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

Apologies for the double post, but here's the Q&A panel from Comic-Con. The showreel footage has been edited out, otherwise YouTube would have taken it down already.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HselkQMNXKM[/yt]

 

Sounds good to me. Hell, they could afford to release just as series of short films which would probably work better narratively.

 

I know breaking up a 2nd film this late in the game would be extremely difficult (maybe not impossible but difficult).

So I think I would just like massive extended editions, though of course with the vast collapse of the home market since the trilogy was released, the studio couldn't make a ton of money off of that, as opposed to a separate film.


But look at the LOTR extended editions with a total of two hours additional footage added (Ie a film), I only thought one additional scene actually hurt the films (Eowyn's soap to Aragorn).

For me at least the director has a great track record with extra footage.

 

Ebert didn't comment on the split per sae, but you can tell what he'd say by reading this.

 

I can't remember where it was to track it down again, but I read a report Friday from a site I trust that said they are not doing a third movie. I'm assuming the extra footage will just be for the extended editions.

 

There are several posts including sound and video, where Jackson mentions there will be an extended versions of the film, but that he wants to film more material if possible.

He has stated he doesn't know if (and thats if the studio even approves it, accountants already counting the cash) it would be even more material for extended versions or if it would require an edit for a third "Hobbit" film.

Technically he could even be talking more specifically about a bridging film (which at one time was actually considered for the "2nd Hobbit" film.
As opposed to the expanded Hobbit film that just features appendix material that happened during the same time period.

Now we already expect additional pickup shooting for the 2nd film to occur next year. Of which fine tuning of script still absolutely occurs. But usually it doesn't require something as major as creating a new ending point (to end a chaptered story). That would take a bit of real work, but its hardly impossible.

Personally I would love more appendix material (ie bridge material). But a lot of that (though clearly not all) I wouldn't want as part of the Hobbit film as they occur a significant amount of time later. But I would still love to see it, be it expanded home market material. TV specials, ect.

The key issue is how much material is he talking about and the associated cost involved. Why its almost assured that the Hobbit will make a sizable profit (It is possible it could flop, but I think its highly unlikely). But a studio is going to want to maximize that profit. With the Home market a mere shadow of its former self. It will be much harder for the studio to greenlite additional (above already planned pickups) large scale expenses. The easiest way to make a huge amount of money would be a separate film release in some form.

But until we have an idea of first the length of material planned for the 2nd film, current level of extra footage that would be about the 2nd film, and how much additional footage Jackson is talking about.

Then you have the issue of what material Jackson wants to film. Is it directly connected to the Hobbit and its specific time period and events? Or is it more of the bridging material that was originally considered a possible option for the 2nd film?

Certainly one thing is certain, its a complete 180 from what he felt about filming when he completed principal filming of LOTR. THough of course those were much more grueling filming schedules for the amout of material filmed.

 

And that's a wrap!

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTUQi8HBlg4[/yt]

 

God, I love these.

And as much as I really enjoyed the Avengers, and as much as I surprisingly loved Trek, or the Batman films, ect, there is simply no film I am more eager to watch.

I just hope that they have some of the magic that I enjoyed from the LOTR trilogy, they weren't perfect, and they had flaws, but I have never enjoyed any films more.

 

I couldn't agree more. Opening night for The Fellowship of the Ring was probably the best theatergoing experience I've ever had, and the whole trilogy are still some of my favorite movies. I was really looking forward to The Avengers, too, but not nearly to the same degree as I have been looking forward to both of these.

 

As much as each individual film was great, when they did Trilogy Tuesday, 11 plus hours of only fans (when do you get a theatre experience were its only people who absolutely want to be there, you weren't going to take a kid or spouse who didn't also want to spend 11 hours watching) was without a doubt the single best movie going experience I have ever had.

 

There's something about The Lord of the Rings that is just beyond anything we've ever seen before in film making. Every actor, producer, director, writer, stunt man, prop guy, etc. all always look like they're having the time of their life. It comes across in interviews and I think it translates onto the screen. These films are truly labors of love and I expect the same thing from The Hobbit films.

 

Saw the trailer in front of Prometheus. The 3D looks amazing already in 24p, after having endured many converted 3D films lately.

I can't see how it should look bad in 48p.

 

FotR was definitely the most satisfying movie experience ever for me as well... seeing it done so well, and connecting so well with the non-geek audience. *sigh*

 

Yep.


SFX has an update on the possibility of extra material, along with a clip of Sylvester McCoy talking about his involvement with the movies.

 

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?

 

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

 

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.

 

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