By now you probably know the sad news: Guillermo Del Toro has left The Hobbit. I will always wonder what Guillermo Del Toro’s version of The Hobbit would have been like.
Almost every movie fan site is full of chatter about this. Whose fault is it? Should Peter Jackson replace him?
I had hoped never to see a big-screen version of the film. The book’s tone is just too delicate, too playful, to perfect. It would require grand special effects and note-perfect casting. But it would also require a director who could restrain himself from turning the story’s modest adventure scenes into bloated Peter-Jackson action frenzies. Goblins are not orcs; they’re funnier, scrappier. Trolls are bumbling and funny. And there is nothing so dark and horrifying as the violence of The Lord of the Rings. And that director would have to respect that The Hobbit is more like a children’s story than an epic romance.
Del Toro was the one director I could imagine pulling it off.
Without him, I’m inclined to hope the whole thing goes away. But I doubt that’s possible. Too much creative energy has been invested in it.
So my mind turns to a few possible, but not entirely satisfying possibilities.
Peter Jackson? No. Just… no. He’s too heavy-handed. He’d try to make it a Return of the King-level epic. It wouldn’t be The Hobbit.
Alfonso Cuarón is a possibility. But he’s not known for respecting source material. He’d probably write his own story.
Brad Bird? Andrew Stanton? Hey, I’d love to see either of them try it. I just haven’t seen what they can do with live action films yet. But they know how to make a great all-ages adventure films, and how to fill action with character development and comedy. If I were choosing a director, I’d go to the two of them first.
As I was thinking this through, I arrived at another idea – a casting possibility I hadn’t considered before.
A lot of discussion over the past few years as focused on the casting of Bilbo. Most people think Ian Holm is too old for the role. I don’t think so; they can make actors look younger very effectively these days, and the character is supposed to look the same in The Fellowship of the Ring as he looked in The Hobbit, according to the text.
I’m not crazy about the idea of James McAvoy, although he’s one of the better suggestions that’s been made. Martin Freeman? I don’t think he’s strong enough to carry a movie. (He certainly didn’t make a strong impression in The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.)
I know this won’t be a popular idea, but as I watched Alice in Wonderland yesterday, it occurred to me that Johnny Depp – with those wildly enhance orange eyes – looked like he was related to Elijah Wood.
Then I thought, You know, he might do a decent impression of a young Ian Holm.
Then, the more I thought about Holm’s performance as the older Bilbo, the more it seemed just the right kind of semi-comic turn that Depp does so well. It’s been a while since we’ve seen a nuanced lead performance from him. I miss the pre-Jack-Sparrow Johnny Depp, the one who played Gilbert Grape.
And now, I can’t think of anybody I’d prefer to see in the role of Bilbo. He really would feel like an uncle to Elijah Wood’s Frodo – older, wiser, idiosyncratic, capable of playing a homebody who needs to be drawn out to become an adventurer. I’d give anything to see him face off with Serkis’s Gollum. He’d be strong enough to carry the movie and make the performance register when surrounded by special effects. And it would draw him out of the mode of Tim Burton clowns and into a character with a real arc and range of emotions.
If the movie must be made, I’m casting my vote.
Johnny Depp as Bilbo.
I was crushed when I heard this. I can’t imagine how Del Toro feels, having invested the last two years of his life in what could have been his dream job. I almost don’t want to see it now. Cuaron came to mind, but it wouldn’t be the same. Peter Jackson is a definite NO. I really enjoyed his trilogy for what it was, but it slowly turned into Saving Private Frodo.
I actually agree 100% with your Johnny Depp pitch. I never would have thought of that.
I’m going to have to politely disagree with you on Jackson. I believe you underestimate him Jeffrey. I’ve always felt he was the only real choice to direct. And, at this point, the smart bet — as along with Boyens, Walsh and del Toro he is supersaturated in the planned vision of the Hobbit films; having co-penned them. And I point you to the scenes from the beginning of Fellowship of the Ring. Jackson completely understands the heart and world of a Hobbit that can translate beautifully into the Hobbit. And, again, I think his action genre tendencies are well complemented by the poetic disposition of both Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens. And, can one really imagine anyone more passionate about the world of Tolkien than Jackson? A quick perusal of interviews and the wonderful documentaries on the LOTR Extended Editions answers that one a resounding NO! =) Granted, they could find a gem of a Director who’s lifelong dream has been to helm the Hobbit — and that would be a wonderful twist of fate. But I say why fix what’s not broke with Jackson and risk it all on a directing gun for hire.
The one element of the films that does cause me great concern, however, is the casting of Bilbo. Ian Holm so cemented that character in the Lord of the Rings, that finding a younger version of him in look and spirit is a tall order. It will be exciting to see how that issue is sorted out.
I wanted to add: I agree with your take on Holm, Jeffrey. I think he could return as well, but I haven’t seen anything yet to confirm that’s even a possibility. With make-up, CG, motion-capture, etc, making a slightly younger looking Bilbo out of an aging Ian Holm seems entirely feasible to me. If Holm is up to it, I’m wondering if this is an option Jackson and Weta have explored or tested in the development lead-up to the films.
Also, I wanted to make clear my enthusiasm for Jackson in no way diminishes my respect and enthusiasm for del Toro while he was on board. If PJ couldn’t do it, I couldn’t think of anyone more totally suited to helm these films. I’m confident there will be a lot of him in the films that eventually get made though (through the screenplays); and I find that very exciting.
One of the editors over at The Playlist made an interesting observation in one of the Hobbit comment threads earlier today:
“You need a pick who can do humanity, humor and soul. That’s what LOTR had above all the swordplay. It was a film about friendship and deep-seated bonds across the board. Multiple friends that would die for one another. There’s something special in that eludes most genre-ists work.”
Based on what he did with The Lord of the Rings Trilogy this best summarizes why my pick for the Director is Jackson.
This is GREAT news! Now they can get Ridley Scott to direct it! Now they can get Brian Helgeland to re-write the script! Now they can get Russell Crowe to star in it as Robin Hood…er, I mean, as the “grim-faced” Bard the Bowman of Dale.
C’mon, people, this is AWESOME news. Now they can turn the movie into what it should’ve been all along, changing it from the boring story of a boring hobbit’s misadventures with boring dwarves – YAWN -but about the people of Dale defending their city from that nasty dragon, Smaug!
Yes, people!!! I’m talking more action! More arrows! More fire! More EXPLOSIONS!!!!
Yes, people, this is a God-send! Who wants to see “The Hobbit” when now we can get…”Bard of Dale: the Untold Legend”!!!!
It’s weird that you said Andrew Stanton, because the minute I started thinking about someone who could sort of capture that childlike wonder of The Hobbit, that was the first person who came to mind. But then again, I’m interested in that live action John Carter of Mars he’s working on right now, so I guess I’d prefer it be someone else.
That said, I don’t see The Hobbit being made into a children’s story about magic, wonder, and friendships. That’s just not going to happen. It will be PG-13, and it will be an action epic with little if any humor. I just can’t see them doing it any other way. It would be too risky for them, or at least, they would perceive it that way.
And in general, I don’t think there are roles out there that Johnny Depp couldn’t play reasonably well, so if they cast him as Bilbo, I won’t complain. The mention of James McAvoy seems like it would fit as well.
I agree with Mayrock on several points and I would be very excited if PJ directed it and would not rule him out as being able to pull it off. However, I would be absolutely ecstatic if Brad Bird (or Andrew Stanton) were chosen. I love their ability to tell an engaging story and cater to all audiences without resorting to cheap laughs or shallow sentiment. As for Depp, out of every suggestion I’ve encountered for Bilbo and cringed he’s the best one I’ve heard, besides a digitally rejuvenated Ian Holm. I cannot tell you the horror I felt upon reading your April fool’s post – I’d neglected checking up on your blog and it was several weeks into April.
By the way Rick Ro., I must say your post had me laughing quite hard by the end.
Cuaron is my first choice, above either PJ or GDT. As for Martin Freeman, I’d argue that he wasn’t *supposed* to “make a strong impression” in “Hitchhiker’s”. Like Harry Potter, he’s more of a reference point character than a compelling protagonist in his own right. And that sounds like an ideal Hobbit descriptor to me. Johnny Depp is interesting; I can’t quite picture it, though I’d certainly be interested in seeing a screen test.
I’d also like to nominate Stephen Sommers. Yes, he’s made nothing but crap since “The Mummy”, but that movie showed a talent and promise that his subsequent paycheck movies shouldn’t be allowed to scrap. Maybe with a good script, GDT’s pre-production work and PJ’s guidance, he could finally make another good movie. Overall, though, Cuaron-Freeman sounds like a winner to moi. 🙂
If Peter Jackson had tacked it on right after LOTR, I’d be excited…but after a 3 hour King Kong and a bloated Lovely Bones, I think he may be too embedded in the studio system to get it right. The reason LOTR worked was because PJ was such a gamble…an indie director with one studio film (a failure, The Frightners), who brought an edge and sensibility to a giant project. Now he is a “name” and can do whatever he wants…and he does, which is the problem.
Del Toro was a great choice; I’m sad to see him leave, but excited that now he can finally get back to work on other projects. Cuaron was my first thought…his work on Harry Potter and Children of Men solidified that for me. Plus, he’s already tight with Jackson and del Toro and they might be able to reign in some of his tendencies to stray from the source material.
Bird and Stanton are fantastic choices, but I agree that I want to see how they do with their first live-action projects (Stanton with “John Carter” and Bird with “Mission Impossible IV”–an inspired choice). But then I started thinking about this…
MGM is dying financially. The best guarantee I can think of that this project would work and retain its whimsy, wit and sense of adventure is to sell it to Pixar and do a computer-animated adventure. Sure, it wouldn’t mesh with LOTR…but the closest thing to a sure-thing in terms of quality in Hollywood these days is Pixar (advance word on Toy Story 3 is that it bucks the trend on third movies). It’ll never happen, but it’s still the best I can think of…
What Jackson did right with LOTR, was cast a perfect cast, and utilize a great visual team. He made Middle Earth come alive. The rest we can write off to Tolkien himself. I think it was the fact source material was as strong as it was that it was carried it off as well as it did.
I use King Kong as proof, a visually stunning movie but flat every where else. I have no faith in Jacksons or co. Story telling ability. I am not one to object to what he cut out, I think he trimmed what needed to be trimmed to be made a successful film. It is what he changed and his focus that showed he is not a story teller but a visual artist. Faramir and Treebeard in the Two Towers are prime examples, in the bonus stuff Walsh and Jackson go on about how these (perfect) characters needed to change because you can not tell as story or have characters develop the way Tolkien wrote it.
I am happy with Jackson remaining a producer and sorry I can’t provide a better solution to Direct. I just hope Jackson doesn’t do it and that they can wait until someone proper can.
I will use a piece from Christian History and Biography to some it up.
“Tolkien anticipated his books might inspire a film adaption, and he stated his concerns in a letter he wrote in June 1958. “The failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration,” he explained, “and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies.” He objected to editors who “cut the parts of the story upon which its characteristic and peculiar tone principally depends, showing a preference for fights,” and said he would resent “perversion of the characters … even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery.””
Adam Hildebrandt wrote:
I will use a piece from Christian History and Biography to some it up.
“Tolkien anticipated his books might inspire a film adaption, and he stated his concerns in a letter he wrote in June 1958. “The failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration,” he explained, “and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies.” He objected to editors who “cut the parts of the story upon which its characteristic and peculiar tone principally depends, showing a preference for fights,” and said he would resent “perversion of the characters … even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery.””
This is precisely why I like The Fellowship of the Ring very much, and why I dislike most of The Return of the King. And… again… why I have no faith in Jackson and Co.
Just one director for The Hobbit comes to mind: Ralph Bashki. Thank you and goodnight.
Very sad news. I hadn’t heard it until I read your blog today. Frankly, I was afraid this was coming during the last year.
Jackson directing Hobbit? No. I just don’t trust him to sustain the whimsy of the first act of Fellowship through most of a film. I do not wish to see Hobbit turned into a series of action set pieces to show off WETA’s digital prowess.
Who should direct? Stanton or Bird are obvious. Neither one will be available, though; Bird has 1906 & MI:IV (!) & Stanton has JCoM & Monsters, INC II (!) that will wrap them up until 2012 & beyond. But what about Danny Boyle? Millions showed he could direct whimsy & take fantasy seriously. I think he’d get the danger of book, too, in appropriate measure. If a film version of Ender’s Game ever gets off the ground, I’d love for Boyle to be at the helm! And I think he’d do OK with Hobbit though, admittedly, he’s not del Toro & could never make a movie like The Golden Army.
But, now that del Toro’s off the movie, I wanna see it die & never get made. God forbid they give it to someone like Burton or a Harry Potter alum (except Cuaron, who I don’t think would be interested, having seen the path the project took under del Toro, not that it was his fault ‘cos I don’t know), especially Columbus. I can see the studio going with someone like Andrew Adamson, just because he’s got “fantasy movie” cred. (SHUDDER) I now have no confidence that Hobbit will be made right, meaning per the book.
But . . . I think it could be done. If Shyamalan gets Last Airbender right (the animated series is a bit Hobbit-like, frankly, in many ways, though far too epic & grand), it could inform H’wood that it’s possible to make this movie the way it should be made.
I’ve seen a lot of talk over at the TORn forums about Peter Jackson’s wife, Fran Walsh, possibly taking the reins. You know, I actually like that idea a lot.
Jackson willing to direct Hobbit, but what about Fran Walsh? | Examiner.com, June 1, 2010
“MGM is dying financially. The best guarantee I can think of that this project would work and retain its whimsy, wit and sense of adventure is to sell it to Pixar and do a computer-animated adventure. Sure, it wouldn’t mesh with LOTR…but the closest thing to a sure-thing in terms of quality in Hollywood these days is Pixar (advance word on Toy Story 3 is that it bucks the trend on third movies). It’ll never happen, but it’s still the best I can think of…”
It would be great if people from Pixar worked on this movie- it would most certainly end up brilliant- but I don’t want Pixar’s name on it. I’m not big on the notion of Pixar starting to make adaptations of other people’s work. I feel like if they start doing that, even if it’s with good intentions, their own original ideas might start getting shoved aside. Since they’re pretty much the only company that can be counted on for original ideas anymore, I don’t really want to see this happen.
“But, now that del Toro’s off the movie, I wanna see it die & never get made. God forbid they give it to someone like Burton or a Harry Potter alum (except Cuaron, who I don’t think would be interested, having seen the path the project took under del Toro, not that it was his fault ‘cos I don’t know), especially Columbus. I can see the studio going with someone like Andrew Adamson, just because he’s got “fantasy movie” cred. (SHUDDER) I now have no confidence that Hobbit will be made right, meaning per the book.”
I’m going to take flak for this, but I wouldn’t be too disappointed to see Tim Burton take this one. There are better choices, but I think Burton has a knack for childlike wonder when he makes an effort at it. I mean, Alice in Wonderland was just average, but I still think he might do well. The others, though, I wouldn’t want to see. I thought Andrew Adamson did fine with Narnia, but I wouldn’t trust him with The Hobbit yet.
“But . . . I think it could be done. If Shyamalan gets Last Airbender right (the animated series is a bit Hobbit-like, frankly, in many ways, though far too epic & grand), it could inform H’wood that it’s possible to make this movie the way it should be made.”
I can’t put into words how much I’m hoping The Last Airbender goes well. First off, the TV series is one of the best Western animated shows ever, and secondly, I really want to see a return to the days when Shyamalan was one of the most brilliant directors in the industry. Because he was brilliant.
That link about Fran Walsh I originally posted might not be working it appears. Here’s an alternate from Mark Sommer over at Hollywood Jesus:
Hobbit Director? Our Friendly Suggestion
For anyone interested, go check out the Director/Writing Team commentary tracks on the LOTR Extended editions. You may join me in the assessment that Fran Walsh could be the visionary and inspired choice to Direct The Hobbit. She’s brilliant.
Andrew Adamson is the best director I can think of (Shrek, Shrek 2, Chronicles of Narnia).
Jeffrey said:
“This is precisely why I like The Fellowship of the Ring very much, and why I dislike most of The Return of the King. And… again… why I have no faith in Jackson and Co.”
Wow! Your opinion of The Return of the King has changed significantly since it was originally released. You ranked it as your Number 2 film of the year in 2003. Now you “dislike” most of it?
Jackson has stated that he does not want to direct The Hobbit. He knows that he would feel the need to “top” LOTR and he knows that is not what the story deserves or needs. I have faith that if he ends up directing the films then he will control himself and do his best to treat the story as something different than LOTR.
Indeed, my opinion has changed, Phil. In repeated viewings, I’ve come to dislike Return of the King. It loses so much of the subtlety and storytelling, the characters stray far from what Tolkien intended, and Jackson loses all restraint when it comes to indulging his love for wild violence. There are some sequences that still thrill me, but others make it an incredibly long and tedious circus. The extended version is even worse (where the extended version of Fellowship is an improvement).
Two words: “Game over.”
I mean… come on, Legolas? “Game over?”
When was the last time you read The Return of the King? The book is full of “wild violence”, much of which Jackson left out of the film. I agree that a few of the characters stray from what Tolkien intended, but most of them do not. I prefer the more intimate scale of FOTR but that applies to the books as well. ROTK in both film and book form is a gigantic epic.
There are grand battles and scenes of violence in the book, but I’m talking about show-offy, “look what I can do” kinds of zany violence that are more about special effects “wow” moments than storytelling. The battles go on so long, at the expense of storytelling moments (the shoving aside of Samwise’s moment with the star, for example). I feel battered by the end, and not in a good “I’ve suffered with the characters” sort of way, but in a “Did everything have to be turned up to 11?” kind of way.
Isn’t the medium of film sort of about “look what I can do” moments – at least to some extent? Did Jackson go too far from time to time? Sure. But I feel he still did a great job of balancing those giant, epic moments with smaller, more intimate moments. The film is full of them. Samwise gets his moment with the star, unless I am forgetting something. Pippin and Gandalf have one of the great film conversations about death in this film. Sam and Frodo share a quiet moment on the slopes of Mt. Doom just before the eagles arrive. I could go on and on. Most people I know that did not read the books but enjoyed the films told me they thought there were too many of those quiet moments.
But, this is not what your original post was about so I will leave it be. Cary on with The Hobbit talk!
I think Depp would be great as Bilbo as long as he leaves his Tim Burton craziness at the door.
I have a lot of faith in Johnny Depp’s ability to adapt to the character with great respect to the source material. Look at his whimsical and tender turn in Finding Neverland, along with Benny and Joon and other great, more nuanced characters than Captain Jack and Willy Wonka.
Brad Bird and Stanton would be great choices for the strength of balance between character development and plot they’ve shown. The problem with Peter Jackson and and the return of the king is that the characters sink into stereotypes, heroic statues (there are great moments. but overall, the plot marches heavily forward, overshadowing those moments)
Hope that the story is done with the respect and light hand it deserves.
Depp. Mmm. Here’s another twist. I guess Elijah Wood is looking a bit older these days than he did back when shooting LOTR. Not that I greatly enjoyed his performance in LOTR. But there would be a kind of family resemblance, wouldn’t there? As for director, I could go with Cuaron.
This is a response to a much earlier comment, but SAVING PRIVATE FRODO is an AMAZING description of the LOTR movies. What disappointed me so much about them was that Aragorn, in the books, was always very much about his becoming king, and didn’t carry this Spiderman-like whining about “my human weakness.” And Frodo came off as a burden himself, someone who couldn’t fend for himself and who just had to be rescued all the time, which bothered me so much.
I wonder if Depp would carry too much stardom to the flick as Bilbo, if he would be too easily recognizable. I like him a lot, but I wonder if that would turn the film into more of a franchise grab.