The Hobbit Film Trilogy Thread

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,355]

Aha. So it looks like:

Film 1: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Film 2: The Hobbit: Riddles In The Dark

Film 3: The Hobbit: There and Back Again

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Richard Penna 3,687]

This means one thing: a second LotR music trilogy. This is good.

[KK 3,307]

Indeed, considering that scene is midway through the first film. Unless they're planning on making some serious changes,

Why couldn't they have just left us extended editions?!!

[Quintus 5,399]

Not in Jacko's basterdised version. You're in for a shock when you find our Barrels Down the Bond opens the second movie with a high octane action sequence.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Muad'Dib 1,802]

I don't mind three films, actually...

I say bring it on

[KK 3,307]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around how this got past PJ's team...

[Quintus 5,399]

They've seen the footage...

[Romão 2,274]

Ridiculous cash grab. One long movie would be more than sufficient for the Hobbit

[Jay 37,355]

Ridiculous cash grab. One long movie would be more than sufficient for the Hobbit

Yes.

[SF1_freeze 131]

What a fantastic decision to do three films! They will shoot additional material that we still get our longer than two hours films and maybe they will include Aragorns hunt for Gollum and the early Gondor battles in the third one...

This is what i originally hoped for, two Hobbit movies and one bridge film to connect both trilogies. I know that it probably won't be exactly just a bridge film because PJ will stretch the Hobbit material to the third film but nevertheless...

[Jilal 569]

What a fantastic decision to do three films! They will shoot additional material that we still get our longer than two hours films and maybe they will include Aragorns hunt for Gollum and the early Gondor battles in the third one...

This is what i originally hoped for, two Hobbit movies and one bridge film to connect both trilogies. I know that it probably won't be exactly just a bridge film because PJ will stretch the Hobbit material to the third film but nevertheless...

I agree.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Romão 2,274]

This is no longer about making a great film based on a book, but trying to cram as much material as possible. But PJ has already graduated with honors in making false endings and streching simple stories to ridiculous lengths

[Quintus 5,399]

I don't quite accept that staunchly cynical view - and I'm one cynical mofo. In an ideal world, Tolkien's The Hobbit would be out this Christmas, one three hour epic of fantasy adventure brilliance. But Jackson, Walsh and Boyens aren't just filming the story of the published book - they're adapting and building on Tolkien's wider works whilst brandishing an earned degree of artistic license. It's far easier for me to accept the trilogy on those terms than it ever would be for me to somehow hope for a quaint word-for-word retelling of Tolkien's little children's story.

Either that, or its time to stock up on tinfoil hats again. Dem people on d interweb be a mongering...

[KK 3,307]

I was very happy with 2 films. But 3 films just smells a bit like a cash grab.

Let's just hope they'll pull it off.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Matt C 453]

A huge cash grab if there ever was one. I'm pretty sure WB/New Line appreciate the move, since it grants them a sure blockbuster for summer 2014 while they figure out their post-HP and Batman blockbuster strategies.

Jackson should have a good excuse to stretching it out to three films (other than what he said already). Two films was pushing it already. But more of Shore's music is a welcome prospect.

[Jay 37,355]

Summer '14? I'm sure it will come out Dec 12 2014

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

Jason, is there an ignore function on this board's software which can be enabled so I can add Bloodboal? Serious question.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,355]

Summer '14? I'm sure it will come out Dec 12 2014

Nope. Apparently it is Summer 14 indeed.

Weird

Jason, is there an ignore function on this board's software which can be enabled so I can add Bloodboal? Serious question.

Yes

Go to My Settings --> Manage Ignore Prefs, then enter the username.

That

[Quintus 5,399]

Thanks BloodBoal. Wait - where'd he go?!

Lolololol! Thank Christ for that.

[Matt C 453]

Summer '14? I'm sure it will come out Dec 12 2014

Nope. Apparently it is Summer 14 indeed.

Weird

Why is it weird? WB has done great when they moved their HP films from fall to summer, and back again (same with Summit's Twilight films). I don't see why it wouldn't work for a third Hobbit film.

I think WB will schedule an early June 2014 or July 2014 date for the third Hobbit film. May 2014 is pretty much booked up, and the X-Men: First Class sequel nabbed the mid-July spot WB prefers for Batman and Harry Potter.

[KK 3,307]

I wonder what extra material is warranting this third film. I'll need to read the appendixes again.

[Quintus 5,399]

Jackson isn't exaggerating about the appendices - there's a wealth of rich information and expostion in them. Put it this way: if they can mine the comparatively tiny The Call of the Cthulhu for entire mediums of entertainment riches, then Tolkiens appendices are a veritable encyclopedia of tales ripe for the telling.

I sincerely believe that all these worries and complaints will go the way of Daniel Craig Not Bond, once the trilogy is out in the wild and people are guzzling down every last morsel of goodness in them.

[Wojo 2,453]

Jason, is there an ignore function on this board's software which can be enabled so I can add Bloodboal? Serious question.

It's not as effective as it could be. It still shows you that an ignored person made a reply, which is sometimes tempting to check, and if the person you may hate is still an active member of the conversation, ignoring them becomes a nuisance.

Plus, if someone's title is colored green or red, you can't ignore them. Bugger.

[Quintus 5,399]

Oh I won't be tempted, believe me. And I don't hate the chap in any sense of the word, I'm just tired of him.

[Wojo 2,453]

Oh, and you can't ignore yourself, either. Believe me, I've tried.

[Incanus 5,714]

Jackson isn't exaggerating about the appendices - there's a wealth of rich information and expostion in them. Put it this way: if they can mine the comparatively tiny The Call of the Cthulhu for entire mediums of entertainment riches, then Tolkiens appendices are a veritable encyclopedia of tales ripe for the telling.

What are you talking about? Lovecraft's Cthulhu mythos is not limited to that one short story. I know what you are trying to say (the Granada Sherlock Holmes series is a good example of succesful expansion of the original stories as is the Hercule Poirot TV series) and I agree that sometimes such expansion and adaptation works but it is left to be seen what they have done with the Hobbit related material in the appendices.

I wonder what extra material is warranting this third film. I'll need to read the appendixes again.

It is more about what are they going to use from the appendices since much of it isn't related to the events of LotR or the Hobbit and Tolkien expounds on a lot of prehistory and languages in there. I guess they can expand the Dwarven history with the material relating to it but it will need a lot of adaptation. House of Eorl or the history of the kings of Arnor and Gondor do not come into these two stories in any logical storytelling way that would feel natural, not at least to me.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

Oh, and you can't ignore yourself, either. Believe me, I've tried.

Yeah, and why is the phone always engaged when I call up my house?

Jackson isn't exaggerating about the appendices - there's a wealth of rich information and expostion in them. Put it this way: if they can mine the comparatively tiny The Call of the Cthulhu for entire mediums of entertainment riches, then Tolkiens appendices are a veritable encyclopedia of tales ripe for the telling.

What are you talking about? Lovecraft's Cthulhu mythos is not limited to that one short story. I know what you are trying to say (the Granada Sherlock Holmes series is a good example of succesful expansion of the original stories as is the Hercule Poirot TV series) and I agree that sometimes such expansion and adaptation works

You sort of explained my answer for me

[Incanus 5,714]

I wonder what extra material is warranting this third film. I'll need to read the appendixes again.

It is more about what are they going to use from the appendices since much of it isn't related to the events of LotR or the Hobbit and Tolkien expounds on a lot of prehistory and languages in there. I guess they can expand the Dwarven history with the material relating to it but it will need a lot of adaptation. House of Eorl or the history of the kings of Arnor and Gondor do not come into these two stories in any logical storytelling way that would feel natural, not at least to me.

The problem isn't even here, as far as I'm concerned. It's the fact that they decide to make a third film just now. It's not like they found new appendices during production. They had all Tolkien's writing in hand before starting production. Why would they suddenly only realize now that two movies aren't enough to show all they wanted to include in the films?

Well that was my suprise as I said above, that they announce the film now. Did they upon review find that they had enough material for a 3rd film when they reviewed everything they had shot or will this entail a new shoot?

[Wojo 2,453]

Maybe they plan to have one movie of Samwise Gamgee reading the appendices of the Red Book of Westmarch to his grandchildren for two and a half hours, to flesh out the history of Middle-Earth and some Silmarillion goodness.

Who's to say that during Tolkien's chronology that such a reading never occurred? It probably happened lots of times. The question is whether this third material of backstory -- none of which was required to enjoy TLOTR proper in the first place -- is worth an $11 3D movie ticket, $7 tub of popcorn, and 32 oz slushy for another $5. Times umpteen.

Oh, and you can't ignore yourself, either. Believe me, I've tried.

Yeah, and why is the phone always engaged when I call up my house?

Engaged? Engaged?

[KK 3,307]

I wonder what extra material is warranting this third film. I'll need to read the appendixes again.

It is more about what are they going to use from the appendices since much of it isn't related to the events of LotR or the Hobbit and Tolkien expounds on a lot of prehistory and languages in there. I guess they can expand the Dwarven history with the material relating to it but it will need a lot of adaptation. House of Eorl or the history of the kings of Arnor and Gondor do not come into these two stories in any logical storytelling way that would feel natural, not at least to me.

The problem isn't even here, as far as I'm concerned. It's the fact that they decide to make a third film just now. It's not like they found new appendices during production. They had all Tolkien's writing in hand before starting production. Why would they suddenly only realize now that two movies aren't enough to show all they wanted to include in the films?

Well that was my suprise as I said above, that they announce the film now. Did they upon review find that they had enough material for a 3rd film when they reviewed everything they had shot or will this entail a new shoot?

There are several problems to consider when expanding a tale like The Hobbit into 3 films. Since the first film was probably intended to cut at the barrel scene, there was already not as much "action" left for the second film. So, the second film would have focused more on character development and of course Smaug (along with some extra stuff maybe). But now that the short story is being scraped over 3 films (and no doubt, each one 3 hours in length), they'll need 3 climaxes. At what point will Smaug die? Halfway through the 3rd film? And to be followed by what? An hour and a half of narration of the history of Middle-Earth? And I'm having a hard time imagining just how much of the Appendixes Jackson plans to include. The dwarf material? The Numenor material?

From a cinematic point of view, 3 films could really be a mess in terms of pacing and story-telling.

The first film, if left as it was intended. should be great but the other two...they will feel thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread.

[Wojo 2,453]

I'd argue that you gave away a major Hobbit-based spoiler...

...but anyone in a Hobbit forum who doesn't know that by now ought to be ashamed of themselves.

[Matt C 453]

I sincerely believe that all these worries and complaints will go the way of Daniel Craig Not Bond, once the trilogy is out in the wild and people are guzzling down every last morsel of goodness in them.

I hope so. But the thing is, I don't know why Peter Jackson just decided to turn it into three films -- after principal photography already wrapped. If the scripts were that long and detailed, they should've made it three films at the start.

[SF1_freeze 131]

Ok now pls start to think about it more extensively...

The scripts were written mainly by PJ, his wife and Philippa Boyens. All the women had to do while shooting were script revisions. It seems obvious that they (while PJ was shooting) came to the conclusion that they could do a third movie and they probably worked it all out over the last half year.

Now they still have time till next year to figure out a script / finish an already progressed script for the third film. So two extremely experienced and capable writers and Peter Jackson have almost ONE year to draft the third film and change the second one accordingly. This is more than enough time! They worked on these Hobbit films and scripts for more than three years now.

They know what they are doing!

[Brónach 1,302]

Wait, I'm late to this. Are they really trying to assemble three films?

Shit. No.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

This is great news!

[Brónach 1,302]

This sucks! The structure of the story over two films could be PERFECT. Three films might feel too slow and dilute the tension and make it a bit boring. Sort of like ROTK.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Idiots!

[SF1_freeze 131]

This sucks! The structure of the story over two films could be PERFECT. Three films might feel too slow and dilute the tension and make it a bit boring. Sort of like ROTK.

The two films also might feel too fast. What you said is pessimistic speculation with no merit cause it could be the exact opposite. An example would be the longer and SLOWER extended editions of the LOTR trilogy. Every one of those was much better than the rushed cinema versions!

Don't you think PJ, Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens know the films and their needs better than us? They came to the decision AFTER watching the rough cut of the first and most of the second movie.

[Brónach 1,302]

But PJ is prone to excess in several ways. That's why I think this might be one of these excesses.

When you think about it, it's kind of funny that they make three films out of such a book.

[SF1_freeze 131]

They make three films out of the book PLUS the appendices of RotK

[Brónach 1,302]

Wouldn't it feel "less fast" if they actually cut down on some of the added stuff and made it fit nicely into two films?

[SF1_freeze 131]

I guess you don't like the slower extended editions with dozens of great but non action character moments then. I guess we will get much more of these in the three Hobbit movies plus maybe new bridge material to connect with the LotR trilogy.

The added stuff by the way is necessary for more dramatic and more grown up versions of the tale. The Hobbit alone is a child book and no one wants to see a child movie.