# Peter Jackson prevented from making The Hobbit **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 20, 2006, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124 "2006-11-20T08:41:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2006, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/101 "2006-11-23T18:03:06Z")
[QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] You know, that’s crap. Look at any one of the very FAITHFUL renditions of Shakespeare plays done by Hollywood over the years. Some of them without a single line cut. Does that preclude doing a movie of a Shakespeare play involving some creative license? Not at all. But that’s because they’ve all been done more than once the RIGHT way. The first LotR movies should have been done **correctly**. They should have been incredibly faithful to the text. They should not have been Peter Jackson’s version of the events described in _The Lord of the Rings_. Most of his additions were done for no other reason than his own ego, to be able to say he had “improved” upon the story. [/QUOTE] :rolleyes: The “right” and “correct” way? What determines “right” and “correct”? How is a movie “right” and “correct”? Is it the degree to which it duplicates the book? You already have the book, so nothing is going to out book the book. A slavish duplication would be pleasing to nobody. Comfortable for the fanboys? Why, so they could sit with a checklist and ensure that all the bases were covered? Where did Peter Jackson ever say that he “improved” upon the story? Shouldn’t the standard be the degree to which it is a good or enjoyable movie? ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2006, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/102 "2006-11-23T19:06:07Z")
To those of you who liked the book and the movies, I have nothing to say. My dispute is with those people who didn’t like the book but who like the movie. I think that there’s something slightly dishonest about making a movie of a book you don’t like by changing the things you like to be closer to books that you do like. Just go and make a film of the books you like. And I object to the characterization of people who don’t think the movies are a very good as “fanboys.” In other words, you can’t be bothered to explain why you like the movies better than the books. You’d rather insult people by calling them names. That’s making personal insults instead of arguing. Why don’t you go through the movies and explain to us why you think that Jackson’s changes are better than the book, rather than calling us names? ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2006, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/103 "2006-11-23T20:30:20Z")
It’s not the “right” way because if you are making a film OF a book, rather than an adaptation, you should stick to the story. Hence, filmed Shakespeare plays, or the filmed version of Pagliacci, done by Zefferelli. If you are going to make up stuff and add it in, then say that the film is BASED upon the works of JRR Tolkein. But don’t present the film as the book itself. That’s the point I’ve made on the subject ever since the project was announced. Personally, I enjoyed the movies, for the most part (I only really got ticked off over the poor treatment of Faramir). But I was disappointed the movies didn’t stick to the books, for the reasons I’ve stated. ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2006, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/104 "2006-11-23T20:56:21Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] :rolleyes: The “right” and “correct” way? What determines “right” and “correct”? How is a movie “right” and “correct”? Is it the degree to which it duplicates the book? You already have the book, so nothing is going to out book the book. A slavish duplication would be pleasing to nobody. Comfortable for the fanboys? Why, so they could sit with a checklist and ensure that all the bases were covered? Where did Peter Jackson ever say that he “improved” upon the story? Shouldn’t the standard be the degree to which it is a good or enjoyable movie? [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Yookeroo] I’m going to have to say that the idea that there’s a RIGHT way is crap. Creative license is always allowed, even when there aren’t 100% faithful versions available. Being 100% faithful to LOTR would’ve led to some pretty crappy movies. [/QUOTE] Why do you two think that changing the story will make it more interesting? I agree that some parts will have to be cut out, that’s not a problem. But Jackson made numerous changes to the story, all of which I personally dislike. Which changes in particular is it that you like so much? ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2006, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/105 "2006-11-23T21:01:01Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] **Wendell** , _Return of the King_ is the second highest grossing movie of all time, with over 1.1 billion dollars in ticket sales. _The Two Towers_ is sixth, and _The Fellowship of the Ring_ is 12th. If that’s a waste of money, count me in for my share of the waste. [http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide](http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide) _Return of the King_ also won something like 11 Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Director. If the intention is to make a good movie, you can’t really do much better than that. If the intention is to please fanboys, well, I’d agree that _that_ would be a waste of time and money, because nothing will be able to live up to their mastery of the text and encyclopedic knowledge of all the backstory for each character. [/QUOTE] Yes, it is a good movie, and it deserves to be succesful. I think that most people agree that the visual aspects were well done. But it could’ve easily been an even better movie, that’s the problem. I will note that I am not a “fanboy”, as such. I have just read and liked the books. I would disagree with stupid changes in movie adaptations to any of the books I have read. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2006, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/106 "2006-11-23T21:23:49Z")
The term “fanboy” has no meaning except “You like a book, film, or TV show that I don’t care for. Obviously no one who disagrees with my opinions should be listened to. Your like for books, movies, and TV shows that I dislike shows that you’re worthless and your opinions should be ignored.” ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/107 "2006-11-24T03:10:56Z")
Hmmm. I use the term “fanboy” to mean fanatic. Particularly, fanatic to the point that one a: knows copious bits of arcane information about a topic, b: cops an attitude about the topic and their knowledge of it, and c: has a hard time coping with dissenting opinions about the topic. I think of Comic Book Guy. people I knew who were really into D&D, and Star Trek convention stereotypes as examples. If the term has some other connotation, more offensive than my intention, I do apologize for that. **mr jp** , I guess all I can say about the changes that I liked is the change that made me not get really, really bored halfway through The Two Towers, and that it didn’t require me to start skipping paragraphs just to get through all the long trekking here and there. I liked that I didn’t have to keep saying “Okay, wait, which character of all the similarly named characters was he talking about there again?” I wouldn’t be able to tell you the first thing about what was added or changed, because I only read the books once, in high school. ---
**Author:** ![Cartooniverse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cartooniverse/32/3084_2.png) [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/108 "2006-11-24T03:45:08Z")
[QUOTE=pinkfreud] Hmmm. Coppola takes on Tolkien. I can see it now: **The Gondorfather**. [/QUOTE] Leave The One True Ring. Take the cannolis. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![NJ\_Kef\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b487fb/32.png) [@NJ\_Kef\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NJ_Kef_1)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/109 "2006-11-24T05:11:41Z")
[QUOTE=DSYoungEsq] The first LotR movies should have been done **correctly**. They should have been incredibly faithful to the text. They should not have been Peter Jackson’s version of the events described in _The Lord of the Rings_. Most of his additions were done for no other reason than his own ego, to be able to say he had “improved” upon the story. [/QUOTE] True dat! For a long time I feared a novelization of Jackson’s _Lord of the Rings_, because I suspected Jackson thought he had improved upon Tolkien. Aragorn or Faramir, for example as a wise, stern leader in exile who sometimes doubted his own decisions was not dramatic enough for Jackson. He had to reinvent them. Elrond too, not to mention Pippin, Merry, and Gimli. I thought only Eowyn and Wormtongue emerged relatively unscathed. > [@](#): > > You will notice I am less critical of material cut; if it isn’t imperative to the story, who really cares. In THAT, at least, I am not critical of the movies. The first Harry Potter film could have used that directorial discretion. I am glad Tom Bombadil was exerpted from the movie. I agree in principle. I’m not sure what was excessive about the first Harry Potter movie, but certainly the sequels have benefited from decisive editing. Tom Bombadil would have slowed down the movie, but at some point I wanted _The Fellowship of the Ring_ to slow down. The movie never made me feel at home in the Shire or Middle-earth. By the end of Tolkien’s _Fellowship of the Ring_, I think most readers are ready to settle down in Middle-earth, either the Shire, Rivendell, or Lòrien. > [@](#): > > But ADDING things that aren’t in the original is just wrong on so many levels… My sentiments exactly. Staying on topic, I think a Jackson treatment of _The Hobbit_ would be a mistake. He doesn’t understand that readers love _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_ because of the author’s distinctive voice, personality, and authority. We trust Tolkien because his manner of story-telling assures us that he knows what he’s talking about. This is missing from the movies. Peter Jackson thinks he is adapting novels. In fact, he is adapting fairy tales and heroic romances, not novels at all. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/110 "2006-11-24T05:50:04Z")
[Sir Ian is considering not doing the movie if Jackson isn’t](http://www.dailyindia.com/show/85191.php/Sir-Ian-Mckellen-may-walk-out-of-The-Hobbit-over-Jackson-snub) ---
**Author:** ![mr.jp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/48db29/32.png) [@mr.jp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mr.jp)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 8:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/111 "2006-11-24T08:42:13Z")
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian] **mr jp** , I guess all I can say about the changes that I liked is the change that made me not get really, really bored halfway through The Two Towers, and that it didn’t require me to start skipping paragraphs just to get through all the long trekking here and there. I liked that I didn’t have to keep saying “Okay, wait, which character of all the similarly named characters was he talking about there again?” I wouldn’t be able to tell you the first thing about what was added or changed, because I only read the books once, in high school. [/QUOTE] I understand what you are saying. The movie is more action-packed. However, that is necessarily true for any proper adaptation of the story. It would be silly to spend one hour of the movie with footage of characters walking through the wilderness. You know, I think we might be in agreeement here. I agree that the movie is well made and has good pace. And you might easily agree that the different script changes are stupid, if you could remember how the book described those characters / events. ---
**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 9:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/112 "2006-11-24T09:27:42Z")
> [@](#): > > Several years ago, Mark Ordesky told us that New Line have rights to make not just The Hobbit but a second “LOTR prequel”, covering the events leading up to those depicted in LOTR. That idea is gonna give me nightmares. If it comes into fruition I’ll be a sad man indeed. You know what? I am selfish enough to want the Hobbit to remain _untouched_. I realize that it has already been made into graphic novels and cartoons and so on, but not in a rendition that stands out as the defeault interpretation of the book, the way Peter Jackson’s movies are. I don’t hold much interest for his movies. I agreed on the first movie, Gandalf and Saruman were superbly casted, as was Sam. But the two others simply didn’t do it for me. Too much bad computer art, too much weird editing, too much Peter Jackson. The Hobbit remains basically untouched by mainstream Hollywood affiliates. I sure hope it stays that way, 'cause the book has a charm that simply won’t be replicated to the silver screen. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2006, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/113 "2006-11-24T23:57:16Z")
I don’t know where someone would find the material to make a “LOTR prequel” movie coming in between _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_. If someone took anything from _The Silmarillion_ or anywhere else in Tolkien’s works outside _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_, they would have problems, since Saul Zaentz doesn’t own the cinematic rights to any part of Tolkien other than _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_. The Tolkien estate owns the rights to everything else in Tolkien. I suspect that they would be unlikely to allow anyone to use material from any part of Tolkien’s works that they still own the cinematic rights to. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/114 "2006-11-25T01:37:24Z")
[QUOTE=Wendell Wagner] I don’t know where someone would find the material to make a “LOTR prequel” movie coming in between _The Hobbit_ and _The Lord of the Rings_. [/QUOTE] They could take stuff from the appendices in ROTK. Timelines, backstory about Aragorn & Arwen, earlier visits by them to Lothlorien, earlier history of the dwarves, the Sylvan elves, and so forth. Even the ride of Eorl the Young to the rescue of Gondor, back when threatened by the Wainriders, and their passage near Lothlorien. Aragorn’s hunt for Gollum, Aragorn’s stint as Thorondor in Gondor, serving Ecthelion, Baldor’s boast to enter the paths of the dead and its unfortunate outcome, the Fall of Helm Hammerhand, the end of the North Kingdom, etc etc etc. I’m not saying they should. But they could. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/115 "2006-11-25T18:28:13Z")
[QUOTE=Qadgop the Mercotan] They could take stuff from the appendices in ROTK. … [/QUOTE] This PJ/Hobbit story is the first I’ve heard of a 2nd prequel movie. Has there been any informed speculation (ie, did PJ drop any hints?) as to what the content of this movie would be? ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/116 "2006-11-25T21:36:46Z")
[QUOTE=NJ\_Kef] Tom Bombadil would have slowed down the movie, but at some point I wanted _The Fellowship of the Ring_ to slow down. The movie never made me feel at home in the Shire or Middle-earth. By the end of Tolkien’s _Fellowship of the Ring_, I think most readers are ready to settle down in Middle-earth, either the Shire, Rivendell, or Lòrien. [/QUOTE] I am now of the opinion that PJ tried to squeeze in four movies’ worth of material into three, but I am stumped as to where to make the breaks between the films. Release the 4th one in the following summer to record ticket sales? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 25, 2006, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/117 "2006-11-25T21:39:41Z")
[QUOTE=John DiFool] I am now of the opinion that PJ tried to squeeze in four movies’ worth of material into three, but I am stumped as to where to make the breaks between the films. Release the 4th one in the following summer to record ticket sales? [/QUOTE] Slight hijack: **John DiFool** , no offense, but you could please not hit “enter” after you hit the end of the message box? The board coding and software will “wrap” your text for you, so it’s unnecessary. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2006, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/118 "2006-11-26T20:22:51Z")
I wrote: \> I suspect that they would be unlikely to allow anyone to use material from any \> part of Tolkien’s works that they still own the cinematic rights to. Let me make a stronger statement. I’m now told that the Tolkien family has outright said that they won’t authorize anyone to make a film from the material in _The Silmarillion_. It’s possible that at some future time enough of the family that has vetoed the idea of such a film will die and the younger members of the family may feel differently. But then, eventually the copyright for the book will run out and anyone who feels like it can make a movie from Tolkien’s materials. According to a news story just recently, Saul Zaentz says that he would prefer that Peter Jackson make the film of _The Hobbit_ if there is one to be made. ---
**Author:** ![Caridwen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c89c15/32.png) [@Caridwen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caridwen)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2006, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/119 "2006-11-27T01:50:13Z")
I hope this wasn’t already posted- **Sam Raimi offered “The Hobbit”** [http://www.mania.com/52876.html](http://www.mania.com/52876.html) ---
**Author:** ![N9IWP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/n9iwp/32/3154_2.png) [@N9IWP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/N9IWP)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124/120 "2006-11-27T04:17:47Z")
Saul Zaentz says he wants PJ to do it (maybe after New Line loses the rights?) > **[Not So Fast New Line - The Zaentz says THE HOBBIT, "will definitely be shot...](http://legacy.aintitcool.com/node/30806)** > > Hey folks, Harry here - gather together, join hands and pray to Zaentz that this comes to pass! From IMDB As Lord of the Rings fans mounted a protest following word that New Line had dropped Peter Jackson from consideration as director of... Brian [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/peter-jackson-prevented-from-making-the-hobbit/381124.md?page=7)