The new trend for splitting movies into two parts and now three!!!
31 July 2012, 01:21 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new trend for splitting movies into two parts and now three!!!
It seems to me that Hollywood has a relatively new trend, that is the unnecessary splitting of films into two parts where one would have done.
Tarantino was forced by Miramax, I think it was, to split Kill Bill into two parts, then we had the final Harry Potter Book made into a 2 part movie (which considering there had been six of them before that was a step too far IMO), then Twilight and now..... the bloody Hobbit is to be THREE parts ... FFS!!!
What with remaking films that don't need remaking and this latest gimmick it seems little orginality and creativity remains in mainstream Hollywood movie making.
Tarantino was forced by Miramax, I think it was, to split Kill Bill into two parts, then we had the final Harry Potter Book made into a 2 part movie (which considering there had been six of them before that was a step too far IMO), then Twilight and now..... the bloody Hobbit is to be THREE parts ... FFS!!!
What with remaking films that don't need remaking and this latest gimmick it seems little orginality and creativity remains in mainstream Hollywood movie making.
31 July 2012, 07:40 AM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is because all the pirates do it as films wouldn't fit on one cd back in the day 
Star Wars was originally something like a 9 hour film when presented to the studios, so they made that into 3 (originally) but was always meant to be 6 after that, and ultimately 9 (but that will never happen)
Star Wars was originally something like a 9 hour film when presented to the studios, so they made that into 3 (originally) but was always meant to be 6 after that, and ultimately 9 (but that will never happen)
31 July 2012, 09:12 AM
#4
The Hobbit in three parts? Hmmmm, comparing the books, LOTR is about 1200 pages, and made THREE films, The Hobbit is around 400 pages........
Maybe they'll put EVERY scene in? Or even more songs to aid soundtrack sales, like Disney do?
I'll still go and see it mind, even though the Americans have, once again, put WOMEN at the centre of things. I can't actually remember a female character in the book
Maybe they'll put EVERY scene in? Or even more songs to aid soundtrack sales, like Disney do?
I'll still go and see it mind, even though the Americans have, once again, put WOMEN at the centre of things. I can't actually remember a female character in the book
31 July 2012, 09:38 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northampton, Xbox GamerTag - Neanderthal1976
Posts: 6,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm getting 3 films out of the Hobbit whilst still leaving him extra footage to release as director cuts on Blu-ray 6 months after the theatrical cut was released seems like he might struggle?
31 July 2012, 09:56 AM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
31 July 2012, 11:10 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
As on LOTR, Jackson is rumoured to be hopelessly over budget and behind on filming. It is alleged that he is a hopeless decision maker and insists on constant re-shoots, re-writes and changes. On LOTR Lucasfilm and ILM were drafted in 5 months before FOTR was released as they knew there wasn't a hope in Hell it would be finished with just PJ and Weta, and history seems to be repeating. If FOTR had bombed, the other two films may have been shelved, or been rushed out cheap to cut losses, but thankfully the public enjoyed it and allowed the completion of what ended up a masterpiece. I hope PJ works his creative magic again and serves up another fantasy epic, using the appendices from The Hobbit and other material from LOTR, The Silmarillion and other Tolkein works. Extending it to a trilogy is indeed about money, but more to do with covering their initial losses and allowing more time to finish off PJ's vision of Middle Earth.
Last edited by corradoboy; 31 July 2012 at 11:11 AM.
31 July 2012, 02:04 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
01 August 2012, 08:56 AM
#19
Okay so you would see a Film:
a).. Tell Half a story
b).. Be over 6 hours long!
I personally wouldnt want to sit through a film for 6 hours straight in the Cinema
a).. Tell Half a story
b).. Be over 6 hours long!
I personally wouldnt want to sit through a film for 6 hours straight in the Cinema
01 August 2012, 11:30 AM
#20
Scooby Regular
I don't see what the problem is.
If the subject matter is decent enough then it wouldn't bother me to have 3 films to enjoy rather than 2.
Money or otherwise its no fuss to me.
If the subject matter is decent enough then it wouldn't bother me to have 3 films to enjoy rather than 2.
Money or otherwise its no fuss to me.
01 August 2012, 02:01 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
The DVD would normally be released allowing you to recap 
On LOTR the theatrical DVD was released around June the following year for each film, then the extended cut in early December just before the nest film hit the cinema. I had dodgy Korean discs slightly before the cinema release for the last 2, and in Jan after the first
On LOTR the theatrical DVD was released around June the following year for each film, then the extended cut in early December just before the nest film hit the cinema. I had dodgy Korean discs slightly before the cinema release for the last 2, and in Jan after the first
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
28
28 December 2015 11:07 PM
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM
