"The Hobbit" is now gonna be THREE movies?

[Sea Level]

"We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance."

-Peter Jackson, here: http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/movie-talk/extra-story-drawn-upon-hobbit-trilogy-194114585.html

[TheOtherScott]

As long as all three are good, I don't care.

[illuminatus]

At least this prequel will not feature Midichlorians

[Librarian of Doom]

At least this prequel will not feature Midichlorians

This! And if it does, I'm walking out and setting fire to the movie theater (okay, not really on the second part. But I'll want to).

[azsf]

Does anyone ever read that word without hearing it in their head like it was said in Princess Bride?

Always. That movie dies with that character.

What it's actually about is how western culture has become so fixated on the three act play we inherently dislike anything that deviates from it. Duologies are considered awkward. Five act plays are called long and boring.

What's this now? I could talk on about this, but i'll let FILM CRITIC HULK explain this one. But without even reading that link; Quentin Tarintino and the vast success of his films would like to differ

[Raincloak]

I see it really easily. They are not going to do 2 "get caughts" in one movie. What they'll do is:

-Get started, visit Rivendell (remember they have to encounter the trolls enroute), get kidnapped by goblins, meet Gollum and get the ring, and escape. Make it clear that the Necromancer (not yet revealed as Sauron) knows the ring has exchanged hands. this may be too much for the first, but I can't imagine them not doing the ring in the first movie...

That can't be right. Sauron had nooooo clue where his ring was at this time, otherwise he would've sent somebody to get it from Gollum ages back, long before Bilbo's arrival. He didn't find out what became of the Ring until Gollum ran into his minions and told them about Bilbo, around the time Gandalf was finally putting the pieces together in "Fellowship of the Ring."

[azsf]

then again athena, without the prequels we would never have had plinketts review of the prequels. and the world would be sadder still...

[Vegemighty]

I just read the Hobbit for the first time. I wasn't very impressed. There wasn't really any character development, and the plot seemed slow and worn out. And there wasn't any female characters in the whole book. Its definitely not enough material for 3 movies.

[WizardTrip]

Ctrl+Alt+Del's take on it

http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20120801/

[joeyb]

I was looking forward to the *one* movie, The Hobbit.

Well, you were always going to be disappointed, then, because they were going to make it into 2 movies from the start. I'm assuming that 3 are being made because he tends to make 4-hour movies and then he has to cut them down for the theaters. Instead, he'll just make them into three 2.5-hour to 3-hour movies.

[Gainsdalf the Whey]

That can't be right. Sauron had nooooo clue where his ring was at this time, otherwise he would've sent somebody to get it from Gollum ages back, long before Bilbo's arrival. He didn't find out what became of the Ring until Gollum ran into his minions and told them about Bilbo, around the time Gandalf was finally putting the pieces together in "Fellowship of the Ring."

We have no idea what Sauron knew at this time. We do know that he has some kind of connection to the ring and can feel it when someone puts it on, as the eye turned to it whenever this happened. He's still just gaining his strength back at this time I believe, he may not have been strong enough or his followers organized enough for something like he did in LoTR. Even if he did have the ability to send someone after it, I feel like at this point he is trying to keep a low profile as he builds his strength again. Sending Nazgul out that early would kinda draw attention to oneself.

As for finding out from Gollum, didn't Gollum reveal the info about the ring after being tortured for awhile, specifically for that info? I feel like he knew awhile back that it was in Gollum's posession. I'll have to go back and look.

[Elastigirl]

Three movies seems too long to me. I'm agreeing with the others who said it was all about the money.

However, I am loving this thread mainly because of all the discussions of the book/and movie. I love how many LoTR nerds there on this board. And for those of you who don't enjoy the series-bah haumbug!

[Guest Alpha Bookworm]

I don't think it's all about the money.

Peter Jackson did an amazing job with the LOTR trilogy and so I will trust him with these 3 films. I believe he is a true LOTR fan and will stick to the story, adding extra material not just filler. And extra stuff = awesome. Anyways, no matter how it turns out I will be seeing all three in theaters.

[Church]

*lol* That's good, because I said it Princess-Bride style in my head when I wrote it. I thought about adding "That word... I do not think it means what you think it means...", but figured y'all would be nerdy enough to read it with the right "voice" on your own.

Oh, and thank goodness for that. I like to live in my happy world where there are only 3 Star Wars movies, Han shot first, and there's no such thing as midichlorians. Oh, we had so much excitement when the movies were being remastered, and the prequels started coming out. How it broke me.

One thing I did enjoy in the prequels was the sword play. The Jedi seem was more badass, and the fights are WAY cooler. I know that's just a nod to the changing technology of the industry, but I thoroughly enjoy the light saber fights.

[azsf]

One thing I did enjoy in the prequels was the sword play. The Jedi seem was more badass, and the fights are WAY cooler. I know that's just a nod to the changing technology of the industry, but I thoroughly enjoy the light saber fights.

choreography was definitely better, but they were meaningless. please watch the plinkett review. look here's the first part:

[Gainsdalf the Whey]

So everyone pumped? 3 weeks!

[Gainsdalf the Whey]

Everyone pumped? 3 weeks!

[Leimanu]

I saw a quick trailer on tv this week. Looks like a lot of fun! Looks like the LoTR movies, but with Martin as the Hobbit, it'll have a different feel.

[Timmy M]

if this is anything to go by their gonna end the first film with the eagles flying them off to Beorn, i'm guessing the 2nd one (Desolation of Smaug) will finish with Smaugs death/build up to the final battle and 'There and Back Again' will probably start with the Battle of Five armies
i'll also agree that there's a shed load of backstory what with the Necromancer, Saruman and the brown wizard who's name i've forgotten, bitta plot building with Frodo and Bilbo at the beginning and at the end Bilbo's gonna arrive at the auction so there's a bit of Hobbiton at the end too
my 2p

[ryanmercer]

I refused to watch the trilogy based on the trailers. This ill probably not watch either, a small young adult book does not need to be 9 hours of film.

[Oogiem]

I keep hoping that he'll pull in details from the later published works and all the notes and other stuff that were found a few years ago. My understanding of how the Hobbit book was published is Tolkien had to leave out s lot of what he wanted in it to make it compete as a kids book. If Jackson adds back the original stuff there is probably enough material there for 6 movies or more. I thought Jackson had access to the entire Tolkien library and notes but not sure. After all just look at how much got left out of the LOTR trilogy that was in those books if you include the appendices and the other notes.

[JJS]

If it was anyone else doing it, I would be wary. Since it's Peter Jackson - I'm quietly optimistic. Whatever the reasons, it's being made by someone who genuinely loves the Tolkien universe. It can't be all bad.

[SuperUnison]

I hope in all 3 films Martin Freeman will be doing his expression.

(It works perfectly in the Office and Sherlock)

[Sea Level]

I keep hoping that he'll pull in details from the later published works and all the notes and other stuff that were found a few years ago. My understanding of how the Hobbit book was published is Tolkien had to leave out s lot of what he wanted in it to make it compete as a kids book. If Jackson adds back the original stuff there is probably enough material there for 6 movies or more. I thought Jackson had access to the entire Tolkien library and notes but not sure. After all just look at how much got left out of the LOTR trilogy that was in those books if you include the appendices and the other notes.

To my knowledge, they only have rights to LOTR and the Hobbit, but not the Silmarillion, for example. Still, there is plenty in the LOTR appendices that would be fruitful.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk 2

[Gainsdalf the Whey]

I refused to watch the trilogy based on the trailers. This ill probably not watch either, a small young adult book does not need to be 9 hours of film.

You missed out and likely will again. It's not just the book, it's also back story that was never told with where Gandalf goes after he leaves the Dwarves on the edge of Mirkwood and where he dissappeared to during the troll events. From a theatrical standpoint, so much happens in the book and there are so many ups and downs that it really does need to be at least 6 hours. Most movies based on books do entirely too much cutting of the story and almost all the really good ones are 2.5+ hours long. The Hobbit could easily have been split into 2-3 books itself.