Official 'The Hobbit' Thread - Part 4

[Poeman]

haha Aaragorn gets me every time

 

[mclay18]

He may as well be sticking stuff from the Similarion in there.

No, The Similarion was published posthumously by Tolkien's son -- who has no intention of letting WB/New Line get their hands on it (and that subsequently caused a rift between him and his grandson Nicholas). The only reason we got the LOTR trilogy and Hobbit films is because Tolkien sold the movie rights for a pittance ($24K) before his death.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Anyone know why the Tolkien estate is so aggressively against the movie adaptations? Is it all about Tolkien selling the rights for so cheap, or something else?

 

[Spideyfan93]

That damn video makes me laugh till tears EVERY SINGLE TIME.

Hmmmmmmm Hmmmmmm...

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

Anyone know why the Tolkien estate is so aggressively against the movie adaptations? Is it all about Tolkien selling the rights for so cheap, or something else?

I think it has something to do with the fact that they weren't as faithful and that they had wanted money...thus why they are against selling the rest of the rights of Tolkien's work and thats why they dislike the films.

 

[Lucien]

Anyone know why the Tolkien estate is so aggressively against the movie adaptations? Is it all about Tolkien selling the rights for so cheap, or something else?

If you read Tolkien's letters there's several concerning an adaptation, possibly the old animated FotR but i can't quite remember. But from those he was very, and I mean VERY protective over his material. He didn't like changes being made because everything he put in the books he put in for a reason. Many instances he would suggest just completely removing something instead of altering them. I think the Tolkien estate, particularly Christopher Tolkien who had a big hand in finishing a lot the work before and after Tolkien died, are just continuing the same level of protectiveness towards it.

 

[Zatanna]

Confirmed:



http://io9.com/5930200/confirmed-th...utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

I just now read about this. Wow.

Not sure if this is a good idea...

 

[Zatanna]

I'm game for 3 flicks. Jackson doesn't have a spotless track record, but he's more than earned my trust. I'll reserve judgement until I've actually, you know, seen the ****in' things.

I guess this is where I sit. While it makes me nervous, I'm gonna give it a chance, because it's The Hobbit, and it's Peter Jackson.

 

[jmc]

Interesting new development. Not sure what to make of it.

 

[Silvermoth]

Oh well.

I guess it's difficult to break out of a bad hobbit


Seriously now, I'll give this a go.

 

[Abudefduf]

And it looked like the fans were right on that one.

Oh yes they were, no doubt about that. But it's still quite funny.

And I really don't understand the amount of people blindly trusting Jackson to do as he pleases with Tolkien's material when he has shown in the trilogy that he can easily make mistakes. Arwen taking Frodo across the Bruinen, depriving Frodo of his character building moment of defiance against the Nazgul and Gandalf's confrontation with the Witch-King in Minas Tirith come to my immediate mind right now, but there are many more.

This. I don't mind plot changes or cutting some stuff, but when you strip down most of the characters of what made them great in the first place (and Jackson sure did, especially with Frodo, Elrond, Sauron, Gandalf the White, Faramir, Denethor etc.), then we have a problem.

I don't trust him and I think his take on Middle-Earth is good but flawed and far from perfect. And now he's gonna turn The Hobbit into a trilogy.

 

[jmc]

Is there even enough story for 3 movies? He's taking a book one-third the size of Lord of the Rings and stretching it over presumably a similar 8-9 hour run time.

 

[psylockolussus]

Wow a trilogy! I didn't see this coming!

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

And not just 3 movies, but 3 movies probably pushing 9 hours.

Unless, they make it so An Unexpected Journey and There and Back Again were three hours and are now two and they take two hours from the middle and try to make a film there.

Because then they maximise profit without any new material.

 

[terry78]

Oh well.

I guess it's difficult to break out of a bad hobbit


Seriously now, I'll give this a go.

The devil takes many forms. One of which is puns.

 

[bunk]

I think there is enough for 3 movies, but I'm not sure how well the individual pieces will work of their own.

 

[CGHulk]

http://fusible.com/2012/07/amidst-t...les-in-the-dark-and-smaug-domains-registered/

Domain registrations made this week suggest the title may be “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug” or “The Hobbit: Riddles in the Dark”.

On July 27, several domain names were privately registered through MarkMonitor, of which The Saul Zaentz Company is a client. MarkMonitor is the same registrar responsible for managing the domains for TheHobbitAnUnexpectedJourney.com (Whois) and TheHobbitThereandBackagain.com (Whois).

Here’s a look at the full list of domain names registered through MarkMonitor:

http://whois.domaintools.com/desolationofsmaug.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/riddlesindark.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/thedesolationofsmaug.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/thehobbitdesolationofsmaug.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/thehobbitriddlesindark.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/thehobbitthedesolationofsmaug.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/thehobbittheriddlesinthedark.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/theriddlesinthedark.com

 

[jacobed]

I would assume if its anything with Smaug, that'll be the name of the 2nd movie and they'll put there and back again as the 3rd

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Wow a trilogy! I didn't see this coming!

Saw it coming the moment Jackson dropped the info as a "possibility" at Comic-Con. Made too much financial sense. Much as I hate it.

Harry Potter and Nolan's Batman are over, Hangover is ending (and before anyone laughs, very few straight comedies do $200M+ domestic), Sherlock Holmes appears to have fizzled out (Wouldn't rule out a third one in the grand scheme of things) and Superman remains a question-mark though I hear good things. And let's not even get started on DC Entertainment when Nolan isn't holding their hand!

This prints money, especially overseas where they love their fantasy epics and their 3D.

 

[marvelrobbins]

We are probally looking at The Hobbit:There and back Again as title of third film.

My thinking Is how they will split story to make It 3 films.

The Hobbit:An unexpected journey ends after Eagles save Gandalf,Bilbo,and dwarves
from Goblins and Wangs.

Film 2-Gandalf leaves Bilbo and dwarves.The film splits Into telling Bilbo and dwarves journey and the White Council story.Film ends with death of Smaug and assult at Dol Guldur

The Hobbit:There and back Again-aftermath of driving out the Neocurmancer and death of Smaug.The battle of 5 armies.Ends with Bilbo returning home.Might focus on Sauron's return to mordor and Gollum beging his search for the ring.

 

[DarknessOfDeath]

I was thinking the first part would end where Gandalf leaves the Company right before they enter the forest of Mirkwood. Or...when the company are attack by the spiders and Bilbo is the only one who can save his friends.

Second part could pick up where part 1 left off or could focus on where Gandalf is heading to. The part ends with the death of Smaug and the assault at Dol Goldur.

and pretty much what Marvel suggested...for the third part.

 

[scifiwolf]

I think the money aspect has more to do with getting new production and footage done and out of the way now, since it'd be likely cheaper to fold it into the production budget of The Hobbit. It also probably is going to be easier to incorporate all that stuff into these films, rather than come back years later, and try and force a whole movie out of little pieces of canon that wasn't in any of the actual books. They can stretch out The Hobbit into three movies that way, include all the new material, and it's a complimentary trilogy to LOTR.

So, for those of you complaining about a cash grab, think about it. Would you rather have the two movies now, and never see anything else? Have the two movies now, wait for years and years, then WB or another studio shoehorns all the extra stuff into another movie (that is bound to happen)? Or have Peter go back, do some new shoots, fold the extras into The Hobbit, make it three films, and it works much better? I think this new three-movie plan is the least of all evils, and presents us with the best shot at having the rest of Tolkien's world adapted into quality films.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

it could be a licensing thing too. If there is a possibility of the film rights expiring they might simply be striking while the iron is still hot. Christopher doesn't like the movies. If that contract expires there might never be another one made, unless he sells them to someone else for a much larger amount.

 

[Destructus86]

I like the idea of making it a trilogy so we can get get stories from other sources. We are never going to see these stories otherwise.

 

[DCW]

Regardless the reason, I was jaded when they announced two movies originally. Now I'm totally put off by the idea of a trilogy. I'll still give them a shot for sure, and I'll probably love them, I love the LotR trilogy, but I was looking for ward to a quadrillogy of movies: The Hobbit, Fellowship of the Ring, Two Towers, and Return of the King. Now we'll have Hobbit 1, Hobbit 2, Hobbit 3, FotR, TT, and RotK. Seems a bit overkill doesn't it?