Come on, Peter Jackson. Stuff would've been lost if you made one single film. Two sounded ok.
Three?
Not necessary, at all. The book is called The Hobbit. It's about that journey. It's not about giving us six endings, or making your own fan fiction she-elf the star of the show, or elaborating on that one dude in the background that did that thing.
What do you guys think? Does it bother you that what was supposed to be two films is now three? Do you buy PJ's explanation that "we looked at it and realized we could tell much more of the story," or will he just be bloating it (see: King Kong)?
I'm still hopeful it'll be good, but it does kinda feel like Duke Nukem....it's been delayed with big changes, there's huge pressure to get it right, and it sounds like scope creep is rearing its ugly head too. So I'm keeping expectations lower than they were for lotr and hoping it will exceed them.
I enjoyed Peter Jackson's King Kong personally, It may be a bit bloated but I wasn't sitting their tapping my foot impatiently throughout the movie when I first saw it.
Not sure where the comparisons to Duke Nukem Forever come in that game was under development for 15 years. The Hobbit has not been in development that long and has experienced farrr fewer delays.
The logic behind making The Hobbit into three films should have been used to make the "trilogy" in 9 films. Now that would have been good business sense.
The logic behind making The Hobbit into three films should have been used to make the "trilogy" in 9 films. Now that would have been good business sense.
Well even with 6 movies for the complete Tolkien experience that is still less films than Harry Potter and its ridiculous 8 films.
I realize JK Rowling wrote more Harry Potter books than Tolkien did with Middle Earth, but that is still one of the longest running movie series of all time especially with the same set of actors.
The logic behind making The Hobbit into three films should have been used to make the "trilogy" in 9 films. Now that would have been good business sense.
That's my problem with this. It absolutely stinks to high hell of cash grab. The story in this book does NOT need 9 hours of film. Peter Jackson's biggest story telling weakness has been "getting to the point" for a while now. Just because Tolkien wrote in an appendix that on this day at this time Twinkletoes was clipping his nails does not mean it needs to be filmed.
The Hobbit is a much smaller story than The Lord of the Rings. If you widen the scope too much, the focus will be destroyed. The heart of the story is Bilbo's journey, and the catalyst is dwarven treasure and vengeance. If this is suddenly a 9 hour epic with different pawns being moved this way and that, bigger pitched battles, higher stakes: is it even The Hobbit anymore? How can Bilbo be the centerpiece in that?
That's my problem with this. It absolutely stinks to high hell of cash grab. The story in this book does NOT need 9 hours of film. Peter Jackson's biggest story telling weakness has been "getting to the point" for a while now. Just because Tolkien wrote in an appendix that on this day at this time Twinkletoes was clipping his nails does not mean it needs to be filmed.
Everything is a crash grab buddy.
I am sure any major series could have condensed their works into less books/movies/games etc..
Very few create for the purpose of just putting great quality content out there.
I am sure any major series could have condensed their works into less books/movies/games etc..
Very few create for the purpose of just putting great quality content out there.
It's probably somewhere in between the two. Certainly there are people invested in the project that are just looking at the returns, but there are also people who are passionate about the content. There's tons of people involved, probably some are looking at the opportunity to express while others are looking just at the money.
And to be fair, it nowhere CLOSE to the pathetic cash grab of turning the last twilight movie into 2. This is turning 6 hours of content into 9, twilight turned 15 minutes of content into 5 hours.
It's probably somewhere in between the two. Certainly there are people invested in the project that are just looking at the returns, but there are also people who are passionate about the content. There's tons of people involved, probably some are looking at the opportunity to express while others are looking just at the money.
And to be fair, it nowhere CLOSE to the pathetic cash grab of turning the last twilight movie into 2. This is turning 6 hours of content into 9, twilight turned 15 minutes of content into 5 hours.
Well to me, my only concern is that they are quality entertainment. I really enjoyed every single second of my first viewings of Fellowship, The Two Towers, and Return of the King. So as long as these films are on par with those he could make the damn thing 4 films for all I care.
Movie quality on a whole seems to have been going down, I am not overburdened with movies that I want to see in a theater these days.
Peter Jackson has been hinting at it for a while, but he very recently confirmed it. If you'd have told me that some day Tristram Shandy and The Hobbit would have a lot in common...
I could see the book being broken into 3 "Acts" to do the movie very easily (pretty sure anyone familiar can see the breaks that he'll likely use) - making sure each of those Acts fills the full two hours might be rough, but seems doable.
The Hobbit is the shortest book, but has the most visually and dramatically intense narrative. It's been a looong time since I read it, but I can still partition the book into two movies easily - and a third is not hard to figure out either. More happens in the Hobbit than probably the first half of the Lord of the Rings.
I don't think I can express how much I wanted to see The Hobbit above The Lord of the Rings. I am so excited for the second (and third I guess) movies just to see it put to film by a visually stunning director, and del Toro is probably a good influence on the grim portions of the film.
To be fair, I don't expect Jackson to be directing three six hour movies like The Lord of the Rings.
But yeah, I cannot imagine the movie taking place over three films' length unless the movies are like one-and-a-half hours. There's certainly enough material to do two films, but three is pushing it.
I realize JK Rowling wrote more Harry Potter books than Tolkien did with Middle Earth, but that is still one of the longest running movie series of all time especially with the same set of actors.
Umm, what? Tolkien devoted an INSANE amount more than Rowling did to HP.
His son compiled it and had it published after he passed, but it was still all his work. That's not including the first 4 books.
I'm looking forward to it. I really liked how Jackson did the other LotR books, and I believe with this much pressure behind it, he will go make sure he goes into a lot of detail to everything. He has some big shoes to fill.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Like DotA/HoN? You should definitely check out League of Legends <--Sign up link for you.
Plus, if if you feel like watching a few games: My Stream
I'm normally on most nights between 6pm-whenever.
His son compiled it and had it published after he passed, but it was still all his work. That's not including the first 4 books.
I'm looking forward to it. I really liked how Jackson did the other LotR books, and I believe with this much pressure behind it, he will go make sure he goes into a lot of detail to everything. He has some big shoes to fill.
Okay, I have only heard people rave about Tolkien's original work I had no clue someone was carrying on with his work. I have not done in-depth study on middle-earth so I only go by what I have heard mentioned and most people only talk about The Hobbit, Return of the King, The Fellowship of the Ring, and The Two Towers in my experience.
I also have a feeling that those works will never be made into films. As far as the casual movie goer is aware there are only 4 Tolkien middle-earth books.
LOTR made sense. Three books, three films. However, I can foresee Jackson breaking off to elaborate on peripheral characters in The Hobbit when it's not necessary. How much more do we need to see of Cate Blanchett? Does each dwarf get his own elaborate backstory? Does each chapter of The Hobbit warrant equal screen time?
I also have a feeling that those works will never be made into films.
Probably not. A lot of it isn't even really possible to film - it's too fragmentary, and/or broad in scope. But The Children of Hurin, or some of the stories in The Silmarillion, could work in principle.
It was my understanding that a lot of the story they are telling deals with the extended works like The Silmarillion and the aforementioned History of Middle Earth. If so, then I'd suspect there's more than enough material to go from. Plus, I remember reading that a lot of it would bridge the decades-long gap between The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings films.
Also, for those that have read the novels, the battles in the books sometimes are covered in very few pages while the battles in the films rage for quite some time. Remember that The Hobbit ends with the battle of the five armies which I'm sure will be epic in the film.
I also have a feeling that those works will never be made into films. As far as the casual movie goer is aware there are only 4 Tolkien middle-earth books.
Probably not. A lot of it isn't even really possible to film - it's too fragmentary, and/or broad in scope. But The Children of Hurin, or some of the stories in The Silmarillion, could work in principle.
Too easy, just gonna let that one fly by.
Elaborate backstory, no, but most of them are undercharacterized in the book, so they represent a legitimately good area for expansion in the films.
I would agree with this. Really, The Hobbit isn't a trilogy. It's a single (albeit long) movie, and nothing more. Now as you said, what's contained in The Silmarillion is at least a trilogy, if not more. And I'm not sure I could sit through it despite having loved it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The above post is the opinion of the poster and is not indicative of any stance taken by the President of the United States, Congress, the Department of Defense, the Pentagon, the Department of the Navy, or the United States Marine Corps."
Captain, United States Marines
"Peace through superior firepower."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Three?
Not necessary, at all. The book is called The Hobbit. It's about that journey. It's not about giving us six endings, or making your own fan fiction she-elf the star of the show, or elaborating on that one dude in the background that did that thing.
What do you guys think? Does it bother you that what was supposed to be two films is now three? Do you buy PJ's explanation that "we looked at it and realized we could tell much more of the story," or will he just be bloating it (see: King Kong)?
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Not sure where the comparisons to Duke Nukem Forever come in that game was under development for 15 years. The Hobbit has not been in development that long and has experienced farrr fewer delays.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
The Family
WUBRGCommander Decklists - PaperWUBRG
CCCCCommander Decklists - TheorycraftCCCC
Sig Credit: Pegasus Bishop
Well even with 6 movies for the complete Tolkien experience that is still less films than Harry Potter and its ridiculous 8 films.
I realize JK Rowling wrote more Harry Potter books than Tolkien did with Middle Earth, but that is still one of the longest running movie series of all time especially with the same set of actors.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
That's my problem with this. It absolutely stinks to high hell of cash grab. The story in this book does NOT need 9 hours of film. Peter Jackson's biggest story telling weakness has been "getting to the point" for a while now. Just because Tolkien wrote in an appendix that on this day at this time Twinkletoes was clipping his nails does not mean it needs to be filmed.
The Hobbit is a much smaller story than The Lord of the Rings. If you widen the scope too much, the focus will be destroyed. The heart of the story is Bilbo's journey, and the catalyst is dwarven treasure and vengeance. If this is suddenly a 9 hour epic with different pawns being moved this way and that, bigger pitched battles, higher stakes: is it even The Hobbit anymore? How can Bilbo be the centerpiece in that?
Everything is a crash grab buddy.
I am sure any major series could have condensed their works into less books/movies/games etc..
Very few create for the purpose of just putting great quality content out there.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
It's probably somewhere in between the two. Certainly there are people invested in the project that are just looking at the returns, but there are also people who are passionate about the content. There's tons of people involved, probably some are looking at the opportunity to express while others are looking just at the money.
And to be fair, it nowhere CLOSE to the pathetic cash grab of turning the last twilight movie into 2. This is turning 6 hours of content into 9, twilight turned 15 minutes of content into 5 hours.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Well to me, my only concern is that they are quality entertainment. I really enjoyed every single second of my first viewings of Fellowship, The Two Towers, and Return of the King. So as long as these films are on par with those he could make the damn thing 4 films for all I care.
Movie quality on a whole seems to have been going down, I am not overburdened with movies that I want to see in a theater these days.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
This is my only concern. But as long as Peter Jackson gets this right, the more time he lets me spend in Middle-Earth the better.
And honestly, the name of the book is The Hobbit. I expect Jackson can take a hint.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
The Family
Oh, I caught it. I was agreeing with you and elaborating. Sorry for the confusion.
I mean once they finish The Hobbit middle-earth is done forever unless they find a way to ressurect Tolkien.
Meanwhile I bet I will be seeing new Bond and Bourne films for the next 25 years unless they start losing money.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
I don't think I can express how much I wanted to see The Hobbit above The Lord of the Rings. I am so excited for the second (and third I guess) movies just to see it put to film by a visually stunning director, and del Toro is probably a good influence on the grim portions of the film.
But yeah, I cannot imagine the movie taking place over three films' length unless the movies are like one-and-a-half hours. There's certainly enough material to do two films, but three is pushing it.
Umm, what? Tolkien devoted an INSANE amount more than Rowling did to HP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_of_Middle-earth
His son compiled it and had it published after he passed, but it was still all his work. That's not including the first 4 books.
I'm looking forward to it. I really liked how Jackson did the other LotR books, and I believe with this much pressure behind it, he will go make sure he goes into a lot of detail to everything. He has some big shoes to fill.
Plus, if if you feel like watching a few games: My Stream
I'm normally on most nights between 6pm-whenever.
Okay, I have only heard people rave about Tolkien's original work I had no clue someone was carrying on with his work. I have not done in-depth study on middle-earth so I only go by what I have heard mentioned and most people only talk about The Hobbit, Return of the King, The Fellowship of the Ring, and The Two Towers in my experience.
I also have a feeling that those works will never be made into films. As far as the casual movie goer is aware there are only 4 Tolkien middle-earth books.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
LOTR made sense. Three books, three films. However, I can foresee Jackson breaking off to elaborate on peripheral characters in The Hobbit when it's not necessary. How much more do we need to see of Cate Blanchett? Does each dwarf get his own elaborate backstory? Does each chapter of The Hobbit warrant equal screen time?
Thanks to GR @ Yavin IV Studios for the signature!
Too easy, just gonna let that one fly by.
Elaborate backstory, no, but most of them are undercharacterized in the book, so they represent a legitimately good area for expansion in the films.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Also, for those that have read the novels, the battles in the books sometimes are covered in very few pages while the battles in the films rage for quite some time. Remember that The Hobbit ends with the battle of the five armies which I'm sure will be epic in the film.
Then I guess they will be enlightened.
I would agree with this. Really, The Hobbit isn't a trilogy. It's a single (albeit long) movie, and nothing more. Now as you said, what's contained in The Silmarillion is at least a trilogy, if not more. And I'm not sure I could sit through it despite having loved it.
Captain, United States Marines
"Peace through superior firepower."