>>Can’t say as I find the prospect of The Hobbit all that interesting, though. More a kids’ story.<<
The movie will need to be very different from LoTR...
It really is a “there and back” boys adventure story, not a dark and epic struggle for the soul of the world.
Hopefully it won’t turn into YAIA - Yet another Iraq allegory.
Doesn't seem likely, it isn't Peter Jackson's style! Also it won't be out for a few years, would be a poor idea to use a by then dated plot.
Haven't you noticed? Iraq seems to have simmered down, with cooler heads prevailing.
Ergo, it is not presently being discussed in the mainstream media.
When something bad and telegenic happens, they'll be right back on it.
J.R.R. Tolkein never liked allegory. Hopefully Jackson and company will take that into account.
For a YA, The Hobbit brought the publisher back to Tolkien quickly, demanding more. I suspect a lot of adults read it too, and someone saw potential for a more significant story set in the same universe. Tolkien rummaged through his never-finished Silmarilion, and found an era where he could shoe-horn in some Hobbits, and write a bigger story. The rest, they say, is literary history.
I have to admit, even after a half-dozen readings, I'm turned off by the childish exposition of the first few chapters of The Hobbit. But the tone changes, and things get more "interesting" after that.
I'm convinced that Peter Jackson was the right person at the right time to do what was considered the impossible: actually make a movie that could tell the story as best as could be done in 12 hours of film. If PJ doesn't do The Hobbit, I'll wait to see it for free on cable some day.
Jackson made Newline billions. You'd think having him do more of the same would be a no-brainer. But there is no such thing as a "no-brainer" when it comes to Hollywood.