Three Hobbit Films

Zaukrie · Jul 30, 2012

Excellent news, imo, as I greatly enjoyed the first three movies.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

Dioltach · Jul 30, 2012

Having seen the three LotR movies, and having watched the video blogs and seen the trailer for The Hobbit, I'm happy to trust Peter Jackson's judgment on this. The only drawback is more waiting ...

IronWolf · Jul 31, 2012

Yeah, I am pretty good with this. Not sure how they are getting three movies from the Hobbit, but if they are as good as LotR was, I am all for it!

MarkB · Jul 31, 2012

Umbran said:
I do wonder a little bit of what, exactly, they are going to include. "The rise of the Necromancer" is not detailed in the original work - my recollection is that it is largely a footnote in the Hobbit, used to get Gandalf out of the way so Bilbo can become a hero. So, they're going to be largely making that stuff up. Jackson has been good at adapting, but this is a bit beyond that.

Yeah, I remember about six or seven years ago, I ran a Middle Earth campaign set in the same time period as The Hobbit, based on the concept of an adventuring group sent out by Saruman to scout the Necromancer's tower, who end up meeting with Gandalf and helping to take the place down.

I wanted to get the details right, so I looked for all the information I could find on the actual events, and I was astonished how little of it there was, even in background materials.

It is a reasonably good area to explore, given that the few mentions we have of it suggest that it was a fairly epic event, but only time will tell whether they manage to make it work with the established setting.

frankthedm · Jul 31, 2012

Don't like. I smell the stench of Hollywood business practices behind those decisions.

1. If I have to wait for a 3rd movie to see Smaug, I'll be :rant:

redder than the dragon!
2. This doesn't actually guarantee much if any more movie. What we will likely be getting is the "extended edition" versions of the two hobbit movies, cut into 3 theatrical releases.
3. Which will then be further trimmed down to 90 minutes each because long running movies hurt showings per day profit potential.
4. 3rd movie will likely be released yet another year later.

Hand of Evil · Jul 31, 2012

frankthedm said:
Don't like. I smell the stench of Hollywood business practices behind those decisions.

1. If I have to wait for a 3rd movie to see Smaug, I'll be redder than the dragon!
2. This doesn't actually guarantee much if any more movie. What we will likely be getting is the "extended edition" versions of the two hobbit movies, cut into 3 theatrical releases.
3. Which will then be further trimmed down to 90 minutes each because long running movies hurt showings per day profit potential.
4. 3rd movie will likely be released yet another year later.

1 - think the last movie will be the battle of Five Armys - PJ will finish movie 2 with Smug destorying the lake city.
2 - Maybe, maybe not - I like to think less ends up on the cutting room floor.
3 - Nope - The Avengers: 2hrs 22 mins, The Dark Knight: 2hrs 30 mins, The Amazing Spider-man: 2 hrs 16 mins - the 90min mark holds true for teen dramas, romantic comedies, shasher, etc., but block busters (franchies of movies that look like they will break a billion worldwide) have a trend of going over 2 hours. Note: each movie in Lord of the Rings was at the 3hr mark.
4 - yes

Herschel · Jul 31, 2012

Probably only a six-month-ish wait on the third movie. Jackson said likely summer 2014.

As for the 90-minute mark, that's all anyone can reasonably be expected to tolerate Adam Sandler, Jim Carey, Sarah Jessica Parker and the rest of the so-called comedians/romantics on a screen without vomiting.

IronWolf · Jul 31, 2012

frankthedm said:
4. 3rd movie will likely be released yet another year later.

Herschel said:
Probably only a six-month-ish wait on the third movie. Jackson said likely summer 2014.

Yeah, I think the tentative schedule they have out there is:

1st movie: December 2012
2nd movie: December 2013
3rd movie: Summer 2014

Olgar Shiverstone · Aug 1, 2012

Err ... struggling to understand how by taking one story and chopping it into three (even with some Tolkien materiel added in) we get three reasonably complete stories.

This one I'll just have to wait and see.

GSHamster · Aug 1, 2012

I dunno. I really like tightly edited films, that have been cut to the bone, and where no time is wasted.

I thought the theatrical releases of LoTR were excellent compared to the extended versions. The extended versions were great fun for fans of the books, but the theatrical versions were better movies, precisely because Jackson had to ruthlessly cut to the bone.

I worry that Jackson is going to indulge himself in the text, and make three flabby movies instead of one spare, elegant movie.