The Hobbit, now a trilogy

[rah]

Director Peter Jackson is turning his highly-anticipated The Hobbit movies into a trilogy.

The Lord of the Rings filmmaker wrapped an epic 266-day shoot in New Zealand in early July and the footage will be split into two blockbusters, titled The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey and The Hobbit There And Back Again.

In a Twitter.com post on Monday, McKellen simply wrote, "Two HOBBIT films will become THREE".
However, rumours recently surfaced online suggesting Jackson had been approached by Warner Bros.
studio bosses to expand the franchise and now both Sir Ian McKellen, who plays wizard Gandalf in the film series, and Jackson have confirmed the news.

In a Twitter.com post on Monday, McKellen simply wrote, "Two HOBBIT films will become THREE".

Greed. While I'm a fan, I'm not sure about this. Does it really take three movies to do one book? Has any book every required 3 movies?

[Aeson]

This will give them plenty of time to explore how the dwarves go about getting drunk and rattling plates. Something Tolkien was extremely deficient in explaining ... also we'll get to experience the barrel ride in real time first person perspective

[Lorizael]

Yeah. Saw this. If true, ridiculous.

Movie One: 634 dwarfs and Thorin Oakenshield show up at Bilbo's door one by one and introduce themselves in a manner that expresses each one's personality trait.

Movie Two: New female character Evangeline Lilly saves Bilbo from evil trolls who want to eat him.

Movie Three: Gollum delivers a two-hour, Oscar-worthy dialogue about his preciousssss and mistymountainsmirkwoodsmaugbattleoffivearmies.

[Hauldren Collider]

This is ridiculous. From what I remember (it's been many years), The Hobbit is a book that takes an afternoon to read, at best.

[Lorizael]

Has any book every required 3 movies?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged:_Part_I

[Elok]

Bull****, Lori. That book didn't even require one movie.

[rah]

If part II does as bad or worse than part I, I don't think we'll ever see a part III.

Personally I'll see none of these

[Lorizael]

Bull****, Lori. That book didn't even require one movie.

Audiences and critics would seem to agree with you. John Aglialoro and Fox News do not.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Is there really enough story to make Part II of the III even close to interesting?

[Elok]

Is there really enough story to make Part II of the III even close to interesting?

In the original book? No. But they also didn't have an elf warrior from Lost.

[ColdWizard]

In the article I read, Jackson stated he was given access to a couple hundred pages of unpublished material and that if he didn't use it now, it may never be seen.

[H Tower]

In the article I read, Jackson stated he was given access to a couple hundred pages of unpublished material and that if he didn't use it now, it may never be seen.

Unpublished material can be unpublished for a reason. Because it sucks.

[Felch]

I've seen the words "unpublished appendices" a lot. It's likely just the published appendices, and the reporters are lazy and ignorant.

[Lorizael]

Unpublished material can be unpublished for a reason. Because it sucks.

How dare you suggest anything Tolkien could suck! Why, I would read his toilet paper!

[ColdWizard]

How dare you suggest anything Tolkien could suck! Why, I would read his toilet paper!

I heard that was published as part of the Similarion.