THE HOBBIT (2012/2013): News, Rumors, Pics Till Release

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

Here's Mike Fleming of Deadline Hollywood writing on the possibility of an expansion to a trilogy.

[Sindatur]

Out Of My Vulcan Mind wrote:

---

Here's Mike Fleming of Deadline Hollywood writing on the possibility of an expansion to a trilogy.

Wow, really? I've never read any Tolkien, just seen the Peter Jackson Movies and the Animated movies, but, I know many were concerned about The Hobbit being even a two parter, is there enough for a Trilogy? Is there enough unwritten stuff going on that can be added into the movies to justify a Trilogy without it feeling really padded or agravating the Book fans?

[SalvorHardin]

Sindatur wrote:

---

Wow, really? I've never read any Tolkien, just seen the Peter Jackson Movies and the Animated movies, but, I know many were concerned about The Hobbit being even a two parter, is there enough for a Trilogy? Is there enough unwritten stuff going on that can be added into the movies to justify a Trilogy without it feeling really padded or agravating the Book fans?

There's more than enough material for 3 movies since they are using Tolkiens notes and appendices.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

The Hobbit should be a simple story. Little touches can be made to link it to the other films, so that exist in the same universe, even a few scenes implied that feature trilogy characters but actually didn't play in the books, but Jackson has to realize that simple story is a simple story.

[RoJoHen]

That is my fear, that the simple tale of The Hobbit is going to end up getting lost in all this extra stuff.

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Ugh.

The Hobbit should be one really good movie. Very disappointed.

But hey, gotta wring every last cent out of the books.

[Alidar Jarok]

Sindatur wrote:

---

Wow, really? I've never read any Tolkien, just seen the Peter Jackson Movies and the Animated movies, but, I know many were concerned about The Hobbit being even a two parter, is there enough for a Trilogy? Is there enough unwritten stuff going on that can be added into the movies to justify a Trilogy without it feeling really padded or agravating the Book fans?

It's the shortest book, so I was initially skeptic. On the other hand, it's also the least padded book. It has many different scenes, while the Lord of the Rings has many more pages of description that isn't going to translate onto the screen.

I go back and forth on a bridge movie. I like the Hobbit being told as the Hobbit. At least the extra movie is indeed extra, rather than dragging out the others (although they have some of Gandalf's scenes, which is fine). While there are fans of the original who would be annoyed by an entirely new story, it's also undeniable that these scenes are made by fans for fans. They have to have the story right and can't just film it haphazzardly as they see something they like. That makes me think we're a little too late for it.

[Reverend]

People keep saying "there's more than enough in the appendices" but has anyone actually read them? I admit it's been quite a while since I did, so I might be misremembering, but from what I recall al lot of that stuff is just about the various lines of kings, a chapter or so's worth on Aragorn & Arwen, a terse timeline of the three ages and a sketch of what happened to Numenor (sp?) I don't recall a lot of details on the Council of White or what Gandalf got up to at Dol Guldur. Indeed, unless I'm misremembering it just says that he went to Dol Guldur once and Sauron did a runner then looked again about 400 years later and caught him out.

I'm not saying Walsh, Boyens & Jackson aren't capable of fleshing out a fuller story from scant information, I'm just wondering if all this talk about the appendices is just a way to get around not having the rights to 'The Silmarillion'. And by that I mean that from a rights stand-point, they can mine The Silmarillion for plot details so long as those same events are at least *mentioned* in the LotR manuscript.

[mswood]

Well the Hobbit (and just the material actually in the Hobbit) was always going to be expanded. For two real reasons.

1. Some material that flies by, will actually take a lot of time (the Hobbit is a fast read, because the story is told very quickly). I mean in Two Towers the Battle of Helm's Deep is one regular sized chapter, in a film form its what 30 minutes,

2. They have said that to have a main cast of 13 dwarves, they were going to have to work to make those characters three dimensional. PArt of that is in design, but part will also have to be on the pages, which aren't there in the book.

Then you have the appendix material, some of which is literally just brief notations.

Clearly that material could consume a lot of time, yet only be a few brief statements in appendix form.

Remember the appendix is partial, notes for Tolkien when he was going to fully expand the tale of the Hobbit to fit it into the Lord of the Rings universe, since the Hobbit was create long before all the events and back stories were created for LoTR.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

It's almost like Jackson has the look and feel right, but he forgets that there's elegance to simplicity.

[RoJoHen]

Indeed. Not everything needs to be the most epic story ever told.

[Samuel Walters]

I'm okay with the idea of a third Hobbit film. If it happens, let's hope the execution does justice to the other five films. But unless I see otherwise with There and Back Again, I'll trust a third film will be worthwhile.

[Gojira]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

It's almost like Jackson has the look and feel right, but he forgets that there's elegance to simplicity.

My fear with the Hobbit movies is that he is going to go all King Kong on us. That movie could have been improved with some simplicity.

I like a lot of his work, but he sometimes doesn't know when to say "that's enough!"

[V]

A "third Hobbit movie" certainly wouldn't be story from the book, "The Hobbit".

Even Jackson has referred to "the appendix material" when talking about this possibility.

It seems that he was intrigued about going back to the original idea of making a "bridge film" between the Hobbit and LOTR trilogy.

Essentially, I think this would be "The Tale of Aragorn and Arwen", plus a bunch of vignettes showing what everyone else was up to -- things we actually *do* know about from the appendixes, not invented stuff.

I'd actually really want to see an "Appendix movie"; it wouldn't be one narrative so much as several vignettes, but given how great the Extended Editions are....as they point out, when a movie is four hours long, you're not really worried about pacing anymore.

[Set Harth]

And no fan club credits this time, please.

I was a fan before a lot of those schmucks were even born.