Movie The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

[Andre]

My understanding is that it is not exactly turning The Hobbit into a trilogy, but rather adding another film based on other bits and pieces of material written by Tolkien, as sort of a bridging film between the end of The Hobbit and the beginning of The Lord of the Rings.

The Hobbit is vague about the evil sorcerer in Mirkwood (and goings on in the land in general outside of quest). They could expand on that as bridging information between the two, without changing what happens from The Hobbit itself. You can have something of Sauron directly or via his minions looking for the Ring without it wrecking The Hobbit by encountering the party.

 

[Wallaby]

I sure hope you are right on this, because even 2 books will be overkill IMO and I'm tipping they will be pretty long movies as well.
I just hope they don't wreck a good thing.

I don't think they can 'wreck a good thing' - Tolkien's not going to write anymore (although it was his son who finished The Silmarillion).

Remember, Hollywood doesn't treat stories with reverence - it treats them in the best possible way to make the maximum amount of money.

Personally, I thought the book of The Hobbit dragged on a bit towards the end - The lakemen, and all that time just sitting around on the edge of the Mountain. The whole book could benefit from a bit of tightening up (which would happen with a film). It would make a fine 2.5 hour movie.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Shit, I dunno why I said 2 books I meant 2 movies, because IMO The Hobbit would be a perfect 2.5 hour movie not 2 movies as they will be doing

 

[Dixie Flatline]

The Hobbit is vague about the evil sorcerer in Mirkwood (and goings on in the land in general outside of quest). They could expand on that as bridging information between the two, without changing what happens from The Hobbit itself. You can have something of Sauron directly or via his minions looking for the Ring without it wrecking The Hobbit by encountering the party.

This could be the foundation of a separate movie. I'm sure the studio will be encouraging Jackson to make a trilogy, given the return on investment in LoTR.

 

[Andre]

Shit, I dunno why I said 2 books I meant 2 movies, because IMO The Hobbit would be a perfect 2.5 hour movie not 2 movies as they will be doing

Yeah, if it was just the Hobbit that'd be about right. I go by the very unscientific principle that movies translated from books work best when they go approximately 1 hr for every 100 pages of a book. Any less and they tend to lose the feel of the book too much. Which made sense then for each LOTR movie to be around 3 hours and The Hobbit 2 - 3 hours.

 

[AG]

Hobbit is a fairly compact story though. It moves from one event to the next without too much filler compared to the LOTR books, so I think they can easily make it two films. The last few chapters are fairly quick as well, so they could make the main battle scene much longer in the movie.

 

[Igloo]

Well, apparently Peter Jackson confirms it will be 3 movies.

http://au.ign.com/articles/2012/07/30/the-hobbit-3-officially-announced

So it looks like the rumours and speculation were true, and there will be a third Hobbit movie. Check out Peter Jackson’s official statement, which just hit facebook.

http://au.ign.com/articles/2012/07/30/the-hobbit-3-officially-announced

 

[Warsaw]

Err overkill.

 

[vast]

Smart decision.

 

[Caesar]

Err overkill.

Yeah, I'm not happy.

 

[Sunny_]

I don't mind. Peter Jackson isn't really the type to do just do it for the cash, is he?

If he has heaps of story left after cutting the two movies together, pushing out a third shouldn't do too much to the story telling.

Also, has anyone noticed how he's put back on the weight again? Starting to get closer to the LOTR size. I wonder if it's a Middle Earth thing?

 

[Caesar]

I'm sure the movies will be alright, but it's not going to feel like The Hobbit. What was a nice little self-contained adventure story in a fairytale world is going to end up being this epic bloated prequel series.

But I guess what everybody wants is TLOTR Mk II, and I'm sure it will deliver on that front.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

The Age has an in-depth look at what Jackson will churn out for the trilogy and is tipping that at least one of the movies will be entirely based on the appendices Tolkien wrote to add on to the end of The Return of the King.

 

[glenferry23]

i wonder what the running time will be for each film, similar to the LOTR trilogy (approx 9 hours) perhaps?

 

[Roobs321]

Not liking the idea of this. As has been said, The Hobbit would fit perfectly for a 2.5-3 hour movie. I honestly dont know if the quest justifies watching 3 long films, like destroying the ring could manage.
I just hope the Hobbit movies are done in 2, and that the third one is different, like The Silmarillion or post-Hobbit material.

 

[Vader]

The book is a fairly short children's story. Anything more than 1x 2hr movie and something's fundamentally wrong. To drag it out to 3x movies is just plain ridiculous. It's not a 1000 page epic like LotR.

 

[HolyRioli]

Looks like while it is going to be titled "The Hobbit", that doesn't seem to be entirely true, but rather, The Hobbit plus a lot of The Lord of the Rings appendicies.

Personally I am quite excited about this. Tolkein left HUGE amounts of work unpublished, which is why Christopher Tolkein (mostly) are still able to release new stories every now and then. The point being, the stories are all there, written (more or less), which hopefully won't lead to a Hollywood story creation. Jackson doesn't seem to be the sort to do that (was probably as faithful to the story as he could be in the LOTR Trilogy).

However, I do agree with the setting of The Hobbit being different to LOTR. It is much less dark and apocalyptic (for want of a better word), and always has a light-hearted, almost silly nature to it at times, even during the more sombre scenes.

However, the casting looks strong, and Jackson deserves getting the benefit of the doubt after his effort with LOTR in my opinion.

 

[DaftPunk]

The hobbit has so many events that only take up a few pages. Whilst the book was aimed at kids now much of the audience it would be aimed at is adults. 2 films will be suffice, and I have trust in PJ that the third will be the appendixes to explain the LOTR connection better

 

[Sunny_]

Second trailer for this is out, in case anyone hasn't seen.

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi650683417/

 

[kaysee]

Second trailer for this is out, in case anyone hasn't seen.

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi650683417/

"If Baggins loses, it eats it whole!" FTW

 

[glenferry23]

looking good

 

[Mint Condition]

I reckon it's going to be good. The whole white council driving the necromancer (Sauron) out of Mirkwood story will be just as big a part of the movies as the hobbit journey I think. And as others have said there are lots of things that happen in the hobbit that only take up a few pages that could become much bigger sequences in the films. Especially the battle at the end.

 

[kaysee]

I reckon it's going to be good. The whole white council driving the necromancer (Sauron) out of Mirkwood story will be just as big a part of the movies as the hobbit journey I think. And as others have said there are lots of things that happen in the hobbit that only take up a few pages that could become much bigger sequences in the films. Especially the battle at the end.

One part from the trailer which has me confused is the scenes where they're running/fighting around a "wooden" settlement (across bridges, pulled up through roof etc). I haven't read the book for ages, so can't quite recall what this part would be... possibly:

1) Wood Elves & King... IIRC I thought they actually lived more underground than above it.
2) Necromancer Tower... possibly a settlement around the Necromancer Tower (including that Rabbit Sled scene).

I can't think what else it could be.

One "minor" scene I DO think will be cool will be "Wright Burrows"... PJ and WETA love their ghost technology/scenes, so they'll be drooling about those scenes... plus it is where Bilbo finds "Sting" which in the entire LOTR landscape is the 2nd most known item after The One Ring... even more renowned than Anduril.

 

[Norwegian Blue]

One part from the trailer which has me confused is the scenes where they're running/fighting around a "wooden" settlement (across bridges, pulled up through roof etc). I haven't read the book for ages, so can't quite recall what this part would be... possibly:

1) Wood Elves & King... IIRC I thought they actually lived more underground than above it.
2) Necromancer Tower... possibly a settlement around the Necromancer Tower (including that Rabbit Sled scene).

I can't think what else it could be.

I think it's underneath the Misty Mountains when they're escaping the goblins.

 

[kaysee]

I think it's underneath the Misty Mountains when they're escaping the goblins.

Could be... I thought it looked outdoors though... will have another viewing tonight.

EDIT: yeah I think you're right.


Note... there are 5 different trailers with a different scene at the end on the official website: http://www.thehobbit.com/index.html#content=choose-your-moment

And one other note... recall that they're shooting this in ultra-high resolution at 48fps instead of the standard 24fps... when watching these trailers some of the detail looks amazing and I can't wait to see it in the cinema.