MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Little Hobitt-y Thing

Haven’t really be obsessing on it, but some of you might be. Horse’s mouth to you now.
Apparently, there has been some stuff floating around, via the IMAXers, about The Hobbit waiting until 2013. Not the case, according to the Hobbit team. 2012 and 2013 are the current release dates.
We will now resume regular broadcasting.

Be Sociable, Share!

9 Responses to “Little Hobitt-y Thing”

  1. LYT says:

    Loved the book, a lot more so than LOTR…bored as hell with hearing about the potential movie.

  2. Me says:

    LYT: Movies.
    I’m looking forward to it, but feel that it should have been only a single movie. I’m still waiting for the edit of Kill Bill that makes it a single movie without all the needless fluff.

  3. Triple Option says:

    Yeah, that would be Kill Bill Vol 1.
    Hey, wouldn’t showing Hobitts on IMAX defeat the purpose of them being little hobitss? On a more serious note, are these scheduled to be like Christmas or December releases or will these be put out in less than one calendar year?

  4. LYT says:

    As far as I can tell, only one will actually be THE HOBBIT. The other will be BULLSHIT FILLER MOVIE WITH ELF EARS.
    Shit, I think I just gave Friedberg and Seltzer their next pitch.

  5. LexG says:

    Is GUILLERMO DEL TORO some kind of EUNECH or something?
    Dude’s got like eight zillion things in development and they’re all like HOBBIT and FRANKENSTEIN and shit about BUGS and COMIC BOOKS.
    If I had GDT’s power, I’d film a movie called GLAZE, which would just be two hours of sheened chicks. Why’s this dude always wanna make dorky horror shit with BUGS and CREATURES and MONSTERS and DUMB FUCKING SHIT?
    Total fanboy DORK. About as asexual as DAVID ARCHULETA. I don’t trust a director who doesn’t put their SEXUAL FETISHES on screen.
    Other than that, he’s kind of a genius, but he needs to make MOVIES ABOUT PRETTY WOMEN.
    And he needs to learn to shoot in 2.35.
    Is HOBBIT gonna be in his usual TV-like, stagey production design phony backlot 1.85?
    That last paragraph is a VALID QUESTION actually.

  6. Hunter Tremayne says:

    The HOBBIT movies will only adapt the book. There were plans to make the second one a bridge to LOTR but they were scrapped some time ago. Del Toro says there is an “appropriate” place to end the first movie. My money is on that place being the first appearance of the dragon, Smaug.

  7. LexG says:


  8. Foamy Squirrel says:

    Someone cast Dick van Dyke in The Hobbit?!?!?

  9. Kambei says:

    I would pay money to see GLAZE.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon