Jul 302012

When “The Hobbit” was originally announce as two movies, I thought that was stretching things a lot. It’s just not that big of a book. But it got stretched out by filling in a lot of details that weren’t in “The Hobbit” the book by including stuff from the appendices of “The Lord of the Rings,” which gives information on what some characters were doing during “The Hobbit,” such as Gandalf off with his wizard brothers fighting Sauron. Well, I guess the team behind the two Hobbit movies decided there was enough material for *three* movies.

‘Hobbit’ trilogy confirmed by Peter Jackson, Internet rejoices

 Posted by at 11:01 pm
  • Sophia the Belly Dancer

    I thought two movies were a stretch. Three is just ridiculous.

    • Anonymous

      Keep in mind, for *most* of “Hobbit” Galdalf is elsewhere. While “Hobbit” doesn’t explain where, “LoTR” does. So that could easily take up more screentime that the straight “Hobbit” stuff. Throw in Aragorn and Legolas, and you could easily squeeze *four* movies out of it.