The Hobbit Trilogy Discussion Thread

[radagast]

''There's no way you can pace yourself for shoots like these,'' Jackson says. ''When we were going through the schedule for The Hobbit, I felt a terrible drop in my stomach when I saw that we'd be shooting for 254 days. We're only 12 days short of The Lord of the Rings even though we're only doing two movies. When I saw that, I had to sort of pick myself up off the floor and carry on.''

Not to mention that these TWO movies are costing $500 million, whereas the THREE LOTR movies cost less, at $300 million.

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,2050....html#20980348

[Duffy12]

Exclusive: World's First Hobbit Cover

Over ten years ago, catching a whiff something really big was going down in New Zealand, Empire decided to feature the next film from promising Kiwi director Peter Jackson on its cover. After all, he just happened to be making The Lord Of The Rings. Listen closely to his commentary on Return Of The King and Jackson actually recalls the day that issue of Empire arrived on set — he couldn’t quite get his head around the fact they were still shooting! To paraphrase someone in a black and white movie, it was the start of a beautiful friendship.

So in honour of Jackson’s long-awaited return to Middle-earth for two dragon-and-dwarf-laden prequels — as a “good luck charm” according the director — Empire takes its symbolic and rightful place as the first magazine in the world to put The Hobbit on its cover. A resplendent ‘younger’ Gandalf the Grey (look closely for subtle differences in costume from his 60-year older Rings self) taking centre stage alongside the first look at Martin Freeman’s Bilbo Baggins (keep your eyes peeled for a hint or two of dwarf in the issue).

Personally invited onto the set barely a month into production, Empire delightedly watched a film — two films — already in full swing. Thirteen cantankerous dwarves, one barely tolerant wizard, and a befuddled hobbit are seen arriving at the gates of Rivendell and sneered at by local elves. Jackson assures us he is once again reaching for the mighty spectacle of Lord Of The Rings, but also bringing a certain ‘Hobbity-ness’ all its own. “The tone is actually the part of it I’m enjoying the most,” he laughs, casting a fond eye upon his rabble of exotic dwarves, clattering about set like they own the place. “They have a healthy disregard for the icons of Middle-earth.”

For the full story see the August issue of Empire out on June 30.


.

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=31328


.

[tommyboy81]

theonering.net said, "wink wink, hint, hint that there should be some new pics" in there.

[Gamma_Winstead]

Originally Posted by radagast

Not to mention that these TWO movies are costing $500 million, whereas the THREE LOTR movies cost less, at $300 million.

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,2050....html#20980348

Wow... Those were cheap!

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

Wow... Those were cheap!

These films are smaller in scale than the action in the Lord Of The Rings yet they are suggesting the films are going to clock in at $250m a piece? That's more expensive than Avatar and Pirates Of The Caribbean 3. Where exactly is the money going?

[Blu-Benny]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

Exclusive: World's First Hobbit Cover



















http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=31328


.

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by SonOfTorah

These films are smaller in scale than the action in the Lord Of The Rings yet they are suggesting the films are going to clock in at $250m a piece? That's more expensive than Avatar and Pirates Of The Caribbean 3. Where exactly is the money going?

From what I can tell, these aren't really going to be smaller in scale at all. The fact that it's being split into two movies is evidence enough of that. But from what I can tell, they're adding battles into it, among other things. This isn't just The Hobbit. This seems to be The Hobbit, mixed with some of the history of Middle Earth. Things from some of the other books expanded on and what have you. It may not be AS epic, but it's still going to be a pretty epic scale of an adventure.

[MCT]

cant wait to see Smaug.

[tommyboy81]

Originally Posted by MCT

cant wait to see Smaug.

Something tells me we won't see an image until late next year.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by tommyboy81

Something tells me we won't see an image until late next year.

Something tells me we might not see Smaug until the 2nd or 3rd trailer...

[Gamma_Winstead]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Something tells me we might not see Smaug until the 2nd or 3rd trailer...

For the second film!

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by Gamma_Winstead

For the second film!

LOL

Good point.


I will go ahead and predict that they just might end the first movie with a good sized battle at 'Dol Guldur'.


.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

LOL I will go ahead and predict that they just might end the first movie with a good sized battle at 'Dol Guldur'..

Having two epic battles in one film would unbalance things, and having the first film close on the events of Flies And Spiders (chapter 8 of my old 1973 edition) would be the too much of a downer. The first film needs a rousing action set piece to finish off with, and Bilbo dukin' it out with the spiders of Mirkwood wouldn't cut the mustard.

[Yojimbo68]

These films have horrible subtitles! Why don't they just call them: THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY & THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY AGAIN.

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by SonOfTorah

Having two epic battles in one film would unbalance things, and having the first film close on the events of Flies And Spiders (chapter 8 of my old 1973 edition) would be the too much of a downer. The first film needs a rousing action set piece to finish off with, and Bilbo dukin' it out with the spiders of Mirkwood wouldn't cut the mustard.

I think the exit from mirkwood would be a nice place to finish the first story.Either that,or the entry.Knowing PJ,he probably gonna add much more to the last segment of the movie.

[Witch King of Angmar]

Originally Posted by Yojimbo68

These films have horrible subtitles! Why don't they just call them: THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY & THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY AGAIN.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Yojimbo68

These films have horrible subtitles! Why don't they just call them: THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY & THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY AGAIN.

They can't take your money if you don't go.

How about these titles?:

The Hobbit (Some People Won't Be happy With Anything)
and
The Hobbit (Another Excuse For People To Threadcrap On A Forum About This Movie)

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Yojimbo68

These films have horrible subtitles! Why don't they just call them: THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY & THE HOBBIT: TAKING YOUR MONEY AGAIN.

I actually find the titles quite pleasing, and to my liking! A LOT better than The Hobbit part I and The Hobbit part II... plus having individual titles for each movie makes them fit more in with LotR... Sure glad they didn't title those Lord of the Rings part I, part II, and part III... just sayin'

[Rizor]

I find the titles to be kind of silly sounding even if they do have relevance to the book.

The new images look OK. Gandalf is looking a little too rough and hobo-ish and it seems like they are making Bilbo look too young and too much like Frodo. Will someone please give Bilbo a waistcoat? He looks indecent without one. But it can just be all the photoshopping and over processing.

As far as the budget is concerned, yes it sounds like a lot, but it seems like it's hard to get any big tentpole done for less than 200-300 mill these days. Not only that, but factor in the 3-D cameras, new 48 fps technology. Principal photography will last for over 12 months, whereas principal photography lasted 14 months on the trilogy. It all goes to make the trilogy seem very economical and tight budgeted in comparison.

[TruBlu06]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

I actually find the titles quite pleasing, and to my liking! A LOT better than The Hobbit part I and The Hobbit part II... plus having individual titles for each movie makes them fit more in with LotR... Sure glad they didn't title those Lord of the Rings part I, part II, and part III... just sayin'

Yeah I like the titles too. They found a way to use both names of the book.
The LOTR parts 1-3 would have sounded stupid . Can't wait to see the trailer. Making two movies will be better in the long run, but for right now it's hard to imagine having to wait two more years before the second part is released. Well, if this does well they'll probably make the Silmarillion too. That would be awesome. I can't imagine how that would look. The battle scenes and Sauron being sucked into the abyss. Awesome!