Elijah Wood Shares Some Hobbit and Hobbit 2 Details

Our friends over at MTV emailed us to let us know about a conversation they had with Elijah Wood regarding the now official and upcoming Hobbit movies (yes, there are going to be two of them.

First of all, Elijah confirmed that he would certainly come back to play in one of the films if he was asked to do so. That’s a no brainer… obviously he would. But it raises the question: “How can he come back to play Frodo when Frodo isn’t even alive in the time frame of “The Hobbit”

The answer to that question is that the second Hobbit movie may not be The Hobbit at all. Many people have been assuming (me included) that The Hobbit would be broken into 2 films, with some extra material added into the second one. But according the the conversation with MTV, Wood suggests that the first movie would be “The Hobbit” and the second one would be an entirely new film that bridges The Hobbit to The Lord of the Rings. This would open up the possibilities of characters like Frodo, Aragorn and others to appear.

Personally, I think that sounds like an amazing approach to it! Yes, you COULD split The Hobbit into two films, but honestly a 2.5-3 hour Hobbit movie would probably cover all the essential elements, and really, there is no logical break point in The Hobbit to end the first part with if you split it in two.

So what do you think of the idea of the second movie being an entirely new story bridging Hobbit to LOTR?

Comment with Facebook

15 thoughts on “Elijah Wood Shares Some Hobbit and Hobbit 2 Details

  1. This could either be great or really streched! Sureley The Hobbit could only be one film? I REALLY hope they dont strech it over 2 movies, I like Elijah Wood but don’t really want the quality acting from LOTR to be tarnished by a diluted Hollywood cash-in : / well to other Elijah fans i found this: http://www.waterbynature.com/adrenaline-junkie-elijah-wood.php Elijah Wood on Jack Osbournes adrenaline junkies! Quality! Some serious extreme rafting…

  2. Hobbit is a great book and I’m glad that they are making the movie. I was wondering why they are not making it even after the great success of LOTR.

    Personally, I agree that a 3 hr movie would get in all details of the Hobbit so there’s no point in making two movies.

    Great news for fans of Tolkein.

    There is an item on my blog about this affair. Perhaps you could view it and give me your views regarding my thoughts. Follow this link


  3. There’s a huge difference between using the old well know characters or making a new scripted movie based on Tolkien’s world. First seems to me like a huuuge mistake while second could not be only limited to one secuel but more than that.

  4. Oldshell and Daryl

    You’re both throwing out predictions with absolutely no foundation,but its OK cause most likely when these films come out you’re gonna hafta eat your own words.There is no reason to assume that these films will be as terrible as you say,the first three films were great.This idea that there will be a bridge between the films isnt confired yet.Its still only a rumor so just calm right down.IF however it turns out there IS gonna be this “bridge” there would still be nothing to fret over.I doubt they would take on a new storyline if they werent sure they had a good plot.Also a bridge probably will coincide with the rest of the saga,and will help to answer any uncertanties.One must realize that Tolken had many unfinished writings that DID help bridge the gaps between Hobbit and LOTR and a sequel would have its foundation in these.If the film turns out to be a success,I really couldnt care less whether it was based soley off of one of Tolkens “finished” books,so long as it dosnt contradict any.Why should a filmmaker have to limit his creativity to ONLY include that which Tolken has secifically written about?why should he not explore the unfinished works?why should he be bond to make films about only the”finished books” when theres more to be told in the saga of middle earth.Thats stupid.You CAN say that it is”looking for a good excuse to make another movie”,but your only foolin’ yourself.

    You say that they are making these films as a means of making more money.Ya darn right they are,filmaking is about making money.But as long as the films have the quality of the LOTR,WHO REALLY CARES.

  5. bullshit to hobbit 2… that would be a shameless cash in to link the two franchises… just split the original hobbit in 2 and stick to that, don;t sell out and get greedy with some random (and most likely terrible addition). I’m no lotr fanboy.. I couldn’t give 2 … if jackson directs or not etc, but adding in another story.. that’s pure capitalism and will be bad i guarantee it. The worst thing about lotr was the “irish” hobbits (clearly pippin and merrian were not designed to be light irish [because irish = funny] relief)… don’t fuck with it and it’s a guarenteed success, and it’ll probably7 be a damn fine movie.. fuck too much and it’ll ruin the franchise with an average fantasy romp.

  6. I think this is just plain greedy. This is nothing short of a huge liberty. I believe that they should stick to just the books that where finished. Anyone saying it is “based” of notes and writting that were unfinished books is just looking for a good excuse to make another movie.

    But I will probably be in line when it comes out. Will it be Oscar worthy like LOTR, I don’t think so.

  7. If these two films are nearly as good as the LOTR — I’m buying a ticket today. And who cares if they make a buck or a billion, isn’t that what they should do. We both get something out of it. The only thing I would hate, backsliding on the budget. If your going to do it — give as much as you did the others.

  8. When it was announced that Peter Jackson was indeed going to be involved with the Hobbit, he said that he wouldn’t be directing and there was going to be 2 films, one of them being the adaptation of The Hobbit and the 2nd film would be an original based on notes and ideas from J. R. R. Tolkien had and didn’t use or on books never completed.

    I don’t know how this talk of splitting The Hobbit in 2 happened when they came out and already said what they were planning with the 2 films.

  9. I think there will be a lot of angry fan boys running around the states and forming on the studio responsible for a screw up if they manage to do so.

    However, if I’m not mistaken Chris Tolkein has heavy insight as to what happens to anything regarding Middle Earth and his father’s creation. So he would have to approve any and all new stories. Correct me if I’m wrong though.

  10. a hobbit 2? that just sounds greedy, and as far as the stories concerned their needs to be that large gap of peace between the two books, its what makes them so unique from each other.

  11. I will admit that as a HUGE fan of both the LOTR books and movies, this makes me a bit uneasy.
    I didn’t really like some of the bigger liberties that were taken in the movies, (read: almost the entire second half of Two Towers).

    So an entire movie which is basically a huge liberty from the subject matter? It could rock for all I know, but it makes me a bit wary. Maybe it’s just that I really like the books.

  12. This is good news! The Hobbit is a film to look forward to as well as the second one. A lot of exciting stuff happens in between, Aragorn meets Gandalf, Aragorn captures Golum, Golum gets captures by Mordo orcs, etc etc. This piece of news has me totally excited!

Leave a Reply