LOL! Cool! :cool:

Don't know who will be playing the younger Bilbo, but Andy Serkis must return as Gollum/Smeagol. Who else could do it with such craven creepiness?;)

Frankly, I felt Lucas' new Star Wars prequel trilogy, mediorce as it was, suffered even more from being released in the same time span as LOTR. Comparisons were inevitable.

http://express.howstuffworks.com/gif/gollum-4.jpg

And one very hard to read book!

I doubt they would make the Silmarillion into a movie. It would probably be 7 hours long... I'm pretty sure they're just breaking The Hobbit into two different parts, which is great because it means more details and less things cut out :up:.

I don't know if it will need breaking up. It's a small book, probably half of one of the LOTR's books.

-That's about half as long as the fellowship of the ring... Maybe a bit longer, but I think a 3 hour movie would be enough. Maybe they want 2 'normal' length films instead of the long epics/bad for cinema style that LOTR were.

I only saw one in the cinema because I couldn't sit that long without a toilet or smoke break. I do have the extended versions of all of them though.


-I have hairy feet like a hobbit.

The Simarillion would indeed be difficult to translate to film... and as Reaves points out, difficult enough now just to read. Still, as a die hard Tolkien reader, I find the notion interesting.

I'm hoping for Wisconsin :lol:.

:rotfl: They could use Lake Geneva for Long Lake... :hmm: And Wilmot could be the Lonely Mountain! It's perfect!