Three Hobbit movies

July 31st, 2012 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

More filming for will be done in Wellington after Sir Peter Jackson confirmed the movie will be split into three.

The film-maker today announced plans for the third film, with more shooting for the US$500 million (NZ$639m) project planned in the capital next year. The third, as-yet-unnamed part will be released in mid-2014.

Jackson said the decision to the turn the two-part film into a trilogy was based on “the richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings”.

“[It] gave rise to the simple question: do we tell more of the tale? And the answer from our perspective as film-makers and fans was an unreserved ‘yes’.”

Jackson said he and co-writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens were keen to make a third film after viewing a cut of the first film, An Unexpected Journey, to be released in December, and part of the second, There and Back Again.

Much of the tale of Bilbo Baggins, the dwarfs, the rise of the Necromancer (arch villain Sauron in The Lord of the Rings), and the Battle of Dol Guldur, would not be told “if we did not fully realise this complex and wonderful adventure”, he said.

“It has been an unexpected journey indeed, and in the words of Professor Tolkien himself, ‘a tale that grew in the telling’.”

Neither Jackson nor Hollywood studios New Line Cinema, Warner Bros and MGM detailed how the three parts would now be structured or whether the Battle of the Five Armies – the climax of The Hobbit novel – would be moved to the third film.

Yay. Even though it means a further year until the final film, it is worth it if more of the story is captured on film. Hopefully it will plug some of the gap between The Hobbit and LOTR also.

I loved the LOTR films but have always been sad that time constraints meant they never covered the scouring of the shire, which was so hugely important from the hobbit’s point of view – showing how they had changed and grown.

It will be a difficult decision whether to have the Battle of the Five Armies in the second or third film. If you have it in the second, what gets people to come to the third – except hard core fans. But if left for the third film, what is the climax for the second film?

I’m guessing that Bilbo acquiring the ring will be the climax of the first film. Maybe the climax of the second film is the killing of Smaug?

28 Responses to “Three Hobbit movies”

  1. Jimmy Smits (246 comments) says:

    Jackson said the decision to the turn the two-part film into a trilogy was based on “the richness of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. RRM (10,099 comments) says:

    Sorry I’ve never read it, I’m waiting for the movie to come out. :-)

    For some reason it’s become quite trendy for artwank type pundits (always waiting for their first novel to get published or for anyone to read their screenplay) to really diss Peter Jackson. And of course a lot of the general population of rugby oafs have no time at all for movies about dragons and magic and old swords & destiny.

    So I kinda feel like these days I’m in a shrinking minority of people who think Peter Jackson’s work WRT Lord of the Rings was completely fucking awesome, because he got the quality of the whole thing consistently higher, and the style of it so much better than anyone else probably would have…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. DaveDustin (11 comments) says:

    > I’m guessing that Bilbo acquiring the ring will be the climax of the first film.
    > Maybe the climax of the second film is the killing of Smaug?

    Dude, spoilers!

    :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Mobile Michael (475 comments) says:

    That now means 6 hours of Bilbo whining…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    Great news.

    I’m fascinated by the success of these movies, given that Tolkien’s philosophical foundation for his stories is deeply anti-modern and Traditionalist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. scrubone (3,097 comments) says:

    Perhaps they could make a shortish movie of the scouring of the shire? Won’t be hard to make it 1.5 hours.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. RRM (10,099 comments) says:

    Mobile Michael (45) Says:
    July 31st, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    That now means 6 11 hours of Bilbo whining…

    Fixed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “Perhaps they could make a shortish movie of the scouring of the shire?”

    My one critique of Jackson’s film version of LOTR was that they left that out. It was one of the most powerful parts of the story, and important to the point Tolkien was making.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. davidp (3,585 comments) says:

    I went to see the first Lord of the Rings film. I nodded off at some point. I suspect you’d like it if you’ve never seen special effects before and are amazed at the little people. Otherwise you’ll find it a drama-free zone that goes on and on and on…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. thedavincimode (6,890 comments) says:

    davidp

    Thankyou soulmate.

    RRM

    I have read the book, or at least, the LOR trilogy. More accurately, I forced myself to read it. I can also recall having the Hobbit read to me at primary school. It seemed like jolly good stuff when I was about 7 or 8.

    Which is pretty well where I put this whole LOR/Hobbit business. Suitable for ages 7 to 12.

    Would it really be getting all this attention without its NZ connection? Great for NZ, but that doesn’t make it the greatest story ever told. Settle down film goers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    Jackson should be charged with treason. Working class traitor.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. metcalph (1,367 comments) says:

    Peter Jackson has jumped the Shark.

    There’s no way the Hobbit which was only half the size of one of the Fellowship of the Ring could possibly be made into three movies without some grotesque padding.

    People who think he can pull it off are the same deluded souls who felt that Tom Bumbledildo was a deep, meaningful and intrinsic part of the Rings Saga.

    Let us not forget the Bullshit that was in the Return of the King – Denethor, for example, doing a hundred metre dash in world record time while on fire so he could jump off a cliff rather than into a pool of water that any sane person would.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Chthoniid (2,047 comments) says:

    I think the merit of the the LOTR films was that at their core, they told the story of the books. Someone who had not read the books would be able to produce a fair summary of the main events. While there obvious omissions and some blending of scenes/characters, I don’t think these were fatal (albeit the omission of the scouring of the shire is debatable).

    The other major flaw was that as Shelob reared over Sam & Frodo, you could see she had 2 pairs of chelicerae. Who is ever going to buy that! Ridiculous :P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Dean Papa (784 comments) says:

    whether these movies are as (or anywhere near as) successful as the original trilogy is yet to be seen. I have my doubts. I watched the first three more out of a sense of duty, but can’t say I’m particularly excited by the prospect of three more.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. davidp (3,585 comments) says:

    thedavincimode… I’m glad I’m not alone. These hobbit films seem to whip people up in to a patriotic frenzy so that even suggesting they’re not very good is tantamount to treason. But just look at the evidence, from Wikipedia…

    “They travel through the dwarf Mines of Moria. Inside, they find that Orcs have overrun the mines and slain the Dwarves; they also realize that Gollum is following them, determined to reclaim the Ring. The Fellowship is attacked by Orcs and a Balrog, an ancient demon of fire and shadow. Gandalf confronts the Balrog, allowing the others to escape, but both Gandalf and the Balrog fall into an abyss. Mourning Gandalf’s death, the group flees to Lothlórien, where they are sheltered by its rulers, the Elves Galadriel and Celeborn.”

    That’s just a story for people who think that a lot of made-up shite is interesting and clever, but don’t notice that the plot doesn’t exist and the film is about five hours long.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “That’s just a story for people who think that a lot of made-up shite is interesting and clever”

    Er….thats what a story is. Although in the case of LOTR it is based on ancient European stories and myths, which gives it more depth than the average work of fiction.

    And yes, there is a plot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. thedavincimode (6,890 comments) says:

    Lee01

    … it is based on ancient European stories and myths …

    And yet despite that, no mention of the Bible. Why is that?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Lee01 (2,171 comments) says:

    “And yet despite that, no mention of the Bible. Why is that?”

    There are a great many Biblical themes in the story.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. UpandComer (537 comments) says:

    davidp ahahahahaha “that’s just a story for people who think that a lot of made-up shite is interesting and clever”. That’s regimental gold right there. Bwahahahaha.

    I don’t know what you mean in your second line, given that the mines of moria excerpt of the movie exactly covers the book plot with less deviation in that part then any other.

    I’m glad it’s in three parts. I still wish Guillermo Del toro (can’t spell his first name) was directing – hellboy was amazing, but three parts = a lot of jobs for the film industry here, and this will be super-well patroned by all the Tolkienites out there. I’m looking forward to it. Say what you like about Lord of the Rings, but the Hobbit is simply one of the best works of fiction ever written.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Jinky (190 comments) says:

    WTF. The Hobbit isn’t even a long book! How the hell can you get 3 feature length movies out of that? Looks a lot like money gouging to me. One book = One movie.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. UpandComer (537 comments) says:

    The movies must be sth like:

    The journey into Mirkwood, or perhaps to Beorn, as well as some of the material from the appendices about how the wizard’s council took the shadow off of mirkwood, and the elves came to rivendell etc.

    Mirkwood and then the journey to river town in barrels and then the journey to the mountain, ending when they shut the door on Smaug.

    The events in the Mountain and the aftermath, as well as some material from the appendices about the reopening of Moria and Gandalf’s journeys.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. dime (10,215 comments) says:

    Another nine hours of midgets walking. Wonder if the trees walk in this one too?

    Dimes prediction – fan boys will hate these as much as they hate the star wars prequels?

    Rrm – the Jackson hate is coming after the dreadful king kong and them lovely bones. Both dragged like a bitch. Fuck the boat ride to the island in king kong was done in real time. By day three I had had enough.

    Also, the midgets are little faggots, the wizard looks like a pedo and the heros are pretty boy homos. That doesn’t help a simple man like dime enjoy the movies :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. RRM (10,099 comments) says:

    There are a great many Biblical themes in the story.

    It’s nice that there’s a representative of the God squad here, as we’re discussing a work of fiction. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Sean (290 comments) says:

    No. I love the books, both LOTR and The Hobbit and would be happy to see *a* film of the latter. What is great about the books is the richness of the language and the character development. But three films of LOTR was too much for me. Three films of the Hobbit I could not even contemplate starting to watch.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Peter (1,695 comments) says:

    Childish dungeons and dragons bollocks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Paulus (2,711 comments) says:

    They had better get moving fast before the new Labour member for Rongotai (home odf Weta) gets into Parliament.
    Helen Kelly and Little Andrew will do all they can to suff it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Sonny Blount (1,809 comments) says:

    Peter (770) Says:
    July 31st, 2012 at 7:02 pm
    Childish dungeons and dragons bollocks.

    ignoramus

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Peter (1,695 comments) says:

    Nerd :)

    Tolkein was a monumentally over-rated author, obsessed with cloaks and geneology.

    Prefer James Joyce, meself, but each to their own….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote