6 comments

[ 5.7 ms ] story [ 26.3 ms ] thread
To date, the Hobbit trilogy has made $2,759,130,028 globally.

This cut may be a better single experience, and maybe would have increased the monetary single experience, but I dunno if it could make up for $1.4b in revenue.

Of course the studios could draw inspiration from this, and in a couple Christmases release their own 3 or 4 hour single cut!
I fully expect this to happen, said so to friends after the second movie. Just have to wait for the studio to wring out the trilogy version money first.
I always thought that the whole LOTR/Hobbit thing could to well as a modern TV series; like Game of Thrones, House of Cards or Breaking Bad -- movie-like quality but much longer, so there's possibility to tell a much bigger story and zoom in on many details which each can tell a story on their own. I for one liked how the LOTR extensions had more time for some quiet moments, and song. Maybe they'll do a longer TV-Show-like edit.

Although with the Hobbit they stretched it in really tedious and annoying ways, not adding much interesting to the story, just dumb action and and annoying characters. So now people want it to be shorter.

I didn't pay to see the second one and I couldn't sit through the 3rd one, which I downloaded. I don't care that Peter Jackson + LOTR = money. He's a terrible director. Any movie with a traveling montage, is a failure in movie direction...which he does in every movie.
Very nice effort! 4.5 hours is still a bit long for a single film. Ever since The Hobbit movies were announced I thought the story could fit into a couple 2-hour movies much better than the three existing 3-hour movies. The Hobbit felt like a five-page school paper where you could only come up with two pages of actual content and you're scrambling to fluff it out, like adding useless anecdotes and increasing the font size of all punctuation.

“I feel thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread.” Indeed you were, Mr. Bilbo, indeed you were.