Neo Posted December 18, 2007 Posted December 18, 2007 Yeah I am very curious to see why there will be two films, don't quote me on this but here is some info from one of the members of their forum "Here's a recent rumor article which may help shed some light on the 2 movie concept. It seemingly gets some stuff wrong, but maybe gets some stuff right. http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2007/12/excl...bit-avatar.html The Hobbit WILL BE a two part film - but here is the new information - the second film will be influenced by the foundation of "The Silmarillion" and "The History of Middle-earth Series" (which is a 12 part series of books where JRR's son, Christopher Tolkien analyses JRR's old manuscripts; the manuscripts that ultimately led to become "The Silmarillion", "Lord of the Rings" and "N Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrewr05 Posted December 19, 2007 Posted December 19, 2007 Yeah I am very curious to see why there will be two films, don't quote me on this but here is some info from one of the members of their forum "Here's a recent rumor article which may help shed some light on the 2 movie concept. It seemingly gets some stuff wrong, but maybe gets some stuff right. http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2007/12/excl...bit-avatar.html The Hobbit WILL BE a two part film - but here is the new information - the second film will be influenced by the foundation of "The Silmarillion" and "The History of Middle-earth Series" (which is a 12 part series of books where JRR's son, Christopher Tolkien analyses JRR's old manuscripts; the manuscripts that ultimately led to become "The Silmarillion", "Lord of the Rings" and "N Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayMeow Posted December 19, 2007 Posted December 19, 2007 I think that's a very questionable move. The LOTR Trilogy was awesome, and I have high hopes for The Hobbit as well...so why potentially screw things up by extending the story further than it's supposed to go. It's good to use those other works for references and insight, but not to make an entirely new feature film. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeble Posted December 19, 2007 Posted December 19, 2007 I think that's a very questionable move. The LOTR Trilogy was awesome, and I have high hopes for The Hobbit as well...so why potentially screw things up by extending the story further than it's supposed to go. It's good to use those other works for references and insight, but not to make an entirely new feature film. Apart from the lack of Tom Bombadil and that mess with the Ents, I thought the Lord of the Rings movies were superb! At this point, it seems like they're just taking a good thing (LotR and The Hobbit) and exploiting them for money. They know that they'll make a fortune even if the movies are crap and receive terrible reviews. And as much as I like all of the lore surrounding Middle Earth, I don't think it will serve as a cohesive movie plot. Then there's the issue I have with sons who live in their fathers' literary shadows (Brian Herbert, Christopher Tolkien). I think they try too hard to out-do and differentiate themselves from their fathers, butchering great things in the process (the Dune and Middle Earth universes). I don't know... I'm eager to see the films, but it seems like the only place to go from here is down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now