Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: What's gonna happen in the movies?

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Hobbit (Movie) > What's gonna happen in the movies?   
Hi everybody. I was wondering what you guys think will happen in the Hobbit movies in terms of where the first one cuts, how the necromancer plot will be incorporated, and if and how you think Aragorn and Arwen will be included. I know there's already an individual blog for all of this stuff, but I couldn't find anywhere to put down my ideas of the whole thing. Please leave your ideas <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> !

I think what would happen would be that the movie would follow much the same plotline of the book until they reach Rivendell. At this point, Elrond tells Gandalf that Saruman is there too and they hold a council (basically a smaller version of the white council). Aragorn would be present at the council as well, seeing as he is trying to see Arwen secretly from her father and is therefore in Rivendell. It ends with them deciding (Saruman very unwillingly) that Dol Guldur must be attacked. They decide that they will send word to other important people to aid them in the assault (Radagast, Thranduil, Legolas etc).

Then the plot goes back mainly to the Hobbit and the Dwarves up until the edge of MIrkwood, every now and then switching back to Elrond, Aragorn and Arwen.
Gandalf says that he has important business in the south and goes to assault Dol Guldur with the elves of Mirkwood and the White Council. The battle (at the end of which Gandalf confronts the Necromancer and reveals it to be Sauron) along with the Bilbo saving the dwarves from the spiders would be the climax, at the end of which they realize that Bilbo is a capable member of the company and Gollum is seen climbing out into the daylight in search of the Ring.


In the second, it would begin with Gollum following the Orcs of the Misty Mountains toward the Lonely Mountain while they both search for Thorin's company.

The rest of the movie follows the plotline of The Hobbit, again occasionally checking up on Arwen. At Bilbo's confrontation with Smaug, the Ring could (in the slippery manner of the Ring) "fall off" Bilbo's finger, Smaug sees Bilbo, breathes fire, and in the heat the viewers see the engravings of the One Ring (although Bilbo doesn't).

In the Battle of Five Armies, of course ARAGORN AND LEGOLAS ARE THERE! (Those Orlando Bloom diehards will be happy) and blah blah blah, Gollum tries totake the ring from Bilbo during the battle, fails, and gets captured by those mean, tricksy orcses!

Sorry that was long-winded. I've though this through a lot.
I like your idea of Legolas and Aragorn being at the battle, lol. But, for me I'm not going to try to think of how the movie will be. I'm waiting for Del Toro to pull that off.
Why would we need Aragorn to be in the Battle of Five Armies, let alone in the movie. We have a differant would be king; Bard
Del Toro and Jackson are just finishing their first draft of the script. So they haven't even finalized the script yet. I strongly believe that they are visiting fansites and forums like this and are reading what the fans want. They are reading what the shallow fans want, they are reading what the LOTR fans want, and they are reading what the utter Tolkien nuts (like me) want. We have some sway. Never forget that.

With that said, I think they should stick with the book as much as possible. They SHOULD NEVER include Legolas (he would totally ruin it and try to make it a huge action film). Gollum should NEVER show up at the Battle, that would just be a repeat of LOTR (Gollum showing up at the climax). I think that they should stick with the book, and then add things that are absolutely necessary to link it to LOTR. I think we are all agreed that the White Council needs to be in it. Some of us think that either an Aragorn/Arwen romance or a Bard romance should be in it. Personally, I think romance would ruin it for me. Romance makes the stakes higher, it distracts people from the plot, and it makes the film fall into the rut of the rest of Hollywood. It would be a beautiful breath of fresh air if it had no romance. The book had no romance. The movie should have none. Aragorn/Arwen is arguable (since it really happened), but we have that in LOTR. We don't need it in the poor innocent Hobbit. People are trying to put too much weight on this movie. The less weight, the better. They must still link it to LOTR, but they should keep it's theme of innocence. Themes are very, very, very important.
Would it be a good idea to portray the movie as if the audience had never seen LOTR, that way the Ring is just a mysterious magic Ring, the Necromancer is a mystery, and Gollum is just some shadowy figure hiding under a mountain?
[quote="rodu":gtrntir5]Would it be a good idea to portray the movie as if the audience had never seen LOTR, that way the Ring is just a mysterious magic Ring, the Necromancer is a mystery, and Gollum is just some shadowy figure hiding under a mountain?[/quote:gtrntir5]


I agree totally, with the exception of Gollum, he's such a cool character, and with CGI capabilities getting better year after year, i cant wait to see what they do for him. As for the Ring it should not be it's own character like in the Trilogy. I don't even think there should even be a hint of it being evil.

As for the battle of the five armies i just hope it is as cool as this painting by Justin Gerard

[img:gtrntir5]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_d2XY6lj3CKo/Sawtx6dnE2I/AAAAAAAAAkM/QP8u09BIqN8/s400/JG_BattleofFiveArmies_109_e.jpg[/img:gtrntir5]

large version http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_d2XY6lj3CKo/S ... _109_e.jpg
The only hint of the Ring being evil I would use is maybe at the end of the movie, have some sort of close up of it and have it make that whisper it would make in the LOTR movies, only fainter.

Another thing I was wondering a while back. In the Hobbit book, it was clearly aimed at a younger audience, and the dwarves set off on their quest seemingly unarmed and unarmored. Since this movie will be more along the lines of the LOTR movies, would it make sense to arm and equip the dwarves?
Alas, smeagollum... Your version would be too much a rip off of the original series... You have some cool ideas about incorporating the characters from the trilogy, but it just seems like a simpler format of the lotrs. The hobbit is such an awesome tale by itself.

In my opinion, arwen and aragorn shouldnt appear much if at all.

Orlando bloom is too much of an attention sucker. plus, if he were to agree to be in a film, he'd need a semi-leading role.

NO COUNCIL at rivendell. We already saw that and has no relevance in the story. The ring has not been found, its still lost.. Sauron is still believed to be vanquished. The only problem is the Necromancer. Gandalf, i think, had suspicions about his true identity, but they werent relevant until the lotrs.

Oh, rodu- I absolutely LOVe your idea about making the ring whisper or something at the end. The ring's menacing nature was so well pulled off in the ttrilogy, i still get shivers. It would be great like when balin and bilbo are visting at the end, the focus shifts to wherever the ring is (on bilbo's mantle piece, or better yet being caressed in his hands!!!) and we here a whisper of doom. Brilliant idea, man..
Watching the Council of Elrond scene on my DVD, it gave me an idea for a scene later in the Hobbit movie. When Thorin confronts the survivors of Esgaroth and the elves, and they demand, he nearly looses, it, and then goes completely ape **** when Bilbo reveals that he gave them his Arkenstone....what if it was the influence of the Ring on him, magnifying his greed.
I would have a more subdued version of the Mordor theme playing in the background, and the Ring's "voice" quietly chanting the inscription on the Ring as it was during the Council. Of course no one would realize this is the Ring at work, save the viewing audience
What do you think?
although that may be kind of cool, rodu, I don't think it has a place in that part of the story. Thorin is ticked off that Bilbo gave up the Arkenstone, which is what Thorin has been wanting more than anything else. It's all about the Arkenstone, and the Ring has no bearing on the situation. But, in a sense, the Arkenstone is kind of Thorin's own Ring in the way that he desires it so much. But the analogy breaks down pretty soon, so I wouldn't take it very far.
ok smeagollum, I like your idea very much, but I think they need to stick to the original story line as well, and not deviate too far from it. I like the idea of Legolas being in it, simply because his character wasn't thought up during the hobbit, but is very much a character that could definitely be there at this time (being related to Thanduril[sorry if i spelled that wrong)
The whole arwen aragorn thing i think was kinda butchered in the LOTR, so i don't really want to see more of that...
Definitely was to see some GAndalf action, but not so much that it takes away from the main story...
I CANT WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
I like some of Smeagollum's ideas too. I think I'm coming around to the notion that the first film doesn't have to end with the death of Smaug <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> (I've been a little stuck on that for a while).

And I think the White Council vs Sauron subplot provides an excellent opportunity to give Aragorn and Legolas sizable roles without really altering the storyline considerably. It allows DT and PJ to establish their history as friends. And it also gives them a chance to expand on the Aragorn/Arwen romance.

How could you say the romance was butchered in LotR Tinny :cry: ??? I thought it was beautiful (it made me cry :roll: ). Not to mention that it actually improved the narrative by putting the romance back into the body of the story instead of being a mere addendum in the appendices. Plus, the greater feminine presence provided more gender balance. And certainly not least, it gave Arwen as a character (one of my faves) a bigger role.

Of course, maybe you mean there should have been [i:t8u1tlb0][b:t8u1tlb0]more[/b:t8u1tlb0][/i:t8u1tlb0] of their backstory. In which case, The Hobbit (expanded as it now is) gives them a chance to fill in any gaps. I think I would understand your point more if the relationship had never existed, or it had been totally altered. But it surely seemed to follow relatively closely Tolkien's original story of their romance, even though he didn't see fit to put much of it into the actual text of LotR.

[b:t8u1tlb0]GB[/b:t8u1tlb0]
I forget which topic it came up in, so I'll say it again. I think we should see Haldir again! He was the one who lead the regiment of elves to assist at Helm's Deep.
I know the elves never actually went to Helm's Deep, but I liked the addition in the film. He very easily could be added leading an elven army in the service of Galadriel against the dark creatures of Dol Guldor.
I love the idea of Haldir showing up in the Hobbit, Show! He's one of my fave original elves (they took Glorfindal out so I just had to love Haldir instead <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> ) and the fact that he died in two towers always makes me cry. :cry:
I'm pretty sure (if I remember correctly) that in the extended edition of LOTR they had a deleted scene with Aragorn and Haldir talking after the nine had entered loth'lorien, which suggested that they already knew eachother or were companions. Maybe the directors of the Hobbit could show either the making of or some re-enactments of their friendship! <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />

I don't think I would mind having Aragorn and Legolas show up in the Hobbit, smeagollum, but I'm not exactly thrilled about it. It kindof seems that both of these characters had their big roles in LOTR, and putting them in the Hobbit would just over-do it a bit. But maybe I'm just being too picky, and the Hobbit wouldn't be complete without them.
All I know is: it's a good thing I'm not the director! :shock:
I also like the idea of having Haldir in the Hobbit, as long as they see him in Rivendell. I don't want them to pick him up in Rivendell and have him as a companion. And I definitely don't want to see him in Mirkwood. He's a Rivendell elf, which is how Aragorn knew him (Aragorn grew up in Rivendell). So I'd love a cameo in Rivendell, and perhaps he could be at the dinner-table with Elrond, the Dwarves, Gandalf, and Bilbo.
Haldir was a Lothlorien elf, who served as a border guard to the realm
Rodu's got you there Beren.
I figured he would show up for the siege against Dol Guldor. My thought was that as part of the White Council, Galadriel would bring a regiment of Elves to attact the fortress. Enter Haldir!
This would of course depend greatly on how Del Toro tackles Dol Guldor. [i:2ktxq8b6][size=85:2ktxq8b6](interesting, Del Toro and Dol Guldor in the same sentence seems like something Tolkien would do)[/size:2ktxq8b6][/i:2ktxq8b6] I wonder if it will be a small but magical and mighty battle of elves and wizards vs the Necromancer, or will an army of elves and dark creatures battle it out as well? Time will tell I guess.
And I agree with Astar; Aragorn and Legolas had their time in LotR. If they show up, it should be a cameo.
Gandalf gets more screen time even though he had alot in LotR, but, come on, he's GANDALF!
aggh, sorry for the misconception. I knew he was from Lothlorien....I don't know what I was thinking.
Now that I have my facts straight, I'm a little more wary of having him in the film. Lothlorien was never mentioned in the Hobbit, so I can't really see him meeting Bilbo anywhere along his journey. So yeah, the attack on Dol Guldor would be the most logical place.

P.S. Aragorn knew Haldir from the previous time that he visited Lothlorien, not because he grew up in Rivendell. Aragorn met Arwen in Rivendell, and then, 30-some years later sought Lorien as a refuge and resting place. There he met Arwen again. And there he made friends with Haldir.
I like your idea of Legolas and Aragorn being at the battle