New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

That's...way more than seven dwarves.

Kim Hollis: Since the post-Thanksgiving weekend at the box office was as boring as ever, let's cheat again by skipping ahead two weeks. What are your thoughts and expectations for The Hobbit?

Jason Barney: I would say expectations for me continue to grow. I am not sure what the opening will be, but I hope it is going to be pretty big. I have found myself thinking about going back and watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy. In different places I have been, including work, people have mentioned a certain amount of anticipation around The Hobbit. I won't go see it opening night, but will probably go opening weekend. The only negative has been more than one person mentioning the drawing the storyline out to three different films. Perhaps it is what happened with Harry Potter and Twilight. I have heard a couple people talk about money grabbing with three films rather than just one.

However, I think there is a difference between these observations and the track record of the Lord of the Rings series. In almost every aspect those films were so beautifully done, so detailed, that I almost get the sense people want to see more of Peter Jackson's view of that universe. He earned A LOT of respect with his serious, dark, and truly real vision of the Lord of the Rings movies, so I tend to discount greed.

Even if it is three movies and all three make tons of money for everyone involved....you can put this one in the "art" category for me. Twilight and Harry Potter can't compare.

Edwin Davies: I'm cautiously optimistic, emphasis on the cautious. I yield to no man in my love of the Lord of the Rings trilogy (though, as per the rules of those films, I may yield to hobbits or women disguised as men) and am excited about revisiting Middle Earth, but I also can't see how they're going to make it three films. Three long-ass films at that. Lovely Bones aside, Peter Jackson has rarely set a foot wrong and I think he is capable of delivering great blockbuster entertainment, but I can't help but think that the Hobbit trilogy (I mean, how stupid does that sound? What next, a four-part, 12 hour adaptation of Catcher In The Rye?) will be a case of too little story stretched too thin, with admittedly dazzling effects.

Having said all that, I think it's going to be very, very big. It might not open to record-breaking numbers because of the time of year, but being the only blockbuster to come out over the Christmas period will help it wrack up some pretty high numbers. After all, it worked for Avatar. I wouldn't be surprised if 2012 produces its fourth $400 million movie.

Felix Quinonez: I can't even put into words how excited I am about this movie. I think the trailers look fantastic and I trust Peter Jackson wholeheartedly. (So much so that I can completely overlook The Lovely Bones.) As we all know this movie has been in production for a long time and has had more than its share of bad luck. For a time I almost thought it would never actually happen but I am very excited to head back to middle earth.

As far as box office goes, I see no reason why it doesn't match or get close to The Fellowship of the Ring. I really can't see it reaching the heights of Return of the King because I think some of the mainstream excitement that Lord of the Rings generated is gone. Plus since The Lord of the Rings franchise inspired so many imitators, the novelty of this type of movie is at least partially gone.

Continued:       1       2