Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News


Empire Admin -> Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 1:44:20 AM)

Post your comments on this article

Whistler -> The Hobbit: The King Under The Mountain? (25/7/2012 1:44:20 AM)

To be honest, I wasn't even aware they were considering a trilogy. If they have enough footage to do it then awesome, but considering the entire LOTR trilogy was adapted from all three books, I struggle a little to see how they can spread The Hobbit, a much shorter book than any of the individual LOTR titles, into three films. But, as always, I have plenty of faith in PJ to do the right thing.

danstokes -> (25/7/2012 1:47:21 AM)

The Hobbit: Chillin' at the Lonely Mountain.

I'd happily sit through as many Hobbit/LotR movies as Jackson can film, but if they do go as far as the barrels in the first Hobbit movie, I struggle to see how they'd fill 2 more with just the stuff at Rivertown and the mountain...

badblokebob -> (25/7/2012 1:49:24 AM)

2 Hobbit 2 Appendices

Appendices with a Vengeance

The Hobbit vs The Lord of the Rings: Requiem

aaaand so on.

NeoBrowser -> RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 4:12:28 AM)

This isn't such a great idea. Save the appendices for the 10-part Silmarillion!

danielcharlwood -> RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 7:59:07 AM)

The Hobbit: Bilbo Saves Christmas
The Hobbit: Cash Grab
The Hobbit: Pound Stretcher
The Hobbit: Lets Make It up as we go
The Hobbit: Frodo Rises
The Hobbit: Rise of the Lord of the Rings
The Hobbit: Back in the Habit.

jmebaby25 -> (25/7/2012 7:59:46 AM)

They must be adding a LOT of material to stretch The Hobbit to two films, let alone three.

I loved the three LOTR films, but I do worry at the thought of Jackson adding some of his own material every since I found out about his (scrapped) plans to have Aragorn and Sauron engage in fisticuffs at the end of The Return of The King.

UTB -> RE: (25/7/2012 8:04:12 AM)

I'm not sure I can put up with Martin Freeman for that long.

Deacon Frost -> (25/7/2012 8:35:12 AM)

The Hobbit: Assignment Miami Beach

crazymoviesdude -> RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 8:55:33 AM)

Yeah, I've gotten my head around two movies. Of course it's still a cash in, but I'm ok, and in fact happy with that now. Three movies is just too far for such a short book. You can talk about adding in as much stuff from the appendices as you like, but the more you do that, the less correct it is to call these films 'The Hobbit'.

paulferrer -> (25/7/2012 9:47:26 AM)

Warner's going to lose big on Gangster Squad so they need the extra income that a Hobbit 3 will give them...

Blyman -> Trust in your Editor Peter (25/7/2012 9:48:24 AM)

When you watch the extras, Jackson talks about having a different editor for each film and trusting their judgement when he disagreed with them (even though the eventual Extended Editions were superior). Sounds like he maybe hasn't got a strong editor on the case with The Hobbit. I'd rather see one long 3 hour film to supplement the original sublime trilogy, rather then have 3 new drawn out films that tarnish the originals brilliance. But then who are we to question the genius of PJ???

Nickwantstowork -> Peter Jackson - Lust for Oscar II and box office (25/7/2012 9:56:21 AM)

Thought they might get away with two LOTR length movies not three, unless they are going for 2hr approach. Guess they know what they are doing..

eddybaby83 -> Too much filler (25/7/2012 10:07:06 AM)

The Hobbit book is less than half the length of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. 2 films is just about do-able, but 3 is a real push and there will be ALOT of filler in them.
Filler - fail. Play it safe - stick to the plan!

BelfastBoy -> RE: Too much filler (25/7/2012 10:39:33 AM)

Two films of under 2 hours for The Hobbit is probably OK, and even with this original scheme it's pretty clear that there's going to be lots of stuff not directly referenced in the book, but elsewhere in Tolkien's writings (Gandalf in Dol Guldur, Necromancer, White Council etc). However, we also know we're getting an invented female Elf character, who may be OK but I'm yet to be convinced. Yes, Tolkien wrote an entire story with basically all-male characters, but that's what he chose to do. In our more PC times it's inevitable that focus groups and 'the production suits' will want to widen their demographics though.

PJ has been banging on about material in the appendices for years, so if he could find a way to expand The Hobbit using contemporaneous material from them, that at least would be derived in some way from Tolkien. But if it's just scenes made up for the sake of padding out the box office for a third film, then don't bother. For example, PJ made Helm's Deep a huge centrepiece of Two Towers, whereas in the book it's covered in a single chapter, something like 13 pages. Similarly, Pelennor Fields in ROTK was evoked rather than described in detail, while in the film version it's about an hour long. A good way of padding out The Hobbit would be to vastly expand the Battle Of The Five Armies, since of course Bilbo in the book gets knocked out just when it starts, conveniently absolving Tolkien from having to describe it!

Something else to consider. Far be it for me to criticise an Oscar winning screenwriter, but from watching the LOTR special features, I always got the impression that Philippa Boyens in particular relished the opportunity to 'improve' certain scenes of LOTR that she felt could benefit from this. In the case of something like Boromir's death scene, she did say something along the lines that she felt that her version was better than Tolkien's. In some cases she's probably correct but hopefully any similar 'improvements' to The Hobbit will be attempted in the spirit of the original text.

Dex381 -> Hobbit 3? (25/7/2012 11:00:16 AM)

Third movie should be called Hobbit: Still milking it!

ZachBobBob -> (25/7/2012 11:37:08 AM)

...please don't. Then we'd have to wait until 2014 just to see the ending. Waiting for part 1 in December is already torture.

Invader_Ace -> RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 11:57:37 AM)

Fuck's Sake, Jackson!
The Hobbit is not Lord of the Rings!
Why couldn't you just bang out a 90Minute Swash-Buckling family Adventure in the first place?!  I had kind of made peace with 2 films, but 3?!

Wild about Wilder -> RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 1:21:09 PM)

Now I'm a massive Lord Of The Rings fan & The Hobbit is my favorite book of all time. BUT! even I think they're taking the piss with this![:@]

DeadCell79 -> The Hobbit: ?????? (25/7/2012 1:57:01 PM)

The Hobbit: Return of the Dúnedain

The Hobbit: The Misty Mountain Heist

The Hobbit: Bilbo's 13

The Hobbit: Revenge of the Necromancer

The Hobbit: Attack of the Orcs/Trolls/Goblins/Uriki

I trust in PJ to do the best thing, if he feels confident in giving us 3 movies without it being made to feel watered down and stretched in a silly way then I don't have a problem.

If not I'll be perfectly happy with a Extended Edition that will add another 30/40+ mins to both movies :)

dougwatsonuk -> Un-Original (25/7/2012 2:00:20 PM)

Typical Hollywood....they can't seem to come up with any new ideas at the moment. If its not a sequel, its a prequel, and if its not a prequel its a re-boot of a film that was successful enough not to need a reboot. Fair enough re-boot films like spiderman and Fantastic Four as they were rubbish, but films like Total Recall, Fright Night and even Footloose just didn't need to happen.

Hollywood need to hire some new writers to come up with some new ideas.

Rant over.

clarkkent -> (25/7/2012 3:52:28 PM)

Hmmmmmmm, i was all for the two parting of The Hobbit (really hoping we see more of The Battle of the Five Armies than Bilbo did) but a third flick? Even if it acts as a bridge between the two stories, it still seems like it would be mostly a greatest hits package.

Spaldron -> RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies (25/7/2012 4:58:41 PM)

There's a shit-ton of extra material in the appendices and in Unfinished Tales etc so it wouldn't be too hard to stretch this out to three films.

The question is, should they?

bb -> I don't think this is a good idea (25/7/2012 6:53:07 PM)

Look, THE LORD OF THE RINGS is one of the greatest film trilogies of all time and I'm glad that filming on THE HOBBIT had gone well. But if they turn that into a trilogy, then it's going to stretch the story even further. THE HOBBIT is best off as a two-parter as intended. Also, what else is there in the 'Appendices' now they have been adapting some of that stuff in both RINGS and HOBBIT.

Despite that, I'm still really looking forward to THE HOBBIT and I hope Peter Jackson will regain his footing after stumbling so badly with "KONG'S GATE" and "THE SCHMALTZY BONES".

Cyberleader -> (25/7/2012 7:33:25 PM)

Just make a film of The Silimarilian next (is that how you spell it?- Lucky guess?). I LOVE the fact they've finally made The Hobbit and am sure it will be one. Of.The. Greatest. Films. Ever. Yet, once you start 'inventing' too much of your own material only 'loosely' based on genuine Tolkien...Well, I do trust Peter Jackson...but it would be sad to leave Middle Earth with amde up filers and plot threads instead of genuine Tolkien ideas. My opinion. Still, I'm sure I'll be happy with whatever them clever chappies/chappettes produce...

andrewgc -> Sore Nips (25/7/2012 9:28:12 PM)

Just like when they split the last Potter into two I had some strange twinges in the nipple area and again now. Yes, being bloody milked again by the studios.......................

PJFan -> 3rd film concept? (25/7/2012 10:23:59 PM)

what seems plausable to me is the bridge film we've heard rumors of and it should center around Aragorn. Will he be seen as a 10 year old in Rivendale in film 1 or 2??? From there you use the LOTR appendices to script out the 'growing up' of Aragorn.

Jack The Green -> Please, God, Please Tell Me It's Going to Be A Trilogy! (26/7/2012 3:19:58 PM)

Just make the trilogy,warner bros. You'll make me and a lot of other fans very happy. Believe me, we'll all pay to see them.

haranjen -> Hobbit 3: Milady's Revenge (26/7/2012 9:53:08 PM)

Is this one of those films they made on the sly while filming the others?... like The four Musketeers, Superman 2 or The Godfather pt 3?
The idea of filming a few extra bits and banging out a third film does not bode well.

abcdemma -> (28/7/2012 7:16:32 PM)

As awesome as this would be, I don't want them to make it just for the sake of stretching it out and making up a load of material that just drags on and therefore ruins the whole experience. But I'd still have to see it of course...

Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI