
The rumor mills continue to whet appetites of fans who have been waiting the better part of a decade for The Hobbit to finally hit the big screen. On the heels of the latest news about scheduling being possibly shifted to accommodate long-time favorite Martin Freeman for the role of main character Bilbo Baggin, fan site TheOneRing provides some updates on the film's status and some possible changes (albeit minor) to the plot. It seems that our hero Bilbo may come across a lot more badass than we were lead to believe in the novel. -- Well, if you consider the concept of NOT lying on the ground unconscious while the epic climax known as "The Battle of Five Armies" takes place to be "badass," anyway. Also, with the veil of secrecy still firmly covering the mere idea of whether or not this film is moving forward, it seems there may also be more encouraging news in the frustrating process that has kept this film from production for several years.
As TheOneRing posts:
"According to our spy, if things go well with MGM and Spyglass in the next few weeks, ‘The Hobbit’ will head to production in January, pending negotiations with Freeman and filming could tie up actors for a year. (January happens to be an excellent weather month to shoot at the Hobbiton set.)"
This statement corroborates last month's report that Spyglass Entertainment had leaped a critical hurdle in the negotiations process to rescue the bankrupt MGM by creating a stake in the company. This report certainly gives the impression that with $1.9 billion on the table, those negotiations may soon conclude successfully, allowing the film to finally move forward.
Oh, but what about those "plot changes?" Well it seems that additional info was "inadvertently" drudged-up in a character summary, which seems to imply some changes from the book-to-film translation.
"Bilbo is described as “charming . . . is renowned for his dry and quirky sense of humor. There is an appealing vulnerability about him. Although . . . he doesn’t have huge courage he does become, particularly in the last battle, very brave."
The statement which specifies Bilbo finding "huge courage" at a point "particularly in the last battle" has led to speculation that he will have a much bigger involvement in the climactic Battle of Five Armies than the book, which had him laid out on the ground unconscious, safely concealed by the ring of power, which rendered him invisible. Of course, the uniqueness of that final battle, was that circumstances would find every group that Bilbo, Gandalf, and the group of Dwarves have encountered throughout their adventure congregated outside the Lonely Mountain looking for a piece of pilfered Dragon treasure. Things would then heat up when some angry goblins arrive and force some unconventional alliances. It's kind of like the end of The Blues Brothers, except without the cool car chases.
While Bilbo was mostly pacifistic in the book, a film obviously needs more visual dramatic elements for our protagonist and this change, if legit, does seem more than reasonable. His involvement in the final battle may just be more in passing (which would be an upgrade from sleeping through the whole shindig,) or we just may see him don some small armor and get into the swing of things, just as his Hobbit successors Merry and Pippin would years later in The Lord of the Rings.
Peter Jackson made plenty of changes to The Lord of the Rings which made it more conducive for a film, many of which were a lot more critical than this. And for the most part, those changes have proven themselves to be necessary. We need to see Bilbo's journey come completely full circle from the meek little man that we'll see of him in the beginning. Seeing him take the field with trusty sword Sting to shed some goblin and warg blood would undoubtedly drive that point home better than being some passive stumble-bum that saves the day in spite of himself.
Anyone out there familiar with the book? Do you think the change is justified?
Source: TheOneRing




Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 1–11 of 11
Ayanami
The changes to "the final battle" could be at the end of the 2nd movie. 1st movie is to cover "The Hobbit" 2nd was to bridge the gap between Hobbit and LotR. IF so, it could be another battle not mentioned or one that was briefly covered in another note by Tolkien or one that will be madeup out of whole cloth by Jackson.
jjfan1
I agree with estel131. Ive read the trilogy and the hobbit and feel that the plot should be made similar to the book. especially plots that is vital to a character's belief. I understand that some changes are necessary for the big screen but some sacrifices should be subtle. I feel the movie should entertain and inspire people to read the books. Not disappoint them once the book is read
estel131
This is difficult. I am torn as well. I agree with Arsenette about the fact that Bilbo is pacifistic. I do not agree that Peter Jackson was high when he read the trilogy. He is a film genius! Yes, he saw the trilogy as a "war epic" because it was and he most definitly understood the many themes and spirit. Now, it seems to me that you had to be smoking some pretty serious pipe weed to not see that. Anyway, I also agree with MrKrinklez. Hollywood should try and make book-movie adaptions more acurate especially this one. I doutb that fans of the book will be disappointed when they see the story has not been tampered with on film. It would make me and many other fans very happy indeed to see young Bilbo Baggins stay true to himself.
MrKrinklez
Forget it being a blockbuster, why can't Hollywood make book-movie adaptations artistically accurate rather than try their best to make money? It won't be a bust even if they kept the correct plot and the less competent moviegoers have a problem with it.
RSG210
I am torn. I absolutely agree with Arsenette about Bilbo being a pacifist and that it would definitly change his character. However, being a movie buff, I also agree that changing Bilbo's role in the Battle of Five Armies is necessary for a Hollywood Blockbuster. I've read the book more times than I would like to admit, and I can reconcile this change by treating the book and the movie as two seperate -though related- pieces of art. I don't believe this change will change the plot (just a few themes).
Arsenette
Anyone that thought that Jackson would leave well enough alone has to be smoking some serious pipe weed.
Personally I think it's horrible he's changing his character. The whole point of him cowering in a corner was that HE HATED WAR.. that's why he didn't get involved.. that's why at the end he was able to not be corrupted by the ring... that's the whole point. Doesn't make him a coward to be a pacifist.. Heck.. I'm not one and when I first read this book more than 30 years ago I GOT why he decided to let them fight among themselves. Jackson as usual is an idiot for not "getting" why those characters did what they did. Same reason why he switched all of Aragorns lines with Gandolf.. making them completely different. Maybe when Jackson read these books in the 1960's he was too high to understand.. all he saw was "war epic" and didn't get the spirit of the story.
MasterBojangles
I've read the hobbit, and found it an better read than lord of the rings. Something about a more simplistic story line. I alwaysed found the final battle kind of a back track in biblo's character development. He pawns off cheating gollum out of the ring and dashing out of the misty mountains as being heroic rather than lucky, and that leads him to leading the dwarfs through the forest where he actually does become brave and saves them from giant spiders(relatives of shelob) and helps them to escape the forest elves once they are captured. He proves that he becomes a true hero and even lists his accomplishments to the dragon smaug in the lonely mountain when he steals part of his treasure. Why then develop him to the point of being a spider slaying, elf tricking, dragon stealing their just to have him go back to being a bumbling hobbit? I agree with the changes and hope they deliver them appropriately.
Purplehasiso
They change the plot, I don't watch the movie. Pretty simple.
randomamber
Careful, but my nerd is showing.
I believe it is Baggins with an s.
chantler
OMG... just make the movie! It's been 7 years sense Lord of the rings came out. Just make the damn movie!
Atavax
why you gotta compare it to the blue brothers? its just going to lead to disappointment... nothing can match that movie's epicness.
it is still common for me and two friends to reenact the orange whip scene with the same line and gesture except replacing "orange whip" with the name of a beer while we are at a bar... the waitress never has any idea whats going on, but its good for a laugh.
Displaying 1–11 of 11