Well, he already ruined the trilogy, why not go for the prequel.

ruined? really? I liked the films. Sure, there were flaws (the absence of Tom Bombadil, for instance), but I thought he did well over all.

In what possible sense was the trilogy ruined? I thought they did very well, though it's been a while since I've read the books for comparison.

no movie could have compared to the books. There is no way that anyone could equal the picture in your minds eye. This being said, why does it have to equal the books. They are 2 different ways of experiencing something. When you read a book ,you enjoy the rythm and texture of the words. The tropes that delight us while reading don't transition to other media well. Film has its own tropes that don't transition well to books. When I say "Wizard of Oz" most people will automatically think of the movie. The books could not match the magical moment when Dorothy transitions from B/W to Color. That visual cue makes you feel the magic, even though we see color movies all the time.

The part that concerns me is that he will be making one movie from The Hobbit and another from source material that Tolkien had left which connects it to LOTR. I think 2 films could be done from The Hobbit. The logical division point of Beorn's house would be perfect.

My comment was in jest, and referencing a previous discussion.

oops. sorry.