Loads of stories in Appendices joining Hobbit to LOTR, thts the meat of the second and third films I would guess.

It is only at the end of a shoot that you finally get the chance to sit down and have a look at the film you have made. Recently Fran, Phil and I did just this when we watched for the first time an early cut of the first movie - and a large chunk of the second. We were really pleased with the way the story was coming together, in particular, the strength of the characters and the cast who have brought them to life. All of which gave rise to a simple question: do we take this chance to tell more of the tale? And the answer from our perspective as the filmmakers, and as fans, was an unreserved ‘yes.'

We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance. The richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, allows us to tell the full story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and the part he played in the sometimes dangerous, but at all times exciting, history of Middle-earth.

So, without further ado and on behalf of New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Wingnut Films, and the entire cast and crew of “The Hobbit” films, I’d like to announce that two films will become three.


It has been an unexpected journey indeed, and in the words of Professor Tolkien himself, "a tale that grew in the telling."

The Silmarillion is largely Tolkien showing his working - essentially an enormous mythological back-story creating the world in which the published novels are played out. The kind of thing that's notably lacking from things like Lost or the Alien franchise and shows up in the impression that the back story is being reinvented to suit the writer making it up as he goes along.

^ This

I do hope that at some point he films some more to fill in the gaps - e.g. Tom Bombadil

Wasn't that at the end of the book after the scouring of the Shire? I haven't seen the extended edition so maybe it makes sense on the screen!

Couldn't agree more, without a doubt my least favourite part of the LOTR books.

I personally think PJ did a fantastic job of bringing LOTR to the screen. He managed to keep all of the important parts of the story in there (especially in extended versions) whilst also making it a more accessible experience for anyone new to the story.

At the end of the day without the huge success of the LOTR films we wouldn't be getting The Hobbit at all, let alone as a trilogy.

This is just bks.

Totally about cashing in - three parts = times the revenue.

The story could be made into one long film or easily 2 medium length ones.

When did Jackson start taking it up the arse from the Hollywood powers that be?

The story will be far worse for this.

The skill in turning a book into a film is getting the story across in under 2 hours.