The Hobbit

[Dinner]

I'm surprised this hasn't hit here yet. Two movies coming, one in 2010 and 2011. Peter Jackson will apparently be involved (producing?), but not to direct. Apparently, they resolved the litigation and came to some sort of an agreement.

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2007/12 ... %e2%80%9d/

 

[samXcor3]

Two?? Why Two?

 

[Dinner]

The story is too long for one movie so they split it into two.

 

[TortillaChip520]

the hobbit WAS one long ass book.

 

[Ekiushi]

I haven't read it, but I DO have the book... It didn't look that long to me. Unless it had the small font, which may explain why I never read it.

 

[Eagles]

The Hobbit didn't seem any longer then any of the other Lord of the Rings books. It was a great book, I'll be looking forward to the movie!

 

[Ekiushi]

In that case, I don't have to read the book! I can wait of the movie! Hurrah!

 

[The L.S]

Why 2 movies..? The Hobbit was waay shorter then LotR. :S

I think this movie will have a distinctly different feel then LotR. Yes, PJ is producing, but he's not directing.

And Ekiushi- READ the BOOK. You must! And if you didnt read LotR, then read that too!

 

[Ekiushi]

I read the Fellowship of the Ring, and most of Two Towers (not entirely sure why I stopped) and completely failed on Return of the King. I think I realised the movie was coming out and gave up killing my eyes on the small font.

Oh, and don't be fooled by my Lord of the Ring 'Location'. I had no idea what it was actually called (although I did notice it when I listened carefully to Gandalf...or Elrond) and had to Wiki it. 'Sauron's Tower Thingy' didn't have the same appeal.

 

[Dinner]

Why 2 movies..? The Hobbit was waay shorter then LotR

Yeah but they cut out alot of stuff from the LOTR books. With two films, there's no reason to omit anything from the Hobbit.