Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
About movie duration

Ffnir
Rohan

Sep 25 2012, 3:38pm

Post #1 of 23 (1374 views)
Shortcut
About movie duration Can't Post

Hello, I've been reading in this forum for some time and I noticed that some members fear AUJ to be only 2h long, because the ending happens sooner in the story than what was originally planned.

When the plan was to make only two hobbit movies, AUJ was probably supposed to be 3h long, and because a third of the story is passing to TDoS, it feels kind of intuitive to suppose that a third of the duration has to be deducted too.
But, if the filmmakers felt that they had too much material for two movies, it is probable that they decided to change the proportional ratio between book and movie, and a page of the book will imply more movie time in a trilogy than in a duology.

Jackson is not known for his hesitation to make very long movies. Since the structure in the hobbit works a lot more in my opinion for two movies than for three, it is probable that he tried the longest possible movies with this structure, something like 200min each wich was the duration of the theatrical version of TRoK, and still felt like he couldn't use all his material. He accepted to cut off at least 20min of TRoK in order to make it possible to be shown in theaters, so he probably wouldn't split the Hobbit in three for less than 40min (20 for AUJ an 20 for TaBA) of extra material that he really would like to show. And he decided to shoot extra scenes this years, for a couple of months, so he will probably add at least 40min other minutes of film material.

Finally it seems reasonable to suppose that the three movies together will have a duration of at least 200+200+40+40 = 480min = 2h30 each. At least ! So there's still hope for a three hour movie. I know it's not enough to have any certitude, and maybe it doesn't even work, but it's a bit reassuring.

I'm sorry if i'm not very clear, like a lot of people in this forum, english is not my native language.

By the way, did you know that TLotR was at a time only suppose to be addapted in only two movies, and that a this time Jackson was planning to end the first movie at Hamon Hen, on an encounter between frodo and the witch king ? I read it on a description in John Howe's website, when i was trying to have a glimpse of what Smaug could look like. With all the thoughts going on how to split the hobbit, it's kind of a funny thing to imagine !


Fardragon
Rohan

Sep 25 2012, 3:49pm

Post #2 of 23 (638 views)
Shortcut
As I keep pointing out [In reply to] Can't Post

3D movies can cause eye strain. So WB aren't going to allow a very long 3D movie to go out.

I'm sure PJ will make it as long as his paymasters allow him to.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


DanielLB
Immortal


Sep 25 2012, 3:55pm

Post #3 of 23 (563 views)
Shortcut
Avatar was close to 3 hours [In reply to] Can't Post

And I didn't get eye strain. The glasses do dig into my ears though.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Sep 25 2012, 4:16pm

Post #4 of 23 (568 views)
Shortcut
I'm not convinced about the running time [In reply to] Can't Post

If PJ thinks that he has enough material to make three films, I am expecting three, three-hour films. PJ may have changed in the last decade but he is not George Lucas! I think its been done with the best intentions.

Also, the film is in post-production now, so even an official announcement by PJ stating the running time could not be entirely accurate. I'll believe it if I see it when I book tickets, or see an official description including running time. But not until then.

"Radagast is, of course, a worthy wizard, a master of shapes and changes of hue, and he has much lore of herbs and beasts, and birds are especially his friends."-Gandalf, The Lord of the Rings.


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Sep 25 2012, 4:34pm

Post #5 of 23 (478 views)
Shortcut
Would make the decision to go 3D a pretty bad one NT [In reply to] Can't Post

 


imin
Valinor


Sep 25 2012, 4:48pm

Post #6 of 23 (450 views)
Shortcut
Not in WB's mind [In reply to] Can't Post

They are getting the extra money from higher 3D ticket prices compared to 2D alone, they are also able to show more screenings of the film each day - more money and get to release one more film - way more money for this one.

So overall way more money - this is assuming people like the movies.

The average length of a film the past few decades has remained surprisingly stable at around 126-128 mins.

Saying all that i do think they will be 2 hours and something rather than 2 hours on the dot.


stoutfiles
Rohan

Sep 25 2012, 4:52pm

Post #7 of 23 (453 views)
Shortcut
Were people who saw Avatar complaing about eye strain? [In reply to] Can't Post

It's pretty obvious it's about money. More screenings for AUJ, and a whole other film to show means a boatload of extra money for WB.


Ffnir
Rohan

Sep 25 2012, 4:57pm

Post #8 of 23 (463 views)
Shortcut
I think 48fps makes 3d easier for the eye [In reply to] Can't Post

That was one of the arguments in favor of 48fps. I think WB have a lot of faith in the way PJ make his movies, they don't restrain him a lot and they give him an enormous amount of time and money. In fact, he knows better than them how to make a success movie.


Ffnir
Rohan

Sep 25 2012, 5:11pm

Post #9 of 23 (408 views)
Shortcut
It's not always all about money ! [In reply to] Can't Post

If you want to make easy money, you make something like Transformers.
When you give 500$ dollar for making the prequel of world acclaimed and oscars winning triolgy, you want to make money AND a memorable loved and awarded movie. I think even the most cynical producer prefer to produce good succesful movies than soulless money trap, and not all producers are cynical sharks.


imin
Valinor


Sep 25 2012, 5:23pm

Post #10 of 23 (413 views)
Shortcut
I dont think PJ is doing it for money [In reply to] Can't Post

i think he is doing it because he sees this as the best way possible to tell the story.

I do think WB are different in that they want to make as much money from their investment as possible. It just so happens that the way they do that and PJ feels he can tell the best story is the same way.

I am not cynical of the crew or anyone involved in the actual making of the film, but i am cynical of WB (is it cynical though, when its there job to make the most amount of money possible?)


Solicitr
Lorien

Sep 25 2012, 6:08pm

Post #11 of 23 (365 views)
Shortcut
Sadly, I agree with you. [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I dont think PJ is doing it for money. i think he is doing it because he sees this as the best way possible to tell the story.



DanielLB
Immortal


Sep 25 2012, 6:10pm

Post #12 of 23 (364 views)
Shortcut
Agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

What could PJ possibly do with more money?! He must have a bucket load!

Perhaps a Silmarillion film on the horizon? Tongue

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



imin
Valinor


Sep 25 2012, 6:41pm

Post #13 of 23 (352 views)
Shortcut
He is rich alright! [In reply to] Can't Post

He was estimated to have a net worth of NZ$450million (April 2009) no idea what it is now, but obviously will go up by a substantial amount when the hobbit trilogy is released and dvd/blu-ray sales have come in.

NZ$450 million is around basically 225 million pounds. Not bad really! I would be happy with just a tenth of that Tongue


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Sep 25 2012, 7:23pm

Post #14 of 23 (337 views)
Shortcut
I would add one factor to the mix. [In reply to] Can't Post

Pete loves new technology. Weta is just a part of his search for ways to enhance movie making. George Lucas was the same way but George (along with his story) got lost in his special effects and computer generated imagery. Spielberg, with whom PJ has recently been collaborating, has better control of his use of these advanced tech methods. Cameron is the Devil on Peter's other shoulder he wants to push the limits and believes that he is absolutely right in pushing 3-D and high frame rates. The Hobbit is a grand experiment. It will sail or fail on its own merits. Fifty years from now it might be viewed as the Wizard of OZ of the first half of the 21st Century.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Sep 25 2012, 7:29pm

Post #15 of 23 (316 views)
Shortcut
Yes many people who saw Avatar complained about eye strain [In reply to] Can't Post

and nausea. Some even vomited. But most who might have problems went to 2-D showings.

Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
Photobucket



stoutfiles
Rohan

Sep 25 2012, 7:40pm

Post #16 of 23 (317 views)
Shortcut
I'm pretty sure PJ is doing it for money as well [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't remember him volunteering to work for free. Last I checked he made a small fortune on LOTR, and will likely do the same here.

Extending the movies gives him more time to tell more stories, but I highly doubt that time will extend the telling of The Hobbit, just the side stories he's embellishing. We'll see though, and I'll be interested to hear the final run time. If it truly is just over 2 hours, that does not bode well for extra storytelling.


Sinister71
Tol Eressea


Sep 25 2012, 11:30pm

Post #17 of 23 (270 views)
Shortcut
but in all fairness [In reply to] Can't Post

Did George Lucas expect to make 3 bad films? I don't think he did. He had his best intentions there too and look where that got him.


stoutfiles
Rohan

Sep 26 2012, 12:08am

Post #18 of 23 (254 views)
Shortcut
The worst part about that [In reply to] Can't Post

...is Lucas thinks he made three very good films. In the "Behind the Scenes" of TPM, you can start to see the denial kick in when his staff is all watching the chaotic finale disappointingly. Lucas is initially upset but then declares himself a visionary and writes it off.


Solicitr
Lorien

Sep 26 2012, 1:27am

Post #19 of 23 (205 views)
Shortcut
I saw Avatar in 2-D [In reply to] Can't Post

and my reaction was certainly nausea.


Fardragon
Rohan

Sep 26 2012, 6:23am

Post #20 of 23 (163 views)
Shortcut
Not everyone does [In reply to] Can't Post

But there are enough people who do to cause a headache for film makers.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


DanielLB
Immortal


Sep 26 2012, 7:11am

Post #21 of 23 (147 views)
Shortcut
Hence the 2D version will be available at the same time ;-) / [In reply to] Can't Post

 

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



DanielLB
Immortal


Sep 26 2012, 7:12am

Post #22 of 23 (186 views)
Shortcut
He should've realised when editing it together! / [In reply to] Can't Post

 

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Radagast-Aiwendil
Gondor


Sep 26 2012, 4:16pm

Post #23 of 23 (159 views)
Shortcut
I agree entirely with what you're saying, but I just don't think PJ will let us down [In reply to] Can't Post

Or at least, I doubt he'll let me down. In my opinion, the footage that we have seen so far in the vlogs and trailers has been fantastic. Of course, that's no proof that the rest of the film will be good, but it's a promising start.

Most importantly the footage shown has been (mostly) true to the book and has kept various things that I did not expect to see (e.g. Elrond naming Glamdring). Obviously there is a lot of stuff which is non canon (essentially all the White Council/Dol Guldur plot is non-canon, even though it happened), but almost everything that PJ has added to the film thus far has been entirely justifiable in my eyes.

I don't mind three two-hour films, so long as they are very good!

"Radagast is, of course, a worthy wizard, a master of shapes and changes of hue, and he has much lore of herbs and beasts, and birds are especially his friends."-Gandalf, The Lord of the Rings.

 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.