 |
| how can we turn a kids book into a massive, sprawling, epic trilogy? easy, with JRR Tolkien's rambling appendices! |
saw on yahoo news that peter jackson is expanding "the hobbit" into a third film (previously only supposed to be two films)
and as usual, these total whackos come out of the woodwork bashing the "greed of hollywood"... which is probably true. they will make a lot more money with three films... but i can't see how anyone in "the hobbit"s target audience is not super excited about this. i think the only half-fair criticize might be in the name of the movie... how much if this is treally from the book 'the hobbit' (no, i dont really care).
 |
| can't wait to watch this bastard "burgal" some dragon treasure |
aka, a tolkien-nerd's wet dream...
( and thats not even counting possible extended editions, and bonus footage).
i am pretty fired up its a trilogy (yeah, trilogies are overdone these days, but whatever. if its three good movies, its better than good movies)
I received a text from Ogre about this last night and almost dropped my phone (which would have been tragic b/c I just got it fixed...again...from a previous drop). This is freaking great news.
ReplyDeleteImagine how disappointed you would be if after the 2nd movie, a ton of "extras" were included in the dvds and Jackson stated he could have made 3 movies...dammit I'd really want that 3rd movie. And now we have it.
Of course this is coming from the guy who is still not happy the "Battle of Hobbiton" was excluded completely from "Return of the King"...that movie could have been 5 hours long and I would not have cared.
100% agree on the battle of the bywater. i'm sort of ticked jackson didn't include it in the extras.... even if it had no set up... just a 10 to 15 minute battle scene of hobbits killing each other... ironically, part of his replacement for that was one of the more awkward scenes in the entire extended dvd collection... wormtongue killing saruman on the top of isengard... with legolas firing an arrow from the ground to kill wormtongue... made total sense it was cut from the theatrical version... its was just weird..
ReplyDeletehave you read some of the asinine backlash? i think mostly its a positive reaction, with the same general thinking: jackson clearly knows how to handle middle earth movies, and clearly respects the hell out of tolkien. more movies means more awesome movies.... but there is amazingly some people against this (though i am guessing they were against it being split into two movies as well. these are either the non-tolkien fans, or the uber-nerdy-jerk 'we are superior to other nerds' tolkein nerds.)
we also have the added security that jackson post LOTR career has not exactly lit up hollywood. i thought king kong was awesome (though not a very rewatchable movie) , but other than that he's done a lot of forgettable work. so i think its safe to say he is in full-on "do what i did the last time" mode with 'the hobbit trilogy' (doesn't that just sound cooler than the hobbit parts 1 and 2?)
Oh man, I botched "Battle of Hobbiton"...it was definitely "Battle of Bywater".
ReplyDeleteSarumans death WAS really weird. Just came out of nowhere. Even worse, it completely eliminated the chances of the "Battle of Bywater" from ever happening. Totally sucked.
I have been an advocate of using material from the appendices for years, even before The Fellowship came out...I think if the The Hobbit Trilogy is a huge success (and it will be) they should go back again and do a 2 part movie on The Last Alliance.
I haven't read anything on "The Hobbit Trilogy" yet; my only question is how does it effect the release of the movies? I'm still going to be in the theater December 2012 watching some Hobbit right?