Tolkien Gateway

Talk:The Hobbit (film series)

Revision as of 21:51, 2 November 2010 by KingAragorn (Talk | contribs)

Dudes, this is awesome news! Dwarf lord

Hyarion wrote: "Unfortunately due to disputes between the distributing rights and the filming rights progress is slow." Is this correctly worded? It reads rather odd! --Earendilyon 13:42, 1 September 2006 (EDT)

It sounds better if we add a few commas in there: "Unfortunately, due to disputes between the distributing rights and the filming rights, progress is slow." --Narfil Palùrfalas 16:03, 1 September 2006 (EDT)

PJ not doing The Hobbit? At least we'll be spared of his revisionism. Sorry, Ringers! Rog 16:06, 20 November 2006 (EST)

Peter Jackson was actually confirmed last year to be producing/writing/etc for the film, however Guillermo del Toro, as of today, will be directing the film. As the other articles on films use the director's name I moved the article to keep with the standard. --Hyarion 22:24, 24 April 2008 (EDT)

Tolkien Estate litigation

Is there still litigation with the Tolkien estate that might slow progress? --Plant doc

New Line is currently resolving the situation with the Tolkien Estate and my guess is if they are already announcing GDT as the director they must have confidence it will be resolved shortly. --Hyarion 17:50, 25 April 2008 (EDT)


It's speculated that Christopher Lee will be voicing Smaug instead of appearing as Saruman. Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).

Stress "speculating", unstress "will be". Nothing's in the bag, in fact, there isn't even a bag yet. -- Ederchil (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 16:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Naming of film articles

At the moment the naming is in a bit of a muddle, with lots of relics still in existence from all the different name changes. We need to establish what articles we want. For instance, should we have one page for the Hobbit motion picture duology and then an article for each film? Just as the LOTR films has The Lord of the Rings: The Motion Picture Trilogy and then an article for each film. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  17:17, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I do think we will need a disambiguation article to be used when referencing someone/something that will be in both films. I'm assuming a unique name will be announced for each part of The Hobbit films, at which point we can move the current article to its proper page. As soon as we start getting information on the second film we can separate that content out to its own article. --Hyarion 18:51, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
I sort of agree with Hyarion. We're in a muddle because at the moment the films are. We don't know the actual name of the first film, second film or the both together. I think I would prefer "The Hobbit films" as a combined article for now, which is, at least, descriptively accurate if nothing else. --Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 19:36, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. We should have one article for now, and then diffuse later when we know the names of the films. 'The Hobbit Films' would be good. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  20:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Move to 'The Hobbit Films', yes? -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  10:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Did we ever come to a decision re: capital letters; I think it should probably be "The Hobbit films".
We will probably have to move this article back at some point, though..?--Mith (Talk/Contribs/Edits) 11:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
As a title I think it should be "The Hobbit Films"; in saying that, I don't really care - particularly as I anticipate that other editors will favour the lower case 'f'. -- KingAragorn  talk  contribs  edits  email  12:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)