So Peter Jackson just announced that his cinematic version of J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Hobbit” will be 3 movies, instead of 2.
There is a part of me that wants to cheer. There is an inherent sadness to great movie franchises, and that is that they eventually end. A large part of the fan experience, the “geeking out” if you will, is the anticipation. The wondering how they will put to screen your favorite scenes, the speculating with your friends, the camaraderie of waiting in line on opening night… they all contribute to the overall experience.
So knowing that the experience of this book-to-film adaptation will carry-on longer, naturally excites my inner geek. The more time I can sit in the theater watching Peter Jackson do justice to a book I have held oh so dear through almost my entire life has to be a good thing; right?
Hold your Wargs though. “The Hobbit” runs 320 pages, while the entirety of “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy hits 1137 pages. Think about that for a second, three movies to tell the very complicated main story and now three movies to tell the much simpler prequel which is a 1/4 of the page count. The cynical in me feels as though this is being drawn out for monetary reasons, but perhaps this is really what a solid treatment of that classic book takes and in actuality it was “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy that was too short?
I am pretty conflicted over this news. What are your thoughts on the Hobbit movie news?
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I really hope that they’re breaking it into 3 movies just to make sure that they can do the story justice. Remember how many people were mad at Tom Bombadil not making it into the LOTR trilogy? Maybe we can avoid missing out on any of the characters we love this way.
Either way, I can’t wait to watch it.
That’s what I am optimistic for; but I already felt two movies was more than enough time to get the 300 page story completely told. We will see, we will see…
Seems like a stretch. A triology runs the risk of having too much content, while important for a novel, is not really relevant in a movie. I hope Jackson has enough worthwhile content to justify three films, and not just padding the film for increased profits.
I’m expecting creative plot development and changes much like in the first film trilogy, in the spirit of the work, but not the work itself.
Predictions/Ramblings: Jackson/del Toro are going to build out Gandalf’s leaving the Dwarves to assist the White council’s initial moves against the Necromancer (Sauron) in Mirkwood in order to tie these movies in with the film LOTR trilogy. Cate Blanchett and What’s His Name….Frodo (lol) …are listed in the cast list on imdb. Their two characters decidedly did NOT appear in the Hobbit. They are also going to create a back story relationship between Bilbo and Frodo..which is explained in the first chapters of Fellowship…material that was also *seriously* glossed over in the LOTR trilogy. Also interesting is the appearance of Radghast the Brown…who, if I remember correctly, is only mentioned in the books, and is never a character of note at all. So, this is a prequel trilogy to the Film trilogy, and will probably draw on the appendices (which are included as endnote material in copies of Return of the King) and Tolkien’s other commentary/historical works IRT the novels as much as the initial films did. There’s plenty of content to draw on….just don’t expect straight reads (minus omitted material) of the novel. The only real changes in the films that really bothered me was the ommision of Tom Bombadil and the alteration of the relationship between Arwen and Aragorn, and how the sword of Elendil is introduced and used in the plot. It’s encouraging that Beorn is listed in IMDB. Both Beorn and Bombadil serve as crucial transitional characters in the original stories; taking the hero/reader from the familliar and comfortable and giving him the first glimpses of the wild reality beyond the borders of his limited wordview.
See any martial arts parallels here?