Thread: Should Legolas be in the Hobbit
    >>
Legolas is son of Thandruil (sorry for spelling) and wasn't really created until the LOTR, but even the most unknowledgeable LOTR fans will know that "hey he's from Mirkwood, why isn't he there?" Taking that into consideraton, do you think Jackson and Del Torro added him? not cuz of ORlando... but because of the character?
Personally, I think it would be interesting, a bit of a connection to LOTR. What do you think?
Legolas was a great character, and the movie really dumbed him down. I understand that they had to do that, since they cannot correctly develop 20 characters. But his role was reduced to stating the obvious, offering help sometimes, and kicking ass.
But, other than my thoughts on Bloom, I am ok with the idea of the CHARACTER being in the film, but not too much. We don't want him to be too involved with the high matters of the world. He never really did that stuff until LOTR. But I guess I wouldn't mind seeing him in Mirkwood somewhere.
There are more than enough major players in the primary Hobbit Storyline. And for the White Council line? I think Gandalf, Saruman, Galadriel, Elrond, Cirdan, and any other key players I missed will be more than enough to fill that sorty line. Devoting the time and energy to develop Legolas more will either wreck the story, or wreck the character. Neither of which I want to happen.
If they film them how they did last time - mixed up, out of order, both films at once, Bloom is going to have trouble acting in both The Hobbit and in Pirates.
I guess my main problem is just not having characters pushed into scenes and quests they have no business being in.
Aragorn's 1st meeting with Arwen: 2951
Aragorn's 2nd meeting with Arwen: 2980
In Aragorn's first meeting with Arwen, he marvels that, although he grew up in Elrond's house, he has never seen Elrond's daughter before. Arwen explains this by telling him that she has spent many years with her "mother's folk" in Lorien, and has only "lately returned to visit [her] father again." The word "lately" is what everything hangs on. If she met Bilbo when he came through, then she had to have been in Rivendell at least 10 years when she met with Aragorn. Personally, I find it hard to believe that even an elf would call 10 years ago "lately," and even harder to believe that Aragorn and Arwen would have lived at the same place for 10 years and would not have seen each other.
So, based on this, I do not think we should see Arwen in the Hobbit.
But now that I think about it, would Legolas be expected to play any role in the battle of 5 armies? After all looking back through Middle earths history It doesnt appear that the Elven lords had any qualms about sending thier children into battle, and obviously, his appearance at the council of elrond in tLotR indicates that his council is held quite highly by his father. So would he not perhaps take the role of Thranduils herald?
Also I was under the assumption that Gollum was held in mirkwood much later than the events of the hobbit, and so any inclination towards such an event would require the infamous bridging movie to make an appearance.
Also consider Bloom's schedule. From IMDB (which isn't always reliable):
Fools Rush In (details only on IMDbPro)
The Red Circle (2011) (pre-production) (rumored) .... Corey
The Cross (2010) (pre-production)
Sympathy for Delicious (2009) (post-production) .... The Stain
Main Street (2009) (post-production) .... Harris Parker
It seems as if he has a busy 2010-2011 schedule. He probably wouldn't be able to fit in more than a cameo.
On the other hand, I [i:mvtz3509]really[/i:mvtz3509] hope that del Toro can convince Jackson that wargs are not, in fact, giant hyenas.
I will be happy for the most part if Alan Lee and John Howe return as conceptual artists, or at least if the look of The Hobbit is consistent with that of LOTR.
Sprry It's a bit off topic I'll start a new thread if your interested in talking about him.
We do have a music inspired by Tolkien thread here, and no problem posting links to a Musician's site or Youtube. But I think file-sharing would probably not fly on this forum . We want to stay legit .
Now, back to "Bloom Bashing" (just kidding .
The Hobbit is a different story from LOTR. Adding elements of LOTR serves no purpose except to warp the story beyond recognition. We already got three movies of LOTR, I think people can handle a bit of variety. And since they're calling it The Hobbit I think they should, well, try to make it The Hobbit and not "the Prequel to The Lord of the Rings".
Was Aragorn even born at this point?
If so he would be very young and I am sure it would be easy to uncover his wear abouts at the time of the book.
Lets see bilbo is about 50 when he sets out to Erebor. During the events of TLoTR aragorn is what 80ish? And Bilbo leaves the shire at 111 about 20 years before Frodo does. so that would make him about 131 during the event of TLoTR.
131-50 give or take a few years comes out to abotu 80ish so I suspect aragorn would have been either a small boy during the hobbit in which case introducing him would be some what pointless as it would just confuse people. Or he would still be a baby living in the north with his mother and father. And so could not appear anyway.
There is however the possibility that Gimli might appear again somewhat briefly, should Del Toro decide to show the origins of the quest in the blue mountains, where Gimli volunteers to go but is deemed to young at the youthful age of 80ish. I am hoping this is shown as it would help to make Gandalf seem more cunning with his ability to see the outcomes of situations rather than just magically procuring the key and the map from no where.
Also, it is my understanding that the later The Hobbit sequels (two, I hope) will attempt to bridge the action occuring between the two sets of films, and it would be good to bring these two characters into the renewed story line, especially Legolas, who already has a defined role regarding Gollum's capture, imprisonment, and escape from Sauron just prior to the beginning of the LOTR action.
Aragorn presents a different problem: he was only 10 years old when the events in TH ocurred, but was living in Rivendell at the time, so a short cameo is in order there as well. I think that there is more room for inclusion of the Aragorn character beginning with the events at Dol Gulder, some 12 years after the Battle of Five Armies, because a then 22-year-old budding Ranger would have been a Gandalf follower at the meeting of the White Council wherein it was decided that Sauron should be driven out of Dol Gulder (and driven, unintentionally, into Mordor). Again, based upon past performance and continuity, I see no reason to substitute for Mortensen.
Now, what if Gimli was the spitting image of Gloin? Just think of the possibilities!
Legolas could be one of the partying elves who capture the dwarves - including, of course, Gloin! The two of them could give each other suspicious unfriendly looks at some point! And what if Legolas (merry with wine) is present and sits on Gloin's barrel before pushing it off into the water during the dwarves escape? But it wouldn't be Legolas and Gimli, now would it! It would be Legolas and Gloin!
Wouldn't fans love it? I know I would.
Eldorion, this might upset your sense of Tolkien Purity - but it wouldn't be too un-kosher, surely?!
It depends. I don't think it's unreasonable to show Legolas as one of a number of elves feasting, for instance. I think giving him a significant role (more than a a couple of lines) in [i:3ehcovbx]The Hobbit[/i:3ehcovbx] would disrupt the "Tolkien Purity" though since Legolas isn't a character in [i:3ehcovbx]The Hobbit[/i:3ehcovbx].
Regarding the Aragorn camio, if he was just there when Bilbo and the dwarves arrived in Rivendell, and then being called by someone, or him admiring his "ring" (i think that was a movie thing...) Little things like that to tease the audience.
And would Gimil even have come with the rest of the dwarves to fight in the battle? Is he from the (iron hills? I'm blanking on the name...)
[quote="Tinuviel":1ys4b280]his "ring" (i think that was a movie thing...)[/quote:1ys4b280]
You mean the ring that Aragorn wore? That was the Ring of Barahir, which does exist in the books, though Aragorn did not obtain it from Elrond until he was 20 - about 10 years after [i:1ys4b280]The Hobbit[/i:1ys4b280] - and did not have it during [i:1ys4b280]The Lord of the Rings[/i:1ys4b280] (the book) as he had given it to Arwen.
The other alternative would be his travelling to the battle of five armies with the eagles who live in the peaks of the blue mountains. But again I dont think anyone would want to see a flying Gimli being dropped into the battle by some eagles.
I had noted in a different thread the possibility that Gimli could make a camio appearance should the contents of The quest for Erebor, from the book unfinished tales, be incorporated into the films. I personally feel that it should, however there are numerous people over at the one ring.net who are of the assumption that film rights to this would never be granted by the tolkien trust or Christopher Tolkien
Yes, you are right, but I can't find anything in the notes indicating that Gimli was positively doing something else during this period (check me on this), so all we need is a little literary license. Perhaps news came to the Blue Mountains, soon after the departure of Thorin and Gloin on their quest to Erebor, concerning an opportunity to recover the last of the Seven Rings of Power, taken from Thrain II at Dol Guldur almost 100 years earlier, and that Gimli was among a contingent of dwarves from the Blue Mountains who travelled to the Dol Guldur area in response, and who were there at the time of Thorin's call for help from Erebor. From soutwest Mirkwood, the arrival of Gimli and company at Erebor in time for the Battle is just as possible as the arrival of Dain Ironfoot's contingent from the Iron Hills. Now, what inconsistencies with the notes might that entail?
Do you have a reason for this statement other than what you would [i:2zo6nmvk]like[/i:2zo6nmvk] to happen?
[quote:2zo6nmvk]Also, it is my understanding that the later The Hobbit sequels (two, I hope) will attempt to bridge the action occuring between the two sets of films, and it would be good to bring these two characters into the renewed story line, especially Legolas, who already has a defined role regarding Gollum's capture, imprisonment, and escape from Sauron just prior to the beginning of the LOTR action.[/quote:2zo6nmvk]
There are only going to be two [i:2zo6nmvk]Hobbit[/i:2zo6nmvk] films and they are both going to deal with the events of the book plus the White Council/Dol Guldur (and [i:2zo6nmvk]possibly[/i:2zo6nmvk] a few other things from that same general time). See [url=http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2009/08/14/33139-mtv-pj-not-planning-on-third-bridge-movie/:2zo6nmvk]this link[/url:2zo6nmvk] for more.
[quote:2zo6nmvk]I think that there is more room for inclusion of the Aragorn character beginning with the events at Dol Gulder, some 12 years after the Battle of Five Armies[/quote:2zo6nmvk]
The events surrounding Dol Guldur took place before the Battle of the Five Armies and concurrently with the middle of [i:2zo6nmvk]The Hobbit[/i:2zo6nmvk]. It's what Gandalf was up to when he left Bilbo and the Dwarves just before Mirkwood.
[quote:2zo6nmvk]because a then 22-year-old budding Ranger would have been a Gandalf follower at the meeting of the White Council[/quote:2zo6nmvk]
The White Council was not a town hall. There's no indication that any humans, let alone "budding" rangers (even if they were the Heir of Isildur) attended any of the meetings, and certainly not Aragorn (for the reason in the preceding paragraph).
I have to respectfully disagree with the implication that this is a workable way to get Gimli into the story (without just tossing the established canon - in which case Gimli could simply replace one of the more obscure Dwarves). We don't know where Gimli was living - if he was in the Iron Hills (which I personally doubt) it would be possible for him to show up with Dain), but otherwise there would be no way for him to show up. The Blue Mountains are much farther away from Erebor than the Iron Hills, so he would have had to leave before any messages from Thorin could have even arrived.
There was no opportunity to recover one of the Seven Rings - it had been taken by Sauron years before and no one, not even Thorin, was foolish enough to even entertain the idea of a Dwarvish assault on Dol Guldur for more than a few minutes. There's also no way that word could have gotten to the Blue Mountains: everyone who knew anything headed east towards Erebor almost immediately after Gandalf revealed what had happened to the Ring, and it wasn't exactly a matter for idle conversation anyway.
Also, even if Gimli did somehow end up in Souther Mirkwood - he would still be several times farther away than Dain (who barely got there on time even going fast) and Thorin would have no way of knowing he was there and thus sending messages to him.
Briefly - I don't think Gimli can show up to the Battle of the Five Armies in this way. As I mentioned before, the only even remotely workable way I can think of is for him to already be in the Iron Hills.
Were the dwarves even aware of the existence of the ring? I was of the impression it was only reveal to the heir towards the end of the current bearers life.
Also adding another cohort of dwarves to the battle wouldnt make sense as it would no longer be the battle of 5 armies.
I wish I find the source where Gimli states he had asked to go to Erebor with his father. As this implies he had been living in the Blue mountains at the start of the quest and so would have had to have left at about the same time or a short time later, and had no delays, to arrive at Erebor at the same time. I feel this definately places Gimli firmly outside the possibilities of putting in an appearance at Erebor.
Also we have to consider John Rhys-Davis. He hated wearing the prosthetics which he was allergic too they caused his face to swell and become irritated. He ceremoniously burned them at the end of the shoot and vowed never to wear them again.
So while there is an outside chance he might be convinced to put in a brief camio, I very much doubt he would choose to play any larger role especially as it is not waranted by the sources.
In reply to Eldorion:
I'll address your post from the bottom up, by your leave.
First, there indeed was a meeting of the White Council (their very last one) in 2953, Third Age, when Aragorn was 22, and about 12 years after the Battle of Five Armies; so, to borrow a phrase from Treebeard, [color=#FF0000:f4f9gmhs]a Tolkien Purist should KNOW better!!![/color:f4f9gmhs] Next, in addition to the 2941 events noted in your post (when Gandalf left The Company to aid in the expulsion of Sauron from Dol Guldur), there was [i:f4f9gmhs]another[/i:f4f9gmhs] expulsion from Dol Gulder, in 2953, in which Sauron (or, more accurately, Sauron's minions, the Nazgul) was forced to concede control of Dol Gulder to the White Council. I still believe that this fits within the "same general time" frame of "the White Council/Dol Guldur" that you noted in your post, and that Aragorn was then old enough to participate in that latter expulsion (and, contrary to your interpretation of my post, I did not intend to suggest that Aragorn was a [i:f4f9gmhs]member[/i:f4f9gmhs] of the White Council, but merely a [i:f4f9gmhs]supporter[/i:f4f9gmhs]). It has since come to my attention that Gandalf and Aragorn did not meet until 2956 (I'm surprised that you didn't catch that mistake!), but my scenario would work just as well substituting Elrond for Gandalf (both were WC members) as Aragorn's leader during these events.
Thanks for the link to theonering.net--I was disappointed to learn that Peter Jackson is limiting the project to two films and no "bridging"--but, i'm still holding out hope that this might change once the legal proceedings involving the Tolkien Estate are concluded later this month. Last, regarding the 800 pound gorilla (a metaphor, as used in the US, for something which is incapable of escaping attention), I think that the paragraph preceding the statement is pretty much explanatory, and I sincerely do not understand your puzzlement. Please clarify.
I don't have my copy of [i:24jqotac]TLotR[/i:24jqotac] with me at the moment so I can't check this claim (I will later today when I get back home), but that's not relevant to the question of [i:24jqotac]The Hobbit[/i:24jqotac] (see below).
[quote:24jqotac]Next, in addition to the 2941 events noted in your post (when Gandalf left The Company to aid in the expulsion of Sauron from Dol Guldur), there was [i:24jqotac]another[/i:24jqotac] expulsion from Dol Gulder, in 2953, in which Sauron (or, more accurately, Sauron's minions, the Nazgul) was forced to concede control of Dol Gulder to the White Council. I still believe that this fits within the "same general time" frame of "the White Council/Dol Guldur" that you noted in your post[/quote:24jqotac]
No, there wasn't. Sauron left Dol Guldur in 2941 and declared himself openly (in Mordor) in 2951. I will verify this for you when I get home later unless someone else does so first.
[quote:24jqotac]and that Aragorn was then old enough to participate in that latter expulsion (and, contrary to your interpretation of my post, I did not intend to suggest that Aragorn was a [i:24jqotac]member[/i:24jqotac] of the White Council, but merely a [i:24jqotac]supporter[/i:24jqotac]). It has since come to my attention that Gandalf and Aragorn did not meet until 2956 (I'm surprised that you didn't catch that mistake!), but my scenario would work just as well substituting Elrond for Gandalf (both were WC members) as Aragorn's leader during these events.[/quote:24jqotac]
1. Being a supporter of the White Council does not mean that Aragorn would have attended any of its meeting, which you clearly implied in your earlier post.
2. To be blunt, I only went for the major errors since there were so many. The meeting time of Gandalf and Aragorn (which, again, I can't check at this time) is irrelevant since everything related to Dol Guldur was over in 2941.
3. Aragorn went on long journeys across Middle-earth he didn't just tag along after Elrond (or Gandalf).
[quote:24jqotac]i'm still holding out hope that this might change once the legal proceedings involving the Tolkien Estate are concluded later this month. [/quote:24jqotac]
The two parties already reached a settlement, but if anything the case will/would only [i:24jqotac]limit[/i:24jqotac] the scope of the films since the Tolkien Trust was attempting to do that. This is essentially a non-issue though (source: [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8245300.stm:24jqotac]BBC[/url:24jqotac]).
[quote:24jqotac]Last, regarding the 800 pound gorilla (a metaphor, as used in the US, for something which is incapable of escaping attention), I think that the paragraph preceding the statement is pretty much explanatory, and I sincerely do not understand your puzzlement. Please clarify.[/quote:24jqotac]
My point was that it is your opinion that they are an 800 pound gorilla (a saying of which I am aware, incidentally). As I mentioned before I think it would require a bit of jumping through hoops to get Gimli into an appearance, and Legolas for all we know might have been left behind to mind the caves by his father.
Are you an associate of the webmaster of tuckborough.net? You two really should correspond regarding this issue, and a collaboration is in order, I think, but just remember: the final authority in this matter has got to be Tolkien himself. I look forward to your [color=#BF0000:37easypn]detailed[/color:37easypn] and [color=#FF0000:37easypn]referenced[/color:37easypn] reply in furtherance of my education, and would only ask that you replace the space you waste quoting [i:37easypn][color=#004000:37easypn]me[/color:37easypn][/i:37easypn] with space instead devoted to quoting/referencing [i:37easypn][color=#004000:37easypn]Tolkien[/color:37easypn][/i:37easypn]; I already know what [i:37easypn]I [/i:37easypn]said, and I'm rather more interested in hearing your opinion of what [i:37easypn]Tolkien[/i:37easypn] said.
Regarding the possibility of a third Hobbit: Legal proceedings often force the parties to be circumspect about their statements until the court issues a formal order including a pronouncement of "dismissed with prejudice" and, while I don't believe the current settlement will fall through, the parties' lawyers, if they are good ones, have probably instructed eveyone involved not to antagonize the others involved. A dismissal with prejudice certainly won't come until the hearings pending this month are either canceled or concluded. With regard to a third Hobbit, I am still of the opinion that a third "bridge" film may yet appear, especially if the planned two films are as wildly successful as the LOTR films, and because Tolkien created so much material to draw upon, even though that material exists only in the form of Tolkien's notes.