THE HOBBIT! 2 films, 2012

Roland_Deschain

Roland_Deschain

Transcending what is, with what could be.
Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
613
Age
37
Location
Currently working in China, born in the U S of A (
Gil
0
Thats right fans of the Rings. The hobbits is coming to the screen in the form of two films being shot back to back.

The Hobbit = The undexpected journey

The Hobbit = There and back again

Jackson wil direct, and it will be in 3D. The movies are being filmed in New Zealand just as the Lord of the rings were.

It will encoorperate new roles along with retaining the old ones.


The film will star Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins and Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. Several actors from Jackson's The Lord of the Rings film trilogy will reprise their roles, including Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, Ian Holm, Elijah Wood, and Orlando Bloom. Additionally, composer Howard Shore, who wrote the score for The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, has confirmed his role in both parts of the film project.


Is anyone else as excited as I am about this? I was a fan of this book and I look very much forward to the event.


Feel free to post more information to keep us all updated. They expect it to be realeased in the fourth quarter of 2012
 
Last edited:
i was disappointed when del toro cut all ties with it, but in the end its worked out for the better because really, peter jackson is the only one who can make it stand up to lord of the rings. i'm a bit iffy on there being a sequel, since it's planned to be a complete original story and i hope they don't take it too far, but they probably will and it'll be a blackspot on an otherwise perfect set of films.

from what i've seen so far of set photos, it all looks promising and martin freeman looks to be a brilliant bilbo. and benedict cumberbatch as smaug. :ohoho:
 
It has been many, many years since I've read this book. Also many years (only one this time) since I have seen the films for the books "sequels". The movies were very good to watch, but near impossible to watch together, which is why I've yet to watch the final one. :wacky:

I will definitely catch this movie in theaters. I just hope they can deliver on the tall bill they have now, as few people could imo. :hmmm:
 
I really liked the previous films as the book didn't catch my attention as much. My mom and I are really big fans of the movie so well both be so excited when it comes out. I'm glad most of the actors are taking up their roles again. It just makes me enjoy the series that much more =3
 
Does anyone know why The Hobbit movies were not created before LOTR? I've always wanted to know. I'm excited about the movies. The Hobbit is one of my favorite novels. I enjoyed it more than LOTR. I'm sure the movies will at least be decent.
 
Tom Badguy said:
Does anyone know why The Hobbit movies were not created before LOTR? I've always wanted to know. I'm excited about the movies. The Hobbit is one of my favorite novels. I enjoyed it more than LOTR. I'm sure the movies will at least be decent.
Click to expand...

I think it is generally because LOTR is more popular and has the "epic trilogy" going for it. More money to be made.

That being said, like you, I enjoyed "The Hobbit" more than I did LOTR, and am really looking forward to this. Plenty of action, but it always came off as more lighthearted to me, which was a good thing. I hope Peter Jackson can keep the good humour I remember from it.
 
why is it that all these movies are deciding to make books into two parts all of a sudden?

Just because harry potter does it doesn't mean everyone else has to do it also! Sheesh...

but back on topic. I wasn't a real fan of the LOTR movies, they just left a lot out (granted you do leave a lot out when your trying to make an 800+ page book into a 2 hour movie) but still seems like they change a lot to try and make the movies more "exciting."

That said I will wait to see how they split this one up, since I did really enjoy reading the hobbit.

Favorite part
Was when Gollum and Bilbo are doing the that riddle game. Hope they keep that in the movie.
 
Justice Ramza said:
why is it that all these movies are deciding to make books into two parts all of a sudden?

Just because harry potter does it doesn't mean everyone else has to do it also! Sheesh...

but back on topic. I wasn't a real fan of the LOTR movies, they just left a lot out (granted you do leave a lot out when your trying to make an 800+ page book into a 2 hour movie) but still seems like they change a lot to try and make the movies more "exciting."

That said I will wait to see how they split this one up, since I did really enjoy reading the hobbit.

Favorite part
Was when Gollum and Bilbo are doing the that riddle game. Hope they keep that in the movie.
Click to expand...



Well the Hobbit is a very big book. If there is anything that they learned from making the lord of the rings, its that your can't have everything.

Hell even the LOTD director cut films were up too two hours longer.

I think splitting up the film is a good way to mantain all of the story and detail. Same as the last Harry Potter
 
The Dоctor;944831 said:
the hobbit part 2 is tipped to be a completely original story, only part 1 will focus on the book
Click to expand...


Hm... I have mixed feelings about this honestly.

On one hand I love the world being brought to the screen.

On the other I love these films also because I love Tolkien. I hope they do not deviate away from the man's work and make it dissapointing.
 
The Dоctor;944831 said:
the hobbit part 2 is tipped to be a completely original story, only part 1 will focus on the book
Click to expand...

Do you have the link to this article or website? I'd really like to know more about this.
 
The Dоctor;944831 said:
the hobbit part 2 is tipped to be a completely original story, only part 1 will focus on the book
Click to expand...

Are you sure? The book is long enough to be a two parted movie...

I quite liked the LOTR movies and should probably read the books (as I own them). I think I'll go see this.
 
I am so freaking excited.....LOTR has always been my favorite movie it is so awesome....I can't believe its coming back!!
 
an interesting respone from peter jackson on the poor reception the 10 minute screening the hobbit received a few days ago:

One of the biggest — and unhappiest — surprises to come out of CinemaCon this past week was the underwhelming reception to the ten minutes of The Hobbit footage screened at the event. The film is notable for having been shot at a higher rate of 48 frames per second instead of the usual 24, and though there’s no denying that the rate increase makes a noticeable difference, not all attendees were convinced it was a good one. Our own Peter Sciretta likened it to “a made for television BBC movie,” noting that “It looked uncompromisingly real — so much so that it looked fake.”

But director Peter Jackson doesn’t seem too concerned about the criticism just now. In his view, moviegoers will come to accept 48 fps — they just need to get used to it first. Read his comments after the jump.

In a conversation with THR, Jackson acknowledged that 48 fps “does take you a while to get used to.” In fact, he wonders if viewers might have responded better had they seen more of the 48 fps footage. “Ten minutes is sort of marginal, it probably needed a little bit more,” he said. “Another thing that I think is a factor is it’s different to look at a bunch of clips and some were fast-cutting, montage-style clips. This is different experience than watching a character and story unfold.”

Speaking separately with EW, he pointed out that some of the critics seemed less bothered by the higher frame rate in a scene between Gollum and Bilbo, which was shown later in the presentation. “That was the same 48 frames the rest of the reel was. I just wonder if it they were getting into the dialogue, the characters and the story. That’s what happens in the movie. You settle into it.” He insists that people will adjust in time. “It’s literally a new experience, but you know, that doesn’t last the entire experience of the film — not by any stretch, [just] 10 minutes or so.”

In his personal experience, he said, “You get used to it reasonably quickly.” “We have obviously seen cuts of our movie at 48 and in a relatively short amount of time you have forgotten (the frame rate change). It is a more immersive and in 3D a gentler way to see the film.” Indeed, he told THR, when he sees 24 fps footage now, “I’m very aware of the strobing, the flicker and the artifacts.”

Still, the jarring difference between 24 fps and 48 fps has Jackson planning to release the trailer at the lower, more traditional rate. “”I personally wouldn’t advocate a 48-frame trailer because the 48 frames is something you should experience with the entire film. A 2 1/2 minute trailer isn’t enough time to adjust to the immersive quality.” He asked that audiences give the new technology a real shot before rushing to judgment. ”There can only ever be a real reaction, a truthful reaction, when people actually have a chance to see a complete narrative on a particular film.”

And if some moviegoers, after sitting through three hours of a 48 fps film, decide they still don’t care for it? “I can’t say anything,” he conceded. ”Just like I can’t say anything to someone who doesn’t like fish. You can’t explain why fish tastes great and why they should enjoy it.” The studio, of course, is prepared to cater to audiences on both sides. The Hobbit: The Unexpected Journey will hit theaters this December in some six different formats: 2D, 3D, and IMAX 3D, each in 24 fps or 48 fps.

However, Jackson believes that the change in rate will eventually prove to be a positive step in film technology. “A lot of the critical response I was reading was people saying it’s different. Well, yes, it certainly is,” he told THR. “But I think, ultimately, it is different in a positive way, especially for 3D, especially for epic films and films that are trying to immerse the viewer in the experience of a story.” He was even blunter while speaking to EW: “Nobody is going to stop. [...] This technology is going to keep evolving.”
Click to expand...

i'm in full support for 48fps. in time, when it becomes a more standard format we'll definitely see the benefit of it. with hd becoming such a standard thing in cinema now, we need 48 frames to keep up with it. and if peter jackson is in support of it, you can bet your mortgage that it's probably a good thing.
 
I don't mind the FPS, and I think keeping up with technology is a good thing, especially in film making. If the movie is good, I don't care for that. If the acting, story, characters and scenery is as amazing as they were in The Lord of the Rings, I will watch. Though definitely not in 3D, I don't like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top