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:
So the Hobbit would have been a real failure if they stuck with two films??
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

boldog
Rohan

Jul 31 2013, 10:11am

Post #1 of 37 (1948 views)
Shortcut
So the Hobbit would have been a real failure if they stuck with two films?? Can't Post

If Jackson is filming all this new material, mainly bofa stuff, then obviously it wouldn't have been in the final cut for two original films. That means no thorin death, and no major climax! How in the world would they have ended the film without the bofa? in my honest opinion it would have been a very big disappointment for all Tolkien fans. Three is SOO much better than two.

"fingolfin looked up in grief to see what evil morgoth had done to maedhros"


jtarkey
Rohan


Jul 31 2013, 10:16am

Post #2 of 37 (948 views)
Shortcut
Quality is better than quantity. [In reply to] Can't Post

This is the whiskey talking, but this post is laughably ridiculous...unless you're being sarcastic.

You could omit nearly an hour of footage from AUJ alone, and come out with a film that is more faithful to the book than what we got.

I was actually thinking of adapting "The Giving Tree" to film, as a 80 film adaptation. One film for each year of the main characters life. All the info in that book couldn't possibly fit into a 10 minute cartoon after all...

"You're love of the halflings leaf has clearly slowed your mind"


MediaMalable
Bree


Jul 31 2013, 10:17am

Post #3 of 37 (961 views)
Shortcut
Not quite... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
If Jackson is filming all this new material, mainly bofa stuff, then obviously it wouldn't have been in the final cut for two original films. That means no thorin death, and no major climax! How in the world would they have ended the film without the bofa? in my honest opinion it would have been a very big disappointment for all Tolkien fans. Three is SOO much better than two.

While I agree that three films is better than two, these pick-ups just finished shooting and would have been done with enough time for editing even if there was only two films. I presume the BOFA would have been shot even if it was two films.


Faenoriel
Tol Eressea


Jul 31 2013, 10:35am

Post #4 of 37 (848 views)
Shortcut
There's no need to cram in everything you can possibly find [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd rather see a good, intense, well paced movie that lacks some details but makes for an enjoyable viewing experience. A scene that takes place in Middle-Earth and involved Middle-Earth characters isn't automatically good, or worth seeing in cinema. Also it doesn't automatically make the movie it's plastered on better.

Besides, that's what the EEs are for. AUJ's EE is 13 minutes longer than the original? FotR's EE was 30 minutes longer, TTT's EE was 45 mins longer, and RotK's EE was 50 mins longer. A good part of AUJ could have been put on the EE.

But every word you say today
Gets twisted 'round some other way
And they'll hurt you if they think you've lied


Hamfast of Gamwich
Rivendell


Jul 31 2013, 10:42am

Post #5 of 37 (841 views)
Shortcut
Pick ups [In reply to] Can't Post

There probably would have still been pick ups this year even if there we two films, so they'd have filmed the BOFA stuff for the second film this summer. There is no way that would have ever been omitted from even a two film edition.

If they had to make it two films, I imagine the following would have been severely cut from AUJ: Frodo and Bilbo, chip the glasses, Radagast, the Azanulbizar flashback and other Azog scenes, the stone giants. I made an edit of AUJ journey like this and it comes to just under 30 minutes shorter. That'd have made room for some Beorn and Mirkwood stuff (probably ending at the spiders).

"Durin's Heir you may be, but even with one eye you should see clearer. If this is victory, then our hands are too small to hold it. We will not enter Khazad-dum. You will not enter Khazad-dum. Beyond the shadow of the gate it waits for you still: Durin’s Bane. The world must change and some other power than ours must come before Durin’s Folk walk again in Moria.”


Noria
Rohan

Jul 31 2013, 12:05pm

Post #6 of 37 (789 views)
Shortcut
Boldog, I think you're mistaken. [In reply to] Can't Post

There is no way that the BOFA and Thorin's death would have been eliminated from the movie. Never mind the requirements of the story, PJ laps that sort of stuff up.

I said this on the EE thread but I thought that it was always the plan that the BOFA would be shot this summer, even before the three film split was announced. Or am I remembering wrong myself? I'm sure that weeks of additional filming were always planned.


Rohirrim Rider
Rivendell


Jul 31 2013, 12:56pm

Post #7 of 37 (764 views)
Shortcut
It's definitely the case that the two-film version would still have had these pick-ups [In reply to] Can't Post

At COmic-Con last year Richard Armitage was talking about the fact they hadn't filmed the BoFA yet (and would do so this year) and that was before he knew about the three film plan. So it was planned long before the split that there would be this block of filming.

There's absolutely no way they only decided to add in BoFA after they extended it.


dik-dik
Lorien


Jul 31 2013, 3:45pm

Post #8 of 37 (637 views)
Shortcut
I find it hard to believe there would have been no Battle of 5 Armies in a 2-movie version... [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems most likely to me that now that the makers have space for three movies instead of two, they decided to make the battle as memorable as possible by adding a lot of new material to the existing footage, or maybe reshooting the original version from scratch. Granted, I know next to nothing about how movies are made, but it still seems very probable to me.

@ "So the Hobbit would have been a real failure if they stuck with two films??" - I don't think so. There would be fans who would be disappointed if the Bo5A was short enough to cram everything into 2 movies, but then, I am guessing a number of additions and alternations from the book plotline would not make it into a 2-movie cut, either. That in turn would please some fans. I believe the movies would have been a success either way.

"A journalist once asked me what I would like my epitaph to be and I said I think I would like it to be 'He did very little harm'. And that's not easy. Most people seem to me to do a great deal of harm. If I could be remembered as having done very little, that would suit me." ~ Paul Eddington


Escapist
Gondor


Jul 31 2013, 4:19pm

Post #9 of 37 (643 views)
Shortcut
Failure is a funny thing. [In reply to] Can't Post

It depends so much some times on expectations. Some are still saying it is a failure now, actually.

So it all depends! If a person was just expecting an action ride flick without stopping to breath or character moments or comedy, then it would be "not a failure". If a person was expecting two hobbit films and a third not-hobbit bridge film, then it would be ideal (skip through TH as fast as possible and get to the really good stuff about the rangers and Aragorn etc. - or something like that probably (I'm guessing here)).

For the people who expected the humorous tone of the hobbit to come through, the dwarves to be differentiated by more than just hair-dos, the opening scenes at Bilbo's home to be so beautifully done, Mirkwood forest to come through from the book as more than 3-steps-Ohigh-it's-an-elf, and some treatment of the white council / necromancer plot explaining Gandalf's disappearance to happen in an intelligible way ... it probably would be less of a success (or more of a failure depending on your view of it). I'd say all of this stuff adds at least 100 minutes.

They probably had to decide between 3 - 2.5 hr films and 2 - 3.75 hr films (roughly) (or 2 - 3 hour films with major cuts like just cutting Radagast, the White Council, Mirkwood, or something else (at least 3 or 4 things probably) completely out of the theatrical version). I'd say that films over 3 hours really are just too long to sit through, really - so if that is what they ended up doing it probably would have been a real failure - maybe there would have been lawsuits LOL - maybe theaters would have another reason against showing it for very long.


Escapist
Gondor


Jul 31 2013, 4:20pm

Post #10 of 37 (609 views)
Shortcut
Of course we can only guess. // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Otaku-sempai
Half-elven


Jul 31 2013, 4:40pm

Post #11 of 37 (653 views)
Shortcut
If the studio had remained firm on filming two movies... [In reply to] Can't Post

The Battle of the Five Armies would have been part of the third block of filming. It and other scenes were only delayed to 2013 because of the change in plans.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring


kbdiggity
Rivendell

Jul 31 2013, 11:45pm

Post #12 of 37 (505 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
If Jackson is filming all this new material, mainly bofa stuff, then obviously it wouldn't have been in the final cut for two original films. That means no thorin death, and no major climax! How in the world would they have ended the film without the bofa? in my honest opinion it would have been a very big disappointment for all Tolkien fans. Three is SOO much better than two.



I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how things would have unfolded with two films.


There was always going to be a BoFA. Thorin was always going to die. They fact that PJ just finished pick-up shots for those scenes is not in any way an indication those sequences were going to be left out of a 2-film version.


DjU
Lorien

Jul 31 2013, 11:56pm

Post #13 of 37 (528 views)
Shortcut
Not true [In reply to] Can't Post

That's not true. There had always been the intention to come back and film for about 3-5 weeks this year and it was always BotFA focused this was mentioned long before the split to three films. They took the advantage of this filming period to expand the filming block to at least ten weeks to handle the extra shooting for films two and three and to handle the selection of scenes for films two and three scenes that were bumped from block three when they needed to do extra pickups for AUJ to alter the ending.


bborchar
Rohan


Aug 1 2013, 2:24am

Post #14 of 37 (475 views)
Shortcut
I'm fine with the length it is... [In reply to] Can't Post

I have never had the issues some have had concerning "too much" or "not enough", honestly. But I doubt that, even if PJ had made only two movies, that he would have left out Thorin's death or the BoFA. That would have seemed a bit daft to leave out your entire ending. Certainly things like details and unimportant characters would have been left out, but not entire end of the story.


The Doctor: ... No! No! Nonononononono, it's... not like that. That's not what I'm like!
Amy: Then what are you like?
The Doctor: I dunno, Gandalf. Like a space Gandalf. Or that little green guy in Star Wars...


zombywoof
The Shire

Aug 1 2013, 5:06am

Post #15 of 37 (467 views)
Shortcut
Impossibe to tell... [In reply to] Can't Post

The biggest fault with AUJ is in the fact that we only have 1/3rd of the film, so it's really impossible to tell it's true quality (as Lord Denethor might say). I think it would've made a perfectly good two-part story, but I have a feeling our opinion of this film will improve once we have the entire story (in film form) in front of us.

With kitchen prose and gutter rhymes ...

Host of Prog Rock Deep Cuts, airing Thursdays from 8-10 PM EST on progrock.com.


Otaku-sempai
Half-elven


Aug 1 2013, 2:24pm

Post #16 of 37 (388 views)
Shortcut
I'm not saying that there wouldn't have been reshoots in 2013... [In reply to] Can't Post

However, there were originally only three blocks of principle shooting scheduled. The final block might have finished in 2013, but I don't recoall if that was to have been the case. If you have specific documentation that shows that the intention was always to film the BoFA at the time of the final reshoots (once the decision was made to split the book into two parts) then I would like to see it.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring


Salmacis81
Grey Havens


Aug 1 2013, 2:47pm

Post #17 of 37 (387 views)
Shortcut
Agree with this statement... [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
I think it would've made a perfectly good two-part story


I do not at all get the line of thinking that says Jackson needed 3 films to tell this story. The Rankin/Bass cartoon ran for about 80 minutes, with the "Queer Lodgings" chapter being the only major omission. That is less than half the time it took for Peter Jackson to tell just a third of the story. If he would have relegated all of the anachronistic Appendices material (Azog, Thrain, the rise of Sauron, the decay of Mirkwood) to flashbacks/backstory dialogue instead of placing it into the timeline of the story itself, we could have EASILY gotten a faithful adaptation that still included the White Council's attack on DG, an expanded Bo5A, as well as a good amount of character development. We just wouldn't have gotten the (IMO) silly Azog revenge sub-plot, the High Fells fan-fiction, the Tauriel "It IS our fight!!" stuff, Alfrid, and Radagast would have either been omitted entirely or his role drastically reduced (which all would have been 100% fine by me).


(This post was edited by Salmacis81 on Aug 1 2013, 2:53pm)


Noria
Rohan

Aug 1 2013, 2:53pm

Post #18 of 37 (367 views)
Shortcut
Like DjU, I remember hearing that the BoFA was always intended to be shot this summer [In reply to] Can't Post

but I can't remember where I read it or heard it in an interview. Maybe it was when the three film split was announced, a year ago now?

It stuck in my mind because, while I expected there to be pickups this year, I was a bit surprised that such a huge sequence was to be filmed after the fact. I think I just figured that they had their reasons, maybe technical ones.

If ever I find any "documentation", I'll post a reference.


Otaku-sempai
Half-elven


Aug 1 2013, 3:02pm

Post #19 of 37 (367 views)
Shortcut
I can believe that plans might have changed by the time the third block of filming began... [In reply to] Can't Post

By the way, looking it up I am reminded that the third shooting block wrapped in July 2012. I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that by the time the third block began filming there were already unofficial plans to make a third movie. However, up to that point I would think that the Battle of the Five Armies was intended to be shot during the final block of filming. You don't plan such a massive shoot for pick-ups. As I previously posted, if there is documentation that proves otherwise then I would be happy to see it.

'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring

(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on Aug 1 2013, 3:04pm)


Noria
Rohan

Aug 1 2013, 3:04pm

Post #20 of 37 (372 views)
Shortcut
Two or three Hobbit films [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't think it was necessary for The Hobbit to be made into three films but for PJ it became necessary in order for him to tell the story he wanted to tell, in the way he wanted to tell it.

Personally I'm delighted so far.


Darkstone
Immortal


Aug 1 2013, 4:30pm

Post #21 of 37 (386 views)
Shortcut
Even worse, a one-film version! [In reply to] Can't Post

It would have ended right with the rescue by the eagles!!!

Just think, no Smaug!!!

******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”



Brandybuckled
Lorien


Aug 1 2013, 5:36pm

Post #22 of 37 (380 views)
Shortcut
Well, PJ never liked the part of the book after that... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
It would have ended right with the rescue by the eagles!!!

Just think, no Smaug!!!


Just like the Scouring of the Shire -- all that dragon stuff is not really integral to the story PJ et al wanted to tell. The whole story should end with the eagles.

NAArP: Not An Ardent purist since Arda was dented



Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 1 2013, 8:55pm

Post #23 of 37 (358 views)
Shortcut
If galadriel is so amazing and badass, pardon my french, [In reply to] Can't Post

that she can time travel or evaporate out of thin air in front of a Maiar....why didnt the council of elrond just aks her to disapparate to the eagles nesting grounds? Then , surely they wouldnt refuse her, not anyone who doenst appreciate a bit of feminine energyAngelic, and voila!

Take a flight to mt doom and drop the ring!

Yes they are not taxis...but for the lady of the galadhrim, it would be a pleasure right?

Vous commencez à m'ennuyer avec le port!!!

(This post was edited by Lusitano on Aug 1 2013, 8:56pm)


nuck
Rivendell


Aug 3 2013, 5:30pm

Post #24 of 37 (216 views)
Shortcut
He could have well used 3 films to tell the tail but... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To

Quote
I think it would've made a perfectly good two-part story


I do not at all get the line of thinking that says Jackson needed 3 films to tell this story. The Rankin/Bass cartoon ran for about 80 minutes, with the "Queer Lodgings" chapter being the only major omission. That is less than half the time it took for Peter Jackson to tell just a third of the story. If he would have relegated all of the anachronistic Appendices material (Azog, Thrain, the rise of Sauron, the decay of Mirkwood) to flashbacks/backstory dialogue instead of placing it into the timeline of the story itself, we could have EASILY gotten a faithful adaptation that still included the White Council's attack on DG, an expanded Bo5A, as well as a good amount of character development. We just wouldn't have gotten the (IMO) silly Azog revenge sub-plot, the High Fells fan-fiction, the Tauriel "It IS our fight!!" stuff, Alfrid, and Radagast would have either been omitted entirely or his role drastically reduced (which all would have been 100% fine by me).


As Dispicable Me 2 passed AUJ in the box office I tried to sort out what made a group of beloved characters with a titanic budget yield such a weak result. The choice PJ made to add all the "clutter" made this such an action heavy film the story got lost. Too much detail. FOTR succeeded so well in spite of having half the chase scenes/action/comic relief for that very reason. It created the world, eased the neophytes into the legendarium, and built up to a number of compelling scenes. The walking mountains, the absurd chase through Goblin town, the cartoonish portayal of Radagast all combined for sensory overlood and a confusing lack of a climax. If you look at what the common threads are in bad big budget effects films, it is action overkill. I know without a doubt the GDT would not have gone down this path. His movies aren't all great, but he understands film structure and the difference between stunning imagery and gratuitous action.

Keep it simple Peter. The next two in the series need to be fixed in the editing room, not by filming in more action footage. This isn't Raiders of the Lost Ark or Star Wars. There is a wonderful story to be told and it doesn't require a 3 hour CGI assault. I want Smaug, and BOFI, maybe a Dol Goldur scene and maybe the introduction to Beorn to jump out of the screen. The other 5 hours of footage can and should be story telling.


dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 3 2013, 6:57pm

Post #25 of 37 (201 views)
Shortcut
I wouldn't have thought that any film.... [In reply to] Can't Post

... which made what AUJ did at the box office could be said to have produced a 'weak result' no matter what other films brought in.

AUJ's was a very strong performance from a very good film which a lot of people liked, despite the baggage of negative comment and negative comparisons that preceded it. It seems obvious to me that a two-film version would have been horribly cramped.

I'm not sure that I understand your distinction between storytelling and CGI either. CGI is neither more nor less than a means of storytelling - a tool in the hands of a director without which a live action film like The Hobbit simply wouldn't be possible. You want Smaug and you want the Battle and you want Dol Guldur and you want Beorn - but what about giant spiders (I don't want them myself, I have to admit, but I know they are part of the story) - what about all the fantastic and wonderful things that are part of the story? What about the simple fact that the main characters need constant up or down scaling to appear the size they're meant to be? I begin to wonder if those of us who grew up before there was such a thing as CGI are the only ones who appreciate how amazing it is! Wink

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

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.