If the LOTR trilogy was being released today theatrically

I am talking about the current trend to milk out the conclusion of series than the Hobbit specifically. Think Potter, Twilight, etc.

It might be somewhat justified material wise, but it's mostly to have another 300+ million movie.

But it kinda goes for the Hobbit though.

2 movies are justified with expanding into the Sauron connection and what Gandalf is up to for half the book (which btw will be fan fiction connecting the dots, not something from the appendices which mostly cover history going back thousands of years than material directly related to the current story).

But 3?

In a book shorter than any of the LOTR books?

Yeah it's a money grab.

If that is a dead topic, you could at least get the rebuttal accurate.

The supplementary material originates from mostly unpublished and/or esoteric written works. (And no, not The Silmarillion either)

Not the book appendices.

I wish they would have made 12 movies from the Hobbit.

It was a joke

This whole 3 movies complaining is about as bad as the Jordan Jefferson vs Jarrett Lee discussion.

I dont think they were really milking Potter when you could have been splitting each book from the get go into at least 2 movies.

hell, from Goblet of Fire on you could have made each one into 3.

I'd rather studies make books into films this way than have then cut out half the plot no matter how major, merge or drop characters, or change up so much its basically just a movie with the name of a popular book just so it can have a runtime of under 90 minutes.