Hobbit Trilogy Is Confirmed (Full Version)

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



Message


Empire Admin -> Hobbit Trilogy Is Confirmed (30/7/2012 5:14:01 PM)

Post your comments on this article




gusbuster -> (30/7/2012 5:14:01 PM)

If ROTK is anything to go by, this 3rd film could just be loads of endings to the 2nd film.
I guess the question is are they shooting new material, or are they just editing what they're already filming into three films? If they're not adding new stuff my concern is that there'll be a films worth of scenes that would normally be on the editing room floor.




eamonn_finn -> bad idea (30/7/2012 5:24:06 PM)

i would prefer two great films, than 3 average ones!




ronnieconnelly -> Really not required... (30/7/2012 5:24:12 PM)

Smells like a cash grab. A breakdown of the three proposed films: http://www.cinemabums.com/?p=412




rams -> Overkill (30/7/2012 5:33:31 PM)

I really like P.J's movies,but like I said previously,Jackson could use a bit of restraint.He is a bit too susceptible to new input from the entire Cast and Crew that make some of his latest movies a bit uncohesive and unfocused,giving the impression that the film was made by a lot of directors and bandaged in editing.I know that film is a group process but usually the final product looks singular but with P.J it looks like too many views,disconnected,little cohesion.He needs to be more methodical,one movie should be enough for The Hobbit,two is a bit of a stretch,three is overkill...Still,I look forward to it,and even with these mentioned(perceived) flaws in his style,I really like his moovies




Jasper_29 -> RE: Overkill (30/7/2012 5:43:24 PM)

Peter Jackson's last 3 film have been overlong wannabe epics with shite effects and shite endings. Why would his next three be any good?




kitf -> not my thing (30/7/2012 5:46:26 PM)

Honestly, I'm not surprised. The big issue is the material. The Hobbit is a fabulous book, well paced and with decent character definition for the major players. It's just the right length to make one great film. The reason Tolkien relegated the extra bits with the Necromancer to appendices within the LOTR was because they didn't fit anywhere else, or it was lore he developed to flesh out other stories he had. Spanning the Hobbit over 2 or 3 films is purely a way to cash in.

It's something I won't be going to see. After seeing LOTR, I can't read the books and react with them the same way as I used to. I don't want to risk a similar reaction to the Hobbit.




sanchia -> Money Money (30/7/2012 6:09:02 PM)

Money, Money, Money.
Must be funny,
In a rich man's world.




LjStronge -> RE: not my thing (30/7/2012 6:10:59 PM)

Seems like the only reason to push to 3 films is money.

I don't understand the need to make this a trilogy, I am not actually that excited to see "The Hobbit" let alone 2 sequels. I may be biased (as I am not a MASSIVE fan of LOTR) but I can't look past the money side. Is Peter Jackson going to direct all of them?

Can someone who is a tolken fan explain to me how this is going to be stretched out to 3? Is there really enough material?




lazythinking -> Ridiculous (30/7/2012 6:31:43 PM)

The Hobbit should be 1 action packed great film, 2 films is padding it out just to make more money, 3 films is ridiculous.




lazythinking -> Ridiculous (30/7/2012 6:41:16 PM)

The Hobbit should be 1 action packed great film, 2 films is padding it out just to make more money, 3 films is ridiculous.




andyw316 -> Give Us Your Money.... (30/7/2012 6:53:40 PM)

I totally agree with lazythinking The Hobbit book has enough material for one great film, I was concerned when i heard they were padding it out to two movies, now three!!! Obviously Jackson doesn't care about the source material and just wants to make money! We can also look forward to the extended Blu Ray discs.




CaleGiles -> (30/7/2012 8:06:50 PM)

Bugger. Was afraid this might happen. I don't want to have to wait 3 years to get the whole story! It was bad enough I had to wait 2. Not happy. Love Peter Jackson, but not happy.




SiD300 -> (30/7/2012 8:24:24 PM)

WANKERS! Does this news mean bbc's Sherlock wont be back till even later???




Cynric -> Uh-oh (30/7/2012 8:44:44 PM)

This... this is worrying. Does this mean principle photography is over, or are they gonna sretch what they've already done across an extra film? Did it just so happen that the had about six hours of helicopter fly-by footage to pad every thing out with? Maybe the third film isn't so much "The Hobbit", but the period between the battle of five armies and the start of the start of "Felloship"?

Either way, I'm somewhat apprehensive.




adamsmith65 -> This is a good thing! (30/7/2012 9:10:07 PM)

I was worried before that Smaug would be a bit of an anticlimax coming in the middle of film 2, and then the big battle at the end taking the impact off it. Now I think it will fit in a lot better, Smaugs attack at the end of film 2 and the build up and battle of 5 armies in film 3. More middle earth can only be a good thing!




adamsmith65 -> This is a good thing! (30/7/2012 9:12:42 PM)

I was worried before that Smaug would be a bit of an anticlimax coming in the middle of film 2, and then the big battle at the end taking the impact off it. Now I think it will fit in a lot better, Smaugs attack at the end of film 2 and the build up and battle of 5 armies in film 3. More middle earth can only be a good thing!




Marly93 -> Integrity (30/7/2012 9:20:59 PM)

The press statement should just have read "£££££££".




haranjen -> Something to Look forward to in Xmas 2020 (30/7/2012 9:35:50 PM)

Come 2020 clear your Christmas stockings for the 12 disc extended mega cut 3D Green rays (or whatever the technology is by then) of the Halfling Sextology. Will Jackson finally overtake Lucas as the person who can squeeze the most money out of the same old crap from his fans?




andrewgc -> Have You Read The Book? (30/7/2012 9:36:17 PM)

Wondered how many commenting have read it. It really is one FANTASTIC film or two Good ones. But three? The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are basically journey films where the characters walk everywhere. LOTR is set over years not the few months it appears to encompass.

So expect lots of walking around. There are some good sequences - the bit where the dwarves get caught by spiders in the wood (didn't JK Rowling 'borrow' that?) and many others. But making three films is a bloody joke.




Drone -> RE: Have You Read The Book? (30/7/2012 9:55:52 PM)

To hell with the lot of you; I couldn't be more excited. The more Middle Earth I can cram into my life on the big screen, the better as far as I'm concerned.




Lucky Day -> RE: Have You Read The Book? (30/7/2012 10:11:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drone

To hell with the lot of you; I couldn't be more excited. The more Middle Earth I can cram into my life on the big screen, the better as far as I'm concerned.


Hell Yeah. I would take 6 films if Jackson was up for it. All 6 hours long each, and I would imagine most of us have read the book.




Fallen Giant -> (30/7/2012 10:39:08 PM)

More Gollum, more necromancer, more Bilbo, more battles and a giant gorilla in there some where fighting Ollyphants with two Elf archers strapped to his shoulders...




nortonglr -> There and Back Again....And Again....And Again, (30/7/2012 11:18:33 PM)

Deathly Hallows was split into two parts and the first part was a padded waste of time-unless you were a Warner Bros. bean counter!
LOTR's totals 3 books 1200+ pages of small fine type and three films were sensibly made. The Hobbit is more kiddy fair, a large type 400 pager or if on the same press as LOTR's- around 250 pages! 3 films?! I understand that Jackson does flesh out reference material and literature summarised in LOTR's but this seems excessive. It also has the studio rubbing its greedy little hands. They might want to think about this decision, because if the first or even second part stinks-the third might not get a look in. That could be a daft gamble when you consider 3 major separate film promotions.




Whistler -> (31/7/2012 1:42:30 AM)

I think it's great if he really has enough to make three quality films, but I worry he's trying too hard to make this LOTR. I want to see The Hobbit; Bilbo, Gandalf and the dwarves on their quest to the Lonely Mountain. That's all. I don't want to see a convoluted plot that strays from the main, exciting quest. As I always say, I do have faith in PJ to do the right thing, but I'm not 100% sold on this yet. Fingers crossed.




AaronGallagher1 -> Give him a chance (31/7/2012 8:22:26 AM)

Call me naive but I am just gonna have faith in Mr Jackson. He did very little wrong with the LOTR and if he wants to do more with The Hobbit I give him more credit than just making more films to make more money. These films are what made him the success he has become and don't believe he wants to do anything that will turn the fans of LOTR (films/books) against the new films.

If he is "milking it" as put earlier it is no different to the many many unfinished tales put out by Tolkein (or his son). The extra stories he will be making use of may not stand on their own as a film but as part of the new trilogy perhaps he can make The Hobbit's simpler plot into a more epic film that we have come to expect after his LOTR adaptation.

And to compare Mr Jackson to George Lucas in the what he is doing is ludicrous. Just look at George Lucas' IMDB page and search for the last original idea or project he did.

I am more than certain that Jackson has found more than a few gems in the additional to make some quality films and I for one am happy to leave my cinemagoing experience in his safe hands.

(Though I do so wish it was not being made in 3D.)





waltham1979 -> RE: Give him a chance (31/7/2012 8:52:13 AM)

When these are finally released on DVD I plan to watch The Hobbit films followed by the Lord Of The Rings films (Special Edition natch) in an epic Middle Earth day fueled by beer, red bull, doritos and patience...!! [8|]




ronniem -> Much as I love the books (31/7/2012 9:47:18 AM)

Looks like Jackson is gonna do a 'George Lucas' with his career...and that's not a good thing...Warners suits are at it again...Would have expected him not to cave in...because if he originally wanted to do 3 films to tell the story then he would have done that from the get-go. This just sounds like a cash grab to me..think of all that 3D revenue for years to come...not to mention the Special Edition DVDs...This.Is.Overkill.




EVIL BSTD -> RE: Have You Read The Book? (31/7/2012 11:08:04 AM)

Maybe you need to re-read LOTR Frodos Journey took about 6/7 months not years.




Whistler -> RE: Give him a chance (31/7/2012 1:26:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltham1979

When these are finally released on DVD I plan to watch The Hobbit films followed by the Lord Of The Rings films (Special Edition natch) in an epic Middle Earth day fueled by beer, red bull, doritos and patience...!! [8|]


I do the LOTR extended trilogy every Christmas. The Hobbit films, how ever many there are, will make a fine addition [:)]

(I say that now...)




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.03125