If/When "The Hobbit" is made...How many installations?

[Clark Griswold]

To tell the whole story of the Hobbit on the silver screen will be another huge undertaking, just as LOTR was...We all know that the movie company originally wanted LOTR to be a 2 part movie, but clearly it would never have translated from a three part book seriers to a 2 part movie. They made the right choice.

So do you think the Hobbit can be done in one 3 hour movie? Or should it be done in say two 2 hour (give or take) movies? (sort of like how the recent Kill Bill movies were released)

Thoughts?

Again, a 2 part movie means more money in the bank for an already wealthy LOTR franchise. I wouldn't be surprised, as a matter of fact I hope, we see a 2 part movie for the Hobbit.

[Ithrynluin]

Given that The Hobbit has fewer pages than either of the three The Lord of the Rings books. Of course, that's a very simplistic way of looking at it.

I do think one film is enough, and I do think we'll be seeing only one film, if they decide to produce it.

[Inderjit S]

One three hour movie should be more then enough.

[Mrs. Maggott]

Absolutely, if whomever makes the film sticks to the story as written. The Hobbit doesn't have any of the "counter-themes" we encounter in LOTR. It is a fairly straightforward story as befits a children's tale. Kids aren't able to juggle too many plot lines; they like to keep centered on the "hero" or main character and not lose sight of him (or her). So whereas the story may digress from time to time (such as the "asides" made by the narrator), Bilbo is never far away and the story keeps us apprised of his whereabouts and what he is doing almost continually. Therefore, though you can have a part of the story which concerns only Bilbo (when he is with Gandalf at the house of Beorn before the Dwarves arrive, when he is separated from the Dwarves in Mirkwood, when he is with the dragon etc.) there is precious little of the tale in which he is not directly involved, an example of such a situation would be the time Thorin is brought before the Elf king.

That means that a good scriptwriter can move the story along without losing any of its meaning or opportunities for good scenes - always providing, of course, that one doesn't have a director who decides that he or she can tell the story better and introduces all kinds of plot ploys to confuse and lengthen the tale. Absent that, it should make a dandy 3 (+ or -) hour film.

[Arthur_Vandelay]

It's a one-film book, pure and simple: even if the filmmaker includes extradiegetic material such as the assault of the White Council on Dol Guldur, Smaug's descent upon the mountain, or Thorin's meeting with Gandalf in Bree.
(All likely if PJ takes the helm).

[Inderjit S]

Such thing, could, of course, be made for an E.E version of 'The Hobbit' Things' like Thorin's meeting with Gandalf will only take what, like 5-15 minutes at the most.

The whole White Council thing could be too diverting.

[Wolfshead]

I reckon because it's more of a children's story, it'll be one two and a half to three hour film, then with an EE (if Jackson makes it) clocking up anything to three and a half hours.

[Minas]

One Movie can do the Hobbit Justice. There are a few clear lessons/themes (greed) but it has nothing of the complexity of LOTR.

[MrFrodo]

Yeah one movie.......


However two would be great add a little hype :D

[Nkenobi]

defanitly one movie :/
I sure hope PJ does it... first i hear he is gna, then i hear he isn't :/