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

[Emh]

I'm not surprised and I look forward to it. However, I'll be royally pissed if the DVD set gets shafted on extras in favor for Blu-Ray.

[JarodRussell]

JD wrote:

---

Yeah, after the success they had with the LOTR EEs I'm not at all surprised.

Well, hm. The difference is that for LotR is was kind of a neccessity, but with the Hobbit it seems they are only doing it for the sake of doing it.

[chrisspringob]

Have they announced approx. how long the theatrical cut of An Unexpected Journey is going to be?

[Set Harth]

I hope they keep the obnoxious fan club credits that make the film so long you want to kill yourself.

[Samuel Walters]

Yes ... because, clearly, on the DVD and Blu-ray ... you HAVE to keep watching until the last note of the credits score has been played.

Damned Orwellian technology...

[Ayelbourne]

Evil Headhunter wrote:

---

I'm not surprised and I look forward to it. However, I'll be royally pissed if the DVD set gets shafted on extras in favor for Blu-Ray.

That's totally gonna happen.
Wasn't it the FotR SEE that finally enabled DVDs to surpass videotapes in market sales?

[Chris3123]

Stephen Colbert to cameo in one of the movies. Not in An Unexpected Journey, though.

Apparently he's a big Tolkein fan.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

As we get closer to the Hobbit I find my enthusiasm at an all-time low. I loved the first trilogy and I should be psyched to see this. But--

Well it just feels like it's more of the same. I remember when the studio released the first official still from Fellowship.. even simple shots of Gandalf and that would be it, they filled me with a kind of awe, that it was going to be a serious, gritty, and epic approach to a fantasy film. I wasn't disappointed (at least as far as the first film went) but now I know what to expect, and, as far as capturing the feeling of an epic fantasy, I can get that now by popping in my FOTR Blue-ray. In particular, the beginning of that film leaves some hints and warm feelings about the events of the Hobbit. Sure the Hobbit is a tgreat story, but I'm not sure why I can't get worked up over the adaptaiton. It might be because it's three films.. taking away the simplistic, whimsical and cildlike nature of the story. Also, it makes me sad that despite the increased frame rate and the 3-D I feel sad because this is still all been-there done-that territory for Jackson and that he's not challenging himself. With LOTR he was amkign an exquisite film where but the train never stopped and he was barely able to set the track in front of him as he left. But he really wanted it, the same way Lucas worked over time on Episode 4. Now they gave him a blank check and he's off!
Plus you know the Hobbit may be a good story but as far as it goes the film is still a prequel. Prequels, sequels and reboots are all that's out there. It's starting to become annoying that they'd spend - what over $300 million on a prequel trilogy...?

[Klaus]

Chris3123 wrote:

---

Stephen Colbert to cameo in one of the movies. Not in An Unexpected Journey, though.

Apparently he's a big Tolkien fan.

He is... back when he was still on the Daily Show, Elijah was doing the promo tour and came on the show. At one point Jon Stewart asked him a question about whether the Elvish he spoke in the clip was Sindarin or Quenya... Elijah started to answer and Jon said "Wait - that really meant something? I have no idea what that is, Colbert wrote that question."

[Emh]

Awesome that Colbert will be showing up in one of the films. Hopefully he'll get a few lines but won't stand out too much. Maybe bury him in a lot of make-up.

[Starbreaker]

Set Harth wrote:

---

I hope they keep the obnoxious fan club credits that make the film so long you want to kill yourself.

I'm at a loss for words.

[Dart]

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote:

---

As we get closer to the Hobbit I find my enthusiasm at an all-time low. I loved the first trilogy and I should be psyched to see this. But--
...

I love the LOTR trilogy too. At the minute I think a 2.5 hour Hobbit would have been the best thing. This whole 3 movie Hobbit seems a bit excessive.

Maybe I'll be sold in the next couple of months though.

[mswood]

First tv spot released, it's up on youtube, at deadline, and at theonering.net

AS to the running time anyone who thinks you can tell a good version of the Hobbit in two and a half hours in really not paying that much attention to the book.

The book is short because there is almost no dialogue and the writing flies through the narrative.

If you look at the time it takes Tolkien to write passages that are similar between the two works, LOTR basically takes three to four times the length to describe similar events.

Though Bilbo and Frodo's quest are different, I believe they take the same amount of actual time once they start. And thats without ever addressing whats up with Gandalf and the larger events in the world.

Now they could have filmed a version without much real dialogue, they could really compress the time, or they could spend up the motion of events like animated films often do, but that would certainly be a different type of movie. From the get go Jackson said he wanted the Hobbit to be set his take of the Tolkien universe. Ie be done in a style similar to LoTR.

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I honestly understand what you are getting at. That said, three films still seems bloated.

Let me tell you this:
My mother read the Hobbit when us kids were younger. She enjoyed the break from reality and would find herself lost in the book - during the short times us kids were napping. A few years ago when this project was being bandied about in the Hollywood news bits, she was eager to see it, and eager to know that the people behind the Lord of the Rings films were making it.

When I told her it was three films, she was actually upset and didn't want to see it anymmore. She thought it was ridiculous. Honestly, I think her view might be shared by the "non-nerd, non fanboy" type who just wants to go and see the Hobbit put on screen, something where thse people can pay their ticket and get a complete story.

The point is that, while you are correct in what you are saying, you are also missing the point. I don't know if the whole three-film thing has even sunk in for the casual Hobbit fans, but it will eventually, and, when it does, this group of people (these casual fans generally familiar with the Hobbit story but uninterested in the actual production-aspects of Hollywood films) will, at best, be scratching their heads - not bubbling with enthusiasm, and, at worst, they'll see it for what it may be, a safe money-grab on the part of Jackson.

[Skywalker]

I still think two films would have been ideal. Three just seems like they were all sitting around a table one day and someone said "Hey, why only make two billion dollars when we could make three billion dollars?"