Comments on: Original Hobbits Back For Hobbit Movie? http://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/ News and gossip surrounding the hobbit movies Wed, 23 Mar 2011 06:27:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: becca bagginshttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-1748 becca baggins Tue, 08 Dec 2009 10:12:51 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-1748 fair enough its hard to make such an amazin book into a great film but then dont call it what it aint if you cant make the hobbit make a film based on tolkiens hobbit call it something different even the start of lotr where merry and pippin let of the dragon firework bothers me by not stayin true to the story! the cast for lotr was great as it turns out dont just bring people back for fans and money! the hobbit shud have whoever portrays the charactars best preferably new actors its a different story dont merge it not necessary if you only change small parts of the book like tiny parts then it will be great as the book is sorry that turned into a big rant its early! fair enough its hard to make such an amazin book into a great film but then dont call it what it aint if you cant make the hobbit make a film based on tolkiens hobbit call it something different even the start of lotr where merry and pippin let of the dragon firework bothers me by not stayin true to the story! the cast for lotr was great as it turns out dont just bring people back for fans and money! the hobbit shud have whoever portrays the charactars best preferably new actors its a different story dont merge it not necessary if you only change small parts of the book like tiny parts then it will be great as the book is
sorry that turned into a big rant its early!

]]> By: Markhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-1253 Mark Sun, 31 May 2009 22:54:07 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-1253 They could cast one of them as Bilbo but without completely changing the story there's no way to bring them all back. They could cast one of them as Bilbo but without completely changing the story there’s no way to bring them all back.

]]> By: Krishttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-1245 Kris Fri, 29 May 2009 17:06:06 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-1245 Um guys... Dom was Merry not Pippin... just so you know Billy was Pippin... so yeah just so you know Um guys… Dom was Merry not Pippin… just so you know Billy was Pippin… so yeah just so you know

]]> By: Redhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-1039 Red Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:43:13 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-1039 I think I would cast the actor Rupert Friend as Thranduil. He's young yes, but makeup can always give him the illusion of looking a bit older. Plus, he is a splitting image of Orlando Bloom. I think I would cast the actor Rupert Friend as Thranduil. He’s young yes, but makeup can always give him the illusion of looking a bit older. Plus, he is a splitting image of Orlando Bloom.

]]> By: Aaronhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-1028 Aaron Sun, 19 Apr 2009 01:52:42 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-1028 Ok gang, I guess you have to think of this as storytelling. Obviously the only way to bring back old characters is to begin the movie as a retrospect from Bilbo,s POV. Perhaps Bilbo is telling ,Sam ,Merry, Pippin, And Frodo about his adventure and then get to the main parrt of the film. There you could reprise Ian, Elijah, Sean, Dom and Billy and I would like to see them start the movie like that, after all Hobbits love storytelling. Ok gang, I guess you have to think of this as storytelling. Obviously the only way to bring back old characters is to begin the movie as a retrospect from Bilbo,s POV. Perhaps Bilbo is telling ,Sam ,Merry, Pippin, And Frodo about his adventure and then get to the main parrt of the film. There you could reprise Ian, Elijah, Sean, Dom and Billy and I would like to see them start the movie like that, after all Hobbits love storytelling.

]]> By: the wickhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-1012 the wick Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:16:15 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-1012 please,please,stay true to the story of the hobbit please,please,stay true to the story of the hobbit

]]> By: travelormanhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-935 travelorman Mon, 23 Mar 2009 02:27:28 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-935 if i was casting roles for the hobbit movie i would try to land the following actors: bilbo: topher grace(he might also have been a good frodo in another universe) thorin: james cosmo(he played "campbell" in braveheart) balin: brendan gleeson bombur: robbie coltrane(he has that aura of gruffness and geniality as seen in the "harry potter movies") its also a good idea as suggested by another person to use maybe dominic monaghan and billy boyd to play fili and kili...i think theyd fit in nicely there. the part of thranduil would be perfect for willem dafoe. he has the look of nobility with the slightest hint of ruthlessness that would be good for that character. if not in "the hobbit" then definitly in any future silmarillion movie as thingol. maybe peter jackson could put himself in as another dwarf...maybe dwalin or ori.... and Ron perlman would be awesome as Beorn(assuming they even use the character...you know how they totally reshape a story to benefit a movie ) if i was casting roles for the hobbit movie i would try to land the following actors:
bilbo: topher grace(he might also have been a good frodo in another universe)
thorin: james cosmo(he played “campbell” in braveheart)
balin: brendan gleeson
bombur: robbie coltrane(he has that aura of gruffness and geniality as seen in the “harry potter movies”)
its also a good idea as suggested by another person to use maybe dominic monaghan and billy boyd to play fili and kili…i think theyd fit in nicely there.
the part of thranduil would be perfect for willem dafoe. he has the look of nobility with the slightest hint of ruthlessness that would be good for that character. if not in “the hobbit” then definitly in any future silmarillion movie as thingol.
maybe peter jackson could put himself in as another dwarf…maybe dwalin or ori….
and Ron perlman would be awesome as Beorn(assuming they even use the character…you know how they totally reshape a story to benefit a movie )

]]> By: The Hobbit Movie - Sean Astin On The Hobbit Moviehttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-902 The Hobbit Movie - Sean Astin On The Hobbit Movie Tue, 10 Mar 2009 23:36:35 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-902 [...] Original Hobbits Back For Hobbit Movie? [...] [...] Original Hobbits Back For Hobbit Movie? [...]

]]> By: it's mehttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-893 it's me Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:13:42 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-893 fool of a took lol :) fool of a took lol :)

]]> By: dontjackithttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-887 dontjackit Sun, 01 Mar 2009 22:44:28 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-887 Simple (see my arguments in other related previous posts on this web site) "Jackson" equals not "true to book" - did it for the LOTR films - will do it again for The Hobbit. For those who have the extended versions of the LOTR films- listen to the director's track on his "justification" for changing things from the book in making the films - they aren't justified and this brings a new meaning to artistic licence - more like self centered artistic "butchery". As Stevo' says above maybe (and probably) will see our four "famous" (and huge money making) hobbits in the (2nd) Hobbit film. Del Toro please save us Tolkien purists! Simple (see my arguments in other related previous posts on this web site) “Jackson” equals not “true to book” – did it for the LOTR films – will do it again for The Hobbit. For those who have the extended versions of the LOTR films- listen to the director’s track on his “justification” for changing things from the book in making the films – they aren’t justified and this brings a new meaning to artistic licence – more like self centered artistic “butchery”. As Stevo’ says above maybe (and probably) will see our four “famous” (and huge money making) hobbits in the (2nd) Hobbit film. Del Toro please save us Tolkien purists!

]]> By: stevo'http://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-882 stevo' Sat, 28 Feb 2009 01:54:43 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-882 for all you who are soooo bloody worried about not staying true to the book, any of the said characters would only be in the second of the two movies.... that (the second movie) film is going to use the apendixies (written by tolkien) to fill in the gap between the fellowship of the ring and the end of the hobbit book.....(which is true to tolkien) .... so stop wetting your bed over it...... we have tolkien fanatics in charge of making the movies for all you who are soooo bloody worried about not staying true to the book, any of the said characters would only be in the second of the two movies…. that (the second movie) film is going to use the apendixies (written by tolkien) to fill in the gap between the fellowship of the ring and the end of the hobbit book…..(which is true to tolkien) …. so stop wetting your bed over it…… we have tolkien fanatics in charge of making the movies

]]> By: Bryanhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-870 Bryan Sun, 15 Feb 2009 16:29:32 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-870 I agree with Jacob, the LOTR movies were a very poor adaptation of Tolkien's stories. I particularly was disappointed with the portrayal of Gimli and the dwarves in the LOTR movies. I don't know if PJ disliked the dwarves, but his version of Gimli was a very brash, crude, and otherwise unsophisticated background character, who was of very little use to the fellowship other than in a fight. Tolkien had a much higher respect for the dwarves, and in reality Gimli was every bit as helpful to the fellowship as Legolas, who was placed on a pedestal by Jackson & Co. I will be very curious to see how Jackson & Del Torro portray Thorin & Co. My guess is they will be cast in the same mold as Gimli - brash, unsophisticated, and selfish. Granted the dwarves do have some selfish characteristics, but I thought Jackson overplayed this trait tremendously with Gimli. For example, in Tolkien's version of the Fellowship, Gimli never begged Gandalf to pass through Moria. He went willingly with Gandalf, but only after Gandalf believed it to be the only possible passage through the Misty Mtns. Hopefully, the new movies will do a better job of portraying the dwarves, and staying more true to Tolkien's greater story. But I am doubtful. I agree with Jacob, the LOTR movies were a very poor adaptation of Tolkien’s stories. I particularly was disappointed with the portrayal of Gimli and the dwarves in the LOTR movies. I don’t know if PJ disliked the dwarves, but his version of Gimli was a very brash, crude, and otherwise unsophisticated background character, who was of very little use to the fellowship other than in a fight. Tolkien had a much higher respect for the dwarves, and in reality Gimli was every bit as helpful to the fellowship as Legolas, who was placed on a pedestal by Jackson & Co.

I will be very curious to see how Jackson & Del Torro portray Thorin & Co. My guess is they will be cast in the same mold as Gimli – brash, unsophisticated, and selfish. Granted the dwarves do have some selfish characteristics, but I thought Jackson overplayed this trait tremendously with Gimli. For example, in Tolkien’s version of the Fellowship, Gimli never begged Gandalf to pass through Moria. He went willingly with Gandalf, but only after Gandalf believed it to be the only possible passage through the Misty Mtns.

Hopefully, the new movies will do a better job of portraying the dwarves, and staying more true to Tolkien’s greater story. But I am doubtful.

]]> By: Jacobhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-865 Jacob Thu, 12 Feb 2009 15:53:05 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-865 Erika, I have to disagree that PJ always remained true to the essence of Tolkien. By removing such themes/events as healing and renewal (Aragorn), the ultimate failure of Frodo to destroy the Ring, the removal of the Scouring of the Shire that was, according to JRRT "foreseen from the outset", PJ and Co. have effectively created an entirely new story only loosely based on Tolkien's original. I know that there are differences between books and films, but changing that much is not necessary. Especially for The Hobbit, which is less than a third of the length of LOTR. I agree with DAVE DAVIES that money is the prime motivator here. I have little doubt that the Frodo, Sam, Merry and/or Pippin, as well as Aragorn, Legolas and maybe Gimli will all be back. This is because PJ and GDT aren't making the The Hobbit, they're making The Lord of the Rings: The Prequel. Additionally, there is NO WAY (sorry, but I can't italicize stuff) to make it realistic for the LOTR Hobbits to be in The Hobbit (singular) when they weren't even born. Additionally, it is impossible to have it realistic for Aragorn, who was 10-years-old at the time of The Hobbit, to be in Lake-town, though a small cameo in Rivendell be POSSIBLE. Arwen however was in Lorien during the events of The Hobbit, and could not be in Rivendell. Legolas IS the sun of Thranduil, but in the (made-up) backstory for the LOTR MOVIES, PJ and Co. decided that Legolas had never seen anyone die. Tolkien never mentioned this, but continuity within the movie franchise is important as well, and there would be no way to reconcile Legolas fighting in The Hobbit with his naivete in the LOTR movies. I know that there were events in Middle-earth beyond Bilbo's adventure (the White Council springs to mind), but they are not part of The Hobbit, and should not be in the movie. This movies is being and will continue to be billed as The Hobbit, not "The Middle-earth Schmorgasborg of Events". PJ and GDT should keep their movies at just The Hobbit, because adding other storylines is dishonest and takes away from Bilbo - the main character. In short, I am extremely doubtful, even after much thought, that "things will work out wonderfully." The LOTR movies were good AS MOVIES, but not great. They were horrible adaptations. The Hobbit is looking like it will be a horrible adaptation as well, though it remains to be seen if it will be good as a movie. Erika, I have to disagree that PJ always remained true to the essence of Tolkien. By removing such themes/events as healing and renewal (Aragorn), the ultimate failure of Frodo to destroy the Ring, the removal of the Scouring of the Shire that was, according to JRRT “foreseen from the outset”, PJ and Co. have effectively created an entirely new story only loosely based on Tolkien’s original. I know that there are differences between books and films, but changing that much is not necessary. Especially for The Hobbit, which is less than a third of the length of LOTR.

I agree with DAVE DAVIES that money is the prime motivator here. I have little doubt that the Frodo, Sam, Merry and/or Pippin, as well as Aragorn, Legolas and maybe Gimli will all be back. This is because PJ and GDT aren’t making the The Hobbit, they’re making The Lord of the Rings: The Prequel. Additionally, there is NO WAY (sorry, but I can’t italicize stuff) to make it realistic for the LOTR Hobbits to be in The Hobbit (singular) when they weren’t even born. Additionally, it is impossible to have it realistic for Aragorn, who was 10-years-old at the time of The Hobbit, to be in Lake-town, though a small cameo in Rivendell be POSSIBLE. Arwen however was in Lorien during the events of The Hobbit, and could not be in Rivendell. Legolas IS the sun of Thranduil, but in the (made-up) backstory for the LOTR MOVIES, PJ and Co. decided that Legolas had never seen anyone die. Tolkien never mentioned this, but continuity within the movie franchise is important as well, and there would be no way to reconcile Legolas fighting in The Hobbit with his naivete in the LOTR movies.

I know that there were events in Middle-earth beyond Bilbo’s adventure (the White Council springs to mind), but they are not part of The Hobbit, and should not be in the movie. This movies is being and will continue to be billed as The Hobbit, not “The Middle-earth Schmorgasborg of Events”. PJ and GDT should keep their movies at just The Hobbit, because adding other storylines is dishonest and takes away from Bilbo – the main character.

In short, I am extremely doubtful, even after much thought, that “things will work out wonderfully.” The LOTR movies were good AS MOVIES, but not great. They were horrible adaptations. The Hobbit is looking like it will be a horrible adaptation as well, though it remains to be seen if it will be good as a movie.

]]> By: DAVE DAVIEShttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-860 DAVE DAVIES Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:52:45 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-860 Unfortunately what motivates movies is money. Even the need for a dialogue about the 4 hobbits returning in the Hobbit move is ludicrous. There is no question that the 4 actors were marvilously cast and did a fabulous job. But the Hobbit is a different story. If they, or Viggo or Liv or...show up, the movie will be a disappointment. But producers do not care what fans of the story think. They know we will watch. They want all the "others". It is not about the Tolkien fans, it is about everyone else. Unfortunately what motivates movies is money. Even the need for a dialogue about the 4 hobbits returning in the Hobbit move is ludicrous. There is no question that the 4 actors were marvilously cast and did a fabulous job. But the Hobbit is a different story. If they, or Viggo or Liv or…show up, the movie will be a disappointment. But producers do not care what fans of the story think. They know we will watch. They want all the “others”. It is not about the Tolkien fans, it is about everyone else.

]]> By: Erikahttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-849 Erika Wed, 04 Feb 2009 04:13:33 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-849 I think what most of you need to remember that the books and the movie are NOT going to be identical. it's just not feasible, and honestly, some things that work in literature just don't work on the big screen. That being said, I think PJ was always true to the essence of Tolkien and I think he will continue to stay true to it with del Toro. I freely admit that I would love to see my hobbits in one of the Hobbit movies (being a Pippin-junkie myself) but I for some reason never really thought about how old they would be at the onset of Bilbo's journey! I trust though, that if they are put in the movie, PJ and del Toro will make it believable. As for other characters like Legolas, Gimli, and Aragon, well... I think that's a bit easier! Legolas is the son of Thranduil, is he not? So it would make total sense for him to make an appearance in Mirkwood and maybe even at the Battle of Five Armies. Gimli could come with the dwarves from the Iron Hills to aid Thorin, and Aragon... well he's a bit more difficult, but maybe he could be passing through Rivendell or Lake-town? Even Arwen could make a small appearance when Thorin and Co. pass through Rivendell. Wow, sorry for the long post, but I just want you guys to realize that there are ways of making this work that are realistic. There is stuff going on in Middle-earth outside of Bilbo's adventure, so seeing some of our favorite old characters isn't out of the realm of possibility. Don't be too hasty to judge and I'm sure things will work out wonderfully! I think what most of you need to remember that the books and the movie are NOT going to be identical. it’s just not feasible, and honestly, some things that work in literature just don’t work on the big screen. That being said, I think PJ was always true to the essence of Tolkien and I think he will continue to stay true to it with del Toro.

I freely admit that I would love to see my hobbits in one of the Hobbit movies (being a Pippin-junkie myself) but I for some reason never really thought about how old they would be at the onset of Bilbo’s journey! I trust though, that if they are put in the movie, PJ and del Toro will make it believable.

As for other characters like Legolas, Gimli, and Aragon, well… I think that’s a bit easier! Legolas is the son of Thranduil, is he not? So it would make total sense for him to make an appearance in Mirkwood and maybe even at the Battle of Five Armies. Gimli could come with the dwarves from the Iron Hills to aid Thorin, and Aragon… well he’s a bit more difficult, but maybe he could be passing through Rivendell or Lake-town? Even Arwen could make a small appearance when Thorin and Co. pass through Rivendell.

Wow, sorry for the long post, but I just want you guys to realize that there are ways of making this work that are realistic. There is stuff going on in Middle-earth outside of Bilbo’s adventure, so seeing some of our favorite old characters isn’t out of the realm of possibility. Don’t be too hasty to judge and I’m sure things will work out wonderfully!

]]> By: Richardhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-844 Richard Tue, 03 Feb 2009 12:56:35 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-844 I have a suggestion: bring back the actors, but put beards on them and have them play some of the minor dwarfs: Elijah Wood and Sean Astin could play one of Dori, Nori or Ori, perhaps Dominic Monaghan and Billy Boyd could play Bifur and Bofur or Oin and Gloin. And while we're at it, John Rhys Davies could play Balin. As for Orlando Bloom, it would be very easy to include a minor role for Legolas as his home realm is among the Wood Elves of Mirkwood. I have a suggestion: bring back the actors, but put beards on them and have them play some of the minor dwarfs: Elijah Wood and Sean Astin could play one of Dori, Nori or Ori, perhaps Dominic Monaghan and Billy Boyd could play Bifur and Bofur or Oin and Gloin. And while we’re at it, John Rhys Davies could play Balin. As for Orlando Bloom, it would be very easy to include a minor role for Legolas as his home realm is among the Wood Elves of Mirkwood.

]]> By: Seashellhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-841 Seashell Mon, 02 Feb 2009 00:33:30 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-841 I know the the four hobbits did a great job in LOTR but people have to realize that LOTR wasn't just sucessful because of actors or the amount of money spent. It was sucessful because it did a good job of portraying a timeless classic. It worked because (for the most part) it stayed true to Tolkien, save for the wargs in the second movie and so on. It made money because it was good. Even if people don't read books now a days and don't know anything about the source the Hobbit movie will come from they're going to scratch their head about the presence of these four hobbits. Audiences are smart enough to know that this a prequel and that those characters weren't born yet. If they have to bring those actors back, then bring them back as different characters, dwarves maybe. Sure they'll be in makeup, but at least we won't have a movie that is untrue to the text. I know the the four hobbits did a great job in LOTR but people have to realize that LOTR wasn’t just sucessful because of actors or the amount of money spent. It was sucessful because it did a good job of portraying a timeless classic. It worked because (for the most part) it stayed true to Tolkien, save for the wargs in the second movie and so on.
It made money because it was good. Even if people don’t read books now a days and don’t know anything about the source the Hobbit movie will come from they’re going to scratch their head about the presence of these four hobbits. Audiences are smart enough to know that this a prequel and that those characters weren’t born yet. If they have to bring those actors back, then bring them back as different characters, dwarves maybe. Sure they’ll be in makeup, but at least we won’t have a movie that is untrue to the text.

]]> By: Jacobhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-837 Jacob Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:38:04 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-837 Actually, the six part division is the only one Tolkien had a hand in. Additionally, the six parts are called "books", and the three volumes are called "parts". The three volume division was made by Tolkien's publisher, not Tolkien. This is in the Foreword to the 50th Anniversary Edition of LOTR. In the "Letters", Tolkien actually complained about the three volume division, particularly TTT, since the two "Books" in that volume were so unrelated. The movies however ARE divided into three parts. I also have to agree with everyone who has said that the four hobbits should not be in "The Hobbit", as they are not born and have no relevance to the story. I will be interested to see if the second film is a "bridge" as was originally indicated, or will be "The Hobbit" after the death of Smaug, which del Toro has suggested may be the case. Actually, the six part division is the only one Tolkien had a hand in. Additionally, the six parts are called “books”, and the three volumes are called “parts”. The three volume division was made by Tolkien’s publisher, not Tolkien. This is in the Foreword to the 50th Anniversary Edition of LOTR. In the “Letters”, Tolkien actually complained about the three volume division, particularly TTT, since the two “Books” in that volume were so unrelated. The movies however ARE divided into three parts.

I also have to agree with everyone who has said that the four hobbits should not be in “The Hobbit”, as they are not born and have no relevance to the story. I will be interested to see if the second film is a “bridge” as was originally indicated, or will be “The Hobbit” after the death of Smaug, which del Toro has suggested may be the case.

]]> By: Magic Carpet Ridehttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-836 Magic Carpet Ride Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:35:08 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-836 Well, yes there are Six Parts, divided under "3"Books. However, these are split up in the movie, and they are suppose to be right after each other. But there are 6 parts, under "3" Books Well, yes there are Six Parts, divided under “3″Books. However, these are split up in the movie, and they are suppose to be right after each other. But there are 6 parts, under “3″ Books

]]> By: Showhttp://the-hobbit-movie.com/2009/01/19/hobbits-back-for-hobbit-movie/comment-page-1/#comment-835 Show Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:50:27 +0000 http://the-hobbit-movie.com/?p=123#comment-835 I thought it was one piece broke into six parts? I thought it was one piece broke into six parts?

]]>