They did it with Christopher Lee in LotR and Star Wars, so it can be done. They used scale stunt doubles for the younger hobbits half the time anyway.

They did that, but I heard they titled it Across the Universe or something like that.

They don't even have a script yet, Kimchi. They'll get a director when that's done.

Very exciting! I've heard something along the lines that Sam Raimi is being considered for a directorial role... we'll just have to wait and see.
It's good that Peter Jackson and Weta studio will reprise their roles in various areas of production. That should keep a sense of continuity from LOTR to the HOBBIT.

No he didn't. He barely pulled off the part in Gollums cave in about a 5 to 10 seconds shot. He was wearing a terrible wig and the only reason it appeared decent was due to camera tricks to make him seem younger than he actually was... For a 5 to 10 second shot it may work fine, but such techniques which would be useless for a full length feature. I don't believe he would be convincing for the role of a younger Bilbo for the entire duration of a film.

What I am saying is that it will probably pay off to hire an entirely different younger, more physical actor for the role of Bilbo. After all, the Hobbit script has plenty of actio, which will likely call for a more youthful and athletic approach to the role.

I believe Bilbo was nearly 50 years old at the time that Hobbit begins.

I think his point is that Jackson doesn't derail a Hobbit film in terms of creative output is he is not involved. Because, he really isn't the end all, be all of directors.

However, I do think the film will be derailed if Jackson doesn't direct as I think McKellen and some others didn't want to be a part of it if he didn't. So, pragmatically speaking, the film will suck if Jackson isn't there, because I don't think anyone would be willing to accept a Gandalf that isn't McKellen, but philosophically-- I don't really think Jackson is a requirement. There's plenty of good directors out there.

That said, I do think Jackson gets too much credit for Lord of the Rings. Yeah, he worked hard and certainly went beyond the requirements of merely point a camera and staging the actors, but it doesn't mean he doesn't output shit, which is I think Deni's chief point.

Not gonna lie, King Kong? Kinda thought it sucked. And wasn't his involvement similar?

And now with that said, Lord of the Rings is brilliant. I don't think someone can walk away from it and go: "Well, I didn't like it because of [blank]."

Yeah King Kong was a horrendous movie. I didn't watch it to the end.

I don't think Bilbo is going to have a success like the LOTR trilogy did since it is intended to be more like a child's book instead of an epic tale.

Since he,s not directing the movie, it might be good if they choose someone that is familiar with the story and mythology of JRR Tolkien.

It's been awhile since I've read LotR, so I might be wrong on this.
But as I recall, the Ents came to the humans' aide. Or if not the Ents then the forest sprouted up in the battlefield or something to that effect.
Either way, I remember the humans were bailed out of the fight somehow.

At the battle of the Hornburg, humans were bailed out by humans. Gandalf eventually leads the Rohirrim, or what is left of them, into the valley driving the orcs back. The only thing resembling ents that were there is a forest of the non moving ents, the living forest, which blocked a retreat alley. They don't aid in the fight until after it's already over. They mop up the enemies that had already been fully routed by the humans. In the movies, the elves turn the tide of battle, in the books, man turns the tide by perseverance and strength of will.