To answer the posed question: Yes, I'm looking forward to The Hobbit. I'm sure that a more than adequate job will be done with it, given that it's a much easier (and shorter!) story to adapt for a screenplay and to film.
What I'm not sure about is the proposed "second Hobbit film", covering the seventy-odd years between TA 2942 and TA 3018.
If it sticks to Appendix B, the Tale of Years, well and good - but I have my doubts whether this will satisfy Messrs Del Toro and Jackson, somehow...
From what I remember of the appendixes and Unfinished Tales there's not a great deal of events that could be worked into a plot bridging the gap between The Hobbit and Fellowship Of The Ring. Tolkien even called it "the watchful peace".
I don't think we need worry anyway, in one of his more recent interviews Del Toro indicated that the idea of a 'bridging' film had been dismissed in favour of a two part Hobbit. News which I was delighted with, and now has me very much looking forward to seeing what they do rather than slightly anxious as I would have been if they were to take more liberties with Tolkien's work than neccesary.
In fact here is the interview (I can't post links apparently):
iF MAGAZINE: Where are you with THE HOBBIT right now?
GUILLERMO DEL TORO: Writing every day. Talking to Peter [Jackson]. Emailing. Going to New Zealand back and forth. I really think that the bulk of the hardcore pre-production is going to start in January.
iF: Are you writing two scripts simultaneously?
DEL TORO: The way we view it, and I think it was Peter who said, “let’s stop talking about two movies, let’s talk about one story.” I thought “abso-*******-lutely.” Then it made sense. I was so worried about this and that. Then all of sudden, seeing it as one narrative, saying, “this is the story” and not only the two movies. When we agreed, “let’s think about the five movies as a single story – a single narrative thread,” it opened up the scope of what we’re doing. You don’t have to try to contain the
HOBBIT book in one movie, which I think would be a disservice. People tend to think, “why two movies,” and you go back and take notes of the book. The book you read, is not the book that [you think it is]. The book is such an effortless read and it seems like it goes like a breeze, but there are so many events in
THE HOBBIT. Especially if you’re taking into account, ancillary stuff, there’s so much there. It really is barely containable into two movies.
iF: You’re linking it into the first LORD OF THE RINGS movie – I read that the last part of the second film would include material not in the book, but would link it more fully to the first LORD film.
DEL TORO: We’re not doing that. That was spoken about early on, as I said, we stopped talking about in terms of a bridge film, it’s a single film. We said, “we’re talking about a ‘film’ and we’re talking about two chapters of a film or two episodes.”
