Barnald

Oh I completely get why he did it - economically, it makes absolute sense. But how I'd love to have seen that white tree sail unfurled... that would have been another great moment (and imagine the music!). As for how you'd do it... yeah, I think having Elrond, his sons (you'd need to have introduced them prior) and the rangers come to the party makes the most sense. Maybe you could have also introduced Imrahil and the Knights of Dol Amroth. I appreciate this would have required more time to be achieved, but hey, what's another 10-15 minutes in a 4+ film in its EE form?

If Jackson didn't like them so much, he could have just, I don't know, have stuck to their role in the book and not had them arrive at Pelennor Fields...

The first four letters of my username here might give some clue...

While I'd love to see Gandalf and Balin's visit, I wondered what relevance it would have to the story, short of possibly setting up a later Gandalf and Aragorn trip through Moria. But then I thought of something. Perhaps here, for the first time, Bilbo could reveal to Gandalf exactly how he 'acquired' the ring? We know Gandalf learns this eventually, some time between The Hobbit and LOTR, so it would make sense. It could be the thing that begins to spook Gandalf as it were, learning of this Gollum creature for the first time and the devastating impact it seems the ring had on him (and possibly also signs of such possessiveness in Bilbo). And it's the perfect set-up for a transition to showing how Gollum has been taking things since the events of The Hobbit.

It'll be interesting to see how they incorporate Frodo. Logic suggests something similar to The Hobbit - an early appearance, seemingly on the night of Bilbo's party and Gandalf's departure (we could see different elements of the scene). But if they've got their sights on something bigger (and 'bridge' related), I'm not sure how they'd do it, unless they intend on having Bilbo as well (presumably Martin Freeman would return?). Either way, I'm entirely on the returning characters train. If it's a choice between rampant de-aging and new invented characters, I'll take the former every time.

I totally get Serkis feeling some kind of affinity with Gollum, but the way he talks about him does raise a chuckle. There's a couple of sympathetic moments, but in the main I find him a scheming, murdering little shit. And if we are going down the road I've trying to 'humanize' him further (haven't we had enough of this already?), good luck when I imagine you'll show him snatching babies from their cribs within the opening 15 minutes. It's one of the more potent images in relation to this tale, and I have to think it will appeal hugely to Jackson's horror leanings, so I don't see how they skip that.

You may well be correct. There will be fanfic, we all know that, but it need not be done in such... how can I best put this... reckless, unnecessary, and uninteresting fashion. If they wanted to call this film 'The Bridge Movie', fair enough, but calling it The Hunt for Gollum, you're setting a level of expectation re. the plot, elements of which are already clearly established. On the subject of Gollum, all this talk of him being the focus is highly concerning, for reasons we've already discussed. But on a general level, I really think they're overestimating his appeal to audiences. The recent game was a huge flop, and I expect it would have done little better even if it wasn't crap.

Another thing worth bearing in mind about this 'bridge film' talk: the extended Fellowship is about 3.5 hours long. I haven't checked to see the precise moment, but going off the score, Gandalf departs Bag End probably around 30 minutes in (so about 1/7 of the way into the film). I don't think anyone would really begrudge them all this 'bridge' talk for that.

But it's not the Hunt. The Elves aren't interested in Gollum for any reason other than him being an unwanted presence in their lands. And once he slips their forest, the film just follows him leisurely to Mordor, without any element of pursuit? Yes you can show Gollum in Dale and Mirkwood and the Woodland Realm (and Dol Guldur), but as I've laid out before, you can easily do that within a proper hunt for Gollum framework, bending the timeline a little (call them flashbacks if you want), but then any film on this subject is going to do that anyway (do the writers really want to fill in the 30 years it takes Gollum to reach Mordor from Mirkwood?). There is no question in my mind this film will feature Aragorn and Gandalf's hunt for Gollum. It simply must. If not, it'll be the biggest misnomer, missed opportunity, and instant failure I can recall.

But if that's the case, how can there really be a titular 'hunt', given we know when it must occur? As I've said before, very little goes on between the timeline of the The Hobbit and FOTR in relation to Gollum. And if you have Gandalf and Aragorn hunt him before Bilbo's birthday, well, that makes zero sense. And Andy did say there would be some returning/familiar faces. Where have Boyens and Jackson said stuff recently about the film being set between the trilogies?

It might be to a small extent, but Philippa Boyens has already said (and she would know best in various respect) that the film will largely be set during a specific time 'in' Fellowship of the Ring (specifically, Gandalf's initial departure from Bag End and eventual return, though I think there's a chance to push a little bit further and overlap somewhat).

I can see it now. He's standing back, cup of tea in hand, watching Serkis direct. After the first take, he steps forward, says 'Hold this a minute would you, Andy?', hands over the mug, and before you know it, he's accidentally directed the entire thing.

Can we freeze Ian McKellen until filming starts?

Not sure if this was reported already, apologies if so: https://www.ign.com/articles/the-next-lord-of-the-rings-movie-has-a-great-script-warner-bros-ceo-david-zaslav-says-with-shooting-set-for-next-year Interesting he mentions only Jackson, given he wasn't one of the four people we know to be working on it... Again, adds fuel to the fire he'll be more involved in this than first stated.

Hasn't Jackson recently said 'we're working on the script'? That should suggest he's already more involved than initially planned. Before we know it, he'll be back in the director's chair...