The Hobbit is now 3 films instead of two

adrock311 · *Last edited by adrock311; 07-30-2012 at 22:14.*

On Facebook, Jackson wrote the following message:

It is only at the end of a shoot that you finally get the chance to sit down and have a look at the film you have made. Recently Fran, Phil and I did just this when we watched for the first time an early cut of the first movie – and a large chunk of the second. We were really pleased with the way the story was coming together, in particular, the strength of the characters and the cast who have brought them to life. All of which gave rise to a simple question: do we take this chance to tell more of the tale? And the answer from our perspective as the filmmakers, and as fans, was an unreserved ‘yes.’

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. The richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, allows us to tell the full story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and the part he played in the sometimes dangerous, but at all times exciting, history of Middle-earth.

So, without further ado and on behalf of New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Wingnut Films, and the entire cast and crew of “The Hobbit” films, I’d like to announce that two films will become three.

It has been an unexpected journey indeed, and in the words of Professor Tolkien himself, ”a tale that grew in the telling.”

Cheers,

Peter J

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/07/3...d-hobbit-film/

adrock311 · 07-30-2012, 22:13 | posts: 714

This feels like a total cash in money grab to me, how can he change it to 3 movies instead of 2 suddenly, when the first movie is already completely filmed and done, and presumably already covers half the 272 page novel (LOTR = 1178 pages btw)

the Hobbit was a much tighter ,well rounded narrative than LOTR imo, and its disappointing to see ruining the pacing by trying to stretch it into 3 films, probably by adding a lot of extra bits and pieces from the Lost Tales and Tolkien's appendixes

to paraphrase the above statement: from someone's twitter --

Peter Jackson's Official Statement on why he's making The Hobbit into 3 Films: "I like it better when your money is my money"

PhazeDelta1 · 07-30-2012, 22:30 | posts: 9,532 | Location: 90° N

I have no problem with giving him my money for the simple fact that he has made some really good movies over the years. Bad Taste and Dead Alive being on my top 10 list of all time favorite movies.

hallryu · 07-30-2012, 22:31 | posts: 10,882 | Location: England

It's a small book or an 'afternooner' I call them. How on earth are they going to spin this out to three films?

Mind you, as an ardent Tolkien fan I don't mind. In fact we have a First Edition, Second Impression copy of The Hobbit in the family.

As adrock311 says they must be delving in to the supplementary materials I hope they do it justice.

Will anyone ever have a go at The Silmarillion I wonder.

pimp_gimp · 07-30-2012, 22:56 | posts: 5,795 | Location: Tacoma, Washington

Quote:

Originally Posted by hallryu

It's a small book or an 'afternooner' I call them. How on earth are they going to spin this out to three films?

Make each film span an 1 hour 30 minutes to 1 hour 45 minutes instead of 2 to 3 hours perhaps?

Bradders684 · 07-30-2012, 23:55 | posts: 213

I have not checked on the film in a while, but i remember "Peter Jackson" saying last year, that they couldn't include things from the other books because they only had the rights to the "Lord of the Rings" and the "Hobbit".

So they have rather agreed a deal with "Christopher Tolkien" or the film is going to be riddled with made up scenes.

Either way, i loved the "Lord of the Rings" and have complete faith that "Peter Jackson" can pull it off.

Dustpuppy · 07-31-2012, 00:41 | posts: 4,150

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bradders684

I have not checked on the film in a while, but i remember "Peter Jackson" saying last year, that they couldn't include things from the other books because they only had the rights to the "Lord of the Rings" and the "Hobbit".

So they have rather agreed a deal with "Christopher Tolkien" or the film is going to be riddled with made up scenes.

Either way, i loved the "Lord of the Rings" and have complete faith that "Peter Jackson" can pull it off.

As long as he doesn't pull a Spielberg...

However, I wouldn't mind seeing a pro version of "The Hunt for Gollum".

IPlayNaked · 07-31-2012, 00:41 | posts: 6,559

Given what he did with The Lord of the Rings, with the possible exception of the end of Return of the King...I don't know how anyone can doubt anyone associated with this, least of all Peter Jackson. I have complete faith in him, and if he says he needs 12 films, I have my wallet ready.

HamsterCrispy · 07-31-2012, 01:08 | posts: 761 | Location: Pacific Ring of Fire

Hell yes! I was able to read The Hobbit waaaaaay before The Lord of the Rings came out. I had to say the adventures that Bilbo had back then was more awesome than Frodo's. Therer were dragons, mountain giants, necromancers, lots of goblins, giant eagles, and THE BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES!
Believe me, making The Hobbit a trilogy was the best decision Jackson made

RedSeptember · 07-31-2012, 05:50 | posts: 470 | Location: Dubai

Best decision made indeed!

Speed Weed · 07-31-2012, 06:36 | posts: 678 | Location: Somewhere in Scotland

Film studios are at it, pure and simple!
Slightly off topic, but The Mockingjay is being made into two films, instead of the 150minute attention-grabber it should have been, and a fitting conclusion to the Hunger Games trilogy.

Anarion · 08-02-2012, 18:35 | posts: 9,275 | Location: Finland

Quote:

Originally Posted by adrock311

This feels like a total cash in money grab to me, how can he change it to 3 movies instead of 2 suddenly, when the first movie is already completely filmed and done, and presumably already covers half the 272 page novel (LOTR = 1178 pages btw)

the Hobbit was a much tighter ,well rounded narrative than LOTR imo, and its disappointing to see ruining the pacing by trying to stretch it into 3 films, probably by adding a lot of extra bits and pieces from the Lost Tales and Tolkien's appendixes

to paraphrase the above statement: from someone's twitter --

Peter Jackson's Official Statement on why he's making The Hobbit into 3 Films: "I like it better when your money is my money"

There's a lot of things happening behind the scenes in Hobbit.

Neo Cyrus · **Memory**: 6GB DDR3-2000 9-9-9-24-1T

So long as more relevant scenes (as in ones from the book rather than made-up ones) are added rather than it just being padded out, I'm all for it. The longer the better in that case.

Veteran · 08-02-2012, 19:01 | posts: 7,504 | Location: United kingdom

Tolkien hey,i grew up and played as a kid where he played in Sarehole mill in Birmingham,we all did,i can see where he got some of his inspiration for his movies especially the trees in Lotr,i guess i was lucky,was a great place to grow up though,the Zx spectrum at the time never got a look in...out and about all the time.

proFits · 08-02-2012, 19:30 | posts: 5,749 | Location: Montreal

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedSeptember

Best decision made indeed!

+1, I don't understand why more movies can't reach the scale of epicness that LoD did. It's just elves dwarves hobbits and humans hitting on trolls, ogre and other magical creatures. There are number of video games that currently exist with similar storyline yet none of them seem to be even decent.

Btw I'd watch the **** out of a Quentin Tarantino Baldur's Gate or Fable I or II movie

scoutingwraith · 08-02-2012, 20:00 | posts: 9,259 | Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

I would say one thing. He did an amazing job with the Lord of The Rings movies and i cant wait to see how he will make the new movies.

The Laughing Ma · 08-02-2012, 21:13 | posts: 1,954

Quote:

I would say one thing. He did an amazing job with the Lord of The Rings movies and i cant wait to see how he will make the new movies.

Just so long as the limit for main characters standing round singing is limited to 1 in 3 films as it was with LOTR.

Quote:

Bad Taste and Dead Alive

Really? This Bad Taste

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092610/

Lol so he did, saw that movie many years ago when I was a younger person and was quite amazed at just how awesome the gore level was.

fxmercenary · 08-02-2012, 21:24 | posts: 383 | Location: Sarasota, FL

These films are going to be incredible. The necromancer hunt, the golum hunt, the 5 armies. They are adding all of these lost chapters from the hobbit into the movie. It is going to be like watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy all over again!

WOOT!

Andrés · 08-03-2012, 03:46 | posts: 4,294 | Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Quote:

Originally Posted by hallryu

It's a small book or an 'afternooner' I call them. How on earth are they going to spin this out to three films?

(...)

Will anyone ever have a go at The Silmarillion I wonder.

I've always believed that if The Hobbit is long enough for making two movies, there must be some material from the Silmarillion in them. As you say, The Hobbit is a very short book.

The Chubu · 08-03-2012, 08:58 | posts: 2,541 | Location: Look out!

Sweet!

Solfaur · 08-03-2012, 12:11 | posts: 3,036 | Location: Romania

Well, I'm glad but a bit sceptical too, I read the hobbit in like 2 days and I didn't rush it. But even so I trust Peter Jackson and the triology might turn out quite awesome, but hard to get close to TLotR, we'll see.

Elder III · 08-03-2012, 15:22 | posts: 1,979 | Location: Ohio

Quote:

Originally Posted by hallryu

Will anyone ever have a go at The Silmarillion I wonder.

If they do I would have to personally hunt them down and either beat them with my cane or buy them a beer; depending on how well they did with it of course.

Chock · 08-03-2012, 15:34 | posts: 1,516 | Location: Berlin, Germany

Quote:

Originally Posted by pimp_gimp

Make each film span an 1 hour 30 minutes to 1 hour 45 minutes instead of 2 to 3 hours perhaps?

i hope he doesnt. i enjoy long movies that stretch out time and are immersive.

Hootmon · 08-03-2012, 16:30 | posts: 205 | Location: New Hampsha'

They always intended to add some 'bridge' material for events between Hobbit and LoTR.

Take a look at The One Ring.net for all sorts of info on this.

adrock311 · 08-10-2012, 17:18 | posts: 714

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anarion

There's a lot of things happening behind the scenes in Hobbit.

yes, and it being my favorite book growing up, it is worrisome -- how can they simply adjust the pacing to turn it into 3 films at this late date, so close to the release of part 1? the 1st film is practically completely done. suddenly another film is added, what happens to the speed of storytelling (level of detail) of the first film?

If they were trying to make 3 films into 2, thats not a problem, its just a matter of editing, but when they are trying to make 2 into 3, they need more content and they need to change the pace (the speed at which they cover the pages of the book) of each film completely!