Harry Potter and Twilight's last books were over 700 pages each, so I'm okay with those being split into two films, but The Hunger Games being a 350 page book didn't need to do it, and much less The Hobbit being turned into 3 long films... what do y'all think?

The Hobbit actually works because that universe is really intricate and fleshing out all of the characters is necessary. Mockingjay is beyond pointless. I liked the movie, but most of those "propaganda building" scenes could've been axed. Could've been one movie for sure.

Mockingjay
Last Twilight
Hobbit
The future Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them movies.

All of them. The only reason they got split is because the studio's wanted to milk as much money out of the series as they could.

Harry Potter didn't really need it either. The spent half the first movie at that campsite, doing basically nothing.

Mockingjay definitely needed two films.
They couldn't have done it justice with one.

BD is the only one where it's unnecessary. All the others I enjoyed them splitting them

Probably Mockingjay. When I heard they were going to do 2 films for the last book I was left really dumbfounded X_X

None of them needed to be split except the Hobbit. Peter Jackson's always needs a 100 hours to tell a story, but he does it so well.

Twilight considering nothing actually happens.

Breaking Dawn

The Hobbit. It's literally one book split into three 3 HOUR films

It's incredibly boring and critics didn't praise the length either.

Mockingjay definitely needed two films. Too much would've been crammed into a small slot otherwise.

Twilight. It was a mammoth of a book and literally NOTHING happened in it at all, so to try and stretch 1000 pages of nothing across 2 movies is just like ugh.

Actually if Twilight, Harry Potter, and Mocking jay had stayed one film they would have been about 4+ hours each so yes they did need two parts each

Mockingjay & Breaking Dawn

And it's not about the number of pages.

Exactly. It's about the content. And the only one that REALLY didn't need two films was Breaking Dawn.

.

Sounds like a very generic and uneducated answer. If you had even read the books The Hobbit clearly couldn't be faithfully remade in one movie even if it were 4 hours long. The book may be rather small but the sheer amount of events that took place warrant the 3 movies. Harry potter worked fine with 2 movies. Not sure about mockingjay cause the book seems like it could of worked as one movie but BD defiantly didn't need two movies.

Hobbit could have be done in two, so much could have been cut out of the first two. Not here for dwarfs singing around a table for no reason.

Harry Potter did and didn't. The first part of DH isn't fantastic, it lulls in the camping parts but Part 2 is so brilliant because they got that stuff out of the way which set that film up much better for the "this is the end, one of them is gonna die" vibe... so I think it was worth it in the end of HP.