[Movies] Could the Lord of the Rings trilogy have been made into a single film?

[Deleted]

Edit : perhaps a better question would be, what events in the books would you put into it if it was max 3 hr long. I guess it wouldnt even make sense.

[Venziir]

Would be a VERY long film....

[Edison]

Would be a VERY long film....

Yeah but it would be boringly long :P

[HolgerDK]

Or it would have been shortened to such a degree, that it becomes confusing and a mockery of Tolkiens books.

[Venziir]

Yeah but it would be boringly long :P

Opinions really... I feel that say all the original Star Wars films as one movie would be mindnumbingly boring.

[Millennía]

I would love it but it would be like 9 hours so not many could watch it in one sitting, I personally would :P

[Deleted]

I can hardly even be squished into 3 films, even less one ^^
The story has too much detail and meanings.

[Uriel]

i dont think so.
even in 3 Movies was barely enough space to fit it all in.. there is so much content from the book wich wasnt used at all.
I dont like those rushed Movies.. in order to understand the characters feelings you need to get to know him/her first.. in some bad movies this introduction of important characters is skipped or rushed so sometimes you dont know who or why something is done.

[Shiny212]

Would never do the books justice; even as they are now they cut a lot of meaningful content; the third movie almost needed to be cut in two even, extended cut is more than 4 hours. Still an extremely successful adaptation IMO

[lupito]

PJ had to cut a lot of scenes in 3 movies already. I understand tom bombadil and the barrow wights were somehow not that important, but the scouring of the shire was such an important chapter that didn't make it to the movies.

[smokii]

tom bombadil was cut from it entirely as it is, cutting it down to 1 film is simply not possible without completely trashing the plotline. it's like suggesting all 7 harry potter books could've been made into 1 film.

i tend to make time every christmas to do a full extended edition screening - 12 hours of LOTR goodness.

[Capslock]

There is a LoTR animation film which covers book 1 and 2. It's very bad

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lor...gs_(1978_film)

[vizzle]

That would be horrible. They would never make it too long of a movie because that doesn't make financial sense, so it would have to be boiled down to AT MOST 3 hours of movie. How would you compress 9-12 hours of footage to 3 hours without cutting out a LOT of good stuff? You wouldn't.

[Vankrin]

3 movies did an amazing job, but I agree with whoever said that return of the king should have been broken into 2 movies, as was done with harry potter and (lol) twilight.

who would have complained about four LOTR movies?

[pzijderv]

better yet i can fit it into 2 minutes, this thread is begging for this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yqVD0swvWU

on a more serious note: id rather have seen it in more movies then less

[Deleted]

Opinions really... I feel that say all the original Star Wars films as one movie would be mindnumbingly boring.

That's why there tree 3 of them.

YES 3, not 6

[Wolfgang777]

Jyoung, your avatar is amazing. I have myself a Haunter background on my phone =D
I do not know much about Lord of the Rings, since I fell asleep 30 minutes into the first one and never bothered to give it another chance. But I can say that most books being made into movies have to be longer. You know the characters from reading the books, it is not like you are walking in the theatre and just getting to know the main character. 90 percent of the time, movies that are made from books, can come out from both ends of the spectrum. Either really good, or really bad. I was very excited about watching the Darren Shan, Cirque De Freak. But after seeing the movie, I was dissapointed. Seemed like a 1 and a half hour joke for children. I was not impressed.
In my eyes, if a book is turned into a movie it has to be long, or you just won't get that "wow" feeling like the book gives.

[Uennie]

I don't understand the question.

What then would I throw my money at with wanton lust?

[Kaj392]

12 hours with the extended editions. I'd do it.

OT: Either a very long movie or a very short and bad one.

+ The hobbit and The hobbit 2, make that a total of lets say, 18 hour?
When it comes out (don't know if its in every country) they will air a marathon of LotR 1 2 3 and the first part of The Hobbit, can't wait!

Darren Shan, Cirque De Freak.

There is a movie of it?

[Wolfgang777]

Yeah Kaj, Jon C. Reily is in it. Don't get me wrong, he is a great comedic actor. But he shouldn't play a badass vampire like the book portrayed Mr. Crepsley to be. It irked me for the longest time. And don't even get me started on that Series of unfortunate events movie. The books were meh, the movie was bleh!