1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

Not all that glitters is gold

Official: Peter Jackson Is Making 3 Hobbit Films (Whether We Like It Or Not)

So is the third going to be called The Hobbit: There and Back Again For One More? The Hobbit: An Unexpected Trilogy? The Hobbit: We Want More Gold Than Smaug? I digress, Peter Jackson is officially making three Hobbit films. Read on for details including potential (real) titles.

We don’t have a whole lot to go on right now but it’s been confirmed that Jackson and New Line are going ahead with a third Hobbit movie.

When the rumors first started, Jackson didn’t exactly deny the possibility of a third movie but said, “We are also using extensive parts of the appendices which were published at the end of Return of the King. This is not just The Hobbit— it’s The Hobbit set in a much greater context of events taking place throughout Middle-earth during this period. The material is so rich. In fact only this last week or two, we’ve been talking to the studio about allowing us to shoot some additional material next year, to fully complete the story.” But an unnamed studio representative said the plan was always for two.

At Comic-Con, Jackson wasn’t sure what the new shoots would be for though he theorized it could be for extended editions of the two films. And the very last we heard was that he was talking to New Line about stretching into a third film which, no duh, the studio said yes to.

Here’s what Jackson had to say on his Facebook page:

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.”

Well, there you have it, folks. The good news? We get to prolong our fandom for a bit longer than expected. The bad news? We have to wait until Summer 2014 to see the completed films. I’m kind of feeling like Jackson is thinking about the books like Smaug thinks about his gold – there’s plenty and to spare.

I made a few jokes above but what might this third film actually be called? /Film points to some recent domain registrations as a clue. “As for the title, domain registrations suggest The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug and The Hobbit: Riddles in the Dark as potential names.”

No word yet on how this will effect actor/crew contracts. Are you ok with three Hobbit films or is this too much?

(via The Hollywood Reporter)

Previously in The Hobbit

Are you following The Mary Sue on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest, & Google +?

TAGS: | | | | | | |

  • Frida Frag

    I am perfectly fine with three movies. I enjoy Jackson’s storytelling, and I don’t mind paying more money for more content, background information and visual splendor!

  • John Robey

    I thought two was pushing it as it was. O.o

  • captain sharmie

    the longer i have to wait between movies, the less i care about the series. i had so much trouble with harry potter and i love the books. i love the hobbit too, but i’m pretty sure that once i see movie two i’ll get mad that there’s an age to wait for the third, and will stop caring. my loss, i guess… :/

  • WonderScott

    I’m unfamiliar with content in the appendices, so I can’t comment on how those will translate into a narrative and how (or if) it will weave in and out of the story of The Hobbit or just be a third film.

    Probably, and most likely, the former knowing Peter Jackson and team’s love for the mythology. 

    I was skeptical at first of 3 movies based solely on the Hobbit–I mean we got 3 movies out of 3 volumes for the original–so it felt like they were stretching it/a cash grab.

    Glad to hear they will be adapting additional info into the Hobbit.  It’s got to be a wonderful, creatively speaking, to from appendix-type info into a story.  A lot of creative freedom there for any artist. 

  • Alana Beltzer

    The Hobbit 3: The Search for Even More Money

  • Sanjay Merchant

    Personally, I think they should just call film three “Smaug’s Hoard”.  Also, I’ve totally lost any interest in seeing this now.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t really get it. The Hobbit is a vastly more simple tale than LOTR, and each of those only got one film (and even though I’ve seen the extended editions, those were pushing it). I just can’t figure out what else there really is to talk about.

  • Lindsay Beaton

    I’m partial to your ideas, personally, and “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Trilogy” cracked me right up, so let’s just go with that.

    My money and I are getting weary of this split-ALL-the-movies trend, especially since it’s not just the theater tickets that will be clamoring for my dollars. There are three DVDs or Blu-Rays or whatever. Then they come out with super special editions with 25,000 hours of footage never before seen because three movies still wasn’t enough to fit it all. Somewhere in there they re-release all the books (not that I ever buy all those; I’m happy with my well-aged editions, thanks). It’s just a marketing explosion, and I get it, but it makes me grumpy.

  • Anonymous

    Honestly, if this was anyone other than Jackson I’d think this was just a shameless grab for money. But because this IS Jackson, and the rest of the LotR/Hobbit crew, I’m going to withhold judgement until I actually see it. I mean, I realise that the making-of videos are largely clever marketing, but one thing in them is clearly true – those people LOVE Tolkien’s creation at least as much as I do (and possibly much more). They have spent over a decade now living the dream of every die-hard fan, and living it well, and they are responsible for some of the best cinema-related memories of my life. If they say that I should spend extra two hours in Middle-earth then I’m going to trust them.

  • Anonymous

    It was obvious this was coming down the pipe “weather we like it or not”. Who is “we”, certainly not me. I welcome you to consider that maybe Jackson also has legitimate reasons for wanting a third movie. Also consider even if it is for the money to some, maybe to him it is also an opportunity to improve on parts that he felt were weak.

  • Anonymous

    Initial reaction was incredulity and apprehension.
    Secondary reaction is cautiously optimistic.
    I don’t doubt the studio would greenlight anything to make money, but I honestly believe Jackson wouldn’t make a short story for extra bucks, much less a whole movie. He loves the material too much.
    If he says it’s enough for one additional movie I will give him the benefit of doubt. He’s earned it a thousand times over.

  • Robin Carlisle

     The three Hobbit movies will be subtitled “An Unexpected Journey”, “There and Back Again”, and  “In Which Hollywood Realized From Deathly Hallows that Splitting Books into Multiple Movies, Even When Totally Unnecessary, Makes Them More Money and Thus Continue to Mutilate Well-Loved Franchises Despite The Desperate Pleas of Fans to ‘For the Love of God Please Stop.’ “

  • Adam R. Charpentier

    It sounds great!

  • Julianna Condor

    It sounds as though what’s happening is that they’re telling the story of The Hobbit — which was written before Lord of the Rings — and also including a lot of the back and side-story that was created later by Tolkien to fill in the gaps in the lore between the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. Bilbo didn’t see the Necromancer or what happened at Dol Guldur; but a lot of what was happening “off camera” plays into the overall story of Middle Earth. Frankly, if Peter Jackson wants to make a Tolkien movie every couple of years, it’s peachy keen by me. :D I love them.

  • Shurree Clouse

    I’m wondering what this could mean for Sherlock…Will our two boys be tied up with even more Hobbit related production due to this third film?

  • SavageMouse

    I love seeing nerds complaining about this. “What? You’re telling me that guy who made those three epically awesome movies that I love is going to make three more?! That’s bullsh*t!!!” XD

  • Amy M Weir

    Nah. S3 is scheduled to film in January and that’s not going to change. Besides, I suspect there won’t be much if any Bilbo in these additional scenes. The Hobbit– the book– IS Bilbo’s version of the story. What Peter Jackson is saying is he wants to fill in all the story that happened NOT from Bilbo’s viewpoint– the Important Deep Worldwide stuff that wizards and elves and such worry about. I’m guessing all Bilbo’s scenes are over and done with. They’re just going to be spread over three movies instead of two now. (As someone who has this weird problem of getting REALLY ANTSY whenever Martin Freeman is not on camera during a film/show that he’s in otherwise, this, admittedly, worries me most about the news. My Bilbo is being diluted. Strangely I’d probably be THRILLED with three movies if my favorite actor wasn’t starring in them. I KNOW. THIS IS WEIRD).

  • John Wao

    I’m willing to bet this is why Del Toro left the project.

  • Maddie Lindsey

    More Martin Freeman. I cannot possibly be disappointed by this.

  • Anonymous

    While I’ve been moderately looking forward to the forthcoming films, I definitely think this is pushing it too far. I actually thought the LOTR trilogy was seriously flawed, and was riddled with numerous problems, so I’ve been iffy about Peter Jackson and the Hobbit all along. Despite that, I’ve been pleased with the casting, and some of the news I’ve heard, but this just seems fundamentaly like a bad idea. Even if you allow that this isn’t just a cash grab, this seems like it’ll kill any kind of narrative momentum the story will have, and will result in a plodding, muddled mess. Who knows, I could be wrong, but I’m certainly not optimistic about the end results.

  • Anonymous

    I’m confused about all the hating on long movies at the moment. I love them. If I see a movie these days that’s less than two hours long I get a vague feeling of disappointment.

    I say bring on The Hobbit 3 (mind you I would watch a movie of the linguistics or hobbit family trees in the Appendices, so I may not reflect the larger Tolkein fandom)

  • Anonymous

    No one is a bigger Tolkien fan than me but I am very skeptical of this.
    This seems motivated by greed and Peter Jackson’s more self-indulgent
    tendencies as a filmmaker. If they’re making a third film from
    appendices and timelines, they’re going to drift further away from the
    original story and stretch things out more than is necessary. Jackson’s a
    good director so he possibly COULD do this. I’m just not sure that he

  • Anonymous

     Coming in ’15, ’16, ’17, ’18′, ’19, and concluding in 2020, the epic story of the origin of Middle Earth and the ten thousand years or so of history that is… The Silmarillion! 

  • Anonymous

    See, this is why I hold off on purchasing movies when they first come out. When LoTR was first released on Blu-ray as just the theatrical versions, I knew the extended edition was coming. Waiting sucked, but between renting from rental stores/redbox and streaming (through questionable means) I spent a few dollars on each movie and eventually purchased the extended edition.

    And I’ll likely do the same for this new trilogy. I’m happy Jackson is making three as there is plenty of content to do so, but I know the movie studios are already planning what content will go on what initially, and when exactly to release the extended edition…

  • Gregory Williams


  • Anonymous

    As Jackson says, there is so much material here, and if it doesn’t get done now, when the opportunity is before him, it may never be done. Knowing how difficult it was to wait for THE HOBBIT, and how fraught the production was with troubles, let’s let the Master of Middle Earth make the 3 films while he has the chance. After all, all Tolkien fans have devoured the Appendices, wishing they were fleshed-out stories. Seeing them in a narrative form will be a delight.

  • you guys

    To be fair, The Hobbit was one book, LotR was three.

  • Derek Lee K

    To be fair, LotR was One book, released Part by part due to paper cost at the time

  • Derek Lee K

    When it comes to Peter Jackson, more is always more entertaining and better. More character development, hell I dont see why ppl dont like to go to the theatres and watch longer movies (especially when theyre even entertaining), those hour and 20 minute movies (including the credits on some of them) go by so fast, I feel I dont get my moneys worth, with Peter J you get more than what you pay for!