Cable Forum - View Single Post

Tezcatlipoca · 05-01-2013, 13:04

Back when this was going to be just two films, the second was going to be a "bridge" between The Hobbit and LOTR.

Although they don't have the rights to The Simarillion or the Lost Tales, there's a lot of material in the Appendices (which they do have the rights for), plus there are things in the book that IIRC were briefly mentioned but have been fleshed out in the film (e.g. Gandalf going off on wizard business becomes Gandalf meeting up with Saruman etc.).

Perhaps it would have been better if it wasn't called "The Hobbit", but instead was "Chronicles of Middle-earth part 1: The Hobbit", or something like that, given that it's not simply that one book being adapted into three films.

---------- Post added at 13:04 ---------- Previous post was at 13:03 ----------

Oh. I saw it last night. Loved it. I prefer the previous films, but I thought it was still very good.

05-01-2013, 13:04	#113
Tezcatlipoca Inactive Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Cambridge Posts: 16,760	Re: The Hobbit Back when this was going to be just two films, the second was going to be a "bridge" between The Hobbit and LOTR. Although they don't have the rights to The Simarillion or the Lost Tales, there's a lot of material in the Appendices (which they do have the rights for), plus there are things in the book that IIRC were briefly mentioned but have been fleshed out in the film (e.g. Gandalf going off on wizard business becomes Gandalf meeting up with Saruman etc.). Perhaps it would have been better if it wasn't called "The Hobbit", but instead was "Chronicles of Middle-earth part 1: The Hobbit", or something like that, given that it's not simply that one book being adapted into three films. ---------- Post added at 13:04 ---------- Previous post was at 13:03 ---------- Oh. I saw it last night. Loved it. I prefer the previous films, but I thought it was still very good.