'The Hobbit' will now be THREE MOVIES LONG
By
Arcanaville,
Posted on: 2012-07-30 18:30 in Comic and Hero-Villain Culture
Quote:
****Wheel of Time*** *Cough Cough****
|
Originally Posted by Nethergoat
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. |
Quote:
*Sniff*
|
Originally Posted by Dr_Illuminatis
****Wheel of Time*** *Cough Cough****
|
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
The Council driving Sauron out of Mirkwood happens roughly at the same time as the Battle of the Five Armies, but could still be used as the climax of part 2, with the Battle of the Five Armies as the climax for part 3, which would let Bilbo's return home be the finale of the trilogy, meaning it'd help it to keep closerr to the lighter tone of the book, even if the Council vs Sauron battle is more important in the wider story.|
Originally Posted by Atomic_Saint
On the one hand, any exploration of Dul Gurdur , the Necromancer, and the Council of Wise is going to be some awesome geek .
|
Of course, if he wanted to make them more like a series of 6 movies rather than 2 trilogies, he could always rework the LotR into for the Hobbit instead.
@Golden Girl
City of Heroes comics and artwork
Quote:
Can I get an Amen?
|
Originally Posted by Energizing_Ion
Scouring of the Shire...I miss thee!
  |
@Mental Maden @Maden Mental
"....you are now tackle free for life."-ShoNuff
I am a little dubious about this. Three seems a bit excessive. But I think, as has been pointed out, they'll put more then just what was in the Hobbit into the movies. Which I would not complain about at all.
Besides, Peter Jackson has earned some credit with me. I am not to worried about it.
"I have something to say! It's better to burn out then to fade away!"
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by houtex
I am the weird one. I didn't see any of the LOTR trilogy in the movies. Not one of them.
|
Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.
Quote:
Betting on the following:|
Originally Posted by Energizing_Ion
I'll watch all 3 but I, too, wonder how it will be done.
|
1: Shire through the Misty Mountains (ends after Gollum, etc)
2: Beorn through the Elf Kingdom (ends heading down the river toward Esgaroth).
3: Escaroth through Smaug, through the Battle of Five Armies, through the return to the Shire, maybe with a sneaky little intro to "young Frodo" after a short time-skip, roll credits)
Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.
"Two films will become three"... That's what happens when you leave two films alone in a closed dark room...
And Houtex, that was not a bad way to do it at all (well, besides not reading all of them first... hrumph).
We saw all of the original cuts at midnight premieres in the theatre, but always waited for the extended cuts for the DVDs. And each of them lessened (sometimes removed) much of our complaints here and there. The extended cuts are a far better telling of the tale, in my opinion.
Quote:
I read a bit from Jackson the other day where he was saying that he wanted these movies to match the tone of the other LOTR movies of his. So, he said that the Hobbits and Dwarves and Bilbo's adventure will have the lighter, fairy-tale tone of the book, while other aspects are going to go more for matching the tone of the previous films (something along those lines...).|
Originally Posted by Atomic_Saint
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. |
The Hobbit is a strange book, really... The tone of it changes... it starts as a rather whimsical tale of unexpected adventure and climaxes with the grim realities of warfare. I often wondered how he might approach tackling that.
*shrugs*
We shall see... (or not and draw opinions based on secondhand information, haha).
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Electric-Knight
"Two films will become three"... That's what happens when you leave two films alone in a closed dark room...
... |
So THAT'S how sequels are made! I never knew!
Leader of The LEGION/Fallen LEGION on the Liberty server!
SSBB FC: 2062-8881-3944
MKW FC: 4167-4891-5991
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
Betting on the following:
1: Shire through the Misty Mountains (ends after Gollum, etc) 2: Beorn through the Elf Kingdom (ends heading down the river toward Esgaroth). 3: Escaroth through Smaug, through the Battle of Five Armies, through the return to the Shire, maybe with a sneaky little intro to "young Frodo" after a short time-skip, roll credits) |
I could see that. I haven't read the Hobbit in a while but I hope that Jackson does cover the Council vs Sauron and Radagast (shape-shifter!
) (as well as Beorn).
Leader of The LEGION/Fallen LEGION on the Liberty server!
SSBB FC: 2062-8881-3944
MKW FC: 4167-4891-5991
They need to get the most out of their paying for copyrights to the movie.
I can see it taking three movies, if they go into the books even more. Details that likely would of been skipped in 1 movie.
BrandX Future Staff Fighter
The BrandX Collection
The only word I can think of to visualize this is...
Moo.
IIRC- When G left the 14 outside Mirkwood, he left to join the Council in the action at Dol Guldur.
He shows up outside Erebor after Sauron was "compelled" to vacate his hideout and return to home sweet home in Mordor.
As for my take on 3 from 2, is that I have trust that PJ knows what he is doing, though if I ever had time to spend w/ him, I would strongly inquire on the TT changes, specifically Faramir and the un-needed diversion to Osgiliath (!!???!?).
I would love to see bits of the backstory/forestory (post LOTR, contained in the appendix's). After all, Sam takes a boat west and both Gimli and Legolas also make it there building a boat together. Will these things be present? How about some of history of fall of great Numenor and founding of the Kingdoms of Arnor and Gondor--The Kinstrife?
Who knows what PJ will add to the narrative that we know as the Hobbit, but it will surely be interesting and at 48 fps- will look fantastic.
Quote:
They could go for the cliffhanger and end it *at* Gollum without actually showing him completely. Just the glint of eyes in the dark and perhaps a "*gollum*" or "preciousss" to tease.
|
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike
Betting on the following:
1: Shire through the Misty Mountains (ends after Gollum, etc) |
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nethergoat
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. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dr_Illuminatis
****Wheel of Time*** *Cough Cough****
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
*Sniff*
|
Quote:
This seems reasonable. And avoiding the second movie with two unrelated climatic battles would seem to be the main reason for going to three.|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
The Council driving Sauron out of Mirkwood happens roughly at the same time as the Battle of the Five Armies, but could still be used as the climax of part 2, with the Battle of the Five Armies as the climax for part 3, which would let Bilbo's return home be the finale of the trilogy, meaning it'd help it to keep closerr to the lighter tone of the book, even if the Council vs Sauron battle is more important in the wider story.
Of course, if he wanted to make them more like a series of 6 movies rather than 2 trilogies, he could always rework the LotR into for the Hobbit instead. |
The hints from the official site suggest that the first movie would end with the escape-by-barrel episode, and the second begin with arrival at Lake Town. Assuming that doesn't change, I would go for something like this. I will put material from the appendices and other writings italics, and material from the book in bold.
(Major spoilers)
Movie 1 (An Unexpected Journey)
Gandalf enters Dol Guldur and discovers Thrain and the map (possibly told in flashback).
Gandalf encounters Thorin and Co in Bree.
Bilbo is recruited. Tolkien wrote a scene, cut from RotK, with an important conversation between Gandalf and Thorin, after Bilbo had gone to bed on the night of the unexpected party.
Journey from Hobbiton to the Edge of Mirkwoood.
Gandalf meets with the White Council at Rhosgobel. (we know this location is in the movie.) Could be moved to beginning of Movie 2.
Misadventures in Mirkwood, leading to Barrel escape.
Movie 2 (The Desolation of Smaug)
Dwarves arrive at Laketown, Travel on to Misty Mountain
White council forces march towards Dol Guldur, worry about what would happen if Necromancer calls on Smaug.
Bilbo enters the Mountain and disturbs Smaug, who attacks Lake Town.
Death of Smaug.
Dol Guldur sacked, Necromancer flees, goblins of Gungabad roused.
Movie 3 (There and Back Again)
Aragorn encounters Arwen for the fist time. Leaves Rivendell. (moved a bit in time)
Political thriller, as Bilbo and Gandalf try to avert a war.
Battle of Five Armies.
The Return Journey
Gollum leaves the mountains in search of Baggins.
I really should do something about this signature.
Quote:
This is actually answered in some of the bonus material in TT. I believe it's in an interview with David Wenham (Faramir). It might be in a "book to screen" doc or something like that, as he says he was also concerned with the changes to Faramir's character from that of the book. The reason that is given is that basically the way they split the movies, Sam and Frodo had no real obstacle to overcome at the end of TT. So Faramir and Osgiliath became that for them.
|
Originally Posted by Razawere
As for my take on 3 from 2, is that I have trust that PJ knows what he is doing, though if I ever had time to spend w/ him, I would strongly inquire on the TT changes, specifically Faramir and the un-needed diversion to Osgiliath (!!???!?).
. |
Arc 180901: Flight of the Dreadnought
I do enjoy the movies Peter Jackson makes. Unfortunately, there is one glaring issue I have with him as a filmmaker. Pacing. My friends and I call it Peter's Pacing Problem. He likes to drag it out. It doesn't surprise me that he wants a third movie.
So, yes. It's not a terribad decision, but I suspect I will enjoy the movie regardless, but there will be moments on subsequent viewings where I start checking my watch.
Infinity
Sam Varden 50 MA/Reg Scrap
Doomtastic 50 SS/Inv Brute
Ceus 50 Eng/Kin Corr
Cinderstorm 50 Fire/Fire Blaster
That Bull@#i* I read the book, didn't seem 3 movie long, it wasn't a trilogy like Lord of the ring You got the fellowship,The Two Towers and Return of the King.
I think they trying to make money off of this and milk it for all they can, by doing this they going to ruin the movie.
They might just rip J. R. R. Tolkien work apart and put together there own story and mash it into something else that might end up becoming a steaming Pie Of CR#$.
Never play another NcSoft game, If you feel pride for our game, then it as well, I Superratz am Proud of all of you Coh people, Love, Friendship will last for a lifetime.
Global:@Greenflame Ratz
Main Toons:Super Ratz, Burning B Radical, Green Flame Avenger, Tunnel Ratz, Alex Magnus
Quote:
A movie is generally about the same amount of story you can get from a short story.|
Originally Posted by Demobot
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? |
Getting a full novel, even of the Hobbit's size, with all the appropriate complexity and scenes, is more something that would take a full season of an hour long television drama.
Really, to fully cover the Lord of the Rings would probably take six seasons of hour-long television drama. Assume 24 episodes a season.
That would be almost 4 and a half DAYS, as in 24 hours, worth of material.
Thrythlind's Deviant Art Page
"Notice at the end, there: Arcanaville did the math and KICKED IT INTO EXISTENCE." - Ironik on the power of Arcanaville's math
Quote:
Yep.|
Originally Posted by Lycanus
A movie is generally about the same amount of story you can get from a short story.
Getting a full novel, even of the Hobbit's size, with all the appropriate complexity and scenes, is more something that would take a full season of an hour long television drama. Really, to fully cover the Lord of the Rings would probably take six seasons of hour-long television drama. Assume 24 episodes a season. That would be almost 4 and a half DAYS, as in 24 hours, worth of material. |
I always felt like a BBC series might have been the best way to do a live action translation of the books.
It's not unreasonable to make three movies out of the Hobbit, really. Making the LOTR trilogy of books into just three films was far more of a jarring notion than making three films out of one book.
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
unfortunately, people are stuck on the idea that one book=one movie. Even when they go to television rather than the theater, novels are usually portrayed as mini-series or even two-hours specials.|
Originally Posted by Electric-Knight
Yep.
I always felt like a BBC series might have been the best way to do a live action translation of the books. It's not unreasonable to make three movies out of the Hobbit, really. Making the LOTR trilogy of books into just three films was far more of a jarring notion than making three films out of one book. |
And think about it, usually the conversation about books made movies there's some sort of discussion about the idea that "more was explained in the book", usually as a way of excusing the inevitable plot holes that appear when you try to crush a novel's worth of material into a short stories face
also, executive meddling is more rampant in an ongoing series....if they tried to do a live action TV version of the Hobbit, you can bet there'd be attempts to increase its marketability. That would likely be even worse.
Still, it would be nice if people finally realized that a feature movie is a short story.
Thrythlind's Deviant Art Page
"Notice at the end, there: Arcanaville did the math and KICKED IT INTO EXISTENCE." - Ironik on the power of Arcanaville's math
Quote:
This. |
Originally Posted by Lycanus
unfortunately, people are stuck on the idea that one book=one movie. Even when they go to television rather than the theater, novels are usually portrayed as mini-series or even two-hours specials.
|
Or let's put this into another perspective: Would you rather have the Hobbit in three movies, or a 2 hour movie based on DUNE? Cramming a book like the Hobbit or DUNE into one movie to me is a bad idea. SCi-Fi channel making Dune into an excellent 3 part miniseries was the way to go and I suspect 3 movies for the Hobbit will also be good.
Also sad to say a DUNE movie is slated for 2014........please no.
Quote:
How ironic. The Lord of the Rings was actually written to be a single novel. The publisher split it up into three books, but that was not the author's original intent. The Lord of the Rings is only a trilogy, instead of a single volume or six volumes, because a publisher decided they could make more money selling it as a three volume set.|
Originally Posted by GreenFIame
That Bull@#i* I read the book, didn't seem 3 movie long, it wasn't a trilogy like Lord of the ring You got the fellowship,The Two Towers and Return of the King.
I think they trying to make money off of this and milk it for all they can, by doing this they going to ruin the movie. They might just rip J. R. R. Tolkien work apart and put together there own story and mash it into something else that might end up becoming a steaming Pie Of CR#$. |
I say six because The Lord of the Rings is divided into six "books" by the author: The Ring Sets Out, The Ring Goes South, The Treason of Isengard, The Ring Goes East, The War of the Ring, The Return of the King. So its either one giant novel, or six books of a series. Its only a trilogy because of money.
Tolkien always intended all of his Middle Earth stories to be pieces of one grand story. He even went so far as to change the Hobbit after it had been originally published to synchronize it with the Lord of the Rings as he wrote that. Tolkien constantly made changes to both The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings due to his work on the Silmarillion. Its reasonable to suggest that there are lots of non-linear connections between the works that could be explored in a movie based on The Hobbit, particularly appendix content, and including that content actually more closely follows Tolkien's story-telling intent. So much of his work is in appendices or originally unpublished addendums specifically because of perceived practical limitations of publishing page count.
And irony stacked upon irony: we only have a Lord of the Rings because Tolkien's publishers thought his originally intended next work, the Silmarillion, was unmarketable. The Lord of the Rings is actually an attempt by Tolkien's publishers to milk more money from Tolkien's readership's interest in Hobbits.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
And usually as background during double XP weekend runs.
Thank you, City of Heroes, for giving me a superhero social network combined with amazingly smooth game play. Petitions signed with realistic expectations.