Colin Firth?? I would probably not see this movie if he were to play Bilbo. No disrespect to Firth or his acting abilities, I just don't like him as an actor and I don't think he'd do the character justice whatsoever.

"The similarity with Frodo is really the exact reason i would go for an actor that much older. I've given my own justifications for why i think casting Frodo so young worked but the same does not apply to Bilbo." Dr Death

There is no question that the actor chosen to play Bilbo will approach the character quite differently from the way Elijah Wood did Frodo. To me--and I'm sure the Hobbit filmmakers as well--that's a given. The most critical issue with Bilbo's casting is his talent, not whether he's middle-aged.

Oh totally, and i'm of that age group myself (20). But do said age group only see films which have a like-aged protagonist? I suppose there's an appeal (i have had a glance at msn's feature on the top box office hits worldwide, there is a trend for films with young protagonists but then i suppose you cant argue against that with Harry Potter).

But frankly when your average teenager comes out of the cinema and you ask them their favourite character it's rarely the angsty kid hero, it's Aragorn (purposefully recast to get an older actor), Snape, Jeff Golblum in Jurrassic Park or Darth Maul (That covers the top 10 box office hits except Titanic and i doubt the Hobbit will share much of the same audience).

The similarity with Frodo is really the exact reason i would go for an actor that much older. I've given my own justifications for why i think casting Frodo so young worked but the same does not apply to Bilbo. Because the Hobbit is that much lighter in tone, really playing up the 'unlikely hero' element of Bilbo with a middle-aged actor will mark the difference between the tone of the pieces. It shouldnt be all out comedy but certainly humourous....there's also the small matter of being an adaptation of the book. Whether it's profitable or not, the films must be an adaptation of the book and so whether or not it makes the most mathematical sense at the box office is rather by the by (its worth noting there's not a single del Toro film in the top 50 of box office grosses).

As you said yourself, Bilbo went off on his adventure at the SAME AGE as Frodo left the Shire with the ring. So if Frodo can be played by Elijah Wood, Bilbo can be played by James McAvoy.

My choice of McAvoy was more a guess at what I thought GDT and PJ will do. McAvoy has the acting chops plus the kind of youthful appeal that Wood brought to the first LOTR film. Like it or not, blockbuster films are created by the number of 12-22 year olds going through the turnstiles.

I do apologise BB- i've just read you're a McAvoy man. So what can i say in favour of Firth that i cant say in favour of him? They're both real dramatic actors who have dabbled in comedy and with a number of award nominations to their name. Well there's a couple of reasons. For a start and most obviously he just doesnt look 'Hobbity', particularly not 'Bilbo Bagginsy'. While we dont want a dead ringer for Ian Holm at the expense of acting ability, someone who could conceivably become the older Bilbo is preferable: there's a likeness in Firth, there isnt in McAvoy. People have said he'd make a good Brandybuck or Took and there's some truth in that (Billy Boyd and Elijah Wood were hardly the most 'hobbity') but even then, those staring eyes and chiselled jaw speak more of Faramir than Bilbo

Secondly- he's too young. Bilbo's well into middle-age by the time thirteen dwarves show up on his doorstep. While Frodo too was 50 when he started his adventure and was played by someone not even out of his teens, i can attempt to justify it by saying Frodo got the Ring upon his coming of age and also that Frodo as a character is 'purer' than Bilbo who has spent 50 long years trying to fit into the hobbit social blueprint and not succeeding very well. While a younger actor will appeal i sincerely hope Bilbo is kept as firmly middle-aged.

I also doubt the wisdom in casting 'Mr Tumnus' as Bilbo Baggins. Granted there are goat legs to make the break but it's still a leading role in a fantasy film. There is a strong case for James McAvoy- he is a very good actor, and nicely 'left field'- not as obvious as Martin Freeman.....But he's still wrong for the part

I'm still holding a candle for Ian Holm, regardless of his age, i'm hoping they will go with the digital option, keeping the continuity.
If they go with a younger actor, then that may have a bearing on the release of the blu ray editions of the original trilogy, because i'm guessing that the first thing they may refilm then, is Bilbo finding the ring and then Gandalf's you've hardly aged a day statement, then they'll do a editing job on Fellowship, thus having the younger actor for the two Hobbit films and keeping the continuity. Then they can announce who's playing Bilbo and release the blu rays with the first glimpse of the new Bilbo as a big selling point. But against the odds, i still want Ian Holm as Bilbo.

"I too just want the right Bilbo and while Martin Freeman (who is your 'horse'- you've said as much yourself) is adequate he "sure as hell" isnt right." Dr. Death

I don't know who you've gotten me confused with on this board, DD, but my "horse" is not Martin Freeman. I've provided my fantasy casting choices, but Martin Freeman was not among the actors I selected.

I too just want the right Bilbo and while Martin Freeman (who is your 'horse'- you've said as much yourself) is adequate he "sure as hell" isnt right.

And what shall we say of Martin Freeman? Go to the Martin Freeman for Bilbo thread and you will see much written about how he's so right based on Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? Is the Hobbit just going to be a medieval prequel?

As for a gormless everyman- i dont think Freeman's fans would use that term, that is certainly my own construction, but Freeman's performance of Arthur Dent could very well be described as such. He wasnt good for Dent and he wont be good for Bilbo

“So Breath, tell you what- if you can come up with a similar list of qualifications for Martin Freeman.”
Dr. Death

This thread you started is entitled “Colin Firth as Bilbo.” I don’t have a horse in this race. I just want the ‘right’ Bilbo and that sure as hell ain’t your boy.
Blackie

“Colin Firth, it is worth noting was nominated for a Bafta for his performance as Darcy” (in Pride and Prejudice.)
Dr. Death

Which is another reason why Firth WON’T get the part. The producers don’t want the general public to view The Hobbit as “Mr Darcy goes on an Adventure.”
Blackie

“My argument for Firth was merely one part of my overall argument and not the most important. The most important part was dispelling the myth that Bilbo is some gormless everyman that so many seem to take him for.”
Dr. Death

Where is all this evidence that Tolkien fans view Bilbo as “some gormless everyman”??? It’s easy to dispel the myth when it’s all in your head.
Blackie

Chewie- i'm glad you at least appreciate the conviction and work that i have invested in what has almost become a vigilante mission to break down the preconceptions of 'one stop casting'. Like i said, i wouldnt be doing this if i didnt have an empassioned desire for the success of this film and its adherence to the spirit of Tolkien. Martin Freeman i daresay would do an adequate job (he'd be my second choice certainly) but i think both in terms of image and ability, Colin Firth would produce a far more interesting and accurate Bilbo (i hope the above picture shows he also fits physically)

Breathalizer: My argument for Firth was merely one part of my overall argument and not the most important. The most important part was dispelling the myth that Bilbo is some gormless everyman that so many seem to take him for. I would note that no-one's argument for Freeman has been in depth other than someone declaring him perfect and the rest agreeing on nothing more than a picture. My admittedly rather vague 'evidence' for Firth as an actor does not distinguish him from countless others, but it does distinguish him from Martin Freeman who has never moved beyond comedy in mainstream cinema.

By means of evidence if that is what you desire, I’m going to list some of the ‘qualifications’ that Colin Firth has for the part of Bilbo. I’ll quickly note that Colin Firth described himself as a bit of a tearaway in his youth- a bit of a rebel among a very middle class family (both his parents were lecturers) which in itself is rather Bilbo-esque; Bilbo like Colin was considered rebellious in his early years, that’s what made Gandalf think of him. Moving on; Pride and Prejudice- Firth of course played Mr Darcy: a man of means, a bachelor “in possession of a large fortune” and a notably grand house. While Darcy is a significantly different role to Bilbo, being truly of the upper class where Bilbo is of a lower social order there are some parallels you can draw. Colin Firth, it is worth noting was nominated for a Bafta for his performance as Darcy (in fact this was his second Bafta nomination).

Following the ‘Darcy effect’ Colin Firth appeared in a number of dramas including The English Patient and Nick Hornby’s Fever Pitch. He was back in costume for Shakespeare in Love before sending up his growing reputation for costume dramas in a memorable cameo in Blackadder: Back and Forth (As William Shakespeare himself). He was selected for the role of a modern Darcy in Bridget Jones who was notably more middle-class and ‘Bilbo-esque’ to fit in with the modern era. He played the “title role” in the 2002 adaptation of Oscar Wilde’s comedy of manners The Importance of Being Earnest which was set in the Edwardian era in which Tolkien grew up: These are the standards of manners which Tolkien was using when he constructed Hobbit social structure. He has a long association with Richard Curtis from Blackadder, Bridget Jones and Love Actually the latter of which also starred Martin Freeman as an unassuming British porn star.

So far i’ve shown Colin Firth can do period drama and comedy, but that’s not all his talents for among the varied roles of his career he’s also done action adventure and war films. Back in 1988 he was nominated for a Bafta for best actor for his role in Tumbledown about the Falkland’s War. Much later he would cut his teeth in the lead role for The Last Legion: an action adventure set in a fictional version of the dying days of the Roman Empire. While the film was badly received, it did give Colin Firth experience of working in such a film including the skills of sword play. Now if only he could apply those skills playing a part slightly more in his millui.....

The last two roles i’m going to mention are St Trinians and Mamma Mia. Both are very light hearted and in both, Colin Firth was playing roles cheekily against type. In the former he was the smarmy government inspector who was often caught in compromising circumstances- not a repugnant character but certainly one full of self-importance and so easily caught with his trousers down (in one memorable scene literally). In the second role mentioned i’m really just shoving it in to remind you of his ability to send himself up, produce unlikely behaviour for the man who was once the thinking woman’s totty. It also shows he is able and willing to let his tone deafness do the talking, quite possibly endangering himself by composing a walking song at an inopportune moment.

So Breath, tell you what- if you can come up with a similar list of qualifications for Martin Freeman, I will place a bet for you of £10 with Ladbrookes on Martin Freeman to get the part. I daresay he will, but the real bet is whether you can prove he’s so appropriate- on what do you found your belief?

Dr Death, I for one applaud you for your empassioned and articulate championing of Colin Firth. I think it true to say as you have that no-one has given as convincing an argument for any other actor in the role. That is not to say I think you are right, but I give you the utmost credit for the justification of your opinion.

I might just say though that you should not be so quick to dismiss Martin Freeman's capabilities as a serious actor. His performances in productions such as Charles II and a lot of his stage work (in particular Silence as King Ethelred) have been met with critical acclaim.

We don't even know if he has been considered for the role, but i'm sure if he's given the chance then he will give a very respectable performance.

Dr. Death, there is absolutely no relationship between the length of your dissertations and the strength--or sophistication--of your argument.

You made no compelling case for Firth beyond pointing out his ability to play 'bourgois' roles. I'm sorry but knowing Firth "can play comedy" and is "also a serious actor with huge range" doesn't do much to distinguish him from countless other English actors who could be described the same way.

So pardon me if I take "a mild degree of offense" in your reaction. Get off your high horse---this is simply a discussion of Colin Firth's appropriateness for the role of Bilbo, not a referendum on you.

Well excuse me if i take a mild degree of offense to presenting a cohesive argument and then having it shot down as a "superiority complex", being told to "just chill" and "oversimplifying" Bilbo (bloody hell, if my paragraph-long essay was your idea of oversimplifying i'd hate to see your idea of complex ). I am simply trying to show you an "interesting angle" as Lalaithiel puts it on a character who is at the heart of this film. Fortunately it is not also "unique": Tom Shippey (if no-one else) agrees with me.

Right, well lets deal with you in sequence since i dont want to generalise here:

Lalaithiel: Well for a start what is the Hobbit according to Peter Jackson's portrayal? Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro are approaching The Hobbit as i did- forming our perceptions as a prequel to Lord of the Rings rather than Lord of the Rings as a sequel to The Hobbit. Tolkien himself wished to go back and redo The Hobbit to iron out the inconsistancies of tone but never got round to it. Surely then we can expect a darker tone than The Hobbit as written. However it does seem plain that Peter Jackson's idea of comedy is rarely Tolkien's. Is Bilbo to be a 'It comes in pints?!' character, should we await a thirteen-fold increase in dwarf tossing jokes? And is Bilbo a comedian? In many ways the comedy of Bilbo (much like dwarves) comes in the very seriousness with which he regards himself (analogies to the current writer will be met with dirty looks ;D). On the point of the unlikely burgler Bilbo is unlikely because he's so upstanding and socially stable that being called upon to be a petty thief is inconceivable- would Colin Firth not appear likewise?

Uruk-hai: I dispute the likeness of Martin Freeman to Ian Holm- the 'Martin Freeman for Bilbo' thread where there's a side by side comparison i similar only in the direction both actors are looking (and in fact that picture of Ian Holm doesnt even look particularly like Ian Holm as we know him- there's more a similarity to George Cole than Martin Freeman by that picture). It's not that i dislike Martin Freeman specifically but i just think why settle for him? There's an equally known and (to my view) better actor for Bilbo out there. Using the Star Trek analogy, your argument would run casting someone like Orlando Bloom as Captain Kirk rather than the less obvious Chris Pine. It would also have been the point of view that would have Sean Connery for Gandalf rather than Ian McKellen.

Black Breathalizer: I've already criticised you for yourself oversimplifying my argument by condensing it into a single quote and accusing that of being oversimplifying (that was a very odd sentence to write ). I hope i have shown if you would but acknowledge it that Colin Firth could portray the multiple facets of Bilbo's character whereas Martin Freeman would give only the 'funnyman' side and even then it wouldnt be 'funny Bilbo' but just 'funny Martin Freeman'. If you care to refer me to scenes which could enlighten me to the dramatic potential of Martin Freeman- say something analageous to the moral ambiguity of stealing the Arkenstone from Thorin who he had only just gained the respect from in the name of the greater good, I will happily eat my words, but so far the argument for Martin Freeman has run 'Oh doesnt he look like one picture of Ian Holm from one angle' and 'If you make a pursuasive sourced argument you're caring too much'. When you say you're glad that GDT and PJ are choosing the actor instead of me, in my cynical fashion it strikes me you are effectively saying 'I'm happy someone who is under pressure to please the majority is choosing the actor rather than you'

Now i'm sorry if any of this has come across as condescending or patronising- i'm afraid it's a bit of a habit when i find myself confronted with apathy and jokey character assasination rather than a straight, honest debate. My defence for my attitude lies simply in my deep care for these characters and the film as a whole. While things will doubtless not follow the book exactly or even not be to my satisfaction (i too Uruk-hai can separate books from the movies and even if the film is total crap there'll still be things to be gleaned) for as long as there is a channel to voice my opinions and the slenderest chance they might be heard and acted upon i'm going to voice them .

.....Oh bugger, seems i've written another essay *rolls eyes*

" Colin Firth can play bourgois very very well." Dr. Death

DD is oversimplifying Bilbo if feels an actor who can 'play bourgois well' has all that it takes to unlock the character. I agree that the actor selected should be able to project an aristocratic air. But that same actor must be able to hit a lot of other key cords too. While colin can play comedy, his style of comedy is NOT the kind that is required for a honest portrayal in The Hobbit.

I am relieved that GDT and Peter Jackson are choosing the actor and not Dr. Death!!!

lalaithel, i couldn't agree more.

dr. death, relax! your superiority complex is borderline offensive (grin). life (and these MOVIES) will be more satisfying if you just chill (choose your battles). my opinion probably doesn't matter (as i am a yank), but having a degree of intelligence (and a sense of reality), i can separate the books from the films (regardless of THEIR faults) and enjoy them both. as i've stated in other forums: actors act. considering the acting from the pervious films, either actor could do a fine enough job. what it boils down to is film cohesiveness. martin is a spot on double for holm. have you seen the new star trek film? could a better actor have been found to portray spock? sure, he's a less complex character, but that's not my point. would he have been as universally accepted? i think not (and that is my point).