Admittedly I felt a warm glow the first time I saw a trailer for The Hobbit, due in theaters this December. It was as though we were among old friends again, something familiar, very fine about the look of the preview, which captured the feeling of The Lord of the Rings so beautifully. Peter Jackson’s accomplishment with the The Lord of the Rings trilogy remains astonishing, as he brought each book to vivid life on the screen with incredible detail, love and depth. There were some complaints that Tom Bombadil, a major character in the books was deleted, but upon seeing the films, I did not miss him. The actors gave the film such incredible dramatic heft with their wonderful performances, so much so that we began to care for them rather deeply. There were tears when it seemed Gandalf, and then, Aragorn had perished, and genuine heartache as that gutsy old King died a terrible death. As Sam lifted Frodo onto his back to carry him to Mount Doom we began to understand the depth of the little hobbit’s fierce loyalty to his friend. Best of all, the moment that still gives me chills, when Aragorn turns to Gandalf and whispers, “for Frodo” becoming at that moment the King we all knew he could be.
Of course one of the most extraordinary scenes in the film happens near the end after the crowning of the King. As Aragorn moves through the crowd he comes to the four brave little hobbits, and they begin to bow to him. He stops them and says to them, “My friends, you bow to no one” and in turn bows to them, falling to his knees, which in turn the entire population of the reception follows in tribute of the heroes. It was a moment that has been forever seared into my mind, moving and strong, a King of enormous courage recognizing courage far greater than his own because the hobbits felt constant terror on this journey and overcame it for the greater good. Sure the films have moments of massive spectacle and brilliant visual effects, but it was the small, intimate moments that gave the pictures their heart and soul. I remember sitting in the theater after the credits had finished for The Return of the King (2003) and feeling very sad because it was over, there were no more The Lord of the Rings films to come. Jackson’s accomplishment is one of the greatest in the history of the cinema as he created the greatest trilogy ever put on the screen.
With The Lord of the Rings, Jackson was working from three thick books. With The Hobbit he is working from one, and not as long as any one of The Lord of the Rings novels at that!!
So what is this really about?
Can he truly make a trilogy out of a single volume or is this pure Hollywood economics? Sadly I believe it to be the latter and I mourn this event. Do they ever learn? Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows Part I (2010) suffered from being the first of two films, as it was unspeakably dull. Even while watching it we understood the real muscle of the book was yet to come!! I will watch a long film, four hours if necessary as long as it is good, (Che (2009) was close to five hours!!) and they could have made one last, massive kick ass film rather than splitting into two. The same thing is happening with Twilight’s finale, but I don’t care about that series at all, they are simply bad movies, with grotesque performances towards which I feel no affinity…sorry fans.
I was looking forward to The Hobbit, and believed it had chances at the Academy Awards. Jackson is not a filmmaker to take lightly, which he has proven time and time again, but this move worries me deeply. Will the Academy honor the first film and then forget about the subsequent two or wait until the third and honor it? Or will they decide that the entire series has been honored with the previous movies and Jackson has been awarded more than his fair share? They began shooting the film with a script, so has that script been re-written? If so when did the film become a trilogy? And why?
We all know why.
Greed. Simple, pathetic greed. New Line wants another cash cow. I will go to see The Hobbit films, all three of them, and it is very likely I will admire them, but something has been lost now. The blatant cash grabs from the studio has made the films a little less precious to me. What a shame.
Alex
August 3, 2012 at 10:18 pm
The Lord of the Rings trilogy are my favourite films of all time and I have been anticipating The Hobbit films more than any other films in my life. This news felt a bit off to me to begin with, simply from the fact that the scripts were written to be 2 films not 3. But after hearing what PJ had to say about the decision, I honestly believe that this has been done because they had too much good material to fit into 2 films. Sure the studio will love getting an extra billion dollars for their investment, but I think the decision was made for the right reasons.
And I think all 3 Hobbit films will be bigger awards season players than everyone seems to expect.
Alex(Quote) (Reply)
John H. Foote
August 4, 2012 at 4:20 am
I truly hope you are right Alex — the films are among the greatest I have ever seen and meant the world to my wife and I — they were the last great series of films we really adored together — a few weeks before she passed, we watched the extended editions again, and they were every bit as fantastic as they had been when released — straight up, I have grave concerns, and hope you are right.
John H. Foote(Quote) (Reply)
Joey Magidson
August 4, 2012 at 4:20 am
I wasn’t especially interested in either of the two films, so a third does absolutely nothing for me…
Joey Magidson(Quote) (Reply)
Sean
August 4, 2012 at 9:59 am
You can look at this one of two ways – yes the studio gets an extra movie and yes it will make them billions. Or, you can really look at Jackson’s passion for Middle Earth and realize that he is drawing on not just a 300 page novel called the Hobbit, but also over 150 pages of appendices that he has the rights to in Return of the King. These appendices cover events not told in the Hobbit proper, but that occur in the same time period. They also cover major events leading up to The Lord of the Rings. The wealth of material that he has at his disposal is really quite exciting. What struck me about watching the extended editions of LOTR recently was how they really took their time with events and characters. Nothing is taken lightly. Jackson has an intense passion for Middle Earth and now he has the opportunity to not only create a satisfying Hobbit film, but also to connect the story to the larger world created by Tolkien on paper and realized by Jackson on film. Who knows, he could be creating his master work. And how exciting could it be to know that Jackson will spend a significant portion of his career creating the definitive portrait of middle earth on screen? From my view point, very exciting indeed.
Sean(Quote) (Reply)
UBourgeois
August 4, 2012 at 10:17 am
Honestly, my interest in the project plummeted as soon as Guillermo del Toro stepped down as director. That would have been something to see. I’m still interested, of course, but it’s hard not to long for what could have been.
UBourgeois(Quote) (Reply)
John H. Foote
August 4, 2012 at 11:44 am
I so hope you are right Sean, truly I do.
John H. Foote(Quote) (Reply)
GL
August 4, 2012 at 1:37 pm
There was actually a list going around the internet of things Jackson had said or hinted about the contents of The Hobbit trilogy. The biggest part of it all is Gandalf. During The Hobbit, Gandalf is MIA quite often. Apparently Tolkien had written down on the appendix exactly where he was and what he was doing. We later find out on the book that he was meeting with The White Council. In the trailer we can see Galadriel talking with Gandalf as proof that this meeting might actually take place. There are also battles and origin scenes that that could be explored greatly with a trilogy. Best of all in my opinion is that what a trilogy ultimately mean is shorter films. One of my biggest problems with “The Return of The King is the length. The pace is extremely slow at the beginning and sort of messy and rushed at the end. With The Hobbit you really have a straight forward story line but with so many little details here and there that I think this trilogy idea is the best thing they could do for this franchise.
GL(Quote) (Reply)
Jeremy DC
August 4, 2012 at 1:44 pm
I tell myself that I like LOTR and I feel like I should like LOTR but everytime I sit down to watch it, I’m just not interested. The characters and dialogue get on my nerves after awhile. The whole Mount Doom part with Sam carrying Frodo and the destroying of the ring was pretty great though. I was very interested when Guillermo Del Toro was involved with The Hobbit but when Peter Jackson decided to do it I don’t care as much.
Jeremy DC(Quote) (Reply)
Matthew Barker
August 5, 2012 at 5:29 am
I must admit that I feel uneasy about these two films being turned into three, but I have faith in Jackson. He has said he will need to do some further shooting so it could all come together. Not sure where he will find his third climax after the death of the dragon and the wAr….
Matthew Barker(Quote) (Reply)
Mark Johnson
August 5, 2012 at 8:25 am
I’m with Sean, above. There is very little they could do to make me lose excitement for these films. Whether 2, 3, or 5 movies, when it comes to Middle Earth, in Jackon we trust.
Mark Johnson(Quote) (Reply)
Joseph Braverman
August 5, 2012 at 1:16 pm
John, thank you so much for that opinion piece and analysis! Although this does seem to be a cash cow, let’s cross our fingers it’s a high quality cash cow, as we have no power to prevent this book from expanding to three films, so it’s simply best to reserve judgment until seeing the final products. Mark Johnson’s enthusiasm for the new trilogy, and even just now you recalling some of the best moments from Return of the King (which, by the way, gave ME chills) has me less cynical/skeptical and more positively inquisitive about what is to come for the next movie adventures(s) of Middle Earth.
Joseph Braverman(Quote) (Reply)