The Hobbit

[HolyHandgernade]

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

Disagree. If he had done the Hobbit first, he probably would not have stretched it ridiculously into a 3 movie epic...you'd have had one really good movie, and then 3 good movies for the LOTR series. He just went apeshit on the Hobbit because of the technology and the fact that nowadays, you have to have a 3 movie epic thing rather than just tell a good story.

Bleh.

At Comic Con, Jackson revealed the original pitch was a stand alone Hobbit, and if it did well, a two movie Lord of the Rings. It was actually the producers that told Jackson he has a three part movie in LotR, he originally was going with the two movies.

I could care less. I love the movies. I prefer the extended editions on disc. I can understand why some don't, but I love seeing the interpretation of the works come to life and I'm glad they decided to open up the appendices. Did the first movie drag in parts? Yes. But, not so much that it really irks me.

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by HolyHandgernade

At Comic Con, Jackson revealed the original pitch was a stand alone Hobbit, and if it did well, a two movie Lord of the Rings. It was actually the producers that told Jackson he has a three part movie in LotR, he originally was going with the two movies.

I could care less. I love the movies. I prefer the extended editions on disc. I can understand why some don't, but I love seeing the interpretation of the works come to life and I'm glad they decided to open up the appendices. Did the first movie drag in parts? Yes. But, not so much that it really irks me.

So yesterday was a movie day for me and the wife, and we watched the Hobbit (1 and 2). I've decided that it's fine that that they go so far afly from the book. The purpose of these movies is to give background to the LOTR as well as tell the Hobbit story. So, I guess I can get on board. It's not as fun as LOTR, but these types of things rarely are. See Star Wars Prequels.