Latest Entertainment News Headlines

MOVIE POLL: Do you think that adding a Part Three to the Hobbit is too much?

Jul. 31, 2012by:

Do you think that adding a Part Three to the Hobbit is too much?

Definitely too much - having a Part One and Part Two was plenty for this story
37.88% = 289 votes
Never, bring it on!
26.61% = 203 votes
Only if it splits up The Hobbit more - use it to bridge the gap between The Hobbit and LOTR, and I love it!
20.05% = 153 votes
I'm indifferent until further plot/structure details are released
15.47% = 118 votes
TOTAL VOTES = 763 votes

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

8:25PM on 07/31/2012
How will I know until I see it? Was three Lord of the Rings too much?... Maybe :)
How will I know until I see it? Was three Lord of the Rings too much?... Maybe :)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:15PM on 07/31/2012
Just another money making scam. Three LOTR movies made sense. Two Hobbit movies made sense, because the book was split in two. This is stupid.
Just another money making scam. Three LOTR movies made sense. Two Hobbit movies made sense, because the book was split in two. This is stupid.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-1
3:50PM on 07/31/2012
Heh, the book isn't that large...2 movies was more than enough
Heh, the book isn't that large...2 movies was more than enough
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:44AM on 07/31/2012
My biggest concern was that the 2-part Hobbit would seen rather trite compared to the epic Two Towers and Return of the King. I'm fairly confident this won't be a problem now.

I'm hoping they decide to film a bit of connective tissue into a new cut of The Lord of the Rings, replace Ian Holm with Martin Freeman in the Riddles in the Dark flashback, a flashback to Balin's fate in Moria, an update on the War in the North during The Two Towers and The Return of the King. All of this could be
My biggest concern was that the 2-part Hobbit would seen rather trite compared to the epic Two Towers and Return of the King. I'm fairly confident this won't be a problem now.

I'm hoping they decide to film a bit of connective tissue into a new cut of The Lord of the Rings, replace Ian Holm with Martin Freeman in the Riddles in the Dark flashback, a flashback to Balin's fate in Moria, an update on the War in the North during The Two Towers and The Return of the King. All of this could be accomplished in less than 10 minutes of screen time spread across the entire trilogy. It doesn't really require changing anything (except for the Riddles in the Dark flashback), but just expanding on what's already there.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:24AM on 07/31/2012
My biggest concern was that the 2-part Hobbit would seen rather trite compared to the epic Two Towers and Return of the King. I'm fairly confident this won't be a problem now.

I'm hoping they decide to film a bit of connective tissue into a new cut of The Lord of the Rings, replace Ian Holm with Martin Freeman in the Riddles in the Dark flashback, a flashback to Balin's fate in Moria, an update on the War in the North during The Two Towers and The Return of the King. All of this could be
My biggest concern was that the 2-part Hobbit would seen rather trite compared to the epic Two Towers and Return of the King. I'm fairly confident this won't be a problem now.

I'm hoping they decide to film a bit of connective tissue into a new cut of The Lord of the Rings, replace Ian Holm with Martin Freeman in the Riddles in the Dark flashback, a flashback to Balin's fate in Moria, an update on the War in the North during The Two Towers and The Return of the King. All of this could be accomplished in less than 10 minutes of screen time spread across the entire trilogy. It doesn't really require changing anything (except for the Riddles in the Dark flashback), but just expanding on what's already there.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:43AM on 07/31/2012
So you want the director to go back to the original trilogy and make alterations to make things fit better with the new prequels? Doesn't that sound an awful like like a certain someone else that everyone complains about.
So you want the director to go back to the original trilogy and make alterations to make things fit better with the new prequels? Doesn't that sound an awful like like a certain someone else that everyone complains about.
9:49AM on 07/31/2012

Too much? Silence, atheist scum!!

Can there be too much of awesomeness? I don't think so. That should answer your question, PollMaker!
Can there be too much of awesomeness? I don't think so. That should answer your question, PollMaker!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:31AM on 07/31/2012

Peter Jackson

Sigismundo - Jackson originally wasn't directing because he was in the middle of a lawsuit with the studio, claiming they owed him money. The heads of the studio weren't eager to shoot The Hobbit with a fellow who was suiing them at the time. But the studio was having money issues at the time and weren't able to start shooting, delayed The Hobbit as a result and Del Toro wasn't willing to put his life on hold for 5 years in order to wait for the money to arrive. By the time the studio sorted
Sigismundo - Jackson originally wasn't directing because he was in the middle of a lawsuit with the studio, claiming they owed him money. The heads of the studio weren't eager to shoot The Hobbit with a fellow who was suiing them at the time. But the studio was having money issues at the time and weren't able to start shooting, delayed The Hobbit as a result and Del Toro wasn't willing to put his life on hold for 5 years in order to wait for the money to arrive. By the time the studio sorted their finances out, Del Toro was gone, the lawsuit was agreeably settled, and no one wanted to do the movie unless Del Toro or Jackson directed. Leaving Jackson who was producing the Hobbit no choice but to take the director's chair back once more. Make sense?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:41AM on 07/31/2012
Thanks for that. I knew it was something but my memory was damn hazy on it, you cleared it up.
Thanks for that. I knew it was something but my memory was damn hazy on it, you cleared it up.
7:46AM on 07/31/2012

3 books=3 movies, 1 book=1 movie

3 movies for Lord of the Rings. Fine. It was 3 books, after all. The Hobbit was 1 book, and a kids book at that. It really should have been done as just one movie. Now, the Silmarilion? That could be a miniseries because of how dense it is. Now, if the third movie has nothing to do with the Hobbit and it's all taken from Unfinished Tales and Silmarilion, regarding how Galdalf found the key and stuff like that, fine. Can't believe it would make for a great movie. Feels more like a bonus
3 movies for Lord of the Rings. Fine. It was 3 books, after all. The Hobbit was 1 book, and a kids book at that. It really should have been done as just one movie. Now, the Silmarilion? That could be a miniseries because of how dense it is. Now, if the third movie has nothing to do with the Hobbit and it's all taken from Unfinished Tales and Silmarilion, regarding how Galdalf found the key and stuff like that, fine. Can't believe it would make for a great movie. Feels more like a bonus feature. But hey, they gotta get paid, right? I mean, ya' gotta feed the monkey!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:13AM on 07/31/2012
I have no interest in The Hobbit as a film. The book is nothing more than a children's story with a bit too much fluff for my taste, and to adapt it after The Lord of the Rings feels a bit underwhelming. Though I am more than happy to be proven wrong once the films are released. That being said: what I do find interesting is the fact that Guillermo del Toro was set to direct with Jackson as EP, and if my memory serves me correctly the film was quite a bit in development at the time. One
I have no interest in The Hobbit as a film. The book is nothing more than a children's story with a bit too much fluff for my taste, and to adapt it after The Lord of the Rings feels a bit underwhelming. Though I am more than happy to be proven wrong once the films are released. That being said: what I do find interesting is the fact that Guillermo del Toro was set to direct with Jackson as EP, and if my memory serves me correctly the film was quite a bit in development at the time. One then can only assume Jackson didn't want to direct The Hobbit then, yes?

So after del Toro drops out, Jackson is left once again to direct, and then he suddenly wants it to be a trilogy? Is Jackson just being the manic ex-boyfriend of Middle Earth? He leaves, then comes back because the grass isn't greener? If someone could shed some light on this I'd be grateful.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Entertainment News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!