(September 20, 2012 at 1:31 pm)5thHorseman Wrote:(September 20, 2012 at 1:21 pm)Red Celt Wrote: The Hobbit is much shorter than The Lord of the Rings and doesn't justify the same movie time. Buuuut, Jackson is including elements from The Silmarilion in order to give the story the same degree of depth as TLOTR... so that it doesn't feel like a children's story when compared to the (more adult) 1st trilogy.When it comes to epics, it's better to have moooooore films and more hours to watch, too little misses too much.
Plus 3 movies is always better than 1, when it comes to Tolkein.
How awful would LOTR have been if it was only 1 movies.
Haven't read Silmarillion... I'll have to check it out... I'm a weirdo, if I'm seeing a movie based on a book, I like to have read the book first...
LOTR simply could not have been done in a single film... It would have bastardized it too much.
