• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Thank GOD. No Hobbit "bridge" film

Well hopefully the two Hobbit movies will only be 90-120 minutes each and not feel so bloated. I have no idea where to make the cliffhanger. Isn't the midpoint of the novel being captured by Beorn or something like that? Or maybe it could be the Gandalf / Necromancer battle as the first film's climax.

No, Beorn doesn't capture them or anything.

It's that....that IS the middle of the book, but the obvious "stopping points" are like...when they're fighting the Orcs in the Misty Mountains, but that's too early...

...and maybe the spider fight in Mirkwood...
....or maybe being captured by the Elven king?
...or Smaug's death
 
I don't need to see a film explaining the time passage between the events of The Hobbit and LOTR. But if they make The Hobbit and flesh the storyline out a bit concerning events beyond Bilbo' quest, I would not mind seeing that.
 
It's kind of funny that the original LOTR movies can fit into one film but the Hobbit, the shortest and most accessible of the books, will end up split in two.
 
There's little in the appendices that takes place between Hobbit and LOTR except disjointed filler material that takes place over 80 years. It's described in little detail, unlike the relatively dense volumes of the Hobbit and the LOTR books. It's a lull in the fight against Sauron; the main plot point is him reestablishing power in Baradur with no one opposing him. There are no major battles like in the books. I guarantee if they actually dramatized it, they'd be making most of it up in order to create a sufficient narrative.
 
Last edited:
The Quest for More Money!


The Hobbit should be one film, and that's it.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top