Sooooo–I thought when all this talk of a possible third Hobbit film came up at Comic-Con, it was simply the media deciding to run rife with speculation. Media is like that, yes it is, precioussssss.
I was a bit skeptical early on about making The Hobbit, a rather slender children’s book, into two films, to be honest.
Now, of course, I know flashbacks are included not seen in the book, and characters and events from LOTR and its appendices have been incorporated into the storyline, fleshing it out satisfactorily enough for two films. Plus we’ve got to have those singing dwarf sequences!!) And if it gave me more of Richard Armitage as the world’s sexiest dwarf on the big screen, well–bring it on.
However, having read this detailed article provided byour trusty friends at TheOneRingNet, I see there are several possible options for Sir Peter, and a lot of it revolves around the 100 or so pages of appendices at the end of the LOTR trilogy.
Here’s an excerpt from that article discussing why Warner Brothers may very well be contemplating giving the green light to a third film:
It says shooting would be for about two months next summer (North America’s summer presumably). It seems Jackson thought about it, mentioned it to the studio, floated the idea at Comic-Con and is energized and now wants to do it, or at least that is how I read it.
I trust that Hollywood Reporter story for the best accuracy and fans who want to read it carefully might find further clues.
Reports in New Zealand are that he was at the top of his game during “The Hobbit,” shoot. It seemingly went well and actors seem happy despite the length of the shoot. The team seems creative and energized and ready to keep telling the story of Middle-earth. But, shooting movies, especially big ones with a big crew and big logistical needs costs big money. So WB is into two films for something like $500 million. For another, say $100 million or less, they now have three films to collect box office from, three different home video sales items to ring up. Instead of grossing $2 billion for a $500 million investment, they get to dream of $3 billion for $600 million. Seems like smart finances. It also fills a hole in the 2014 schedule, which will please stock holders and best of all, the desire to make the film didn’t come from marketing or merchandising, it came from the creative team involved. It also seems the only time to do this is now and not try to start the whole thing up from scratch in two years. The right people, the big movie-making machine that helps Jackson realize his vision, is in place.
There seems to be no doubt that Sir Peter is a director with some major clout. And I think we’d all agree he’s a creative genius.
Of course, the big question for me is: would there be any Thorin in a third film? I hope I am not providing a spoiler here when I point out that Thorin does not *sob* survive the original book.
It sounds from the article as if we might get more Lee Pace as Thranduil, which would be a big plus for me, but I have to confess it’s Mr. A that is my primary interest. After all, what’s the name of this blog?
If you haven’t read the entire theonering.net article, I suggest you do so and then share your thoughts on the subject. Do you think a third film is a good idea/bad idea and why? And would you still feel an urgent need to see the third film sans Thorin?
- New Images From The Hobbit & Will It Be A Trilogy? (emileeid.com)
- ‘The Hobbit’ Going For A Trilogy? Say It Isn’t So! (m.deadline.com)
- “The Hobbit” filmmakers, Warner Bros. looking to make 3rd movie (panarmenian.net)