The Hobbit officially being made into three films

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/peter-jackson-confirms-that-the-hobbit-will-become-three-films

As long as there is no filler used to strentch the story into three films then I'm more than happy with this decision

Three films now? They better not make these movies short.

BOOO

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/peter-jackson-confirms-that-the-hobbit-will-become-three-films

As long as there is no filler used to strentch the story into three films then I'm more than happy with this decision

The_Gaming_Baby

As long as there is no filler The_Gaming_Baby

I kind of hoped for just one.

Guess this means more filler than all LOTR movies put together.

Great, more ways I can waste my money on what should be awesome movies.

I'll wait to hear how the first one gies to hear if they are pulling out massive filler and such.

Eh....can't say I'm 100% thrilled with them stretching it out to 3 movies. I would've been more than happy with just the two. I just hope they know what they're doing.

... I will be able to read the book in less time then I will be able to watch the movies, and I'm not a fast reader.

Jeez how big is the Hobbit? I hope these movies don't drag on a lot.

Jeez how big is the Hobbit? I hope these movies don't drag on a lot.

Wanderer5

It's shorter than any of the individual lord or the ring books. It will be like 100 pages of book per movie?

Jeez how big is the Hobbit? I hope these movies don't drag on a lot.

Wanderer5

Jeez how big is the Hobbit? I hope these movies don't drag on a lot.Wanderer5

So they're making three movies of a book that is shorter than any of the books in trilogy? Well I just hope these movies aren't going to be long.

[QUOTE="Wanderer5"]

Jeez how big is the Hobbit? I hope these movies don't drag on a lot.

Guybrush_3

It's shorter than any of the individual lord or the ring books. It will be like 100 pages of book per movie?

"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."

Yet he had no qualms about leaving huge bits of 'the Lord of the Rings' untold. Even small sh*t that could have been told in a minute that would have helped explain monumental sh*t later on.

On one hand I am wondering if there is enough material for three movies without them being boring, but on the other hand if the movies have the same feel as LOTR with an equally great soundtrack, I'm ok with it.

The book was kind of hurried along especially with regards to Elrond and Rivendell. The book also states Gandalf and Bilbo had other adventures on the way home. What I don't want to see is a bunch of singing. The book had too many and I'm not a fan of musicals.

Edit:

I've also wondered if Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli were already alive during The Hobbit. Perhaps they might appear in the background. :lol:

Wow that's stupid. The book is shorter than any of the LotR books.

I've also wondered if Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli were already alive during The Hobbit. Perhaps they might appear in the background. :lol:jun_aka_pekto

Jeez. Isn't filming for the first two already done?

Three films now? They better not make these movies short.

Pirate700

LOTR had plenty of filler. I respect that you can't translate books directly into movies, but even the non-extended versions had lengthy filler scenes, despite the books containing much unexplored material.

I understand why film makers want love stories in their work, but that does'nt change that the Arwen/Aragorn thing was litterally in the addendum, rather than the actual story ;)

LOTR is also three times as long as The Hobbit.

My two cents.

Don't like it but oh well.

its not about making quality movies anymore, its about dat money

Have they ever heard of an editor?

For those wondering of how they can stretch out the book into 3 movies, the company has the rights to most of Tolkiens works iirc. So they can go into Tolkiens appendicies and tell the back story.

the rise of the Necromancerworlock77

[QUOTE="worlock77"]the rise of the NecromancerSkittles_McGee

Hobbit will be a contender for

[QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"][QUOTE="worlock77"]the rise of the NecromancerBossPerson

Remember when Faramir caputures Frodo and Gollum?

In the books, he pretty much lets them go after questioning them.That particular plot point, took up a fifth of the entire second movie.

After choices like that, I don't really have any confidence in their choice of expanding The Hobbit to the same length of LOTR.

With 1/3 the amount of source material, I fear there's going to be somereally pointless bloat in there.

It's not like you can just fluently integrate Silmarillion into it and they certainly did'nt do that with LOTR.

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/peter-jackson-confirms-that-the-hobbit-will-become-three-films

As long as there is no filler used to strentch the story into three films then I'm more than happy with this decision

The_Gaming_Baby

"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 basically the reason PJ is making one book into three films is because he isn't just using material from the Hobbit but is also using material from the appendix of the Lord of The Rings and possibly some of Tolkien's other writings (such as the "of the rings of power and the third age" section of the Silmarillion). For instance the Battle of Dol Guldur (where the White Council attack the fortress of the Necromancer (Sauron) in Dol Guldur and "force" him to flee, though in fact Sauron really just pertends to flee into the East and then relocates into Mordor and a few years later sends two nazgul to re-occupy Dol Guldur) is not mentioned in the Hobbit but does take place during the time of the Hobbit (basically in the Hobbit books Gandalf leaves Bilbo and the Dwarves and doesn't reappear until a few chapters later. Gandalf's absence is because him and the White Council are planning an attack on Dol Guldur - Gandalf had actually wanted to attack Dol Guldur for a while, ever since he found out who "the Necromancer" really was, but Saruman kept stopping the Council from attacking). Also one of the Hobbit movies (probably the third one) is supposed to show events that happened in the decades between the Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings (most notably Saruman's going over to Sauron's side, and probably also Sauron's return to Mordor).