What are people expecting of them?

I'm hopeful, not happy with a lot of the aesthetic choices, perplexed at the need for a trilogy.

Hobbits.





I've not seen much other than a line-up of dwarves, but as long as the same attention to detail and script is done like LotR and the look and feel the same, then they should be good.

I was annoyed when they announced three, it seemed excessive. But I've since heard it's added bits from his other tales so, could be super spesh.

Yeah cleansing the forest should be a jolly good time.

Agreed, three seems too many.

Who are you agreeing with Caps, we all seem to be grudgingly accepting the triple Middle Earth buggering that's in store for us...

Why don't the hobbits have shoes?

I'm excited to see Christopher Lee in it.

James revealing his gerontophilia for us there.

Hopefully the third film will be all about Tom Bombadil, otherwise I don't see the point. The Hobbit is something like less than half the length of one of the LOTR books. I just know that some dick head at New Line Cinema or Warner Bros or whichever twat is throwing money at this called up Peter Jackson every day and said "Make it a trilogy, make it a trilogy! Make it in 3D, blaaargrgh! We need more money!" and eventually he caved in. Pete did an amazing job with LOTR of course, but I think it turned him into a silly Hollywood boy. I hope he proves me wrong and Ian McKellen makes me feel as warm and lovely as he did back in the original trilogy, and I hope Martin Freeman isn't just 'Tim from The Office dressed as a Hobbit,' but I can't help but be a bit more cynical about this one.

If only everyone was like Christopher Nolan, then the world would be the best place ever.

James wrote:Who are you agreeing with Caps, we all seem to be grudgingly accepting the triple Middle Earth buggering that's in store for us...

Dian Wei wrote:perplexed at the need for a trilogy.

Seems to suggest less would have been adequate.

Lev wrote:I was annoyed when they announced three, it seemed excessive.

STD_Caps wrote:three seems too many.

dictionary.com wrote:ex·ces·sive/ikˈsesiv/
Adjective:
More than is necessary, normal, or desirable; immoderate.

Hence, probably agreeing with Billy, definitely with that other guy, whoever he is...

jonny_boy34 wrote:Hopefully the third film will be all about Tom Bombadil

hopefully at least some bits of the films!!

I read the Adventures of Tom Bombadil, here's my review: it was kinda hard to read stoned but i had a great time

There's only three movies to mug us Tolkien fans for more money and to appeal to anyone not sure about the movie because they never read any of the books but saw the LOTR movies and had sticky pants at the end.

STD_Caps wrote:

James wrote:Who are you agreeing with Caps, we all seem to be grudgingly accepting the triple Middle Earth buggering that's in store for us...

Dian Wei wrote:perplexed at the need for a trilogy.

Seems to suggest less would have been adequate.

Lev wrote:I was annoyed when they announced three, it seemed excessive.

STD_Caps wrote:three seems too many.

dictionary.com wrote:ex·ces·sive/ikˈsesiv/
Adjective:
More than is necessary, normal, or desirable; immoderate.

Hence, probably agreeing with Billy, definitely with that other guy, whoever he is...

I yield to your efficient quoting!