Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Hobbit (Teaser Trailer released)


Unforgiven

Recommended Posts

I did a search and didn't see this posted, so here ya go.

1 year out and they just released the teaser trailer for the first film (of two) for The Hobbit.

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thehobbit/ (for the quicktime link)

EDIT : YOUTUBE - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGM1RB73Zso

---------- Post added December-20th-2011 at 10:09 PM ----------

nm...fixed! :)

If for some reason you don't have quicktime and want to watch it, here is the download.

It works for both PCs and Macs (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you justify splitting The Hobbit into two films when each Lord of the Rings (much longer books) was only one each? Shameless money grab, I tell you!

It'll work on me.

Trailer looks awesome, but also disappointed no Smaug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you justify splitting The Hobbit into two films when each Lord of the Rings (much longer books) was only one each? Shameless money grab, I tell you!

Im happy with 2 movies, would have been upset if they only did one. No way you could get everything into just one movie for the Hobbit. I am sure Peter Jackson would have preferred more movies for the Lord of the Rings, but the studio probably wanted to keep it as a trilogy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was looking over IMDB, and I have to admit I'm confused. I've probably read The Hobbit 10+ times from the time I was 9 or 10, so I've got the story pretty well memorized. Are they doing flashbacks or side stories or something, because I'm pretty sure they've included characters in the cast list that weren't in the Hobbit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn... wanted a sneak peak at Smaug :(

he won't be around until the 2nd movie I think

---------- Post added December-21st-2011 at 01:59 PM ----------

How do you justify splitting The Hobbit into two films when each Lord of the Rings (much longer books) was only one each? Shameless money grab, I tell you!

A lot of LOTR is history-building where as The Hobbit is one adventure after the other, with only some history included. Before it was ever announced they were making the film I said it would have to be split in two, with the first one likely ending when they all get caught by the elves in the woods.

---------- Post added December-21st-2011 at 02:04 PM ----------

I was looking over IMDB, and I have to admit I'm confused. I've probably read The Hobbit 10+ times from the time I was 9 or 10, so I've got the story pretty well memorized. Are they doing flashbacks or side stories or something, because I'm pretty sure they've included characters in the cast list that weren't in the Hobbit.

yeah, they have Frodo at the intro, which wasn't in The Hobbit. I think they did it just to give the non-book readers a frame of reference from LOTR. And they also just straight up made a new character, a sprite/elf chick played by Kate from Lost. I still have full faith in Peter Jackson and Del Toro/ jackson has put a bunch of on the set stuff up on facebook and so far I remain impressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he

A lot of LOTR is history-building where as The Hobbit is one adventure after the other, with only some history included. Before it was ever announced they were making the film I said it would have to be split in two, with the first one likely ending when they all get caught by the elves in the woods.

.

I was thinking it would be when the Eagles drop them off at the edge of Mirkwood. 2nd film begins with them walking in Mirkwood and Bilbo has to get the draves back from the spiders.

Also, with the trolls that turn to stone, I imagine they will be different than the trolls we saw in LOTR, cuz these trolls are supposed to talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you justify splitting The Hobbit into two films when each Lord of the Rings (much longer books) was only one each? Shameless money grab, I tell you!

I think I read a while back that they are adding come content from the LotRs book trilogy to The Hobbit movie. It's content that happened in the same time period as The Hobbit. It is material that wasn't covered in the LotRs movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you justify splitting The Hobbit into two films when each Lord of the Rings (much longer books) was only one each? Shameless money grab, I tell you!

No, it was a necessity.

You couldn't get it all in one movie. Not unless you made the film like 5 hours long. Look at how much they left out of "Return of the King", and that movie was still very long.

Also, Jackson said they were going to add a few things to connect it better to his LotR trilogy.

I look forward to seeing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you justify splitting The Hobbit into two films when each Lord of the Rings (much longer books) was only one each? Shameless money grab, I tell you!

I think more books-to-movies should be split into multiple movies... or perhaps better released as a high-production-value mini-series like Band of Brothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the tid bit i heard was that the 2nd movie will actually tell the story of what gandalf was doing when he disappeared from the book (he comes back at the end). he fought the necromancer, which was an early manifestation of sauron. supposedly these events are referred to in some obscure writings somewhere. not sure if that's true, but the source is a big time lotr :geek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...