Three Times The Hobbit?

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

And speaking of Olympics,

Caught a glimpse of the opening ceremonies. Though this 'Merican doesn't understand the British obsession with the stovepipe-hatted Abraham Lincoln (vampire hunter though he may have been), I did like that, in the end of that one sequence, the One Ring is forged...at least that's what I saw.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by alatar

Caught a glimpse of the opening ceremonies. Though this 'Merican doesn't understand the British obsession with the stovepipe-hatted Abraham Lincoln (vampire hunter though he may have been), I did like that, in the end of that one sequence, the One Ring is forged...at least that's what I saw.

Tch. That was Isambard Kingdom Brunel

It looks like I am wrong about the third film. However, I am quite pleased.

[Kuruharan]

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=746962

The line in this that really gets me is:

"there was more story to tell than could be contained in the originally planned two films"

I assume this must translate to, "I threw out almost all of the original material (because let's face it, Tolkien was a horrible writer and he wasn't PJ) and made up as much junk as I possibly could to service and worship my own ego (PJ be praised!) because...I mean gosh, who else but me could deserve this much mone...I mean adoration!!!! Next week, I shall announce that for no other reason than to service and worship my own ego (PJ be praised!) the trilogy will be doubled! Huzzah!!!!!"

[Nogrod]

My first worry is this though: they have wrapped filming and realised they had moore footage they could fit in two films... then one night after too much wine and in frenzy after looking at required cutting-choices they thought, goddammit, let's make three films with this material! All is required is a speedy re-cut for film one, and then they have time to make tricks to make the two latter films to work... maybe a few additional shoots then next year?

But OMG what will the quality of that sudden remodelling of a two-part movie turned into a trilogy be? I'm not too optimistic... (especailly when it is a PJ movie )

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

My first worry is this though: they have wrapped filming and realised they had moore footage they could fit in two films... then one night after too much wine and in frenzy after looking at required cutting-choices they thought, goddammit, let's make three films with this material! All is required is a speedy re-cut for film one, and then they have time to make tricks to make the two latter films to work... maybe a few additional shoots then next year?

But OMG what will the quality of that sudden remodelling of a two-part movie turned into a trilogy be? I'm not too optimistic...

Yes– it's awfully, awfully late in the day for them to be making such a radical change, isn't it? Not that it's the first time P.J. & Co have given the impression they're not quite sure what they're actually trying to do with "The Hobbit". *sigh*

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by alatar

Caught a glimpse of the opening ceremonies. Though this 'Merican doesn't understand the British obsession with the stovepipe-hatted Abraham Lincoln (vampire hunter though he may have been), I did like that, in the end of that one sequence, the One Ring is forged...at least that's what I saw.

I find it quite funny that most fans immediately read a Tolkien context into much of the ceremonies, but I've also read non-Tolkien fans ask why there wasn't any recognition of Tolkien.

[alatar]

It's simple math:

• LotR is three books (or one very long one), and yet with three long films, PJ found the need to insert PJisms to...what? Increase everyone's love of the author's work, make the story more understandable, scare the audience, tick off the fan base, prolong the agony? Go rewatch the scenes like Aragorn falling off the cliff, Gollum falling off the cliff, Denethor diving off a cliff, the need to have the sewers of Osgiliath, the bad bouncing scene...
• 3 Tolkien books = 3 PJ movies + filler
• The Hobbit is one smaller book, was written more with children in mind, and yet from this material we're going to have three even average length films? How many Dwarves will need to fall off cliffs in this trilogy?
• 1 Tolkien book = 3 PJ movies + ?

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by alatar

How many Dwarves will need to fall off cliffs in this trilogy?

Stop it, alatar! You are going to give me nightmares!

Yes– it's awfully, awfully late in the day for them to be making such a radical change, isn't it? Not that it's the first time P.J. & Co have given the impression they're not quite sure what they're actually trying to do with "The Hobbit". *sigh*

Sadly, I suspect they know exactly what they are trying to do, milk as much money out of this as possible. What I think they are unclear about is the best means to get the milk out of the cow, because obviously something faithful to the text and spirit of Tolkien's original writing is not up to the task.

[Kitanna]

Three movies isn't necessary. Too bad they're going to milk it like this. Two movies made sense, three is overkill. I'm still excited about The Hobbit movies, though. I won't go into them expecting to see a true, accurate adaptation of the book. I will be going in expecting to see a well-done, visually appealing movie with some of the best music a movie has ever been blessed with.