The Hobbit Trilogy

As long as they take the hobbits to isengard.

I still don't know how they managed to stretch The Hobbit into two movies, let alone three. Must have added in a lot of new stuff.

I like trilogies. I like LotR. Hobbits? I HATE HOBBITS.

Wow after reading that article it seemed they were cutting a lot of cool stuff from the books.

I wonder what they'll call it....

An Unexpected Journey

There and Back Again

...?

@MooseyMcMan said:

I still don't know how they managed to stretch The Hobbit into two movies, let alone three. Must have added in a lot of new stuff.

Apparantly Jackson said that he's using a lot of thsoe appendices or extended universe things Tolkien wrote after Return of the King. I guess it's going to be like a bridge between the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. So says Wikipedia.

This is pretty absurd. This is a 320-page young adult fantasy book he's adapting....

What?? Mother of fuck

I'm a little nervous about this one, actually. The Lord of The Rings trilogy was amazing, and I'd argue better than the source material. But, we've seen Jaskson isn't actually the be-all, end-all that we once thought - and, it seems like there might be a lot of creative liberties being taken here. I guess I'm not as confident that The Hobbit needs those changes as much as The Lord of The Rings did.

I'll wait and see though, I am keeping my fingers crossed.

@TooWalrus: If it's mostly coming from Tolkien's other writings, then I'm cool with that.

I'll be interested to see if turning it into a trilogy feels right or if it feels like they are just stretching it out unnecessarily. I'm excited to see it though. The break between Lord of the Rings to now has been long enough that I'm ready for more of this.

So I heard you like money mister Jackson.

@TaliciaDragonsong: and food. Lots of food. Which he may gain more of in exchange for mentioned money.

@Funkydupe: I'm pretty sure he lost a lot of weight after he made the Lord of the Rings movies.

@MooseyMcMan: Okay? If I had plenty of money I'd spent it on some really fine dining.

Sure.

I'm struggling to see how they can turn such a short book into 3 movies. There's a lot of stuff in the later appendixes, but much of that is very dry.

I've got faith in Peter Jackson, but it seems a little bit like they're just trying to milk the cash cow with this.

Sounds good to me. I do hope they are all somewhat long though, I like my tolkien movies long.

PJ knows he has tremendous pressure from the world to deliver the films right, and I think he will do everything in his might to see that it happens.

@SoothsayerGB: I don't know, the symbolism in Lovely Bones came off trite, and a bit heavy-handed, to me. Not sure about the whole making light of child murder, I certainly didn't get that from it. My problem was more one of his scattershot method at eliciting emotion in that movie. Nothing really felt personal or real, probably partially due to the idiosyncratic artistic style of the film. Beautiful visuals and symbolism need to be supported by strong characters and interesting or believable story arcs. Tucci did perform the sociopath quite well, but the rest of the cast was entirely forgettable, and in turn that sort of hurt his role too - same reason you don't care when a monster eats teenagers in a horror flick, though not quite to that extreme. I didn't really find myself especially broken up about any of the events transpiring because I felt like the emotions being elicited from me were being done so unnaturally.

Then again, what do I know? I also thought Dark Knight Rises made some pretty glaring missteps.

So How many of you bet that crappy 3 page poem gets a movie all its own?

Far over the Misty Mountains cold,
To dungeons deep and caverns old,
We must away, ere break of day,
To seek our pale enchanted gold.
The dwarves of yore made mighty spells,
While hammers fell like ringing bells,
In places deep, where dark things sleep,
In hollow halls beneath the fells.
For ancient king and elvish lord
There many a gleaming golden hoard
They shaped and wrought, and light they caught,
To hide in gems on hilt of sword.
On silver necklaces they strung
The flowering stars, on crowns they hung
The dragon-fire, on twisted wire
They meshed the light of moon and sun.
Far over the Misty Mountains cold,
To dungeons deep and caverns old,
We must away, ere break of day,
To claim our long-forgotten gold.
Goblets they carved there for themselves,
And harps of gold, where no man delves
There lay they long, and many a song
Was sung unheard by men or elves.
The pines were roaring on the heights,
The wind was moaning in the night,
The fire was red, it flaming spread,
The trees like torches blazed with light.
The bells were ringing in the dale,
And men looked up with faces pale.
The dragon's ire, more fierce than fire,
Laid low their towers and houses frail.
The mountain smoked beneath the moon.
The dwarves, they heard the tramp of doom.
They fled the hall to dying fall
Beneath his feet, beneath the moon.
Far over the Misty Mountains grim,
To dungeons deep and caverns dim,
We must away, ere break of day,
To win our harps and gold from him!
The wind was on the withered heath,
But in the forest stirred no leaf:
There shadows lay be night or day,
And dark things silent crept beneath.
The wind came down from mountains cold,
And like a tide it roared and rolled.
The branches groaned, the forest moaned,
And leaves were laid upon the mould.
The wind went on from West to East;
All movement in the forest ceased.
But shrill and harsh across the marsh,
Its whistling voices were released.
The grasses hissed, their tassels bent,
The reeds were rattling—on it went.
O'er shaken pool under heavens cool,
Where racing clouds were torn and rent.
It passed the Lonely Mountain bare,
And swept above the dragon's lair:
There black and dark lay boulders stark,
And flying smoke was in the air.
It left the world and took its flight
Over the wide seas of the night.
The moon set sale upon the gale,
And stars were fanned to leaping light.
Under the Mountain dark and tall,
The King has come unto his hall!
His foe is dead, the Worm of Dread,
And ever so his foes shall fall!
The sword is sharp, the spear is long,
The arrow swift, the Gate is strong.
The heart is bold that looks on gold;
The dwarves no more shall suffer wrong.
The dwarves of yore made mighty spells,
While hammers fell like ringing bells
In places deep, where dark things sleep,
In hollow halls beneath the fells.
On silver necklaces they strung
The light of stars, on crowns they hung
The dragon-fire, from twisted wire
The melody of harps they wrung.
The mountain throne once more is freed!
O! Wandering folk, the summons heed!
Come haste! Come haste! Across the waste!
The king of friend and kin has need.
Now call we over the mountains cold,
'Come back unto the caverns old!'
Here at the gates the king awaits,
His hands are rich with gems and gold.
The king has come unto his hall
Under the Mountain dark and tall.
The Worm of Dread is slain and dead,
And ever so our foes shall fall!
Farewell we call to hearth and hall!
Though wind may blow and rain may fall,
We must away, ere break of day
Far over the wood and mountain tall.
To Rivendell, where Elves yet dwell
In glades beneath the misty fell.
Through moor and waste we ride in haste,
And whither then we cannot tell.
With foes ahead, behind us dread,
Beneath the sky shall be our bed,
Until at last our toil be passed,
Our journey done, our errand sped.
We must away! We must away!
We ride before the break of day!

@Ghost_Cat said:

PJ knows he has tremendous pressure from the world to deliver the films right, and I think he will do everything in his might to see that it happens.

This. I thoroughly enjoyed the Lovely Bones and think that the hate for it is a bunch of critic crap that most people don't really think of in the first place until they read about it. Also, PJ has done nothing but prove to us he is an amazing and capable director for Tolkien's work. Is this a money grab as much as it is a way to stuff more content into what was an originally one title movie? Sure, but if there is anyone who can make me enjoy the hell out of the three movies: it's Tolkien.

@HatKing said:

@SoothsayerGB: I don't know, the symbolism in Lovely Bones came off trite, and a bit heavy-handed, to me.

To be fair, that's true of the source material as well. It was a great concept mired in a lack of subtlety.

@ck1nd said:

@Ghost_Cat said:

PJ knows he has tremendous pressure from the world to deliver the films right, and I think he will do everything in his might to see that it happens.

This. I thoroughly enjoyed the Lovely Bones and think that the hate for it is a bunch of critic crap that most people don't really think of in the first place until they read about it. Also, PJ has done nothing but prove to us he is an amazing and capable director for Tolkien's work. Is this a money grab as much as it is a way to stuff more content into what was an originally one title movie? Sure, but if there is anyone who can make me enjoy the hell out of the three movies: it's Tolkien.

@HatKing said:

I'm a little nervous about this one, actually. The Lord of The Rings trilogy was amazing, and I'd argue better than the source material. But, we've seen Jaskson isn't actually the be-all, end-all that we once thought - and, it seems like there might be a lot of creative liberties being taken here. I guess I'm not as confident that The Hobbit needs those changes as much as The Lord of The Rings did.

I'll wait and see though, I am keeping my fingers crossed.

I´m actually pretty confident. He knows and LOVES LoTR. He is at his best when making these big scale films. He also made sure before starting the movie that every creative desicion should be made by someone who loved and knew the material as well as he does. That´s why Andy Serkins is in charge of the second block of shooting. This may well be even bigger and better than LoTR. Just watch the Production Diaries, you´ll feel better about this.

This one feels like a little bit of a stretch, but I am totally willing to let Peter Jackson do his thing. He treated the Lord of the Rings so well, we will see how this turns out.

Don't see how there is a lack of material as others say considering how much they had to cut from the lotr trilogy and that they're taking from the appendices of rotk for the third film.

@Dagbiker: Do you even read posts before you decide to reply to them?

@Ghost_Cat said:

PJ knows he has tremendous pressure from the world to deliver the films right, and I think he will do everything in his might to see that it happens.

This. I thoroughly enjoyed the Lovely Bones and think that the hate for it is a bunch of critic crap that most people don't really think of in the first place until they read about it. Also, PJ has done nothing but prove to us he is an amazing and capabledirector for Tolkien's work. Is this a money grab as much as it is a way to stuff more content into what was an originally one title movie? Sure, but if there is anyone who can make me enjoy the hell out of the three movies: it's Tolkien.

I specifically pointed out that he hasn't not proven us wrong with his directorship of Tolkien's Work. I'm guessing you missed that point, so I will leave that boldedandunderlined for you.

Geez.

This is kinda ridiculous. I'm still interested though.

As long as they don't drastically alter things like they did in Return of the King and Two Towers, I am cool with it. Fellowship didn't bug me as much because it was mostly omissions, which aren't as bad.

If they are adding in the extra stuff then it would've been cool to have Aragorn in there. It's messed up of Mortenson wants to distance himself from it.

For people that don't know, Aragorn was actually ninety-something years old during the events of LOTR. He's one of men of Westerness, not like normal humans. So it would be interesting to see him fifty years younger during the events surrounding The Hobbit.

I hope King Kong makes an appearance.

Even though I know this was done for money purposes, I would love to see PJ expand the universe and create new characters and stories in it. Just don't make them 3 hours a piece please.

Yeah, I dunno, this whole thing seems a little much. I like the Hobbit and all but three movies? I think this a wait and see kind of thing. Hopefully it will be great.

Hey, this means more LotR universe stuff. I'm up for that shit.

@MooseyMcMan said:

I still don't know how they managed to stretch The Hobbit into two movies, let alone three. Must have added in a lot of new stuff.

Really? The Hobbit is slam full of interesting events, all of them worth putting on the screen. I don't see how someone could do it in one single movie without significantly changing the story or making the pace so fast as to be nothing more than a summary.

But three movies? That does seem like a bit of a stretch. I can still see it happening, and it will be slow-paced, but shouldn't this have been something that was decided a long time ago?

@MooseyMcMan: They're also pulling from another tolkein book, my understanding is that both stories will be going on at once or something. I'm hoping Gandalf is tied up on a chair being asked what the numbers mean while he has flashbacks.

This news annoys me. Maybe if they weave some shit from the silmarillion in then it could be expanded, but this is not a book meant to be a trilogy of movies. In the amount of time it takes me to watch 3 peter jackson movies I could like just read the entire book.

I have always felt that the Lord of the Rings trilogy (books) should have been a 6 part series. For all those that have read the novels, there are in fact, 2 books for each book. In doing so, they could have fleshed out more important details without rushing through things. I know it's hard to think of the extended cut as rushing through things, but they did, and it's glaring. And they left out really important characters like Fatty Bolger, Tom Bombadil, Glorfindel and Prince Imrahil and the Swan Knights. The books are still better

As for the Hobbit being a trilogy, I'm not so sure of this, unless they make up a lot of dialogue for the characters. Having just read the book again recently (in one day no less), the majority of the dwarves have very few lines. Thorin, Balin and Bombur have the most. So I'll wait and see. Having said all that, I'm still excited because I have always felt what they accomplished visually is as close to what I imagine Middle Earth would be.

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

So I heard you like money mister Jackson.

Haha =P

I can't wait to see what they do with this.Watching the trailer alone got me all excited for it so I'm happy to wait and see on the 14th how it turns out and judge then!

Terrible idea. I liked the book a lot and I'd totally go see a single movie adaptation of it, but splitting it across three? Nope. The trend of turning everything into a trilogy needs to fuck off and die.

Fucking PJ has gone MAD! Guillermo del Toro got out while he could.

@TooWalrus: An Unexpected Journey

There and Back Again

There and Back Again, Again

I like this idea a lot. One more Hobbit movie isn't at all a bad thing for me. There's lots of existing fiction to pull from and I have faith in PJ. He did it before, he can do it again. Nay sayers be damned.

@believer258: I just meant that the Lord of the Rings books (each of which is longer than The Hobbit) were made into one movie each, not three.

@shinboy630 said:

@TooWalrus: An Unexpected Journey

There and Back Again

There and Back Again, Again

...I like it.