The Hobbit is Now a Trilogy (a Rant)

Those who know me better know how much of a Tolkien geek I am. Seriously. LotR is one of my favourite books. You get the idea. So you bet I’m interested in the movie adaptation of the Hobbit, despite the fact I wasn’t crazy about LotR movies.

But hey, the music and visuals were perfect, so it’s worth checking out. Also, the first trailer seemed good, even though it was obvious they went for a darker atmosphere. They’re not going with the Hobbit novel – they’re trying to make a more epic story, more in line with LotR. I never though it was a good way to go, but I was willing to accept it.

But now it seems they (and by “they”, I’m not sure who I mean: Peter Jackson? The studio?) decided to change the plan for two movies and make trilogy instead. That’s right: suddenly, there’s another movie, supposedly made becuase “there was way too much filmed material”.

What. The. Fuck. ???

You don’t do something like this. You just don’t. You can’t just change the plan mid-way and suddenly decide to make three movies instead of two. First of all, you wrapped the movies a few weeks ago. Second of all, the premiere is in December – which means it’s too late to change the first movie now. So does that mean the second movie will be stretched to two? WTF? Even if they use the material available at the Appendix, there’s just not enough of events to justify three fucking movies.

This isn’t LotR. The structure of the story, the characters, the whole narrative – it’s so different. Even if you slap a darker atmosphere it’s still not epic enough to justify a trilogy. You can’t make people go through three movies to see a completed story – this small adventure story. What was Peter Jackson thinking? Is it about the money, is that it?

Finally, does this mean we have to wait till 2014 to see Smaug?

5 thoughts on “The Hobbit is Now a Trilogy (a Rant)

  1. Paula

    Yeah, it’s about the money. I really enjoyed the LOTR movies and I thought that Jackson did a great job with them, so it’s disappointing to hear this. I really didn’t see how they could stretch The Hobbit in to two movies let alone three!

  2. Mira Post author

    I was never crazy about LotR movies. Sure, they were visually stunning, but they failed to capture the spirit of the novel. Music, on the other hand, was perfect.

    That being said, I’m not worried about the Hobbit trilogy per se. What I hate is that it’s been announced now – only a few months before the first movie’s premiere. Now WTF is that? This is not how you do it. You can’t change the whole thing like this.

    The first movie will probably stay as it was, which means he has to stretch the other into two. It seems like he’s doing it because he has “lots filmed material”. WTF? It’s not how you do it. I don’t care if he has 100 hours of filmed material: if he doesn’t have TWO STORIES he can’t split it into two movies!

    That’s what I fear.

  3. Sigg3

    I respect Peter Jackson for taking LotR seriously. If you’ve seen some of the other adoptions… sheesh!

    The reason why the Hobbit’s so long has little to do with The Hobbit, but because Jackson (as he did with LotR) wants to tie it into the Unfinished tales (Silmarillion etc); which was Tolkien’s effort of love.

    This is, in my opinion, contrary to what the Hobbit was about (a child’s tale++). But as any literary work, it is open for interpretation, and whether we like it or not – we can’t say he’s not honoring the old man.

  4. Sigg3

    Btw, I only watch the “extended” or original editions of the LotR. That’s about 15 hours, but I don’t find it too long. Not at all.

  5. Mira Post author

    The thing is, he can’t use Silmarillion or the Unifinished Tales – they only have movie rights to LotR and the Hobbit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>