"The Hobbit film adaptation could turn into the disaster that Tolkien always feared it could be if it were left in the wrong hands.

"THAT'S EXACTLY WHY PETER JACKSON HAS TO DIRECT "THE HOBBIT"

if jackson dont direct its not going to get the respect the film will deserve.
he's already proved he knows middle earth he is the only person fit for the job

I agree.

I will not go and watch the movie, if it is not directed by Peter Jackson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly, everyone has seen the LOTR series and if they make the Hobbit
movie and it is totally differnent from the series, no one is going to want
to watch it! I wonder.....are they still going to get Ian McKellen to play the
part of Gandalf? He just is the part, I don't know how they could get
someone else to play the role. Even when I read the books when I imagined
Gandalf, it looked like him.

There is a rumor that if Peter Jackson does the Hobbit movie that Orlando
will come back in it and maybe play Thranduil, Legolas' father and king
of Mirkwood, or else he will come back as Legolas, but not as a big part so
as not to stray too far from the book. I think either idea is great! But he
will only do it if Peter Jackson directs it, so let's hope he comes back!

Well the rumours say that Sam Raimi the fantastic director of Spiderman will do it.Well the Hobbit would'nt be good with Peter Jackson and Spiderman 4 would'nt be good without Sam Raimi.Keep Jackson for Hobbit and keep Raimi for SM4.

I don't think that anyone else from the LOTR cast will do it without Peter
either, so I don't think I would go to it with Sam Raimi as he director. It
just wouldn't be the same.

Sorry, I meant the instead of he.

I would like to see Peter Jackson direct, but his ego has grown out of control. A shame, but this happens more than one wishes. Don't blame New Line, blame Peter Jackson for his greed (he is essentially trying to hold New Line hostage).

Mr. Jackson, you need to open your eyes and realize that LOTR is
in the company of giants like the Godfather (minus part 3), the Star Wars
double trilogies, The Wizard of Oz, and Casablanca, etc. Fifty years from now, no,
twenty years from now, Mr. Jackson, how are you going to feel when you
reflect on your past decision? You are part of history, Mr. Jackson; only one
man has earned the right to direct the Hobbit, don't forfeit this honor--least of
all for such a small thing as an ego. Indeed, someone else will replace you; and regardless of whether that person does a great job or a poor one, your decision
will remain in your conscience to nag you forever. Be like Aragon, stand up
and face the man you are meant to be: the true director of The Hobbit LTOR
Saga!

I guarantee you if Peter Jackson were to direct this film, the final battle at the end of the book which occupies a few pages would be 1/3 of the movie! If this were to happen the book would loose all of its charm since this book is an entirely different animal than LOTR. I am one of the few who is glad Peter won't be directing it, but do agree that they better pick someone who has a clue and understanding for Middle Earth.

your a fgoot you know that he was a great director

If New Line is fudging the books (why won't they allow any scrutiny of their bookkeeping??), can you really blame Peter for demanding what is rightfully his? It's not about ego, it's about doing the right thing. Pretty "Tolkien-esque", if you ask me. Peter Jackson is the best person for the job. He has already proved himself. Tolkien, himself, was hankering to re-write The Hobbit, and I'm sure that he would be pleased to see Peter give the story the mature portrayal it deserves. This isn't the poetic license of a egotist at play...Peter would simply like to expand the story and bring it to a new level, in order to fit it into the rest of the saga. The Hobbit was written for children, true, but adaptations of children's books have always been the norm. It was done for Cinderella, and look what the 3 Stooges did with Snow White. Peter isn't about to disrespect Tolkien's vision, and, according to what I've read, is more interested in enhancement, using Tolkien's own writings. We can have a "cartoonish" Hobbit (which has already been done, many times), or we can have a more mature version that stays true to the premise of the story, lifting it to artistic and intelligent levels that adults will enjoy, much as the trilogy was enjoyed. We've seen what Peter can do. He should be allowed to finish his vision, which is obviously Tolkien's vision. Just my humble opinion, of course.

Let's just all agree that they should make a Hobbit movie, it should be
directed by Peter Jackson, and that it will have the same feel as the LOTR
trilogy or we the fans will have a meltdown!

The World of cinema has not been the same this last three years without the anticipation of another Lord of the Rings masterpiece from Mr. Jackson....what all of the fans of his trilogy want is another film or two from him bringing The Hobbit to life....hopefully an expanded adult version incorporating relevant additional material like the storming of Dol Guldur....New Line please wise up - NO-ONE wants anyone else to write and direct this film except Peter Jackson & his Weta team!!

Everyone keeps assuming Peter Jackson *MUST* do this movie or it will be bad. I would hope that anyone can see that's faulty logic. The movie *might* be very good if Peter Jackson does it. But it doesn't mean someone else could not do an equally good job.

My personal opinion is that I think the "Lord of the Rings" movies were, for the most part, well done. That said, much of that is due to the material that was at hand to be worked with and not Peter Jackson. He didn't create the series or the characters. In fact, I would argue that some of the decisions he made regarding the plotting of the films (particularly regarding Saruman, Faramir, and the ending of Return of the King) were questionable decisions at best, even though I can see some of why those decisions may have been made.

The point is that Peter Jackson isn't perfect. While he did a good job (my opinion) with the films, myself, like many other fans of the books, do recognize that he made some critical stumbles in how the books were adapted to film.

I agree with you. I think that the movies were master pieces, but I missed some of the large parts of the book, like old man willow and the entire part with Tom Bombadil. They also made Arwen have a much bigger and different part than she did in the book. There were many details and parts left out and things changed that I didnt really like. But the mivies would have been about an hour longer if Jackson had added all those things, so I understand. I just want to see that hobbit, but the thing that matters to me the most is that they get the same cast. I hate sequels/prequels that have different people playing the same part.

ha! I meant *movies, and *The Hobbit.

I don't think I would want to see the movie either is Jackson does not direct it.

People, we just want Peter Jackson to direct so that the movie won't be
totally and completely different from the Middle Earth we came to know and
love under Peter Jackson's direction. Sure, somebody else could do a really
good job, but the point is it would be different! We don't want different, even
though improvements could be made.

Nicole I think you and a few others are missing a major point here - The Hobbit IS different to the LOTR.

Its a kids story for a start so is no where near as dark.

I would have liked it to be done by Jackson but maybe its a good thing it isn't.
If he were loyal to the book, fans of his previous tolkien films would probably have slated him and if he made it like he did the LOTR trilogy, fans of the hobbit book would have slated him.

the point YOUR missing is that in tolkiens own writings he stated multiple times how he had wanted to re write the hobbit in a manner more geared towards adult readers as the lotr trilogy had been done, so with his notes in mind peter jackson wants to produce a movie that would have portrayed tolkiens ideas about the way he wanted the hobbit redone, not as a kids story (because obviously theres already a childrens version) but in the same dark manner as the lotr trillogy was written. hes staying true to tolkiens vision not the way the book was originally written, but how tolkien had wanted it done.

NEW LINE CINEMA BETTER GET THEIR BUTTS IN SHAPE AND PAY PETER WHAT THEY PROMISED TO HIM SO WE CAN GET THIS AMAZING BOOK PUT INTO THE BEST FILM TO HIT THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IF ANYONE ELSE EVEN TRIES TO DIRECT THIS MOVIE, IT WILL END UP IN MY CAMEL'S FOOD BOWL, AND THEN IT WILL DIGEST TO GREAT PROPORTIONS AND BE POOPED OUT NINE TIMES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
IT WOULD NOT HURT NEW LINE (IM POSITIVE) TO PAY THEIR DUES
THEY'RE JUST BLOWING THE WHOLE DEAL OUT OF PROPORTION AND WASTING ALL OF THAT MONEY ON THE TRIAL AND COURT ROOM BILLS, AND THEY COULD JUST EASILY HAND HIM A LITTLE CHECK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ...WHICH TO US....THATS LIKE A CRAP LOAD OF CASH!!!!! BOOOOOOOOOOYA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YO YO YO YO YO YO YOY OY OY OY YO GANGSTA BILBO BE UP IN MAH HIZZY FOR SHIZZY FOR ALL DA NITE LONG WIT DAT RING BE UP IN GOLLUM'S GRIIIIIILL YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BLING BLING YA'LL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jackson is not directing it so its time to forget about who to blame and just look forward to a great hobbit movie

Apparantly you're the one missing something Addy. There's still a chance
that he will direct it, but that's only if he and New Line settle their current
crisis. And yes, the Hobbit was made for kids, but so? That doesn't mean
he can't make it into a movie that both kids and adults (and everyone
inbetween) can love.

Nicole, of course it doesn't mean he can't and given the chance i'd put money on it that he would. My point though is that The Hobbit is a completely different style of book compared to the LOTR trilogy so it won't hurt if someone else does it as it should be different anyway.

If for instance it was the return of the king about to be filmed and Jackson, having made the fellowship and the 2 towers was sacked/resigned then yes i could understand the upproar it would cause.

Last I heard Sam Raimi had signed up to direct the hobbit.

I wish Jackson would stop bitching and just make the movie...

I don't know why people are complaining that Jackson is being greedy/bitching. He is claiming what is rightfully his and his company. I don't think there would be one person that would just not care if their paycheck was less then what they worked for. I know I'd be talkin to someone about that.

Hey everyone...

If Pete does not sit in the director's chair.
Lets boycott the movie
And anything else with Newline and Shaye in the future.

I second that motion!

I don't care who directs it, as long as they stay true to the book. I thoroughly enjoyed Mr. Jackson's adaptions of tLotr except for RotK but that's besides the point. Get some screen writers who know how to adapt books into movies properly and I will go see it.

Look at the Harry Potter series, there have been how many directors for those movies? It wouldn't hurt to have a different perspective on a book that stands alone.

I am so glad the movie is coming out. I have been waiting so long.
Yeah

I simply have a bad feeling about the idea Sam Raimi is doing "the hobbit". Take a look at the man, he's a "suit"man; Picture him in New Sealand. It's a no go. I won't support the movie if SR is making it.
He did a fairly good job on Spider-man BUT THAT WAS A COMIC ADEPTION! nope, I don't beliefe he can make "the hobbit" worthy for the saga.

i dont really care who directs it as long as its good....thats all that matters really isnt it?

Look, all we PJ LotR fans are looking for is continuity. PJ gave
us a masterpiece (true we could all argue to the end of time
about what he left out what he added) trilogy and we want
the pre-quel to have the same look and feel as LotR. Yes,
The Hobbit and LotR are two different books but also DO
share some characters and places that are pivitol to the
combined stories. PJ assembled a mass of talent who combined
to make the LotR movies. The Hobbit by another director
is not going to make a movie that stands seamlessly next
to the LotR movies. PJ has the ability and team to do so.
It really is that simple.

Peter Jackson is not the end-all be-all authority on Middle Earth. There are other directors who can do justice to "The Hobbit". The Harry Potter series has had multiply directors and people still flock to those movies. When it comes down to it, people don't care who directed it, just as long as the movie is good. That's all that I care about.

Carlos: right on! I agree. I'm tired of this "hero worship" of Peter Jackson. I liked the movie adaptations of "The Lord of the Rings" but the assumption seems to be that ONLY Peter Jackson could have pulled it off. Obviously there's no way to know what another director would have done, so arguing from that standpoint is largely a waste of time.

What matters to me is how well the movie is done. A large part of that comes from the material (in this case, the book) and the actors who play the parts. A smaller part of that material comes in the form of the effects (which are now mainly CGI, thus computers doing the work). I'm not saying the director has no ability to shape the final film since, of course, they very much do. But I'm not sure why people presume only one person is capable of doing this.

There is a potentially valid argument that since Peter Jackson already worked on the other films, his vision of how to tell the stories could be changed by another director. That's possible. Does that mean such a change would automatically be bad? Obviously not. What would matter is the extent to which it seemed the films "flowed" into each other. What I think would be intreresting (although it would never happen) is they should keep the director a secret. Then show the film. Then see what people thought.

It would be interesting if a bunch of the fans hated it -- and it turned out it was directed by Peter Jackson! Or, alternatively, a bunch of the fans loved it -- and it was directed by someone else!

First of all i'd like to say, why do you even mention Harry Potter in te same context of LOTR, they don't compare, yes it would be different if they had one director do all seven books and then have another book turned into film by some one else of a COMPLETE different genre. With Harry Potter, the director chose to drop out of the directors chair and give someone else a chance. Where as with Lotr Peter Jackson is being forced out of the directorrs chair by some people who think that he's injust in wanting the money that is due to him!!! I don't know about anyone else but i sure don't want to see Bilbo flying through the trees with a crazy costume on like spiderman!!!Now if they were to get someone that is known for making fantasy yes i'm sure i'd be a bit more open to having domeone else in the directors chair.

I believe that Peter jackson is the man for the job because he is the creator of the Middle earth everyone has come to know and love.. Why waste asll the time and money that has never done anything and that is unpromising to the book nd storyline instead of just saying yes to PJ and jumping straight into Preproduction. it is obviously a matter of time and money here. Peter Jackson will save the franchise money, as has been said in other articles, NewLine is in a slump right now with a bunch of lowend guality features coming out. just think LOTR made NEwLine all the better company, now that LOTR is over, NewLine is going down Hill, if they get PJ on they'll be the next best Production company just for having PJ on the movie.

For all of you people who like to complain about " Well he toook this out and put this in and the battle sequence this and the whatever that...." come on REALITY CHECK!!! just look at the money it brought in, he must have done something properly. guys, thee's only so much you an put into a movie or take out of a movie until it falls apart. i'd like to say any of you people who complain about what is and what isn't go out there and make a movie that is nearly half as amazing as PJ has. When you can prove that, you can maybe start to wine.

Another option would be to have Peter Jackson and someone else (Sam Raimi) Co-Direct that is a possibility. That way we'd have PJ on the directors cahir and someone else for new input, but i want you to remember that the Hobbit is the Prequel so if the funk up the Hobbit, All those people who have all ready come to love the rest of the trilogy will be pushed further away from the 3 movies that were made previously.

Yes i know i am being Harsh but you need to think of the logic in having peter jackson directing this franchise, if he were to just be put down to produce The Hobbit and it were horribly disastrous, then not only would everyone be pissed of that they killed the franchise, but his career would be over before you could count to three.

Cheers

this is stupid. Peter Jackson is a man. men are fallible. i was mad at lotr because they left out my favorite parts- like tom bombadil, and changed things around. it made money, whatever, i don't care --its not really that important. i liked the movies-- they were good.

my favorite thing about the hobbit is that it WAS written for children. the structure of the book is that of a chapter a night for bedtime stories. But it is a very serious book as well. both adults and children already appreciate it, so there would be no reason to take away from the structure of the story. I get bored with the battles in the LOTR movies. The hobbit only has one big battle-- which is a very well written battle, yet it should not take up as much of the movie as it likely will. I don't really care about the director-- the screenplay and whether or not they cut a lot of things out (and focus too much on the violence), is more of my concern. I think that, with everyone having already seen lord of the rings, that the director- if it is not peter jackson himself- will be able to structure the characters around those in the other movies-- like the characteristics of dwarves. i mean, nobody would dare change things like that, they are already established. so all this fear about 'anyone but peter jackson will screw things up' is complete BS. He was vital in creating our notion of the cinematic middle earth, but now that that's done, and his interpretations of the different races and characteristics is basically set in stone, he isn't really that vital to the making of the hobbit. sure, it's a shame that everyone is being a stubborn bastard, but who the hell cares? at this point, taking peter jackson's influence from the trilogy in directing is probably as effective if not more effective (new perspectives on established norms) than having jackson do it himself.
Just quit wasting time talking about how you won't go see it if jackson doesn't direct it. you know you will anyway, if you truly appreciate tolkien's works. And keep in mind people that it's just a movie. It's not life or death, it's entertainment.

"And keep in mind people that it’s just a movie. It’s not life or death, it’s entertainment."

william shakesphere would beg to differ...

1. it's not life or death. except for the movie series. I'll live if they never make it.
2. there's lots of stuff that will need to tie into the LOTR trilogy. they'll need bilbo + make up, ian mckellon or whatever his name is... they'll need Agent Smith if any of Elrond is to appear dude... (granted, i have yet to read the hobbit since no movie has been annced.)
3. if they blow this on the hobbit, it will be as if George Lucas were to botch up the star wars series by botchin up the prequel trilogy... oh. wait. he did. never mind.
4. if anyone really WANTS the hobbit to suck, put George Lucas in charge. There's nothing like shooting the goose that was laying the golden eggs.
5. in my opinion, LOTR made it possible to totally forget star wars (partially because of the prequel). PJackson really made a great team. lots o blood sweat & tears to make it as excellent as it was.

Ian McKellan has already stated that he will not be invlved in a movie of 'The Hobbit' if Peter Jackson is not involved, however I do think a lot of you are nissing the point, the reason the Lord of the Rings movies were so good is because the source material, the books, were so good, lets give Tolkien a little credit here for goodness sake, as long as whoever is behind the camera sticks to the plot it should be ok

Dear Sirs,
My name is San Harper, and mistakenly I bought the Return Of The King box st thinking it would include the original "The Hobbit" movie too. But alas, it didn't. So each time I have tried to watch this box set, I always think.........Wait!.....This story began with the Hobbit!
Sirs I thought I had seen the original Hobbit movie first, then all the rest of the other movies, so am continuing wonering where is The Hobbit?
The reason this Hobbit movie is so important to me is because for so many years the Hobbit book was my son's favoite book, and he had even found a small original edition of this book, and was so thrilled when he found it, that when he died at the age of 30 yrs old from Diabetes.......I burried that original copy of The Hobbit with him.
I read the Hobbit myself later on, so maybe that is the reason I keep thinking they had made that movie first. Am I wrong? Or did they make that movie first, then all the rest of them following?
Please clear up my mind letting me know if I keep searching for the first movie "The Hobbit' in vain when it doesn't even exist yet? Ha.

San Harper
San@prodigy.net

In addition to my question above........please keep in mind that I am now partially blind, so my typing skills such big time! Ha. Seriously.....I really would like to know where I could find the first movie of the Lord Of The Rings beginning. I know I saw it. I can even see it right now in my mind as I type. I know I couldn't have imagined it all! I think anyway. I know getting old turns your brain to mush........but by damned I know I can see him receiving the ring which began his journey! So what was the name of that first movie please? :)

San Harper

paul i totally agree, that's kind of what i was getting at. it's the source material that really counts, as tolkien gives detailed accounts and a lot of insight into his characters.

peter jackson did a good job, but by no means is he a god, and who is to say that someone else might not have done better? we'll never know will we? and anyway, if they are true to the story and have good actors, then the movie will be good regardless of who directs it... if they ever even get on with it. of course, it wouldn't be the same if ian mckellan doesn't play gandalf, but, again, it's a different production. it wasn't shot along with the lord of the rings movies, it's entirely separate.

source material:
i reference Star Wars Episodes 1 – 3. Lots of great source materail. PHENOMINAL actors when given the latitude to act (Ewan McGreggor, Natalie Portman, Liam Neeson, Christopher Lee, etc.) but they all sucked! ok, granted... if you walked in with your brain turned off and didn't think about the original trilogy, they were OK action/sci-fi movies... but the story was a watered down catastrophe!

You CAN have great source material and still make a movie that sucks. And the person to do that is the same guy that made the Spiderman movies. I'm sorry. Dude. those things friggen suck. If you're a comic-con geek, you'll watch them. I'm sorry. Spiderman and J.R.R. Tolkien are just not equivalent reads. one is en par with high literature... the other is cartoonish and melodromatic. LOTR & The Hobbit are filled with areas of quiet & openness. There are no spandex suits in LOTR.

no, i fear that an absense of PJ will result in a really polished, special effects driven movie that you'll see once in theatres, rent once and never watch again... as it stands now, i watch LOTR extended at least once every 3 months (it takes about that long to watch it. LOL!)

NEXT thing you know, they'll want to cast Will Smith in the Hobbit and say Isaac Asimov wrote it. they could call it: I, Hobbit.

OK the truth is... if they make the Hobbit, I'll go see it. But if someone other than PJ does it, i will be HIGHLY critical. If Peter Jackson DOESN'T do The Hobbit, that would be like Star Wars Episodes 1 – 3 being done by Michael Bay... of course... would that have been a bad thing?

Well I hope peter does it but if he does not I hope they get someone who will read the book 5-6 times BEFORE they make the movie. The Hobbit is dramatic and interesting. It has scary sceans and funny sceans. I hope the director can capture the essence of the hobbit in 2.5 - 3 hours. Great book it could be breathtaking.

my god would you stop comparing it to star wars? or friggin spiderman? spiderman is a comic book. woop-de-damn-doo if it wasn't very good. it's a movie production of a comic book. how good could they possibly make it? and star wars--- of course no one liked the new ones, but that was only because of the huge following of the original ones in the late 70s and 80s. i liked both sets of trilogies for different reasons. its the people that can't separate the two that have issues with the new ones---my boyfriend for example. but that is completely beside the point. we're talking about the hobbit. a classic book that the movie is going to be based off of. star wars is not based off books, therefore the source material is nowhere near as rich as the hobbit would be. it's not even comparable. and if star wars IS based off books, and i'm wrong, then nowhere near as many people have read them as have read the hobbit.

BUT on the other hand, maybe it would be better if they never made a hobbit movie, like they should never make movies of really good books, since people will just watch the movies and then never read the books, and their kids will never read the books but see the movie, and then they will never imagine the things in the books happening, but will have everything shown to them through the movies. It would be another step in stifling the imagination of the next generation. the hobbit is my favorite book, and probably always will be, so i worry about these kinds of things. instead of parents reading the hobbit to their children, they'll just put it on the tv to get the kids out of the way. it's sad.

kelsey,

you're right, there's more people who've read LOTR/Hobbit than SW or Spidey.

but have you been payig attention to anything that has been said?
1. why compare LOTR / potential hobbit film to SW or Spidey? simple. (A) LOTR trilogy was an epic of grandiose proportions en par with Star Wars. SW (Ep 1 – 3) was based on books. Thus, there's roughly an equivalent amount of "reference material" for the story. Granted, there's more historical reference for costumes in LOTR... so i guess some leeway must be afforded George for having to make up EVERYTHING from imagination. SW & LOTR/Hobbit all have multiple societies & cultures that all come together in a time of great peril. All have a cast of characters with potential biographies of material to build. Anyone who does NOT see the correlation of the making of the Star Wars trilogies & the making of the Hobbit post LOTR is on crack. It's a VERY valid reference. Many here have noted that the characters we've begun to associate w/ LOTR characters are now embedded. That continuity is what makes the LOTR & the Hobbit the same family. If Ian McKellen doesn't play Gandalf, i'll still see it. but Gandalf is SUPPOSED to look like Ian McKellen now. he can't NOT look like Ian McKellen. Otherwise the character has no validity in many viewers eyes. Instead, someone else will simply be playing the part of Ian McKellen as Gandalf... That's a tough bridge to make the vieweres cross. Especially the die hard fans. (I'll address the fans & books in a second...)
(B) The relationshio of LOTR/Hobbit & Spiderman... this has nothing to do with the being trilogies... Instead, it is rumored that the Spiderman director is the next in line to direct the Hobbit if PJ doesn't return to the director's chair. This is a travesty. A trajedy, even. PJ worked YEARS on the LOTR trilogy. YEARS. Spiderman movies are generally 18 months (NOTE: MONTHS) in the making. I compare it to the contractor who was doing work on our tile floors: he will only do his PASSION work slowly, meticulously & purposely... he'll pour his heart & skill in it. The Spidey movies were simply cash machines. there was little comparison in the heart behind the films vs the LOTR series. There was grave attention to detail in creating everything in the LOTR as their should be with the Hobbit... No short cuts will be acceptable to those of us who are uber-fans... why? because we all READ THE BOOKS!

Fans who Read:
the reason we're yammering on about the LOTR/Hobbit so much is that we are all fans of the movie, but we're not the illiterate fans... we actually READ the books. We're as familiar with the grass in the land of Rohan as we are with our own back yards. The details that PJ put in were as vivid as our imagination. Sure, he left out Tom Bombadil... sure there were areas that were changed for the sake of getting the story on film. but the detail... the richness were very Tolkien-esque. The lack of such detail would be almost ensured by those who do comic book movies.

So why do we reference SW & Spiderman? simply because there IS a viable comparison! There IS reason to be concerned that the Hobbit will be directed by a two-bit special-effects film maker. There's VERY viable concern that Gandalf won't be the real Gandalf... It's as alarming for movie goers as if Harrison Ford decided to not play Indiana Jones in the next Indiana Jones.

Now i'm glad that no one has compared LOTR/Hobbit to Harry Potter. These are Barnes & Nobles push offs... blech! HP is what i like to term as Liturature-Lite. Spare me the "block-buster."

The real fear of the Hobbit: Is new line simply looking for the next blockbuster? Are they doing it JUST for the money? or are they honestly wanting to pour a love for the art into the film? New Line! I challenge you to REALLY, truthfully... sincerely answer that question. Not with a PR news letter... but just in your conscience. The real fans will judge you here.

New Line: Do the right thing. Get Peter back... you'll make far more $ just by having him in the saddle...