The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Necronomicon

I think there was more to it than just that quote above. Here is another account of it:

Peter Jackson is investigating the option of turning his hyped Hobbit double feature into a trilogy.

In an interview with HitFix during his weekend appearance at Comic Con, the Kiwi director said he wanted to film extra Hobbit scenes next year that weren't originally included in the first two films.

The option of splitting the second Hobbit film - The Hobbit: There and Back Again, due for release on December 14 next year - into two had been raised.

"That's a discussion we're having, yeah," Jackson told HitFix.

"We have certainly been talking to the studio about some of the material we can't film, and we've been asking them so we can do a bit more filming next year.

"Which, I don't know what would come of that, whether it'd be extended editions or whatnot. But those discussions are ongoing."

Jackson said JRR Tolkein's books, which The Hobbit and Jackson's previous Lord of the Rings trilogy were based on, contained plenty of supplementary material that he'd like to include in the Hobbit films.

"I'd like to shoot a bunch more material that we [couldn't] shoot. There's so much good stuff in the appendices that we haven't been able to squeeze into these movies."

The topic resurfaced during Comic Con's Hobbit press conference, reported Screenrant, where Jackson said talk of a trilogy was "very premature".

"I mean we have an incredible source material with the appendices because The Hobbit is obviously a novel but we also have the rights to use this 125 pages of additional notes ...

"Fran and I have been talking to the studio about other things we haven't been able to shoot and seeing if we could persuade them to do a few more weeks of shooting. Probably more than a few weeks actually, next year, and what form that would actually end up taking.

"The discussions are pretty early. So there isn't really anything to report but there's other parts of the story that we'd like to tell that we haven't been able to tell yet."

Jackson announced he had finished shooting the films on July 6 with this Facebook post: "We made it. Shoot day 266 and the end of principal photography on The Hobbit."

He showed fans 12 minutes of material at Comic Con, including a chillingly comic exchange between Bilbo and Gollum, a tender moment between McKellen's Gandalf and Cate Blanchett, reprising her role as elf queen Galadriel, and the pivotal moment when Bilbo discovers the ring.

Jackson shot The Hobbit in 3D and at 48 frames a second, twice the speed that has been the standard since the 1920s. The higher frame rate allows for greater visual clarity, though it requires costly upgrades to digital projectors for cinemas showing films at that speed.

Jackson's first film, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, is due for release on December 14, with the world premiere being held in Wellington on November 28.

- Herald online with AP

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=10819936

I would be more than a little pissed off if this transpires.

Basq

Comic-Con 2012 Panel..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uixoaV9x6E

.. no footage obviously!

paddy kerins

Oy vey

Necronomicon

FFS. He's going to turn it into a bloated mess.

Bullseye1

Talk of three movies. They must be seriously going outside the main books and into his notes.

krudler

Necronomicon wrote: »

FFS. He's going to turn it into a bloated mess.

this, the book is what? 350 pages or thereabouts? padding that out to three movies is going to either drag a lot of stuff out or delve into the appendices from LOTR and go into other stories, could work or could be a mess.

spank_inferno

There is so much content to draw from it certainly can be done.

The appendices in LOTR and the very good Unfinished Tales may well provide the source.

It would be time consuming weaving it into an extra narrative that fits with the other two which have already completed filming.


Obviously it's down to studio greed..... I'm not optimistic for the outcome

Mickeroo

Screw this. The only way I would be ok with this is if they leave The Hobbit arc as the two films then make the third as a link between hobbit and LOTR, dealing with what maybe Aragorn and Gandalf were up to in the interim. Even then its stretching it. Anyone who's read the hobbit knows there's not enough there for a trilogy so they have to be putting a lot mmore stuff in this.

I'm very dissappointed. Having said that, if we end up with three great movies instead of two then I won't be complaining

al28283

I'm guessing the whole thing will include a lot more links to LOTR than were in the book alone. I also think that this probably was something Jackson wanted to do rather than the studio. Remember King Kong? He just didn't want to cut anything out of that movie

Zubeneschamali

spank_inferno wrote: »

The appendices in LOTR and the very good Unfinished Tales may well provide the source.

No, they don't have (and will never get) the rights to Unfinished Tales or any other Tolkien works, just the Hobbit and LotR (including appendices).

However, the film rights obviously allow them to make up as much non-Tolkien-sourced crap as they like, as we saw in Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Jimmy Iovine

Basq wrote: »

Comic-Con 2012 Panel..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uixoaV9x6E

.. no footage obviously!

There's a bit of footage on this. Mainly just the sets used and some of the costumes and props.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTUQi8HBlg4

johnny_ultimate

I'm getting ever more concerned this is going to be an extremely bloated film(s). Was just reading the rumours of a third film, and it's kind of getting to the point when they should just let a good thing go. It's cool we're getting The Hobbit (albeit potentially two or three hours longer than it should be :pac:) but there's a lot of high fantasy nonsense in Tolkien's world alongside two iconic stories: appendices shouldn't be made into films.

Jackson struck gold with LotR, and did a fantastic job. But The Lovely Bones and King Kong (which I admittedly quite liked despite it being overlong) show that he's far from the most reliable of directors. I'm hoping The Hobbit will be good, but I really don't like the idea of stretching it to within an inch of its life.

Mellor

krudler wrote: »

this, the book is what? 350 pages or thereabouts? padding that out to three movies is going to either drag a lot of stuff out or delve into the appendices from LOTR and go into other stories, could work or could be a mess.

It's going to be stuff like Dol Guldur, while not specifically narrated in the hobbit, it referenced a few times and if probably the event that ties the Hobbit and LoTR together the most. Aside from Bilbo capturing the ring from Gollum.

In 2850, Gandalf made a second attempt to spy out Dol Guldur. Stealing into the stronghold, he was finally able to confirm the identity of its lord, later reporting to the White Council of Elves and Wizards that Sauron had returned. Saruman dissuaded the Council from acting against Sauron, hoping thereby to acquire the One Ring for himself,.

Eventually, the Wise put forth their might and drove Sauron from Mirkwood in 2941. During the White Council's delay he had, however, prepared his next move, and was willing to abandon Dol Guldur.

Just before Sauron fled Dol Guldur, the hobbit Bilbo Baggins, on an improbable adventure with a party of Dwarves, stumbled across the Ring deep within the Misty Mountains. After his quest was over, Bilbo brought the Ring back to Hobbiton in the Shire. Decades later, he passed it on to his heir, Frodo.

aidan_walsh

The Hobbit Part I: The Silmarillion.

Vokes

Mickeroo wrote: »

Screw this. The only way I would be ok with this is if they leave The Hobbit arc as the two films then make the third as a link between hobbit and LOTR, dealing with what maybe Aragorn and Gandalf were up to in the interim.

A link film could be do-able. There's the Balin / Moria last-stand bit as well.

Sad Professor

They already integrated the "link" film into main narrative of The Hobbit. The only way this third film is happening is by splitting the second film in half. Jackson insanely overshoots his films, so I'd well believe he already has enough footage to make this possible. The studio will jump at this because it will probably mean two relatively short films as opposed to the 3+ hour bladder endurance tests Jackson usually delivers.

Mickeroo

Sad Professor wrote: »

They already integrated the "link" film into main narrative of The Hobbit. The only way this third film is happening is by splitting the second film in half. Jackson insanely overshoots his films, so I'd well believe he already has enough footage to make this possible. The studio will jump at this because it will probably mean two relatively short films as opposed to the 3+ hour bladder endurance tests Jackson usually delivers.

I'd say they'll still both be close to 3 hours long if the extended cuts of LOTR are anything to go by. I hope they don't put a whole year between them.

AllWasWell

I don't get why every1 is so concerned about Jackson directing it..he did a good job on LOTR! I personally can't wait to see it..although I've heard it's going to be a trilogy, not too sure how that will work! I think 2 parts is enough

Zubeneschamali

AllWasWell wrote: »

I don't get why every1 is so concerned about Jackson directing it..he did a good job on LOTR!

Jackson did a good job directing the bits of Tolkien that he used. He did a good job cutting out bits he could not use.

But all the extra stuff he made up was absolutely shocking. It made no sense even in its own terms, and it made nonsense of a lot of the stuff from the book.

So, I trust him to film the Hobbit. I trust him to insert some extra stuff lifted from elsewhere in Tolkien.

I expect him to add a lot of nonsense. If he pads this out to 3 movies (it should be 1), I expect an awful lot of nonsense.

Basq

PJ has just made the 3 film announcement official via Facebook in the last 10 minutes:

It is only at the end of a shoot that you finally get the chance to sit down and have a look at the film you have made. Recently Fran, Phil and I did just this when we watched for the first time an early cut of the first movie - and a large chunk of the second. We were really pleased with the way the story was coming together, in particular, the strength of the characters and the cast who have brought them to life. All of which gave rise to a simple question: do we take this chance to tell more of the tale? And the answer from our perspective as the filmmakers, and as fans, was an unreserved ‘yes.'

We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance. The richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, allows us to tell the full story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and the part he played in the sometimes dangerous, but at all times exciting, history of Middle-earth.

So, without further ado and on behalf of New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Wingnut Films, and the entire cast and crew of “The Hobbit” films, I’d like to announce that two films will become three.

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

Cheers,

Peter J

splashthecash

Basq wrote: »

PJ has just made the 3 film announcement official via Facebook in the last 10 minutes:

Chi-Ching.....$$$$

jaykhunter

Ecstatic to hear we're getting another film and spending more time in Tolkien's world. I've complete faith in PJ that he'll do a fantastic job with 3 films. I loved the extended editions of LOTR and hope it'll be a longer story worth seeing.

Basq

Yeah, there's no real other way to think of it but a tad greedy unfortunately!

al28283

Basq wrote: »

PJ has just made the 3 film announcement official via Facebook in the last 10 minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmrJx32xefM

BopNiblets

I'm not sure how I feel about that, it means more AWESOME CONTENT (!) but more time to wait for closure from it.
I sure hope he doesn't balls it up, but how could he? PJ is great.

johnny_ultimate

Afraid I'm getting a bit of a **** buzz from the announcement

I just am not convinced there's enough story there, and appendices do not necessarily make the most dramatic narrative arc.

Hopefully I'll be surprised, but personally thinking two films was too much, three is just comes across as cynical.

al28283

Its pretty hard to see wight now where the cut off point between each movie will be. With 2 its fair enough but with 3 movies I can't really see where part 2 will start and finish.

Necronomicon

A firm kick in the balls for my enthusiasm. I really fear for how much original content he is going to create to pad out three films resulting in a bloated, over-indulgent mess.

aidan_walsh

And yet somehow there will still be enough for three more Extended Editions no doubt.

johnny_ultimate

We have to remember that Lord of the Rings actually justified three films due to its basic form - three lengthy, dense books full of characters and subplots yet still forming a coherent whole. It needed three long films. The Hobbit is a short, sweet and self-contained story that's a mere fraction of the length of one of those books. The appendices are even more probelmatic: a series of loosely described incidences taking place over the course of decades. How that is going to make three coherent, compelling films I do not know, and I don't envy Jackson's task in trying to achieve it. Especially when - the endless endings of LotR considered - he's often unable to decide when enough is enough.