The Hobbit films, previously to be directed by Guillermo del Toro and now to be directed by Peter Jackson again.

I never did like the posters for the LOTR movies, I admit, so it's nice to see that tradition carried on here. Just gimme a new trailer!

Guess the spiders will be the climactic sequence.

Yeah, looks like they're arranging the division between the two movies for Maximum Cumberbatching, which is really your only winning strategy these days.

LOL at invisible Bilbo

http://geek-news.mtv.com/2012/07/10/exclusive-the-hobbit-figures/

Ice Ice Bilbo

Though now I wonder if they're going to do some bullshit thing where he's transparent in the movie or something (like the Rankin-Bass version), even though the LOTR movies went a full-on invisible route.

It's probably just another toy to sell. IIRC they sold invisible Frodo figures as well.

Makes sense.

Also, call me amused:

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/07/08/58398-benedict-cumberbatch-visits-the-zoo-for-inspiration/

Some Jacksony stuff from his FB:

Looking forward to giving fans a glimpse of the Hobbit, answer questions and share a few stories about our return to Middle-earth.

For those of you who won't be attending Comic Con, we have several things in the pipeline to share with you over the next few weeks. Our new video will be ready very soon - in fact our video blog crew has already left for Comic Con, and we'll be capturing a behind the scenes look at our experiences there. We're talking about possibly including a few clips from our Hobbit reel in the blog.

We are also working on our next trailer, which you should expect to see sometime in September.

Lastly, let me give you more detail about my decision to screen the Hobbit Reel at Comic Con in 2-D and 24 fps. My LA Times quotes are brief and the topic deserves a little more detail than that. We have conducted many private screenings of Hobbit footage in the US and several international territories, running the same reel twice - once at 24fps, and secondly at 48fps. This has allowed distributors and exhibitors direct comparison of the two formats. The response has been universally strong for the higher frame rate of 48fps.

When we screened only the 48fps reel at CinemaCon a few months ago, some bloggers focussed stories, not on the content, but on their negative reaction to 10 mins of high frame rate footage. This reaction convinced me that the only fair way to experience 48fps, is to sit down and watch a complete feature length movie, with a narrative, not quick trailer cuts. Do I want the ComicCon Hobbit stories to be all about 48 fps? Of course I don't. I want to present footage from a movie we're all proud of, with terrific performances and I'm looking forward to seeing what you think.

I've always been happy to bet on myself, and for me the experience of watching the full Hobbit movie in 3-D and 48 fps is something really special. Fully immersive, like stepping into Middle-earth. The screen disappears, and you enter the world of the movie in a vivid way. I love it.

The subject of high frame rates has serious film industry implications, and it's important that it's judged in the fairest possible context. I'm afraid that a presentation of a short clip reel in a huge convention center is simply not the way to do it. I'm sorry if people attending Comic Con were hoping to see a glimpse of 48 fps, but let me say that in December, if you choose to see the Hobbit in a great cinema, projecting the higher frame rate, you will be in the best place to make up your own mind. And you will have the choice - there will be plenty of cinemas screening both versions.

Here's my prediction: this time next year, there will be several movies shooting at 48 fps. As an industry, we have to push the current technology to provide more spectacular and immersive experience in the cinema, on a nice huge screen.

fuck you and your 48fps hire a fucking writer

uh not you, ned

take it to the beef thread darragh jeez :)

i'm p sure peejay doesnt do beef anymore

lol

Astounding!

More PJ:

Q: Even as well as you know Tolkien, I'm sure the process of making these two new films has presented you with new insights and connections with the material. What surprises have you found in Middle-earth or in the work of the bookshelf wizard?

A: As slight as people think the "Hobbit" novel is, compared to the "Lord of the Rings" books, we have been surprised at how rich the world is, and how many interesting themes and characters there are to explore. We are also using extensive parts of the appendixes, which were published at the end of "Return of the King." This is not just "The Hobbit" - it's "The Hobbit" set in a much greater context of events taking place throughout Middle-earth during this period. The material is so rich. In fact, only this last week or two, we've been talking to the studio about allowing us to shoot some additional material next year, to fully complete the story.

Bits of the trailer hinted at that use of the extra appendices material, like the whispered, intense exchange between Thorin and Gandalf.

These comments seem to be being spun into a "Is The Hobbit now going to be three films, not two" story

http://www.hitfix.com/news/peter-jackson-considering-hobbit-2-film-split-watch

Or maybe they're separate comments, actually.

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/07/30/59780-peter-jackson-confirms-third-film/

Eye-rolling big time here.

Why not four films

This seemed like a foregone conclusion to me the very second the idea was first floated.

so there's gonna be a lot of slow motion in these movies I guess

It is only at the end of a shoot that you finally get the chance to sit down and have a look at the film you have made. Recently Fran, Phil and I did just this when we watched for the first time an early cut of the first movie - and a large chunk of the second. We were really pleased with the way the story was coming together, in particular, the strength of the characters and the cast who have brought them to life. All of which gave rise to a simple question: do we take this chance to tell more of the tale? And the answer from our perspective as the filmmakers, and as fans, was an unreserved ‘yes.'

We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance. The richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, allows us to tell the full story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and the part he played in the sometimes dangerous, but at all times exciting, history of Middle-earth.

So, without further ado and on behalf of New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Wingnut Films, and the entire cast and crew of “The Hobbit” films, I’d like to announce that two films will become three.

It has been an unexpected journey indeed, and in the words of Professor Tolkien himself, "a tale that grew in the telling."

Cheers,

Peter J

aloha on the steel guitar

Christ. Each one three hours long presumably.

Ok, I'm checking this thread again in 2018 when the Extended Edition Blu-Ray box set of The Hobbit + LOTR is released. Bye!

ugh.

and here I was thinking that stretching this into two films was a bad idea...

I'm sure none of the New Line or Warners execs were exactly trying to talk Jackson out of stretching things out more.

xpost -- It is a bad idea. This is worse.

See the part of me that (yes) loves the appendices, the minutiae and everything extended and sprawling about what Tolkien did perversely enjoys this huge expense to film what was essentially his retconning of his own work.

But dramatically this really could have been been a great self-contained film, a glorious if long one-off. Two films, a stretch. Three films telling this story? I just don't even.

Warners needs to milk those cashcows (esp since there is never ever going to be another Batman film).

I sincerely hope this turns out to be three 70-minute flicks.

(esp since there is never ever going to be another Batman film).

Yeah I'm pretty certain there will be, albeit quite possibly not another decent one.

As somebody who loves Peter Jackson's early movies, it's a bummer that it looks like his work is going to be centered on the Hobbit/Tolkien for the forseeable future. Not that I didn't like the first trilogy of movies, but I would like for him to do something different.

He's rumoured to be adapting Phillip Reeve's excellent Mortal Engines books at some point, which I would be more excited to see than more Middle Earth twaddle at this point.

http://mortalengines.wikia.com/wiki/Mortal_Engines_%28film%29

I think they're already kicking around the idea of another Batman flick now with it coming out in 5 years or so under a different director

no wonder Del Toro ran a mile

This io9 photo seems apt.

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17uftph5epp2cjpg/original.jpg

'DEAL WITH IT'

http://io9.com/5930350/some-totally-real-reasons-why-the-hobbit-had-to-be-a-trilogy

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - December 14, 2012
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug - December 13, 2013
The Hobbit: There and Back Again - July 18, 2014

http://www.movies.com/movie-news/the-hobbit-third-film/8949

sigh, fine.

The Hobbit: Hobbity and Hobbiter - May 28, 2015

hobbit, hobbit, for the love of god please hobbit at once

The Silmarillion VIII: the Reckoning - December 14, 2024

with charles bronson

The Hobbit III: There and Back, Again!

The Ho4bit

Complaining about how it's "stretched" begs the question. With two movies, it always seemed to me that stuff would still have to be compressed or left out. Plus you know they'll expand the battle o' five armies, which was just a short summary in the book.

Oh yay cause the battle scenes were so the best thing in LOTR :/