The Hobbit Trilogy Discussion Thread

[Agent Bond]

I got The Hobbit and The LOTR trilogy in paperbook. Now Jackson gave us three (rightfully extended) movies from a combined count of about 1,400 pages.

How the hell is he going to three movies from a barely 300 book?!!

[frogmort]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

I got The Hobbit and The LOTR trilogy in paperbook. Now Jackson gave us three (rightfully extended) movies from a combined count of about 1,400 pages.

How the hell is he going to three movies from a barely 300 book?!!

From what I've read, they will be drawing from information mentioned in The Lord of the Rings books, plus the Appendices at the end of them which has a wealth of information that happened during the timeline of The Hobbit, plus I'm sure they will be adding(hopefully not too much) some of their own little bits here and there.

I just really hope that they take advantage of this opportunity to include more of Tolkien's world, instead of just adding too much of their own new characters and made up side plots.

[Blu-Benny]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

I got The Hobbit and The LOTR trilogy in paperbook. Now Jackson gave us three (rightfully extended) movies from a combined count of about 1,400 pages.

How the hell is he going to three movies from a barely 300 book?!!

see the below post. jackson will be pulling info from the appendicies which is related to events that happen during the hobbit but "off to the side" if u get my meaning.

it's happening @ the same time as the hobbit and then after i believe.

Originally Posted by frogmort

From what I've read, they will be drawing from information mentioned in The Lord of the Rings books, plus the Appendices at the end of them which has a wealth of information that happened during the timeline of The Hobbit, plus I'm sure they will be adding(hopefully not too much) some of their own little bits here and there.

I just really hope that they take advantage of this opportunity to include more of Tolkien's world, instead of just adding too much of their own new characters and made up side plots.

[frogmort]

Agent Bond, this has been posted in here before a while back, but it is a very well thought out speculation as to what could be included in The Hobbit trilogy. It is a very lengthy, but quite interesting read:


Greenbooks guest post: in defense of a Hobbit trilogy

[Tony208]

cmon I've been saying 2 movies is a cash grab

now it's 3 freaking movies

you can say whatever you want, 3 movies for 1 book is greed

[irockmysocks]

Originally Posted by Tony208

cmon I've been saying 2 movies is a cash grab

now it's 3 freaking movies

you can say whatever you want, 3 movies for 1 book is greed

how about you do some research before you make stupid statements

[Tony208]

Originally Posted by irockmysocks

how about you do some research before you make stupid statements

do some research? talk about stupid statements
without a ton of exposition you can't do 3 movies from the hobbit

don't be naive, it's about money, it always is
there's billions at stake

[mattymoron]

Even if it is a cash grab, who cares?! The more of Tolkien's mythology that makes it on screen, the better, as far as I'm concerned.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Col. Zombie

It looks as if those who wish to see this in 24fps, won't have to look far.



Souce ... http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118057587

Thanks for that info. 48 fps is twice as much data as 24 fps standard, so I can understand why not all theaters would be ready for that. 30 fps for computer animated 3D movies.

Originally Posted by mattymoron

Even if it is a cash grab, who cares?! The more of Tolkien's mythology that makes it on screen, the better, as far as I'm concerned.

If this holds true and there is a 3rd Hobbit film, I'm sure it going to be worthwhile as the original Lord of the Rings series was, each film taking its time to tell the story well IMO as not every detail from the books can be recreated even in 3 films or extended versions.

Great news IMO.

[frogmort]

I would agree that there is probably some "cash grab greed" to it being a trilogy, but from what I understand it will no longer be just based on The Hobbit. It will probably have stuff from before the time frame of The Hobbit, stuff that happened during The Hobbit but wasn't directly mentioned in the book, and stuff that occured between The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, plus apparently it will be told as a flashback with "old" Bilbo reading or recollecting to Frodo and maybe others about his adventures.

If you take the material mentioned in The Lord of the Rings and the included Appendices about events that occurred before, during, and after The Hobbit, combine that with the events mentioned in The Hobbit, then add on the flashback storytelling style, I think that there is a lot of potential for it to be a great "Middle-earth" trilogy more so than just strictly The Hobbit trilogy.

All that being said, I'm still a little worried that they might try to add too much of their own made up filler, but I'm hoping for the best.

[pikeman1]

[Buddy Ackerman]

Originally Posted by Tony208

do some research? talk about stupid statements
without a ton of exposition you can't do 3 movies from the hobbit

don't be naive, it's about money, it always is
there's billions at stake

I completely disagree. I'm certain that the studio didn't mind Jackson requesting an extra film because of the extra money it would bring - why would they? - but I completely believe that Jackson has done this with the best intentions of telling the best story available. 100%. He's drawing from so much more than The Hobbit. And you only have to watch the production diaries or read interviews with him to see how passionate and enthusiastic he is about the films and the story.

After what he did with Lord of the Rings I have as much faith in him as it is possible to have in a filmmaker. Could it go wrong? Possibly but I for one am sure, based on everything I've seen and read about the film, that it's heading in the right direction. If Jackson feels he can tell the story in three films and he wants to give us more of his vision of Tolkien's world on the big screen then I'm all for it.

[TheWildWhelk]

The first-rate BBC radio dramatisation of The Hobbit clocked in at just under 4 hours and was a complete adaptation of the book. Add in Gandalf and the Dol Guldur saga plus The Hunt For Gollum and you have 3 films. The original Hobbit book itself will make up 50% of the total running time of the trilogy. It's the only way it could work.

And people should be thankfull that we are getting further Middle Earth on screen. The Hobbit. Lord Of The Rings. The Appendices. And that's it. That is the only thing that the Tolkien Estate has licensed the film rights to. Nothing else.

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by pikeman1

A 16 month 2013 calendar?That was funny.

Kind of feel about this project like I feel about apple products:Baffled that such a product can generate such hype.Any news on new trailer being released soon?Any trailers featuring shots from mirkwood as that's the part I look most forward to along with the eagles ofcourse

[Buddy Ackerman]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

.Any news on new trailer being released soon?Any trailers featuring shots from mirkwood as that's the part I look most forward to along with the eagles ofcourse

The next trailer is due in September. The 21st is the 75th anniversary of the Hobbit being published so there's a chance it may be released then (but that's just a guess).

There are a few shots in Mirkwood floating around but they're mostly close shots on Bilbo rather than showing much of Mirkwood itself. I'll see if I can find them.

[Buddy Ackerman]

Here you go - Bilbo in Mirkwood.





That first picture is especially cool to me as it looks like Bilbo's "...and I shall name you Sting!" moment.

[Mahatma]

Thanks man.Hope mirkwood and the eagles is in the first movie

[Buddy Ackerman]

I would assume that they are - originally the break was during the barrels sequence but now that it's three films long I suspect the break point would be earlier. There's no way they could end the film before the Eagles so you'll definitely get them and I would have thought that the end of the Mirkwood scene would make a great and natural end for the first film with Biblo's character arc reaching a turning point

[Show spoiler]as he becmes a hero

and a nice cliffhanger

[Show spoiler]with the elves capturing the dwarves

. I would think you're sorted

[Blu-Benny]

the more i read this thread, the more i'm convinced that people have no idea what the appendicies are and what's in them.

this is directed @ the "cash grab" posters who think all 3 movies are about just the events in the hobbit.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

I got The Hobbit and The LOTR trilogy in paperbook. Now Jackson gave us three (rightfully extended) movies from a combined count of about 1,400 pages.

How the hell is he going to three movies from a barely 300 book?!!

Several ways: If you are familiar with the book version of LOTR, you will note that the battles took a bigger percentage of the time in the movie story than it did in the book story.

Then there is the extra-Hobbit material in the LOTR appendices.

Going back to the movie version of LOTR, the script writers have no reluctance to ADD stuff that wasn't in the books.

Originally Posted by Tony208

cmon I've been saying 2 movies is a cash grab

now it's 3 freaking movies

you can say whatever you want, 3 movies for 1 book is greed

Originally Posted by Tony208

do some research? talk about stupid statements
without a ton of exposition you can't do 3 movies from the hobbit

don't be naive, it's about money, it always is
there's billions at stake

See above.