I'm super interested in seeing it, but I'm still not sure if it was necessary to stretch the story over 3 separate 3 hour movies. I love the Lord of the Rings movies, and that made sense, there were three books, and even at 4 hours, there were parts that needed to be left out. The Hobbit, one of my favorite books that I remember reading with my father when I was a kid (we had the hardcover one with the paintings, so good), doesn't really need that kind of treatment, in my estimation. But that's probably why I'm not getting paid millions of dollars to make movies.
How closely did it follow the book? That was one of the great things about the LOTR.
cubdog
I'm super interested in seeing it, but I'm still not sure if it was necessary to stretch the story over 3 separate 3 hour movies. I love the Lord of the Rings movies, and that made sense, there were three books, and even at 4 hours, there were parts that needed to be left out. The Hobbit, one of my favorite books that I remember reading with my father when I was a kid (we had the hardcover one with the paintings, so good), doesn't really need that kind of treatment, in my estimation. But that's probably why I'm not getting paid millions of dollars to make movies.
I have not read the book, but the reviews I've read stated that is follows it pretty closely. Almost too closely for some reviewers it seems.
Actually, LOTR was written as a single book and the publisher broke it up into 3 to maximize profits.