The Hobbit in 3 parts

[Dalebert]

http://www.smosh.com/smosh-pit/articles/new-hobbit-trailer-sort

I can't believe I'm thinking this and saying it, but I just might have to pointedly avoid watching The Hobbit in the theaters. I may just wait for the whole thing to be out on DVD. Even then, I'll be renting; not buying. Splitting it into THREE movies is just fucking ridiculous. Lord of the Rings, sure. It was three LONG books. Even as a child, The Hobbit was a quick read, for crying out loud! It's seems the viewing experience can only suffer for it being padded out and broken up, forcing us to wait long periods of time to finish the story while at the same time making it more expensive.

Bad move, Peter Jackson. To say I'm disappointed would be an understatement.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - Official Trailer 2

[Turd Ferguson]

It seems Jackson is a one-pump-chump. Hasn't had quite the level of success on par with LOTR with anything he's done since then, so he's just milking the Tolkien thing for all its worth. I'll probably still go see all three in the theater though, since I think he does a great job with the Tolkien stuff.

[Dalebert]

I guess I won't be able to decide for sure until I get an idea of how exactly he's going about this. I'm just picturing some false climax like ending the first movie arbitrarily after they deal with the trolls or something. Pfft.

I've heard on FB that the first movie might actually end with the death of Smaug (not too bad), the 2nd would focus on the battles that followed, and the 3rd would be some completely different storyline about a battle between some necromancer and the wizards that happened after The Hobbit and before LOTR. Why they would make that part of The Hobbit instead of it's own movie with its own title... marketing I guess. Most people haven't heard of it.

We'll see.

[freeAgent]

They're just trying to pump as much cash out of a sure-fire success as they can.  Why have one movie when you can have three!?

Ridiculous.

[Dalebert]

They're just trying to pump as much cash out of a sure-fire success as they can.  Why have one movie when you can have three!?

Egg...zachary

[anarchir]

I am a huge huge The Hobbit fan, and a decent fan of TLOTR trilogy. I am actually happy to have heard about the fact that it will be 3 films instead of two. Heres why.

The first film will be a decent chunk of the book. It will not feature Smog or anything after Smog. It will likely be very true to the books. This includes the bit at Bag End, a bit with the Trolls, the part where they are at Rivendell (likely extended because they seem to want to include a female character not found in the book & who is an elf), then the large bit with the goblins and the famous scene with Golum and the ring. I bet it will end with them starting to enter Mirkwood.

The second film will feature a lot more of Smog and will lead UP TO the Battle of the Five Armies. It will feature an extended part about Mirkwood. More elves. The humans. Smog. And ending with Smogs death.

The final film will have the final battle. Obviously this bit will have a huge extended portion away from the books.

Also extended from what was in the books: They will go very much into detail about where exactly Gandalf was when he disappeared from the group all those times. This really will tie into the LOTR trilogy more, where Sauron came from, perhaps about the ring, etc.

Also, Beorn.