Ian McKellen Shoots Final Scene as Gandalf

Ian McKellen Shoots Final Scene as Gandalf

Gandalf Final Shot

Director Peter Jackson has confirmed that the actor's turn as the classic character has come to an end.

There were a lot of reasons to love The Lord of the Rings films. The scenery of New Zealand was gorgeous, the score was epic and, of course, it was just nice to see the generally accepted progenitor of the fantasy genre competently adapted to film. For our money though, one of the elements that kept us returning to the cinema to watch the trilogy over and over again on the big screen was Ian McKellen as Gandalf. Sure, the rest of the cast was good; Sean Bean was great as Boromir and Andy Serkis owned the part of Gollum. That said, McKellen's performance as the wizard to end all wizards was so wholly excellent that it had us screaming "You shall not pass" at every semi-imposing creature we could find.

It has now been revealed however, that the days of McKellen donning the robes of a wizard may finally have come to an end. Peter Jackson, the director behind The Lord of the Rings and the ongoing Hobbit trilogy, confirmed that all shooting involving the veteran actor had officially wrapped up. "Seconds ago we finished our last shot with Gandalf" said Jackson. "The end of an incredible adventure that began in 1999. I'm feeling very sad right now." Fantasy fans everywhere will likely concur. Even if The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey had some quibbling problems holding it back from the same greatness achieved by The Lord of the Rings, it was still a joy to see McKellen return as Gandalf. Knowing that he'll truly never never take up his wizard's staff again is definitely a bit of a downer. On the plus side, at least we still get to see him play an angry mutant one more time.

Source: Facebook

Permalink

I spy a typo, "McKellan" instead of "McKellen", several times.

Other than that it's quite sad and all, though not at all unexpected.

VeryOddGamer:
it's quite sad and all.

It always is, even more so that the original trilogy is one of my all-time favourite movie collections.

What are you talking about? Ian McKellan finished playing Gandalf nine or ten years ago... unless you're implying this azure eyed monstrosity is the same character that a younger me idolised so.

Also, wow, PJ looks horrible in that photo.

Like on the verge of death horrible.

What a sweet heartwarming picture.
McKellen has an amazing aura of kindness that fits so perfectly with Gandalf.
All good things must end though. On to your next adventure.

Too bad, man. The article was right, McKellen really did rock that part.

Also, "The Hobbit had some problems."

LOL. You're such a kidder, Shearer.

VeryOddGamer:
I spy a typo, "McKellan" instead of "McKellen", several times.

Other than that it's quite sad and all, though not at all unexpected.

A wizard makes no typos, he types precisely what he means to.

(P.S. Fixed)

Just a shame it couldnīt have been a better movie, my expectations for the rest of the series is very low. But McKellen is really enjoyable in the role of Gandalf, and when heīs onscreen The Hobbit was pretty watchable, atleast when they werenīt running around screaming with a flailing camera and tourettes editing.

I still hope we one day get to see a new Hobbit movie (one that isnīt an over the top action movie), unfortunately that would probably also mean getting a new gandalf :/.

I enjoyed the Hobbit and I'm excited for the rest. Also Ian McKellen is such a nice guy, got his autograph and a photo with him, I couldn't imagine anyone else playing Gandalf.

Well, technically he still has any voice acting for the inevitable tie-in games, if that counts...

But yeah. Gandalf is an awesome character, and Ian Mckellen's interpretation nailed it. Much as I'm looking forward to the next two Hobbit films, it'll be sad to see him go.

Well...he's not going to do anymore acting in this trilogy, but then we've only seen the first third anyway.

Tis sad but at least we have more great films on the way to remind us how good he is.

He made a fantastic Gandalf, and I enjoyed every single minute of the hobbit. The hobbit had its problems? the problem was that it was too GOOD!

Quite frankly, I don't care anymore. The first Hobbit movie was a mass of gibbering lunacy pissing on Tolkien's greatest work and I won't be bothered to see the rest.

I want to play Lord Of The Rings Monopoly. So i can shout..."You Shall Not Pass!!!! Go, you can not collect $200 dollars. "

StewShearer:
Director Peter Jackson has confirmed that the actor's turn as the classic character has come to an end.

Don't you mean a Bag end?

BanicRhys:

Also, wow, PJ looks horrible in that photo.

Like on the verge of death horrible.

Perhaps you need to see some actual dead people.

OT: I suppose the fact that it's the second "it's all over!" makes it even worse.

Regardless of how the Hobbit stacks up against the original trilogy, Gandalf is always a delight to watch. He was my favorite character in the trilogy and he continues to be enjoyable in the Hobbit. Looking forward to seeing him in the next movie.

Well, then I...uhm, I'm not crying...

Everything I've read and seen suggests there was always a real sense of camaraderie among the cast and crew of the LOTR pictures- a sense I see very much reflected in that picture. I'm sorry to see even a part of it come to an end.

Wait so Gandalf isn't going to show up in the third movie? or it is someone else playing him?

DTWolfwood:
someone else playing him?

Don't think so mate. Not in todays industry.

DVS BSTrD:

StewShearer:
Director Peter Jackson has confirmed that the actor's turn as the classic character has come to an end.

Don't you mean a Bag end?

Nyuck nyuck nyuck.

RJ Dalton:
Quite frankly, I don't care anymore. The first Hobbit movie was a mass of gibbering lunacy pissing on Tolkien's greatest work and I won't be bothered to see the rest.

The Hobbit is not Tolkien's greatest work. Tolkien himself was dissatisfied with it and said that if he could, he'd go back and rewrite the novel to no longer be a children's story.

See: Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien.

Which is interesting, considering that it's the only thing he's written that doesn't read like someone pumping cement through your eyes. The emphasis on simplicity and brevity did a lot of good to that work, at least in my opinion.

But then again, I genuinely like the Hobbit, book and film, a bit more than The Lord of Et Cetera. I am now scum. :3

RJ Dalton:
Quite frankly, I don't care anymore. The first Hobbit movie was a mass of gibbering lunacy pissing on Tolkien's greatest work and I won't be bothered to see the rest.

The Hobbit was Tolkien's greatest work? It's pretty much a Children's book, saying it's Tolkien's greatest work is like saying the best part you enjoyed of a 5 course meal was the mint to clear your pallet at the beginning. It included barely any of the Darker undertones or metaphorical writing of his other works, it's a nice story but it's just not even in the same league as his other books and unfinished works.

Being a bit melodramatic at the film as well, an opinion is plain and simple someone's individual thoughts, but pissing on it, really? Going a bit over the top.

On the topic of the films, I thought the Hobbit was pretty solid, tbh if you compare the LOTR book and the film they have no more changes than they did with this film, if not more, there were a shed load of changes in the original trilogy, it's just everyone has forgotten that now as they were dam fantastic films. I don't think it's quite on par with the original LOTR films atm, but it's quite hard to judge as was a teen watching the originals so always going to have the rose tinted glasses for it as I sat in awe for everyone at the cinema. I'll reserve judgement till after I have seen how they handle the battle of the five armys I think!

And to this "News" story, this happened days ago, this isn't news, this is looking back several days.

Muspelheim:
Which is interesting, considering that it's the only thing he's written that doesn't read like someone pumping cement through your eyes. The emphasis on simplicity and brevity did a lot of good to that work, at least in my opinion.

But then again, I genuinely like the Hobbit, book and film, a bit more than The Lord of Et Cetera. I am now scum. :3

You should try reading The Children of Hurin. It was edited together by Tolkien's son after his death but it's a pretty good read and somewhat similar to The Hobbit in being a simpler, smaller story. A hell of a lot darker though.

Jedi-Hunter4:

RJ Dalton:
Quite frankly, I don't care anymore. The first Hobbit movie was a mass of gibbering lunacy pissing on Tolkien's greatest work and I won't be bothered to see the rest.

The Hobbit was Tolkien's greatest work? It's pretty much a Children's book, saying it's Tolkien's greatest work is like saying the best part you enjoyed of a 5 course meal was the mint to clear your pallet at the beginning. It included barely any of the Darker undertones or metaphorical writing of his other works, it's a nice story but it's just not even in the same league as his other books and unfinished works.

Being a bit melodramatic at the film as well, an opinion is plain and simple someone's individual thoughts, but pissing on it, really? Going a bit over the top.

On the topic of the films, I thought the Hobbit was pretty solid, tbh if you compare the LOTR book and the film they have no more changes than they did with this film, if not more, there were a shed load of changes in the original trilogy, it's just everyone has forgotten that now as they were dam fantastic films. I don't think it's quite on par with the original LOTR films atm, but it's quite hard to judge as was a teen watching the originals so always going to have the rose tinted glasses for it as I sat in awe for everyone at the cinema. I'll reserve judgement till after I have seen how they handle the battle of the five armys I think!

And to this "News" story, this happened days ago, this isn't news, this is looking back several days.

It's not completely devoid of depth. For instance, I can't remember what I read this from (was back in college) but The Hobbit is actually a fairly clever retelling of Beowulf, told from the perspective of a non-warrior. Bilbo and Beowulf both leave home, face a monster that this arguably their equal and opposite and, at the end, have to face a dragon.

I'm not arguing against it being a children's story, but it does have some layers.

StewShearer:
Ian McKellen Shoots Final Scene as Gandalf

No, just you wait ~5 years until somebody announces the epic 3 part (3h each) movie adaption of the Silmarillion, because of.... well, money.

Kiwi the Tortoise:

StewShearer:
Ian McKellen Shoots Final Scene as Gandalf

No, just you wait ~5 years until somebody announces the epic 3 part (3h each) movie adaption of the Silmarillion, because of.... well, money.

That's assuming McKellen is alive at that point. I don't want to be morbid, but the man was born in 1939.

And the Silmarillion would need more than three movies. Gods, there must already be studio executives drooling over the prospect of all those potential sequels.

BanicRhys:
Also, wow, PJ looks horrible in that photo.

Like on the verge of death horrible.

The guy's been making a movie for, what, the past three years straight?

I'm surprised he doesn't look worse.

Jedi-Hunter4:
The Hobbit was Tolkien's greatest work? It's pretty much a Children's book, saying it's Tolkien's greatest work is like saying the best part you enjoyed of a 5 course meal was the mint to clear your pallet at the beginning.

It is not "just a children's book." It is an excellently written children's book. There is no reason that we should discount children's literature just because it was written for children. More than anything else in the series, The Hobbit captured the feel of an old folktale with cues from epic poetry. The Lord of the Rings may have its high points, but it's not nearly as well written and it has a tendency to get bogged down in the world building to the detriment of the story.
And it's not just that they changed things. I'm not precisely a purist about Tolkien's work and I don't think any of his works is without flaw. But the way they changed things for the movie was done in profoundly stupid ways.

Consider this example:
Trolls: Surrender, or we'll kill this one person!
Thorin: Okay, we surrender.
Trolls: Great, now we'll kill all of you!
Thorin: Oh, balls, I totally didn't think of that!

Things were changed for the sake of putting action into the plot, but The Hobbit is not about action and was never about action. LotR was a book about war, but The Hobbit was about the journey and the growth of the character. Trying to change it to make it action oriented just made everything profoundly stupid because, at the end of the day, they had to backtrack on all that action to bring it back to where the plot was in the book. It makes the film a mess.

StewShearer:
You should try reading The Children of Hurin. It was edited together by Tolkien's son after his death but it's a pretty good read and somewhat similar to The Hobbit in being a simpler, smaller story. A hell of a lot darker though.

I used the Children of Hurin as an example to someone who said GRR Martin has broken 'some unwritten laws' on acceptable context in reaction to the Red Wedding. Most of the Silmarillion is far darker than people think, if the only Tolkien they know is LotR. But it really does help you understand why, by the Third Age, the Elves are such a reserved and sad people.

This is much preferable news to, "Gandalf dies before filming 'The hobbit'"

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here