I'm not sure that it's a "sequel" - what I thought I read was that he's splitting it into two segments - so maybe The Hobbit I covers the "There" part and The Hobbit II covers "Back Again" - or some integration of the Simirillion etc. But I'm not sure it's going to be a sequel. Though again, I embraced the hype well before I really read every single word in the news, so...I could possibly know not of what I speak.

I'm strangely uninterested in this project, especially considering my complete embrace of the LOTR hype beginning approximately 3 years before the first film finished production.

I spent a lot of long nights during college playing AD&D and knew all about dwarves, elves, and treeants; but I never had read any Tolkien. My first real exposure came when a friend “required” that I read each volume prior to the release of the movie that inspired it. Maybe I've changed since my die rolling days, but it just seemed like there was an excessive amount of time spent just walking. Maybe that was part of making a point of how enormous a task had been set before a small, hairy-footed halfling.

But I digress. For a couple months now, I've been thinking how I wished there were another Tolkien movie – or Star Wars movie or another chronicle of Narnia – in the works. Anything that might compete against and contribute to a failure of The Golden Compass at the box office.

Last I heard the second movie was going to be about a lot of the stuff that happens from the time Bilbo gets "Back Again" until the beginning of the Fellowship of the Ring. Either way I'm all for it.

Beth, if you had bothered to follow the link that would have been available if I had bothered to actually include it (you can never find a telepathic keyboard when you really need it) you'd have had no doubt as to the labeling of the second movie as a "sequel." However, it does remain to be seen (and see it I will) whether said sequel consists of original material.

Jim, we shall lift intercessory prayers for your apostasy.

Foo, I tend to agree that a lot of the appeal of the LOTR movies came from the omission of all that "walking" (a euphemism for "the boring stuff that serves as filler between the really cool CGI"). But – BUT – my dim recollection of The Hobbit is that it was a much quicker-paced story, and I can't wait (if that wasn't already obvious) to see it translated to film.

In any event, the tale of the box office seems to indicate that The Golden Compass has lost direction on its own without any such peripheral distractions. Even some atheists are expressing disappointment.

Jennifer, I agree with you. Too much is not enough when it comes to this stuff.

I need to get my telepathic keyboard fixed again - and it just came back from the shop. Sheesh. :)

Foo - They're filming another Narnia movie as we speak - Pretty sure it's Prince Caspian (I believe they're doing them in order) and I think is to be released in May. (Ah - here we are the movie site .

I was all set to like the Golden Compass til I read two of the three books. They're well written, but the story is so pointedly preachy that it's hard to just enjoy the story (much like the later Dune books).

As I was from the moment I saw my first LOTR trailer, and as I am, still, today ..... I am torn by the prospect of Peter Jackson's "Hobbit" .....

I absolutley LOVED what he did with the scenic design of his films, the costumes, the props, and the general line of the story ..... but I was LESS THAN PLEASED with what he did to the characters ..... that included relegating the character of Gimli Gloinson to comic relief .....

If he does the same thing with Thorin Oakenshield and his companions, then Bilbo's quest to the Lonely Mountain may end up looking more like a Keystone Cops movie .....

HOWEVER, I plan to watch the movie - DEFINITELY - and see for myself.

Jeff, your comment addresses an issue that will undoubtedly be debated throughout movie history, and that is whether a film based on a book is best presented as a translation or adaptation of that book. You're a purist in this regard, and I respect that. I had no problem with how Gimli was portrayed, but I can understand your feelings. I think each of us has a line drawn in the sand beyond which we don't want the director to step when it comes to bringing our imagination to life on the screen. Those lines are drawn in different places by each of us, depending in large part on how willing we are to let the filmmaker supplement/enhance/subvert our own imagination.

Anyway, my completely uninformed opinion is that in The Hobbit, you'll see the dwarvish band provide BOTH comic relief and heroics. The former is an intellectual requirement based on the precedent set in LOTR; the latter is necessary to remain true to the source material.

Eric, you're absolutely right ..... I am a purist ..... although I do draw a line between purists who boycotted/trashed the film, and those like myself who embraced it with love (I'm a proud owner of the deluxe, boxed set of DVD's) .....

I deliberately cited the dwarves in my previous comment because they play play a very different, very prominent role in the Hobbit, as opposed to the relatively minor, supporting role they play in LOTR.

But don't get me wrong ..... I will be in line on premiere day, and I will probably enjoy myself!

See you there?

...they play play a very different, very prominent role in the Hobbit...

And that's also why I think they'll get a different treatment from Jackson. He strikes me as the type of director who will pay homage to the source material, even if not with strict reverence.

Hmm. That came out funny. I trust that you know what I mean. ;-)

...much like the later Dune books...

I know exactly what you mean. Those caused me to pretty much cross Herbert off my list.

From the business side of this, I'm surprised New Line hasn't at least thrown out a hint about doing more than one move.

The folks over at Libertas have pointed out that the deal with Jackson comes after New Line's falling out with him led to the company to try and create their own non-Jackson mythological franchise, but decided that "The Golden Compass" would be the vehicle, under the idea that the underpinnings of the plot didn't matter as long as there were some big battle scenes and cool GCI effects.

New Line could use a hit right now, and The Hobbit definitely contains enough material to be stretch to multiple parts (in fact, a single part version may end up crushed down too much to make anyone really happy).

(in fact, a single part version may end up crushed down too much to make anyone really happy).

What's the longest movie that will fit on a DVD? Just asking. ;-)

This is all good except that Peter Jackson is not directing the Hobbit...
http://stuff.co.nz/4332754a1860.html

Rachel, you're exactly right! Jackson will be a producer, not the director. I just didn't catch that at all in my excitement about the announcement of the movie.

Hmm. Not sure what that does for my excitement level now. I think I'll have to reserve judgment until the director is announced.

How can Jackson possibly have anything more important to do? The guy needs to get his priorities straight! ;-)

LOL. I'll pass that on to him hehe.