| RE: Hobbit Fillers for 3 movies? |
This was just confirmed by Peter Jackson himself.
The Hobbit is now a trilogy:
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/07/30/the-hobbit-3-offi cially-announced More
Posted by jmebaby25 at 16:54 on 30 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Hobbit Fillers for 3 movies? |
Well - we had three fairly lengthy movies from LoTR - and that was without the scouring of the Shire (the greatest pity, really). On its own - as written - 1 movie would have done. I understand that we get to see the seige of Dol Guldur as well - alluded to in the Hobbit, but would be a fair chunk of a movie (be sad if two big battles both occurred in Movie #2 though wouldn't it?). probably enough material to eke it out to three - wouldn't complain. More
Posted by PloppyTheJailer at 03:48 on 30 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
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... More
Posted by abcdemma at 19:16 on 28 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Hobbit 3: Milady's Revenge |
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.
More
Posted by haranjen at 21:53 on 26 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Please, God, Please Tell Me It's Going to Be A Trilogy! |
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. More
Posted by Jack The Green at 15:19 on 26 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| 3rd film concept? |
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. More
Posted by PJFan at 22:23 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Sore Nips |
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....................... More
Posted by andrewgc at 21:28 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
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 th More
Posted by Cyberleader at 19:33 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| I don't think this is a good idea |
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 foo More
Posted by bb at 18:53 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies |
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? More
Posted by Spaldron at 16:58 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
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. More
Posted by clarkkent at 15:52 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Un-Original |
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. More
Posted by dougwatsonuk at 14:00 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| The Hobbit: ?????? |
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 More
Posted by DeadCell79 at 13:57 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies |
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! More
Posted by Wild about Wilder at 13:21 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies |
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?!
Bad. More
Posted by Invader_Ace at 11:57 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
...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. More
Posted by ZachBobBob at 11:37 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Hobbit 3? |
Third movie should be called Hobbit: Still milking it! More
Posted by Dex381 at 11:00 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Too much filler |
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 More
Posted by BelfastBoy at 10:39 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Too much filler |
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! More
Posted by eddybaby83 at 10:07 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Peter Jackson - Lust for Oscar II and box office |
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.. More
Posted by Nickwantstowork at 09:56 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| Trust in your Editor Peter |
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??? More
Posted by Blyman at 09:48 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
Warner's going to lose big on Gangster Squad so they need the extra income that a Hobbit 3 will give them... More
Posted by paulferrer at 09:47 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies |
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'. More
Posted by crazymoviesdude at 08:55 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
The Hobbit: Assignment Miami Beach More
Posted by Deacon Frost at 08:35 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: |
I'm not sure I can put up with Martin Freeman for that long. More
Posted by UTB at 08:04 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
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.
More
Posted by jmebaby25 at 07:59 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies |
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. More
Posted by danielcharlwood at 07:59 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| RE: Hobbit Trilogy Talk Intensifies |
This isn't such a great idea. Save the appendices for the 10-part Silmarillion! More
Posted by NeoBrowser at 04:12 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
2 Hobbit 2 Appendices
Appendices with a Vengeance
The Hobbit vs The Lord of the Rings: Requiem
aaaand so on. More
Posted by badblokebob at 01:49 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
|
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... More
Posted by danstokes at 01:47 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| The Hobbit: The King Under The Mountain? |
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. More
Posted by Whistler at 01:44 on 25 July 2012 | Report This Post |
 |
|
 |
| |