Chewie Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 I liked The Lord Of The Rings a long time ago and still think it's awesome. The Hobbit is coming out in 2012 and part 2 is coming out in 2013. The trailer is coming out on the 20th this month. Also, there's going to be a 15 minute satellite feed of the trailer. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/en...emiere-dec-20/1 Jackson is bringing back most of his cast from the hit trilogy franchise, The Lord of the Rings, including Ian McKellan as Gandalf, Elijah Wood as Frodo, Andy Serkis as Gollum, Orlando Bloom as Legolas and Cate Blanchett as Galadriel. Martin Freeman, from the British version of Ricky Gervais' The Office, has come onboard in the title role of Bilbo Baggins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guns N R0se Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 Gonna be great. I love the LOTR movies and The Hobbit book was fantastic too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlowe. Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 I'm glad Jackson is back on-board. I like Del Torro, but he just didn't seem to have the passion for these books like Jackon does, his departure is not a bad thing. And @ casting Martin Freeman - great casting there. Can't wait! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted December 17, 2011 Share Posted December 17, 2011 I love the LOTR movies. Just watched Return of the King today. Got me in the mood for some Skyrim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionist Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 I SHALL NOT PASS... ...this up! I've not read The Hobbit but the LOTR trilogy was an effective adaptation of the Monumental books. The documentaries for this are even being filmed in 2160p I've heard! Feckin' Futureproof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted December 20, 2011 Share Posted December 20, 2011 I SHALL NOT PASS... ...this up! I've not read The Hobbit but the LOTR trilogy was an effective adaptation of the Monumental books. The documentaries for this are even being filmed in 2160p I've heard! Feckin' Futureproof I highly suggest you read the Hobbit. It's lighter and fun compared to the LOTR books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rown Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Trailer likely just launched and I can't see it because they didn't rent a couple dozen more servers for the night to handle the load. Damn it all. Rown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rown Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 If that's down: http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thehobbit/ Rown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIKKS66 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Looks like a lot of fun. I've "started reading" The Hobbit a couple of times but always wondered off. I'll have to make a point of forcing myself to read it before the first film. Man, Tim has come a loooong way since his days winding up Gareth, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Garcia Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Yeah, I have no reason to not want to see that. Gonna miss Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli as central characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Yeah, I have no reason to not want to see that. Gonna miss Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli as central characters. You don't know. You might see legolas and Gimli. Since Bilbo's journey goes through Mirkwood, the home of Legolas, and Gimli's father is Glóin, one of the Dwarfs that accompanied Bilbo. If so it will probably be nothing more than a short cameo. And probably in the second movie. PS I didn't know there would be two movies until I watched the trailer and only noticed that there were only scenes from the first half of the book. But that just excites me more because they can really flesh out the book. Also didn't know that Martin Freeman was going to play Bilbo. I've been sitting here the past couple months thinking to myself, that besides the Avengers and DKR I really am not excited for movies next year. Now, after watch the trailer, I truly am. But I have to wait an entire year. I'm actually more excited for this than the Avengers or Batman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIKKS66 Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Yeah Orlando Bloom is down to appear apparently. If I remember from my half-reading of the books, they do indeed travel to the woods where Legolas' dad is the Lord. I think they'll do as much as possible to tie it to the movie trilogy to make it as accessible as they can. My guess is Orlando Bloom will either be an expensive face in the background or have a scene that not's from the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 I can see one of them at least being in the inevitable extended editions. Jackson likes putting new scenes in, like the one where Saruman dies. I hope they don't take Beorn out like they did to Tom Bombadil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forty Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Oh sh*t that looks awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrpain Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Pretty cool trailer. It's nice to see Gandalf back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhus Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 Given how awesome Shelob was, I am really excited to see how they handle the spiders in Mirkwood. This movie looks fantastic and I can only imagine how memorable Smaug will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I can't wait to see that final battle. Armies of dwarves and elves and men, and then the goblins and wargs, and the eagles and Beorn of course. That sh*t's going to be epic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rucke Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Feels weird to see Gandalf again after all this time. Visual effects have also improved very much. Really looking forward to see this movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Peter Jackson, MGM and Warner have decided that 2 movies isn't enough. Peter confirms third Hobbit movie. "The Hobbit" will become a trilogy, director Peter Jackson announced Monday on Facebook. This isn't needed. He was quite happy taking out huge chunks of the far superior and longer LOTR books, but thinks that the shorter and crappier Hobbit deserves 3 books to tell the tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenn tha killer Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I can`t wait, he`ll do a better job then he did with LOTR because he`s taking the time to make it a well deserved Trilogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Peter Jackson, MGM and Warner have decided that 2 movies isn't enough. Peter confirms third Hobbit movie. "The Hobbit" will become a trilogy, director Peter Jackson announced Monday on Facebook. This isn't needed. He was quite happy taking out huge chunks of the far superior and longer LOTR books, but thinks that the shorter and crappier Hobbit deserves 3 books to tell the tale. Although I highly disagree with the Hobbit being crappy, three movies seems like a lot for a book that's only around 300 pages. That's one movie for every 100 pages. Two movies felt more appropriate, especially if they kept it down to around 120 minutes. Now even 90 minutes for each movie feels like a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Peter Jackson, MGM and Warner have decided that 2 movies isn't enough. Peter confirms third Hobbit movie. "The Hobbit" will become a trilogy, director Peter Jackson announced Monday on Facebook. This isn't needed. He was quite happy taking out huge chunks of the far superior and longer LOTR books, but thinks that the shorter and crappier Hobbit deserves 3 books to tell the tale. Although I highly disagree with the Hobbit being crappy, three movies seems like a lot for a book that's only around 300 pages. That's one movie for every 100 pages. Two movies felt more appropriate, especially if they kept it down to around 120 minutes. Now even 90 minutes for each movie feels like a lot. Compared to LOTR, The Hobbit is crappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Dildo Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 this is a bad idea. The Hobbit doesn't really deserve a trilogy. the LOTR is 3 books long and it's meant for adults. so 3 movies made sense. The Hobbit is 1 book and it's meant for children. 3 movies is asinine. how are they going to keep the story going for 6 - 8 hours when it can EASILY be done in 2.5 tops? this is ridiculous... Peter Jackson doesn't believe that The Hobbit requires 3 films in order to do it justice. Peter Jackson believes in lots and lots of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I don't believe it was Jackson's call. Warner Bros or New Line probably pushed for it. Of course by push, I do mean push a few million more dollars toward Jackson. I just hope they find ways to fill in the time. There's still the story when Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur that's not really fully shown in the Hobbit. That could be half of the second movie the way Jackson's team writes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEoS Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I can see one of them at least being in the inevitable extended editions. Jackson likes putting new scenes in, like the one where Saruman dies. I hope they don't take Beorn out like they did to Tom Bombadil. Am I alone in loving the fact that Tom Bambadil wasn't in the films? I hated that guy. I don't mind it being a trilogy (besides having to wait years for conclusion to the series) as long as it isn't stuffed with non-canon nonsense. I'll have to give The Hobbit a re-read since it's been awhile. Hope we get a good look at Dol Guldur, always curious as to what Sauron had cooking up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unopescio Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeah 3 films is excessive, simply not as much happened in it as LOTR. . Its either going to be really stretched out and boring or the films are going to be too short and unsatisfying. I thought splitting this movie into 2 was a bad idea, this is just retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlowe. Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I don't believe it was Jackson's call. Warner Bros or New Line probably pushed for it. Of course by push, I do mean push a few million more dollars toward Jackson. I just hope they find ways to fill in the time. There's still the story when Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur that's not really fully shown in the Hobbit. That could be half of the second movie the way Jackson's team writes. Peter Jackson has himself 150 pages of additional notes JRR Tolkien wrote to bridge The Hobbit to TLotR. I firmly believe he [Jackson] believes he has enough material to make The Hobbit into trilogy and could care f*ck all what the studio wants. Since taking over the helm from Del Torro, he's ego has possibly grown to an enormous size and bluring his judgement with this project, but you're not going to hear me (or many moivegoers) complaining about more Middle-Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I don't believe it was Jackson's call. Warner Bros or New Line probably pushed for it. Of course by push, I do mean push a few million more dollars toward Jackson. I just hope they find ways to fill in the time. There's still the story when Gandalf goes to Dol Guldur that's not really fully shown in the Hobbit. That could be half of the second movie the way Jackson's team writes. Right now Peter Jackson's Hobbit movie is split into two films (The Hobbit: There and Back Again and The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey) but if Jackson has his way there might be three Hobbit movies total. Right now the director is in discussions with the studio getting the OK to shoot more footage either for another movie, or just a massive extended edition DVD. Source: io9 Peter Jackson has been talking about additional scenes and a potential third film for awhile. So, I'd say it his more him than New Line. Of course, they aren't going to say 'Peter, we don't think a third film of what is going to be a $1 billion + film is financially viable and therefore, insist you don't consider it' And it looks like it will be filled with sh*t from the LOTR appendices. Which, quite frankly, should have been in LOTR. I'm not gonna lie, after 10 years I don't think the LOTR films are that good. I am annoyed that they pushed Gollum's transformation to the beginning of RTotK and ignored what happened in the Shire after they got home. I also am pissed Tom Bombadil wasn't included, sorry TEoS. Doesn't matter in 10 years they will remake all 6? films anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeah, I hated how they didn't show Frodo and Sam and the boys coming home to the shire and saving them from Saruman. And then they put the scene in Lothlorien where Frodo looks into the water and sees the Shire and Sam enslaved. But then they kill Saruman. As for Gollum, I don't mind that they showed him finding the ring, and the transformation in RoTK. I'm more upset that they didn't show the Old Willow, the Barrow Downs, and the Wargs before they go to Moria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iminicus Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yeah, I hated how they didn't show Frodo and Sam and the boys coming home to the shire and saving them from Saruman. And then they put the scene in Lothlorien where Frodo looks into the water and sees the Shire and Sam enslaved. But then they kill Saruman. As for Gollum, I don't mind that they showed him finding the ring, and the transformation in RoTK. I'm more upset that they didn't show the Old Willow, the Barrow Downs, and the Wargs before they go to Moria. This expansion of the Hobbit into 3 films, feels like Jackson is trying to say 'Sorry, I butchered LOTR cause of time constraints, will 8 hours of the Hobbit with EU ( Extended Universe ) references make up for all I didn't include?' I'm going with no. I don't want 3x 2 hour 45 minute films on a 300 page book. What I want is all the stuff you left out of LOTR replaced and that GODDAMN 2 HOUR scene of Frodo and Sam climbing up Mt Doom shortened to 10 minutes, like it f*cking takes them in the books. I know it wasn't actually 2 hours but f*ck it felt like it. On a side note: I think Jackson is a hack film maker. Of his recent films none have been great, mediocre not even good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now