YES! Jackson to make Hobbit film

[Dire Bare]

allo

i hope he makes "the hobbit" a solid, 2-hour movie, rather than another 3-hour epic. :\

Not me! I'm all for two 3-hour theatre versions followed by two 5-hour DVD versions!!!

As long as the story is told well and the pacing is maintained well, Jackson can entertain me as long as he wants! (hmmm, that sounds a bit dirty . . .)

 

[Agamon]

They could have easily made each LotR books into 2 movies, so I can see The Hobbit getting two movies, especially if PJ's idea for it is going to make one very long movie. Two shorter ones is better.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I am good with two 2-hour movies. As for the break there are a couple of options. The actual middle around the spiders in the forest. There is a good cliffhanger there with Thorin separated from the rest, the dwarves all captured, and Bilbo not sure where everyone else is. They could also break after the escape from the goblin caves leaving Bilbo and Gollum and Bilbo's escape as the climax. If they break here they could do more flashbacks in the first film expanding on Smaug taking the mountain, and Gandolf getting the key.

 

[Klaus]

I am good with two 2-hour movies. As for the break there are a couple of options. The actual middle around the spiders in the forest. There is a good cliffhanger there with Thorin separated from the rest, the dwarves all captured, and Bilbo not sure where everyone else is. They could also break after the escape from the goblin caves leaving Bilbo and Gollum and Bilbo's escape as the climax. If they break here they could do more flashbacks in the first film expanding on Smaug taking the mountain, and Gandolf getting the key.

I like this better (ending after the Gollum thing).

 

[Shade]

Between this news and the trailer for the new season of Lost, I'm in geek heaven today.

 

[Traycor]

MGM CEO Harry Sloan talks 'Hobbit'

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2007/12/mgm-ceo-on-the.html

 

[Cabled]

I haven't read the Hobbit in a good long time, but two movies? There's only one book... and it's not a terribly long book at that.

But the length of a book and a movie aren't all that closely connected, and from the filmmaker's point of view are almost inverses. What takes a lot of page space to describe in a book, such as detailed setting or character details, is conveyed quickly visually. By the same token, things that typically take little space in a book, such a an epic battle (because "he swings, she swings, they swing" makes for boring reading in general) are much more interesting visually and stretch on a good deal longer.

 

[Steel_Wind]

If it was anybody other than PJ and Fran Walsh, I might be a little spooked about two movies. But they have earned my confidence and loyalty - so I'm good with this - and then some

And yes - Golden Compass bombing looks like good news for us

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

YES!!!

Though I'm apprehensive about the two-movie thing. I don't think splitting the Hobbit is a good idea; I'd rather seen Beorn dropped to truncate the length into one longer movie. I also don't think there is enough filler material for between Hobbit and LotR to make anything that resembles a single movie with a coherent plot -- there are lots of little sub-plots, but you'd have a hell of a time pulling them together to make a stand-alone film.

 

[replicant2]

Yes, great news. I just wrote a post about my longing to see The Hobbit on screen 10 days ago at my blog, The Silver Key, and now the big news hit!

There are a couple things that concern me with this story. One is that Jackson is the executive producer, not the director. The other is that some news outlets have called the second film "a sequel." I'm assuming this means a two-part adaption of the book, but I fear that it could mean an entirely new film.