Comments on: Poll: Should The Hobbit Have Three Movies?

By: Scooter

Scooter — Wed, 01 Aug 2012 02:25:17 +0000

Um…no. I was slightly annoyed by the second movie and all the additional characters from the later trilogy being shoehorned in, but I could get over it… But no way should there be a third. Is he re-editing the first one now, and hence the second, so that this thing still has something necessary to say? Or is he really just using material originally meant only for the second? Just no…

By: sarah

sarah — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:27:12 +0000

wow, well, i love the lord of the rings movies so it sounds ok to me, but i watched my kids cartoon version of the hobbit by warner brothers and it did it for me all in a hour long movie. all in all it sounds good to me!

By: Shawn Speakman

Shawn Speakman — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:42:46 +0000

Sadly, Peter Jackson is not doing what you both want. The third movie will be the end of THE HOBBIT. Apparently, Jackson thinks he has filmed so much additional material that he needs three movies to tell a short little book like THE HOBBIT. I call poppycock on that. If that’s the case, under that rationale, then FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING should have been three movies too. And TWO TOWERS should have been three movies. And RETURN OF THE KING should have been three movies.

My gut is telling me that AN UNEXPECTED JOURNEY will be incredible. But the next two movies will be as poorly paced and edited as RETURN OF THE KING, KING KONG, and LOVELY BONES.

By: jacob reding

jacob reding — Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:14:48 +0000

I would agree with two hobbit movies, but if he made a third movie it shoul not be on hobbits but the beging of middle earth(if he did that he might put in tom bombadil).

By: ShadowFax

ShadowFax — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 18:22:43 +0000

I’m really hoping there was a fundamental misunderstanding and Jackson just meant another “Middle Earth” movie.

We could still totally get Turin or Beran and Luthien movies. I’d love to watch those!