get through the Lord of the Rings proper. I have this shit down.

[stefan]

why are you people spoilertagging a book nearly three-quarters of a century old

THE NECROMANCER IS ACTUALLY SAURON

THE SEXY DWARVES ALL DIE, ONLY THE MIDDLEAGED FAT ONES SURVIVE

SMAUG CATCHES THE DEAD BECAUSE HE LEFT A HOLE IN HIS BLING

[Magus]

Hey now.

I'm pretty sure Bombur died.

[mauve]

THE SEXY DWARVES ALL DIE Regarding this: I gotta admit I was a bit upset that three dwarves are near-beardless and practically mini-Aragorns and Faramirs, but then I remebered that not only will fate punish them by making them die in the final battle, but they die offscreen while Bilbo is unconscious. And that makes everything okay.

[Locke cole]

SMAUG CATCHES THE DEAD BECAUSE HE LEFT A HOLE IN HIS BLING[/I]
I gotta say, I appreciate The Hobbit for not only giving Smaug a reason to make a big horde and sleep on it (gold armor stuck to his underbelly) but also to show us why regular armor is a good thing (no holes in the armor because you slept on your chalices funny).

[Archbio]

why are you people spoilertagging a book nearly three-quarters of a century old

What does the age of the thing have to do with it?

If you spoil The Mousetrap for people in 2190, the ghost of Agatha Christie will still kill your ass (with arsenic.)

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Regarding this: I gotta admit I was a bit upset that three dwarves are near-beardless and practically mini-Aragorns and Faramirs, but then I remebered that not only will fate punish them by making them die in the final battle, but they die offscreen while Bilbo is unconscious. And that makes everything okay.

Weren't Fili and Kili the 2 youngest ones, and therefore had not yet grown epic beards? I seem to recall that being so.

[RickZarber]

They are the youngest, but I don't believe there is any mention anywhere in the book of them not having full beards.

Well, until Bilbo rescued the dwarves from the spiders, when they were all forced to cut off most of their beards to get rid of the webs (the shame)!

[MFD]

There's gotta be a statute of limitations on spoilers, though.

I mean really.

[Fifthfiend]

why are you people spoilertagging a book nearly three-quarters of a century old

THE NECROMANCER IS ACTUALLY SAURON

THE SEXY DWARVES ALL DIE, ONLY THE MIDDLEAGED FAT ONES SURVIVE

SMAUG CATCHES THE DEAD BECAUSE HE LEFT A HOLE IN HIS BLING

how dare some people be considerate

[Fifthfiend]

how dare some people be considerate

"but GABE from PENNY ARCADE says that's dumb, nobody could ever consider anything he's ever done to be incredibly douchey or assholish?!"

[MFD]

Yes because agreeing with one thing an asshole said one time makes me an asshole.

I'm just saying it's silly. Maybe if someone had said they hadn't read the book, but nobody has said that. After fifty years, in a thread about an adaptation of the book, fans of the book are discussing the book. And they're using spoilers?

Just seems strange. I wasnt going to speak up, but I decided to respond to Archbio.

Age probably has less to do with it than the fact that we've all read The Hobbit.

[IHateMakingNames]

I had forgotten most of the details. Reading that dwarves died surprised me, but them again I also forgot that the book ended with a war.

[Kim]

Yes because agreeing with one thing an asshole said one time makes me an asshole.

Seeing as Fifth was directly responding to someone, who isn't you, who was making a Big Fucking Deal over the fact that some people were being considerate, maybe jumping on the, "How dare you call me an asshole!" horse is a bit unnecessary. Especially when Fifth didn't even directly call the person making a Big Fucking Deal over people being considerate an asshole.

EDIT: Fifth wasn't even complaining that not everyone was spoiler-tagging spoilers for the Hobbit. He was responding specifically to someone making a big deal out of the fact that someone WAS spoiler-tagging.

[Fifthfiend]

Haha wow I hadn't even seen that MFD had directly cited that comic.

But yeah when people are making a new adaptation of something that's probably gonna tend to draw the interest of a lot of people who haven't read/seen the original and I really don't see the harm in allowing that maybe those people don't want to be told all about the ins and outs of this story before they've had the chance to enjoy it.

If this were just a "hey fellow people who've read the book 'the hobbit' let's talk about the hobbit, the book, by JRR Tolkien, irrespective of any movie anyone might be making about it or whatever" then that'd be different.

Maybe I wouldn't have thought to spoiler stuff from the book had I been posting in here and talking about the story and maybe that wouldn't have made me history's greatest monster but I don't really see a lot of point to getting on the nuts of people who did happen to think of that and then thoughtfully spoilered their posts, and then teaching those people a lesson or whatever by allcaps-italics-shouting said spoilers at anyone who hasn't happened to read it.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Yeah Fifth makes a good point; how many of us here had even read LotRs before the first film was released? I know I hadn't, that or the Hobbit. When something like this comes along and suddenly a lot of people get interested in it who've never heard of it or been interested in it before, then they're not gona want it spoiled for them are they?

Beside which why are you complaining about spoiler tags being used anyway? Is it really so difficult/annoying to just click them to reveal what we're saying? They're hardly an inconvenience.


They are the youngest, but I don't believe there is any mention anywhere in the book of them not having full beards.

Yeah I can't remember if there was mention of it in the book either, but it at least makes sense, so I'm happy to go along with it. It's hardly a massive detail anyway. Like, I'm not gona lose sleep over a couple of characters in an ensemble piece of fiction who don't look exactly like they're supposed to.

[Magus]

What does the age of the thing have to do with it?

If you spoil The Mousetrap for people in 2190, the ghost of Agatha Christie will still kill your ass (with arsenic.)

I think it's fortunate that said twist was put to much better use in a slew of other movies I won't also spoil, since even if The Mousetrap is spoiled you probably wouldn't expect it in some other movie. Like it is fortunate that as a plot device it was easily reusable in other things just in case somebody was all like "HEY YO HERE'S THE PLOT TWIST TO THE MOUSETRAP, JERKASAURS! YOU SHOULDA WATCHED THAT PLAY YEARS AGO!"

Some things you can spoil I guess, I just don't go out of my way to spoil them.

Unless it is to save someone a shitload of time they could have not wasted on something else.

Like Adam Sandler's Click? It was all a fucking dream. There. You don't have to waste your time on that movie if you were even thinking of it.

The Happening? It's the plants. The plants are killing everybody with pollen that makes them go crazy. It's really stupid. Mark Wahlberg is scared of a houseplant at one point. Don't watch it.

Actually people should just go ahead and do that for all the M. Night Shyamalayn movies except I dunno, Unbreakable? I"d say The Sixth Sense has been pretty solidly spoiled for everyone involved.

But all in all nothing in The Hobbit is particularly "twisty" anyway, so if people were to spoil it offhandedly I guess it's no big deal. I just wouldn't go out of my way to spoil it.

ANYWAY, back to the Hobbit:

Is there going to be any clear delineation between goblins and orcs this time? Because even in LOTR this was hard as hell to figure out and I'm still not sure they bothered (like Gandalf says the Uruk Hai are the product of "orcs and goblin men", but again at no point is it pointed out what the hell is a goblin and what is an orc, anything that's not an Uruk Hai looks like orcs to me), and from what I can tell Tolkein basically said that goblins/orcs are the same thing, he just used the term goblin in The Hobbit.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Goblins and orcs are the same thing. Uruk Hai are orcs crossed with men.

[MFD]

Seeing as Fifth was directly responding to someone, who isn't you, who was making a Big Fucking Deal over the fact that some people were being considerate, maybe jumping on the, "How dare you call me an asshole!" horse is a bit unnecessary. Especially when Fifth didn't even directly call the person making a Big Fucking Deal over people being considerate an asshole.

Sorry. My post just paraphrased Penny Arcade, so I saw a connection. Apparently Fifth didn't see my post.

Fleeing in shame now.

[Locke cole]

And the first Orcs were Elves that were horribly twisted by magic.

Wait, or was it that they were creatures born of magic made in mockery of the elves' shape?

I'm thinking the latter, since they then compared Trolls to Ents in the same way.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Nah you were right the first time. Morgoth twisted elves into orcs and ents into trolls. Morgoth didn't really make anything, just poured his evil into everything else, except for dragons which I think he may have actually created outright, because they came slightly later than most other stuff.

[Magus]

Uruk Hai are orcs crossed with men.

See, I thought that was how Saruman did it, but it's been a while since I read the books and in the movie Gandalf says "crossed orcs with goblin men" which didn't make a damn bit of sense.

Although doesn't that mean Bill Ferny's friend was an Uruk Hai? For some reason I thought half orcs were different from Uruk Hai but whatever, makes sense to me.

Wait, wait, maybe you get an Uruk Hai when you cross an orc with a half-orc (a "goblin man")?! Like they're only a quarter human, so they get the height but can still see easily in daylight? See that would make Gandalf's shit in the movie actually make sense.

Nah you were right the first time. Morgoth twisted elves into orcs and ents into trolls. Morgoth didn't really make anything, just poured his evil into everything else, except for dragons which I think he may have actually created outright, because they came slightly later than most other stuff.

I know the creepy birds/wyverns the Nazgul ride are the corruption of eagles, but they aren't dragons. I'm trying to think of a "good" analog to dragons other than eagles but dragons are pretty big in comparison to the eagles, I think.

Actually the dragons may have been a type of Maiar, much like the Balrogs, Gandalf, Sauron, etc. It's been a while since I read the Silmarillion but this would make the most sense, since I'm pretty sure the only thing that Eru didn't create were the dwarves, which were mindless automatons created by one of the Valar until Eru gave them the breath of life. So I think pretty much everything "created" by Morgoth was indeed just a corruption of one of Eru's creations. Ungoliant for example was supposed to be a type of Maiar before becoming a giant shadow spider, I'm just going to assume the dragons were Maiar that underwent a similar transformation, since Tolkein seems to make it pretty clear that only Eru can create things outright. Otherwise they are not really "living" creatures, like the dwarves before Eru "fixed" them.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragons_%28Middle-earth%29)

The dragons were created by Morgoth during the First Age, when Glaurung, the first dragon, appears. Tolkien's dragons are capable of breeding on their own, and in later ages the Withered Heath is purportedly their spawning ground.

I haven't personally read the earlier tales, but from what I've read referencing them, it seems likely that Magus has a good point about them being lesser corrupted spirits that were manipulated by Morgoth rather than being directly created by him. It is notable that dragons change over time; Glaurung, who is typically described as the first dragon to emerge in the greater world, had four legs and could breathe fire but lacked wings. The first flying one, Ancalagon is also said to have been specially bred by Morgoth to be the most powerful of all of his kind.

[Archbio]

I always thought that saying that Ungoliant was from "before the world" meant that she was essentially an alien with a distinct, unknown origin.

[Magus]

I always thought that saying that Ungoliant was from "before the world" meant that she was essentially an alien with a distinct, unknown origin.

I really can't remember distinctly enough, but sounds possible. Maybe she's supposed to be the embodiment of darkness or something (kind of like how in Greek mythology actual things like Night are gods/godesses, such as Nyx).

Although depending on how you interpret it "before the world" could mean before creation at all, which would either make her predate even the Valar or have come into existence directly after them or at the same time, such as the act of creation of existence/light causing her to be created, or it could make her a Maiar, unless the Maiar were created at the exact same time as Ea (can't remember), or it could just mean before Arda which would quite easily allow her to be a Maiar.

Chris Tolkein probably covered it somewhere in his reams of documentation.

EDIT:

Let's just go with the LOTR wiki, which isn't sure either and basically covers what I was just saying apparently:

As a Spirit of Evil, she was possibly either a creature from the Void, or a fallen Ainu, created by the discords of Melkor in the Music of the Ainur. Ungoliant may have been one of the Maiar corrupted by Melkor, but in Arda, she served only herself. A creature of darkness, Ungoliant assumed a huge spider form and dwelt in a dark ravine in Avathar. She hated light, and thus agreed to help Melkor poison the Two Trees. Cloaked in her Unlight, Ungoliant and Melkor came to Ezellohar, where she drained the Trees of their sap, poisoned them, and drank the Wells of Varda dry. The Unlight, and Ungoliant stymied the pursuit of Oromë and Tulkas and Melkor escaped to Middle-earth.

So basically "Morgoth did it, probably" either unknowingly or knowingly, but presumably did not actually "create" Ungoliant in whatever original form she possessed, OR she was just some kind of Void monster. The world may never know.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

You know how spiders are always finding their way into your house from the outside? Only in this case the house is Creation and the spider is Ungoliant.

On a tangential note, this makes me wonder if they're keeping the dialog for the Mirkwood spiders in the film. They're noted as being intelligent in the book specifically because they're related to Shelob (who's more of a demon in spider form like her mother), yet in the Lord of the Rings film Shelob doesn't give off much indication of being somehow more supernatural than a fuckhuge spider. I'm wondering if it might be considered a level-breaker (as awesomely creepy as it would be to keep their lines).

[Magus]

All I know is Bilbo shouting "Ettercap! Ettercap!" at them in an effort to make them angry without any sort of narrative explanation of what the hell this means will be totally lost on movie-going audiences.

[RickZarber]

Especially if he said that instead of "Attercop". :P

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Seriously, I'm sure if they could spare keeping it in Andy Serkis would nail the spider voices down pat. Man's got range.

[Magus]

Especially if he said that instead of "Attercop". :P

Yeah, I mixed them up with Gary Gygax's version of a spider-man monster called "Ettercaps"; pretty sure he was referencing the Hobbit when he came up with that name, though.

Seriously, I'm sure if they could spare keeping it in Andy Serkis would nail the spider voices down pat. Man's got range.

From what I read Serkis just went ahead and did his scenes as Gollum the first couple of weeks of production and then stayed on as a project director. So he could step in and do the spider voices, I suppose.

Cumberbatch is doing the voice of Smaug AND the Necromancer/Sauron, so maybe he could do some spider voices?

[The Sevenshot Kid]

Cumberbatch is doing the voice of Smaug AND the Necromancer/Sauron, so maybe he could do some spider voices?

Benedict Cumberbatch (I always have to say that full name with the most pompous British accent I can muster) is such perfect casting for Smaug. The guy's a good actor but even better, dude looks like a dragon. There's a distinctly reptilian look to his face.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

You forgot the love of shiny things (http://twitpic.com/2bkso6)

[Shyria Dracnoir]

Most recent Production Blog (#8), including recap of Comic-Con and last few days of filming

vCVxDbqgu6o

My remarks:

*The set constructed for Dale in its heyday is absolutely gorgeous. Makes me wonder how they're going to handle the bit where Smaug steamrolls all over everything.

*Beorn's house is similarly awesome.

*Warning: gratuitous buffalo shot at 7:13

*I find myself wanting a video of Epic Sax Gollum more than I really should

*Beards are apparently contagious

*I am beginning to consider building a time machine just to make the release date get here faster.

[Shyria Dracnoir]

6N9fDM5TEUc

Slightly fartz video of the Comic-con panel.