Thread: Should Legolas be in the Hobbit
<<     >>
I didn't say that the last meeting of the White Council was in 2941, do not put words into my mouth. I said that I could not check if there had been a meeting in 2953, but that the one in 2941 was the one immediately followed by Sauron's departure from Dol Guldur to Mordor. Now that I am home again I can check Appendix B for this. As it turns out, you are partially right: the White Council's last meeting [i:w1w412p3]was[/i:w1w412p3] in 2953.
[quote="The Lord of the Rings, Appendix B":w1w412p3]2941 - ...The White Council meets; Saruman agrees to an attack on Dol Guldur , since he now wishes to prevent Sauron from searching the River. Sauron having made his plans abandons Dol Guldur....
2951 - Sauron declares himself openly and gathers power in Mordor. He begins the rebuilding of Barad-dur....
2953 - Last meeting of the White Council....[/quote:w1w412p3]
That's my source: Tolkien. What's yours?
[quote:w1w412p3]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[/quote:w1w412p3]
I have no idea who the webmaster of tuckborough.net is, nor why you brought this up.
[quote:w1w412p3]but just remember: the final authority in this matter has got to be Tolkien himself. I look forward to your [color=#BF0000:w1w412p3]detailed[/color:w1w412p3] and [color=#FF0000:w1w412p3]referenced[/color:w1w412p3] reply in furtherance of my education, and would only ask that you replace the space you waste quoting [i:w1w412p3][color=#004000:w1w412p3]me[/color:w1w412p3][/i:w1w412p3] with space instead devoted to quoting/referencing [i:w1w412p3][color=#004000:w1w412p3]Tolkien[/color:w1w412p3][/i:w1w412p3]; I already know what [i:w1w412p3]I [/i:w1w412p3]said, and I'm rather more interested in hearing your opinion of what [i:w1w412p3]Tolkien[/i:w1w412p3] said.[/quote:w1w412p3]
I know the authority on Middle-earth has to be Tolkien, which is why [i:w1w412p3]I[/i:w1w412p3] am the one who has cited him instead of repeating my own assertions without an iota of evidence. The onus is now on you to show your claims are supported by Tolkien. Also, I am not here to further your education, I am simply attempting to have a discussion. As for my posting style, I quote people in order to make point-by-point responses more easily. I have already explained why there were no specific citations in my last post. I now look forward to seeing what evidence you have.
[quote:w1w412p3]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.[/quote:w1w412p3]
Did you read the link I gave in my last post? The two parties reached a settlement on the matter. A bridge film is still possible of course, but it's an entirely separate issue from the court case. Neither Peter Jackson nor Guillermo del Toro seem interested in working on one though.
[quote="Thranduil":3o765zvb]This is not really to do with casting issues but surely legolas would have been present at the battle of five armies seeing as its the main battle the mirkwood elves are involved in[/quote:3o765zvb]
Legolas isn't mentioned as being present at the battle, but of course that doesn't mean that he wasn't as absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It does mean however that we can't say whether or not he was there. It's possible Thranduil would have brought along his son or that he would have left him behind, possibly to watch over the realm. Given the lack of textual evidence this is all just speculation however.
[quote:3o765zvb]and he is a prince after all[/quote:3o765zvb]
He was the son of the King, but that doesn't mean he was a prince. The English word "prince" actually has two distinct meanings. One refers to the son or other male relative of a reigning monarch and the other refers to a ruler who is sometimes subordinate to a King. To use real world examples: the Prince of Wales is the son of the Queen of the United Kingdom, whereas the Prince of Liechtenstein is the head of state of an independent nation.
Tolkien, in his writings about Middle-earth, consistently uses the second meaning of the word. There are various Princely rulers among the Noldor in the First Age, various Princes of Rhovanion in the Third Age, and also the Prince of Dol Amroth and later the Prince of Ithilien (Faramir). I cannot recall any consistent usage of the word "prince" to refer to the son of a King, and in fact, in Numenor at least, the son of the King was called the "King's Heir".
To bring this back to the original topic: calling Legolas a prince, while accurate in the common modern usage, doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the context of Middle-earth. I don't believe that it is established if he has any importance in the governing of Mirkwood. It's confusing though.
[quote:3o765zvb]just wondering where he would have learnt it all really, and the battle of five armies would have been a good place.[/quote:3o765zvb]
Actually, the middle of a battle is not a good place for anyone to learn about fighting. If you're in a massive battle it's good to know how to fight or else you will probably find yourself dead or seriously wounded very quickly. What Legolas knew about combat he would have had to learn in a training setting.
So guys, maybe I can agree with both of you. I must admit though, Eldarion, I can't imagine what kind of training Greenwood Elves would go through to prepare for battle, other than actually fighting in a battle?
Oh yes - and I see the logic for Legolas being around somewhere, but he wasn't mentioned in the book, so liberties will have to be taken if he's put in it, by Jove! And, by Jove, we all know by now that Del Toro is a Rampant Libertarian!
Good point, though I would think that Legolas, were he at the battle, would have had some training beforehand so that he knew what he was doing.
[quote:60haeogx]And, by Jove, we all know by now that Del Toro is a Rampant Libertarian![/quote:60haeogx]
I suppose you'd only see this kind of thing in parodies - but why not in a reasonably serious fairy-story? Of course, you wouldn't want to put it in just to try and be dfferent, you'd put it in to give your fairies a sense of realism. They might even know what sex is. Hells bells!
Eldorion, I'm still interested in what the training would entail. If not a militia or a military academy, what then? How do they get the training?
Clearly the kinds of skills Elvish warriors display would require extensive training.
I can imagine elvish carpenters and cobblers - but it's more difficult for me to think of elvish plumbers, it can be such an unsavory job at times and might seem below them.
We still haven't explained yet how the elves get trained for battle. Maybe it just comes natural, that wouldn't surprise me in the least, but then there would be no actual training required at all.
Eldorion, do you think it all comes natural, or do you think there's some kind of training involved? If so, how does this training manifest itself?
I prefer to think that Elven Martial Training was more like the Warrior Monks of the Orient, such as in Shaolin and Tibetan monasteries, or the Samurai. As such their Martial Training was to benefit Mind, Body, and Spirit as well as for Defense. If you want to see how they did it, just watch a few Historical Kung Fu dramas .
[quote:11anrfio]Eldorion, do you think it all comes natural, or do you think there's some kind of training involved? If so, how does this training manifest itself?[/quote:11anrfio]
GB was right about what I meant by militia, I was drawing on the definition I've always heard used in the sense of "minutemen" and the like: ordinary citizens who take up arms and form a non-professional army to deal with an immediate threat. The Elven warriors seem to me to be more professional, or at least a standing force.
As for [i:11anrfio]how [/i:11anrfio]the training happens, I really wouldn't know. It could very well be a military academy of sorts or it could be less formal, maybe more like an apprenticeship. Just because I think training must happen doesn't mean I know the details though.
I don't think Elves are born with the ability to wield the sword, spear, or bow; and I still think that the demonstrate a level of professionalism and quickness of response that suggests they were a standing group with formal training of [i:2qf075at]some unknown sort[/i:2qf075at].
NB Have you heard of a show called The Mighty Boosh? (Hilarious!)
The Lasses need Hunks and Romance to bring them along to such films, and LotR (the films) had that in spades.
The books worked because they appealed first to Intellectuals/Artists and Hippies , then to D&D players , then to Heavy Metalers , then it seeped into the general culture bit by bit until, it became a Global Icon.
It takes a special sort of Fantasy Flick to draw screaming hordes of fan Girls .
do get captured by the Elves. You simply can't discount the popularity of the character Legolas from "Lord of the Rings," or Orlando Bloom's personal popularity. While it would not be as major of a role, its still a direct tie in with "Lord of the Rings." I got worried when I heard del Toro say his 'vision' for "The Hobbit" was different than Jackson's. What about the original vision that has been in print by Tolkein since 1936? The public can be very fickle about these things, and MGM is having money problems as is.
I think its a no brainer, bring Legolas back for however small the part might be. It cannot hurt, and might bring back a little chemistry from the original Fellowship actors. Jackson falling out with Newline did not help, and there is no such thing as a "sure thing."
[quote="sorcerer_dolguldur":3qrkucvv]What about the original vision that has been in print by Tolkein since 1936?[/quote:3qrkucvv]
That's a good question but in my consideration of it I've decided not to hold my breath hoping for them to be in line with Tolkien's [i:3qrkucvv]Hobbit[/i:3qrkucvv], what with the "expansion" of the story and its integration - to a degree - with PJ's films.
[quote:3qrkucvv]Jackson falling out with Newline did not help, and there is no such thing as a "sure thing."[/quote:3qrkucvv]
I rather disagree, I think that [i:3qrkucvv]The Hobbit[/i:3qrkucvv] films are more or less guaranteed to be successes like [i:3qrkucvv]Harry Potter[/i:3qrkucvv] and the [i:3qrkucvv]Star Wars[/i:3qrkucvv] Prequel Trilogy were, if for nor other reason than that they are part of an existing and very popular franchise. Jackson suing New Line didn't do much except make fans angry at New Line (deservedly since they've been sued by so many people including actors and the Tolkien Estate in addition to PJ), but with PJ back on board as Executive Producer/Writer I don't think that's cause for worry.
I agree that a Legolas cameo would be nice though.
There are several factors to take into consideration: The Return of the King was released in 2003, by the time The Hobbit is released 8 or 9 years will have passed (8 if 2011 as planned). A long gap between installments can sometimes kill a franchise. Though Indiana Jones and Star Wars both survived, so it can be done.
Also, The Hobbit is as well-known as LotR, no-doubt. But it's reputation as more of a "children's story" could put off a lot of the Young Adult crowd who liked the Action/Heavy Metal aspects of LotR.
Then, as seen with the Narnia franchise, Prince Caspian pulled in only half as much as LWW due to poor marketing and a bad release date between two Action Blockbusters. The Narnia series doesn't have quite as much of the Icon Factor as LotR in the USA except among Christians, but it is nearly as well-known as LotR globally. If VoDT doesn't pull as much as LWW there is talk of scuttling the series...so even phenomenal popularity is no guarantee. If a movie company doesn't make as much as they think they should, then bye, bye franchise . Considering PC still pulled in over $400 million it seems ridiculous, but it cost $200 million to make.
So, What To Do to mitigate a possible disaster? Well for one, you want to keep as many of the original Fans as possible:
This means as many returning cast members as possible. And for Screaming Fangirls that means [b:3eif06e3]Legolas/Orlando Bloom[/b:3eif06e3] for the Tweens to Twenty-somethings (preferably shirtless ), and Viggo for the Ladies. And a Romance wouldn't hurt either (though for us Hobbit "Purists" , a romance would be totally unnecessary). But perhaps in The Hobbit part 2 a glimpse of Aragorn/Arwen will suffice.
in the same way that many tolkien fans will hate the idea of another face playing bilbo instead of Holm's, i would hate to see them cast a different legolas....if bloom cant do it then leave legolas out.
i think if Bloom does do it then credit to him as it will obviosly be a small role and he'l be showing alot passion for the whole tolkien story by getting involved again...and not just because of pay check
None the less, he would've been an important character had he been created. And if not him being there in person (perhaps he's on a quest somewhere) his existance should be noticed.
**On a personal note, I think that if Tolkien would have thought of the character sooner he would have included him in The Hobbit! Haha, maybe that is just wishful thinking on my part!