If anyone is interested or is a fan of Martin Freeman - do yourself a favour and check him out as Dr. Watson in the BBC version of Sherlock Holmes - it's really good.
Reminds me of when they ended LOTR, seemed like a really sad day for many. I think one of the reasons those movies were so good is that everyone involved had a lot of passion for the films.
Seems to be the same for The Hobbit.
__________________ "In brightest day, in blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power, Green Lantern's light!"
I know I for one am getting pretty sick of this phenomenon of breaking one single entry into 2-3 movies, especially when the source material doesn't call for it. Two movies was certainly enough to finish this one, and three is just overkill.
But considering Hollywood doesn't develop original movies anymore it's not too much of a surprise.
Very interesting, sounds like they would use a lot of the extra material in the appendices from LOTR. I have faith in Jackson, so if he wants to run with this I'll trust him.
I wonder if they would use the 3rd film to bridge some events that we don't really see in the Fellowship of the Ring. Like the fall of the Mines of Moria, that would be killer.
It hasn't been confirmed whether or not they are making a 3rd film, they've just been discussing it with the head of the studio.
Also, you have no way of knowing whether the source material doesn't call for three films if they indeed do go ahead and shoot more footage (would require another 2+ months of shooting and they would need to re-negotiate contracts, etc). The two films they have now aren't just The Hobbit, but also include short stories, etc. of the Tolkien universe.
If anyone is interested or is a fan of Martin Freeman - do yourself a favour and check him out as Dr. Watson in the BBC version of Sherlock Holmes - it's really good.
Kind of a shame that the Hobbit is causing a delay for Sherlock, that is a great series.
Also I am scared by the CBS pending show Elementary, seems the subtlety and wit will be foregone.
But definitely agree with the above. Also Benedict who plays Sherlock on the BBC will be in the Hobbit I understand
As the voice of Smaug I believe.
__________________
The Quest stands upon the edge of a knife. Stray but a little, and it will fail, to the ruin of all. Yet hope remains while the Company is true. Go Flames Go!
I know I for one am getting pretty sick of this phenomenon of breaking one single entry into 2-3 movies, especially when the source material doesn't call for it. Two movies was certainly enough to finish this one, and three is just overkill.
But considering Hollywood doesn't develop original movies anymore it's not too much of a surprise.
When it's movies like Twlight and The Hunger Games then I go, huh. But it's Peter Jackson... it's Middle Earth.... give me three more of movies in this amazing world they've created and I'm fine with that.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to MrMastodonFarm For This Useful Post:
BREAKING: Peter Jackson has just confirmed that he will split The Hobbit into three films, the third of which will be released sometime in the summer of 2014. Jackson dropped hints about this at Comic-Con, explaining that he had a wealth of storytelling that came
Call me skeptical since I'm not really sure how you could turn the Hobbit into three films, but I guess it might be possible with all the other short stories and the appendices from LOTR.
Very excited about this. It just means more Tolkien, and there is nothing wrong with that. This is probably the last chance we will get of Jackson's take on Middle Earth, why not get as much as possible?
Spoiler!
The Battle of Five Armies should get an extra half hour because of this.. just to make it that much more epic.
__________________ "In brightest day, in blackest night / No evil shall escape my sight / Let those who worship evil's might / Beware my power, Green Lantern's light!"
The Following User Says Thank You to GreenLantern For This Useful Post:
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
The Hobbit is around 300 pages long. Two movies was really stretching it, so three is ridiculous.
I hope they are good, but LOTR was dragging by the end of the third movie - I can't be the only one who was thinking "Sail away already!" when it was getting into hour four.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
It's not just The Hobbit in three movies - it sounds like they are adding a lot of additional material (appendices and new material), bridging The Hobbit to LOTR.
In Game of Thrones, aren't they turning each book into 10 episodes (10 hours)?
It's not just The Hobbit in three movies - it sounds like they are adding a lot of additional material (appendices and new material), bridging The Hobbit to LOTR.
In Game of Thrones, aren't they turning each book into 10 episodes (10 hours)?
The Hobbit is around 300 pages long. Two movies was really stretching it, so three is ridiculous.
Brokeback Mountain: 27 pages
Curious Case of Benjamin Button: 21 pages
From another forum:
Quote:
The films are adapting not only The Hobbit, but a potential extra 125 pages of highly compressed material called The Appendices, found at the end of The Return of the King. These not only add important extra detail to the plot of The Hobbit, but they also sketch an outline of Middle-earth history that spans an enormous time frame.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
It's not just The Hobbit in three movies - it sounds like they are adding a lot of additional material (appendices and new material), bridging The Hobbit to LOTR.
That's exactly what concerns me. It sounds like Jackson is going to kludge a trilogy together out of dissimilar elements that were never intended to be presented together as a whole. The tone of "The Hobbit" is completely different than the rest of Tolkien's material, and what we are going to get doesn't sound to be faithful to the original at all.
I really disliked many of Jackson's changes to the LoTR, because they didn't seem to be so much about telling the story in a different way as telling a different story. Which is fine if you are a brilliant director working with flawed material, but he's not and the material's flaws lie entirely outside the areas where he seems to want to meddle.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
