The Hobbit to become a trilogy

[Solmyr]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=93086

Peter Jackson just confirmed last week's rumor on Facebook that "The Hobbit" will now be three films:

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

The first installment, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, will hit theaters and IMAX on December 14. The Hobbit: There and Back Again will follow on December 13, 2013. The third film is expected to hit theaters in the summer of 2014.

Pants, dairy factory.

[crazy canuck]

I have to admit, I am really looking forward to this.

[garbon]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

[Josquius]

Part of me is happy that this means more Tolkein films.
Part of me is angry at this obvious example of the money machine in action.

[Solmyr]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

LOTR extended editions were a million times better than theatrical versions. So yes, I want them to cram in as much stuff as possible.

[crazy canuck]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

LOTR extended editions were a million times better than theatrical versions. So yes, I want them to cram in as much stuff as possible.

Agreed.

[garbon]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

LOTR extended editions were a million times better than theatrical versions. So yes, I want them to cram in as much stuff as possible.

Ugh. Well we'll have to agree to disagree. My comment came off my memory of watching both the theatrical and extended (my cousin made me watch the latter) and in both sets, I was struck by how overly long they were. I got a headache while watching the hobbits play in bed and the long drawn out gazes while chilling on Mount Doom. I'm likely to pass on this now expanded Hobbit set.

[dps]

Just going by the source material, Lord of the Rings was a much bigger work than The Hobbit, so I'm not sure the fact that the former could support a trilogy means that the latter can as well.

[Tonitrus]

Well, it sounds like they're adding on plenty that wasn't in the actual book, such as the Battle of Dol Guldur.

[Darth Wagtaros]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

I agree with him. garbon is right.

[Barrister]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

LOTR extended editions were a million times better than theatrical versions. So yes, I want them to cram in as much stuff as possible.

Ugh. Well we'll have to agree to disagree. My comment came off my memory of watching both the theatrical and extended (my cousin made me watch the latter) and in both sets, I was struck by how overly long they were. I got a headache while watching the hobbits play in bed and the long drawn out gazes while chilling on Mount Doom. I'm likely to pass on this now expanded Hobbit set.

I probably preferred the extended versions myself, but it changed it from a movie to more of a mni-series - we didn't watch each movie in one sitting.

That being said... the LOTR movies had the problem of too much source material for a 2 hour movie.  The source material of The Hobbit is much more limited.  Compare the number of pages of text for the LOTR books to the number of pages of text in The Hobbit...

[Faeelin]

I know the plan is to add stuff from the LOTR Appendices, but a Gandalf romance? Fighting Sauron in Mirkwood? It just seems silly.

[Razgovory]

Yes because bloat and lack of efficient editing is a positive? Color me skeptical.

I agree with him. garbon is right.

Yes.  Sometime less is more.  The theatrical version of Return of the King could have used some trimming.  For instance it didn't need 5 endings or a green cloud of ghosts.

[Tonitrus]

I know the plan is to add stuff from the LOTR Appendices, but a Gandalf romance? Fighting Sauron in Mirkwood? It just seems silly.

If the LotR series did anything for me, it is that it has turned me off to almost all modern films.  At least, the drama/action ones.  They pretty much all just seem way over-the-top, or like they're always trying too hard to please an audience that has "seen it all".  Or pandering to mindless fanboys/girls.

I find myself returning more to the quaint simplicity of older, classic films. 

[grumbler]

I know the plan is to add stuff from the LOTR Appendices, but a Gandalf romance? Fighting Sauron in Mirkwood? It just seems silly.

Don't know anything about a "Gandalf romance" but the Battle of Dol Guldur is from the books.

My concern isn't that there is enough material to make three movies.  My concern is that making these into three movies might make Jackson more inclined to include some of his disastrous and silly "additions."  His wife "gets" Tolkien; Jackson does not.