The Hobbit

[striderdemme]

The Hobbit and its sequel? Aren't LOTR the sequels?

The sequel to The Hobbit is more of a bridge between it and the Lord of the Rings. I believe del Toro recently said that most if not all of it will be based on Tolkien's writings.

[Hardkore]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/hobbitnews.php?id=45023

http://www.wetanz.com/holics/

http://www.wetanz.com/party/register/index.php

An Unexpected Party

Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro invite you to a live internet chat about The Hobbit.

Peter and Guillermo would love to answer your questions and hear your comments about our new adventure into Middle-Earth. Please register to make sure you don't miss out on the Unexpected Party and get regular updates on the movies.

Weta are excited to be hosting this one-hour live online chat on our website. Please check the start time for your time zone below:

Los Angeles (Pacific) - Saturday, May 24 at 1pm
New York (Eastern) - Saturday, May 24 at 4pm
London - Saturday, May 24 at 9pm
Paris, Berlin, Rome - Saturday, May 24 at 10pm
Sydney - Sunday, May 25 at 6am
Wellington, Auckland - Sunday, May 25 at 8am

[remarkablere]

hi from middle earth...prefer jacksons braindead and bad taste to his latest fantasy rubbish

[michalz00]

This is big news! Guillermo Del Toro announced today that he is no longer directing the two Hobbit movies.

“In light of ongoing delays in the setting of a start date for filming “The Hobbit,” I am faced with the hardest decision of my life”, says Guillermo. “After nearly two years of living, breathing and designing a world as rich as Tolkien’s Middle Earth, I must, with great regret, take leave from helming these wonderful pictures."

Read more: Source

I'm wondering who will replace him?

[Granite]

Sounds like "The Hobbit" is quickly headed for "Development Hell"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_hell

New ripple - Actor Unions wants to boycott film work

You can be forgiven for being skeptical that "The Hobbit" will ever be made. Back in October 2007, Entertainment Weekly announced on its cover that Peter Jackson would be putting together a prequel to his "Lord of the Rings" films based on the J. R. R. Tolkien book series. Since then, everything has gone wrong: Jackson sued New Line over the rights to the film; the Tolkien family then sued them as well; MGM, one of the two studios planning to distribute the film, ran into the money woes (which are also holding up the James Bond films); Guillermo Del Toro, who was supposed to direct, worked with Jackson for two years before dropping out last May and handing the reins back to him. With Jackson taking over, and Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis and Hugo Weaving signed on to reprise their roles, the film was expected to finally be back on schedule.

But now Jackson has a more serious problem: The International Federation of Actors, along with the Screen Actors Guild, is discouraging actors to work on the film because of the non-union labor in New Zealand. This is serious business for SAG: Essentially, actors who work on the film, like McKellen and Weaving, would be in violation of the union's bylaws and subject to expulsion from the union. The Hollywood Reporter notes just how rare it is for SAG to be so strident about a big-studio picture.

Jackson isn't happy about it, according to BBC News:

Jackson said the wrangle was a "grab for power" and "an attempt by the "Australian bully-boy" to exert influence over New Zealand's film industry. "It feels as if we have a large Aussie cousin kicking sand in our eyes... or to put it another way, opportunists exploiting our film for their own political gain."

Jackson has threatened to move the filming to Eastern Europe, which would seem to lack the breathtaking vistas that made the "Lord of the Rings" films look like they really did take place in a fantasy world. It's a bit strange to see Jackson, one of the wealthiest filmmakers on the planet, complaining about having sand kicked in his eyes, and it's starting to look like the project is taking a toll on him. (It doesn't help that "The Lovely Bones" was a critical and commercial disappointment.) It's also worth noting that the weakest scenes in the "Lord of the Rings" movies take place in the shire where the hobbits live; basing two whole movies on just hobbit-land would seem far from the financial slam-dunk that the previous three movies were.

But considering the tortured history of "The Hobbit," it's more than a little likely that, three years from now, we'll be writing about how Peter Jackson is still trying to get "The Hobbit" off the ground.

Source

[Hardkore]

The Hobbit Has Officially Been Greenlit!

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=70790

It's official! The Hobbit films have received the green light. Check out the official press release below:

The two films based on "The Hobbit" are now greenlit and will begin principal photography in February 2011, under the direction of Peter Jackson, it was jointly announced today by Toby Emmerich, President and Chief Operating Officer, New Line Cinema, Alan Horn, President and Chief Operating Officer, Warner Bros. and Steve Cooper, co-Chief Executive Officer of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.

"Exploring Tolkien's Middle-earth goes way beyond a normal film-making experience" Jackson says, "It's an all-immersive journey into a very special place of imagination, beauty and drama. We're looking forward to re-entering this wondrous world with Gandalf and Bilbo - and our friends at New Line Cinema, Warner Brothers and MGM".

"Peter is a filmmaker of incomparable ability; having him return to Middle-earth to produce and direct is a dream come true. A true original, Peter is a gifted story-teller, visionary director and pioneer in film technology," said Emmerich. "Reuniting with Peter, Fran and Philippa truly makes it feel like we are going 'there and back again.'"

"There is no human being on the planet as qualified as Peter Jackson to direct these films," said Horn. "Peter is incredibly talented and has the creative vision and experience to bring this beloved property to life in a way that no other filmmaker could. And the team of Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens has proven through their work on the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy that no one is more skilled at transforming Tolkien's written words into a vibrant, living language that makes the audience believe they are not merely visiting Middle-earth, but actually living in it. We couldn't be more thrilled and look forward to seeing 'The Hobbit' take shape under Peter's stewardship and the team he is putting together."

"MGM is excited to move forward and add to the successful 'Lord of the Rings' franchise," said Cooper. "Under Peter's direction, the films will undoubtedly appeal to fans of the original 'LOTR' trilogy and also bring the stories to a new generation of fans."

Jackson, who directed all three "Lord of the Rings" films, will helm the two films back-to-back, telling the story of "The Hobbit" in two parts. Jackson will utilize groundbreaking visual effects and his incomparable story-telling to bring J.R.R. Tolkien's novel to the big screen. Both Hobbit movies will be filmed in Digital 3-D, using the latest camera and stereo technology to create a high quality, comfortable viewing experience. Jackson also co-wrote the screenplays with Fran Walsh, Phillipa Boyens and Guillermo del Toro.

"The Hobbit" is being co-produced by New Line Cinema and MGM, with New Line managing production, Warner Bros Pictures handling domestic distribution and MGM distributing internationally. Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh and Carolynne Cunningham are producing the films, with Phillipa Boyens as co-producer and Ken Kamins as executive producer.

[Haazhel_Thorn]

New Line, Warner Bros. Pictures and MGM have officially announced in a press release the casting of the various dwarf characters!

Martin Freeman is Bilbo Baggins.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/185...fficially-cast
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2010...or-the-hobbit/

German version with pics:
http://www.herr-der-ringe-film.de/v3...news_57536.php

[Granite]

Hobbit to be filmed in New Zealand

New Zealand will remain the home of "The Hobbit" after the government struck a US$25 million deal with Warner Bros. and promised labor law changes to stop the film studio from relocating the big-budget movie production.

A short-lived union boycott prompted Warner Bros. representatives to travel to New Zealand this week to review the studio's decision to shoot Peter Jackson's two-part adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's fantasy in New Zealand.

Fearing the loss of the project worth an estimated $500 million and damage to the reputation of New Zealand's fledgling film industry, Prime Minister John Key stepped in, negotiating a deal to keep the project that was announced late on Wednesday.

"An agreement has been reached between the New Zealand government and Warner Bros. that will enable the two Hobbit movies to be directed by Sir Peter Jackson to be made in New Zealand," Key told a news conference.

Jackson's adaptation of Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" was shot in his home country of New Zealand and garnered major international publicity for New Zealand. Warner Bros. sold nearly $3 billion worth of tickets at the box office, and the filmmaker and his team won 11 Academy Awards in 2003, including best film.

Economists said the loss of "The Hobbit" could cost New Zealand up to $1.5 billion and the danger of losing the film brought thousands of protestors into the streets in the past week.

Key said the government would introduce legislation into parliament on Thursday to change local labor laws at the heart of the dispute over "The Hobbit" which sparked protests on the streets across the country over the past week.

TAX BREAK AND LEGAL CHANGE

The row erupted when actors' unions said the movie's producers would not allow them to negotiate a minimum wage and working conditions for their members.

Key said laws would be changed to clarify the differences between a contract worker and a movie production employee.

"We will be moving to ensure that New Zealand law in this area is settled to give film producers like Warner Bros. the confidence they need to produce their movies in New Zealand," said Key.

As part of the deal, New Zealand will also expand its film subsidy program for big budget movies, providing an extra US$7.5 million tax rebate for each "Hobbit" movie on top of the usual 15 percent.

Key said Warner Bros., a unit of Time Warner Inc, also agreed to a joint marketing deal with the New Zealand government which would promote the country as a film production and tourism destination.

The government will offset US$10 million of those costs.

Filming is expected to start in February 2011 with the first movie due for release in late 2012 and the second a year later.

"I am delighted that we have reached this result," Key said in a statement.

"Making the two Hobbit movies here will not only safeguard work for thousands of New Zealanders, but it will also follow the success of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy in once again promoting New Zealand on the world stage."

"The Hobbit" is based on the adventures of Bilbo Baggins, a hobbit who lives in the land of Middle-earth that is filled with wizards, elves and other fantasy creatures. Bilbo goes on a quest to find treasure guarded by a dragon.

The book, first published in 1937, is the precursor to the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy that is also based in Middle-earth.

[Granite]

Casting confirmations - Gollum and Gandalf!

The casting news keeps coming for The Hobbit! Andy Serkis and Ian McKellen have officially signed on to reprise the roles of Gollum and Gandalf—and even more familiar faces may be returning as well.

According to Deadline, a deal has been closed for Serkis to once again don the motion-capture suit and perform the role of Gollum for director Peter Jackson's two-part adaptation of The Hobbit. Serkis' portrayal of the doomed creature in The Lord of the Rings was a breakthrough both for him and for the art of motion capture, bringing Gollum to life almost entirely through CG.

Meanwhile, EW.com has confirmed that Ian McKellen has also officially signed his contract to portray Gandalf the Grey, one of the few characters who plays a major role in both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.

The news comes on the heels of last week's spectacular revelation that Elijah Wood was also coming back as Frodo Baggins for scenes that will frame the story and provide a link to the earlier Rings movies.

But more names from the Lord of the Rings trilogy may be returning as well. Deadline says that Christopher Lee is in talks to reprise the role of the wizard Saruman, and that Ian Holm may cameo as the older version of Bilbo Baggins, which he played in the Rings movies (the younger Bilbo will be played by Martin Freeman in The Hobbit). Both Cate Blanchett's Galadriel and Hugo Weaving's Elrond are expected to show up in the films as well, and Orlando Bloom as Legolas may also make an appearance.

As noted before, Jackson and his co-writers (Fran Walsh, Phillippa Boyens and one-time director Guillermo del Toro) may have stretched their adaptation of The Hobbit to fit some of these characters into that novel's storyline. But we would be lying if we didn't admit that the thought of seeing these actors playing their beloved roles again almost overrides any concerns about liberties taken with the text.

[j7wild]

so pretty much everyone will be back from the sequel trilogy except the ones that weren't born yet: the 4 hobbits.

will Liv Tyler be back?



wasn't Arwen about 2,700 years old in the Lord of the Rings timeline?

[j7wild]

Peter Jackson says some interesting things about shooting at 48fps.

Unlike 3D, this seems really to advance filmmaking in general. I´m very interested in watching the result.

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=76341


Peter Jackson on Shooting The Hobbit at 48 fps
Source: Peter Jackson April 12, 2011

Peter Jackson has updated his Facebook page with a post talking about why they are shooting The Hobbit films at 48 frames per second (fps) versus the usual 24 fps. You can read the post below and view a couple of new photos from the set:

Time for an update. Actually, we've been intending to kick off with a video, which is almost done, so look out for that in the next day or two. In the meantime, I thought I'd address the news that has been reported about us shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 frames per second, and explain to you what my thoughts are about this.

We are indeed shooting at the higher frame rate. The key thing to understand is that this process requires both shooting and projecting at 48 fps, rather than the usual 24 fps (films have been shot at 24 frames per second since the late 1920's). So the result looks like normal speed, but the image has hugely enhanced clarity and smoothness. Looking at 24 frames every second may seem ok--and we've all seen thousands of films like this over the last 90 years--but there is often quite a lot of blur in each frame, during fast movements, and if the camera is moving around quickly, the image can judder or "strobe."


Shooting and projecting at 48 fps does a lot to get rid of these issues. It looks much more lifelike, and it is much easier to watch, especially in 3-D. We've been watching HOBBIT tests and dailies at 48 fps now for several months, and we often sit through two hours worth of footage without getting any eye strain from the 3-D. It looks great, and we've actually become used to it now, to the point that other film experiences look a little primitive. I saw a new movie in the cinema on Sunday and I kept getting distracted by the juddery panning and blurring. We're getting spoilt!

Originally, 24 fps was chosen based on the technical requirements of the early sound era. I suspect it was the minimum speed required to get some audio fidelity out of the first optical sound tracks. They would have settled on the minimum speed because of the cost of the film stock. 35mm film is expensive, and the cost per foot (to buy the negative stock, develop it and print it), has been a fairly significant part of any film budget.

So we have lived with 24 fps for 9 decades--not because it's the best film speed (it's not by any stretch), but because it was the cheapest speed to achieve basic acceptable results back in 1927 or whenever it was adopted.

None of this thinking is new. Doug Trumbull developed and promoted a 60 frames per second process called ShowScan about 30 years ago and that looked great. Unfortunately it was never adopted past theme park use. I imagine the sheer expense of burning through expensive film stock at the higher speed (you are charged per foot of film, which is about 18 frames), and the projection difficulties in cinemas, made it tough to use for "normal" films, despite looking amazing. Actually, if anybody has been on the Star Tours ride at Disneyland, you've experienced the life like quality of 60 frames per second. Our new King Kong attraction at Universal Studios also uses 60 fps.


Now that the world's cinemas are moving towards digital projection, and many films are being shot with digital cameras, increasing the frame rate becomes much easier. Most of the new digital projectors are capable of projecting at 48 fps, with only the digital servers needing some firmware upgrades. We tested both 48 fps and 60 fps. The difference between those speeds is almost impossible to detect, but the increase in quality over 24 fps is significant.

Film purists will criticize the lack of blur and strobing artifacts, but all of our crew--many of whom are film purists--are now converts. You get used to this new look very quickly and it becomes a much more lifelike and comfortable viewing experience. It's similar to the moment when vinyl records were supplanted by digital CDs. There's no doubt in my mind that we're heading towards movies being shot and projected at higher frame rates.

Warner Bros. have been very supportive, and allowed us to start shooting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps, despite there never having been a wide release feature film filmed at this higher frame rate. We are hopeful that there will be enough theaters capable of projecting 48 fps by the time The Hobbit comes out where we can seriously explore that possibility with Warner Bros. However, while it's predicted that there may be over 10,000 screens capable of projecting THE HOBBIT at 48 fps by our release date in Dec, 2012, we don’t yet know what the reality will be. It is a situation we will all be monitoring carefully. I see it as a way of future-proofing THE HOBBIT. Take it from me--if we do release in 48 fps, those are the cinemas you should watch the movie in. It will look terrific!

MY OPINION:

This does sound like a much better advancement than 3D that's for sure.

Very much looking forward to The Hobbit and I trust Jackson will not give us the Lucas treatment.



I'm very interested in seeing how it looks and if this will become more and more mainstream.



The whole 3D thing just isn't that interesting imo, other than for Pixar-type movies.



Being a huge fan of the Tolkien books, and of the movies as well I will certainly be there opening day, and still hoping the Silmarillion somehow gets made as a series somehow, someday.

[Mithrandir01]

Look at it! LOOOOOK AT IT!

First video from set

Downloadable version, please!

[Hardkore]

Look at it! LOOOOOK AT IT!

First video from set

Downloadable version, please!

I can't take my eyes off of it. It looks so, so...precious.

[j7wild]

Look at it! LOOOOOK AT IT!

First video from set

Downloadable version, please!

I tried those 'tube' websites, facebook plug-ins, etc

I can't get this to download.

There is a Privacy encoding on the video which will not allow it's download link to show into those websites and plug-ins!

[j7wild]

Frodo is back in this?

Man, How old was he in the LOTR trilogy and how young is he in The Hobbit?