Home
Superhero Store
Members Area
Learn How
Media
Community
Classifieds
CBM Master List
GraphicCity Home : News : Videos : Pictures : Polls : Contact

Smaug In THE HOBBIT, When Will He Appear?

Actor Benedict Cumberbatch reveals exactly when the immense, greedy dragon will show up in the trilogy prequel to Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings saga.

Follow Mark:
View CBM Profile Follow on Facebook Follow on Twitter Follow on Google
By Mark Julian - 8/20/2012

In an interview submitted to Benedict Cumberbatch fansite Cumberbatchweb, a sliver of information was shared that reveals exactly how much Smaug you'll be getting in the first two Hobbit films. Said Cumberbatch on Smaug's screentime---

"I think my eye might open at the end of the first film and then you’ll get the rest of me in the second."

Keep in mind, this information was shared before the The Hobbit was transformed from a two-part tale to a trilogy. Peter Jackson may decide to move footage around and with Smaug being such an integral component of the story, if footage is indeed changed, it would likely be to move the first appearance of Smaug to the second film.

CumberbatchWeb via CS

RELATED CONTENT:
THE HOBBIT Will Now Be A Trilogy
Peter Jackson Talks THE HOBBIT,"Filming For Both Movies Wraps In July"
Peter Jackson Explains The Difference Between THE HOBBIT And THE LORD OF THE RINGS



Running Time: Unknown
Release Date: December 14, 2012
MPAA Rating: Unknown
Starring: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis, Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett, Richard Armitage, Hugo Weaving and Orlando Bloom
Directed by: Peter Jackson.
Written by: J.R.R. Tolkien (novel), Fran Walsh (screenplay), Philippa Boyens (screenplay), Peter Jackson (screenplay), Guillermo del Toro (screenplay)


DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under "safe harbor" provisions and will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. For expeditious removal, contact us HERE.
3
LIKE!
42 Comments
GreenHalJordan - 8/20/2012, 8:20 AM
So why did this need to be a trilogy?!
SimyJo - 8/20/2012, 8:25 AM
What?, They only reach him by the end? and the cliffhanger is his eye opens? - (roll credits).

Sounds like this new trilogy could 'drag-on'.

*Badoomtish*
SimyJo - 8/20/2012, 8:28 AM
@GreenHalJordan

Because they tried to fit the book into one film only to find they had underestimated it's 'SCALE'!. ^^
blvdnoise - 8/20/2012, 8:32 AM
Damn it.
SimyJo - 8/20/2012, 8:42 AM
I don't think I can take another trilogy and 9 hours + of Gollum saying "Precioussssss".

Think I'll wait for the rental.
BizarroGrif - 8/20/2012, 8:49 AM
@SimyJo you have restored my faith in puns and, by extension, mankind. Thank you.
FoxForce5 - 8/20/2012, 9:01 AM
If the third film is indeed mostly material from The Lord of the Rings Appendices and acts as a "bridge" film between the two trilogies, then the pacing of the first two movies and of The Hobbit story might not be affected much.
NorrinRaddical - 8/20/2012, 9:03 AM
bravo SimyJo
BarackObama - 8/20/2012, 9:05 AM
"I don't think I can take another trilogy and 9 hours + of Gollum saying "Precioussssss".

Think I'll wait for the rental."

No one gives a [frick] when you see it, bro.


"shit movies made just to cash in"

Nah, that's those Nolanite Batman movies, bro.
Facade - 8/20/2012, 9:06 AM
How does he know? Aren't the in post production and with a 3rd film added, doesn't that change the editing?

I expect we'll see Smaug attack the Lonely Mountain in the 1st film.
StarkRaving - 8/20/2012, 9:09 AM
"Actor Benedict Cumberbatch reveals exactly when the immense, greedy dragon will show up in the trilogy prequel to Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings saga."

Wrong on two counts. First, as this article's author goes on to explain, "This information was shared BEFORE the The Hobbit was transformed from a two-part tale to a trilogy." (Emphasis mine).

Second, "I THINK my eye MIGHT open at the end of the first filmand then you’ll get the rest of me in the second." (emphasis mine) is hardly an exact description of when he'll show in either film.

By the way, the third film will NOT be a bridge between "The Lord of the Rings" and "The Hobbit". It's been pretty well established that the story of "The Hobbit" will be expanded with scenes from the White Council's investigation into the Neuromancer's identity and the battle of Dol Guldur so that Bilbo's journey will encompass three films.
CrimsonReign - 8/20/2012, 9:41 AM
Awesome...anyone who has read the book and the appendices to LOTR knows that there is a lot that takes place leading up to the dragon and after the demise of said dragon. There is PLENTY of good material for a great trilogy.
AlexDeLarge87 - 8/20/2012, 9:44 AM
Cant wait to see Necromancer on the big screen :)
hope420 - 8/20/2012, 10:17 AM
I knew they would do just a tease of him in the first movie! They are doing it like Gollum and showing as little as they can! Smart for them sucks for us.
hope420 - 8/20/2012, 10:21 AM
I also wonder if we will get a trailer for part 2 at the end of part 1 like they did with the LOTR movies!
kylemf88 - 8/20/2012, 10:23 AM
Because they added a bunch of dirt shit thats not in the book.
Caveboy0 - 8/20/2012, 10:34 AM
looking at the book i think its possible to split it up 3 ways. first film is ends with the goblins and gollum, the second one goes through the mirk wood forest with the spiders and ends with escaping the elves, and the third film is the dragon and the final battle.
HelaGood - 8/20/2012, 10:36 AM
yeah the third film will be totally bridge stuff, but they couldve just done that in the second half of the second movie.

the first movie should go up to and include smaug/bard.
the second would be the battle of five armies.
HelaGood - 8/20/2012, 10:37 AM
still, i cant wait to see smaug!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MrDuck - 8/20/2012, 11:34 AM
How is this any different than having Gollum's eyes appear in the mines of Moria and waiting to see him until the second movie?
Ranger14 - 8/20/2012, 12:06 PM
They're adding in the Battle of Dol Guldur, which is all win if you ask me. I posted this before. Can't believe people are whining about getting 3 films. 3 films means they have more than 2 films worth of great stuff!

http://io9.com/5931001/everything-peter-jackson-added-to-the-hobbit-++-with-proof
MarkJulian - 8/20/2012, 12:27 PM
What Mr. Duck said.
fettastic - 8/20/2012, 12:28 PM
I can't believe we are still hearing people talk about the last Hobbit film consisting of "bridge material". Yes that was the original plan YEARS AGO, but that has radically changed.

The trilogy is the book The Hobbit, with filler material excised from the LOTR appendices and perhaps some other writings of Tolkien's.

NOTHING from The Simarillion will be included.
supermarioworldE - 8/20/2012, 12:54 PM
Smaug definitely isn't the immense, greedy dragon in this project...
SimyJo - 8/20/2012, 1:14 PM
bagadoosh - 8/20/2012, 1:34 PM
it's going to be 3 - 45 minute movies
fettastic - 8/20/2012, 1:57 PM
@deathmetalbrian, LINK?
fettastic - 8/20/2012, 2:08 PM
Here is my proof by the way:

"the director is drawing not only on the original book, but also on more than a hundred pages of appendices Tolkien later wrote that expanded on the world of The Hobbit. Jackson is obviously confident that all of this material taken together can sustain three films and hinted in his announcement at what narrative elements will be incorporated to fill out the trilogy.

“We know how much of the story of Bilbo Baggins, the Wizard Gandalf, the Dwarves of Erebor, the rise of the Necromancer, and the Battle of Dol Guldur will remain untold if we do not take this chance,” he wrote. “The richness of the story of The Hobbit, as well as some of the related material in the appendices of The Lord of the Rings, allows us to tell the full story of the adventures of Bilbo Baggins and the part he played in the sometimes dangerous, but at all times exciting, history of Middle-earth.”
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/07/30/peter-jackson-third-hobbit-film/

There are a million other stories just like this on the internet because this story came from Peter Jackson himself. Notice how there are EXACTLY ZERO articles anywhere on the internet saying the third film will be a bridge between the two trilogies. That's because it's NOT TRUE!
StarkRaving - 8/20/2012, 3:44 PM
I have additional proof to support fettastic. TheOneRing.Net, which has close ties to the film production, categorically stated that there would be no bridge film:

?TheOneRing.net has confirmed with two independent sources that the third “Hobbit,” film will not follow the schedule of traditional December releases for Middle-earth movies and will hit audiences in Summer of 2014. TORn has also learned that this newly announced film will not serve as a bridge film but continue to tell the story of “The Hobbit,” in three parts. It is believed that the breaking points of the first film has changed.?

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/07/30/59780-peter-jackson-confirms-third-film/#more-59780
HelaGood - 8/20/2012, 3:58 PM
@fettastic

the original idea was in fact to have a bridge film, but it was abandoned early on.

here are a couple of articles about a bridge between the two trilogies:

Geeks of Doom

Stack Exchange
fettastic - 8/20/2012, 5:35 PM
@HelaGood, please note that I was the first person here, and until you the only person, to point that out.

As I first said, I can't believe there are still people around, going to NEWS SITES, who are still under the impression that is still the plan. Do these people realize it's no longer just two films? Have they heard that Peter Jackson is directing them?
StarkRaving - 8/20/2012, 5:36 PM
@HelaGood,

fettastic wrote in original post, above, "I can't believe we are still hearing people talk about the last Hobbit film consisting of 'bridge material'. Yes that was the original plan YEARS AGO, but that has radically changed."
CoLest - 8/20/2012, 6:36 PM
Its because thier showing sense from Dol guldur and the white council. Im more than happy to have a third hobbit if it shows battles like that.
comicb00kguy - 8/21/2012, 6:32 AM
This just underscores the ignorance of turning a one-book story into three films. Smaug is an integral part of that story, and he's certainly what audiences are going to want to see. With two films, we can end the movie with the first appearance of Smaug, showing just enough to whet audiences' appetites to come back in a year to see more of him. Three films waters the central story down far too much. Adding some of the material from the LOTR appendices could be cool, but not if it overwhelms the central story.
GLprime2814 - 8/21/2012, 6:57 AM
Vader no!
CoulsonLives - 8/22/2012, 3:30 AM
BRING....IT..........ON!!!!!!!!
PeterParker1991 - 8/22/2012, 5:40 AM
^^Yes. Do it, Jackson
DEADP0000L - 8/22/2012, 3:15 PM
who bloody cares.....oh wait there is over 42+ comments that doWho Cares Pictures, Images and Photos
MadJakHatesSpinoffs - 8/22/2012, 6:52 PM
The Hobbit does not need to be a trilogy, you can easily do it in two. Heck, you can probably do it just fine in one movie as long as they have an extended director's cut later.
wolverine1987 - 8/23/2012, 10:43 AM
I wonder if we'll see some Tom Bombadil?
Or some crazy Hobbits killing an army of men trying to take over The Shire?

I have high hopes for the movie, and it will most likely be great, but damn...

3 movies?

[frick]ing milking it
ScionStorm - 8/24/2012, 12:15 AM
Frankly I'm surprised that his website isn't just called the "Cumberbatchwatch".
ScionStorm - 8/24/2012, 12:18 AM
Beni, you need to get down on all fours and mo-cap that dragon performance. DO IT! BE the dragon.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.

.