'The Hobbit' will now be THREE MOVIES LONG

Story here.

Not sure what to think about this. I was a bit surprised when it was announced that The Hobbit would be two movies long, but three? I'll still watch all three movies, as I think Peter Jackson did a great job with the LOTR trilogy and winning 11 Oscars with a threequel is quite an achievement, but how the heck do you stretch The Hobbit over three films, even with the Appendix material?

Well here it is from the horses mouth. I think they know what they're doing.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/peter-...51114596546558

We might not get three 3 hr movies, either.

There is some back story that would be nice to see on screen. I hope it's not just padding, though, but actually adds to the story Mr Jackson is trying to tell.

Maybe he'll add the last third of Return of the King...the part where the Hobbits take back the Shire, as an apology. That part was one of my favorite parts, because it showed the full maturation process ALL the Hobbits undertook, not just Frodo and Sam.

I am the weird one. I didn't see any of the LOTR trilogy in the movies. Not one of them.

I had not seen the first one, but by Christmas, someone had gotten me the first Extended cut booklet set. And I said awesome. Only two more to go! And I waited. Avoided knowing anything about them, until I had them all. Oh, I'd read the Fellowship and about halfway through Two Towers, but then... didn't finish them. So I had no idea how the other two really went, just the first one. And I had to make sure to tell people "DON'T TELL ME! I'm waiting for the Extended cuts to get done, and I'mma watch 'em all. So shut up about it."

I even avoided watching them on the TBS or whatever it kept rolling on over and over. Easy enough, but still, so very tempting.

So, finally, I get the third Extended cut, and I got 'em all. Ready to go! Finally bus'em'out, and watched them. Over 4-5 nights after work. But all in one fell swoop. 11 hours, 6 discs, of LOTR awesomeness. That's three books, 4 hours-ish each.

Therefore, The Hobbit in 6 movies 2 hours (or longer!) is equally possible, sounds like, if the others were 4 hours apiece. Seems The Hobbit book was a little longer than Fellowship... Been a while since I read them, so...

And Peter's no fool, three movies means three box office takes. Wingnut is gonna make bank, too. If the Extended Cuts are any indication, that is, it'll be well worth it, you ask me, and nobody will care it's three movies. They will care the book has been properly visualized, and that's all that will matter.

/That extended stuff was Worth. Every. Minute.
//Will avoid Hobbit until it's all done and the final DVDs are made.
///Or Blurays, I guess... Sigh... tryin' to avoid those... The DRM sucks.
////Don't worry, I know... I just don't wanna go through the process, k? K.

Arcanaville's right; it takes a while to explain things on film that can be plunked down as expository lumps in a book. I could see enough of that being done, along with including other bits of Middle Earth backstory, to extend a story only as long as one volume of Lord of the Rings into three two-hour movies.

And, given Jackson's penchant for putting every third scene in slow motion, that could easily extend the two hours to three in each case. (Personally, I felt that the Lord of the Rings movies could have replaced about half of their slo-mo with additional dialogue or what-have-you and been much more enjoyable, but that's just me.)

Better to go for three now than having two extra long movies or G forbid some Hollywood exec insisting on a third after the 1st gets released.

PJ can take all the time he wants movie wise (even though it's so *exhausting* for him to be a billionaire). Fill out the story. Add in more LotR prequel stuff (future generations will see the Hobbit trilogy first, so, need to take that into account). Add in Silmarillion flashbacks to set up next decade's Siltrilogy. Heck, throw in the Farmer Giles of Ham.

Hoping this doesn't end up like one of those fantasy "trilogies" that ends up running 10 volumes, 7 of them garbage.


Although as a fan of the 'extended' LotR DVD editions, I'm not that worried.

I think Peter Jackson might be crazy - colour me dubious (which is like octarine with a shade less 'sentient blue').

I mean, I rather liked the LotR trilogy overall (I have a few issues with it, but they don't make me dislike the whole). I think it's within the realm of possibility that he could split The Hobbit into three stories and do it well, but until that possibility materialises I'm going to have trouble envisioning it.

it sounds crazy, but with how long the LOTR stuff was (regular movie was about 2.5 hours per movie, extended full edition was like 4.5 hours per movie)

they could easily stretch a full 5-6 hour movie over 2 hours fairly easy

I think that 3 films might be a tad excessive for an adaptation of a book that's 30% shorter that the shortest book in the LOTR trilogy (going by word count). What concerns me more is the controversy over the frame rate and the reactions over how it makes the film look "flat".

Kaaa Ching! Three movies means more merchandise and more box office revenue. Then you have the Blu Ray for each and eventually the Box set etc etc.
It's a win for everyone except the actors that got paid for one film and the movie goers that will shell out an average of $35 to see three movies instead of $12.

Oh I forgot about 3D...

I was thrilled when Ian McKellen tweeted this yesterday. I'm excited about the additional move, especially since they will be looking at the appendices and pieces of The Silmarillion.

(insert shut up and take my money visual)

I'll watch all 3 but I, too, wonder how it will be done.


Still say there should have been a 4th movie to help out with The Two Towers and Return of the King.


Scouring of the Shire...I miss thee!

So this means we'll eventually get 24-hour marathons consisting of the extended cuts of the Hobbit trilogy and the LotR trilogy played back-to-back?

I dunno. Im mixed about this.

On the one hand, any exploration of Dul Gurdur , the Necromancer, and the Council of Wise is going to be some awesome geek .

On the other, I don't know how well that really plays with the tone of the Hobbit, which is much more of a kids tale than the LOTR was. Are they gonna Grim and Gritty Bilbo? Will the the first movie be a whole half hour of back story with Throrr and such before we even get to bag end?

Meh. As I type this I realize PJ has earned my benefit of the doubt. Ill absolutely give these a chance.