If they try to put Frodo's birth story, young years and adoption into TH I may have to appeal to Higher Powers for a special burny place for them.
TH will be a better film if they leave as much of it alone as they can. You'd think they might have learned from LoTR that the poorest parts are the bits they went furthest from source. Yet they seem intent upon TH being nothing at all like source.
If they want to do a film based on TH and LoTR where they can make up loads about Frodo's upbringing, and then do White Council stuff fine, do it seperatley. But its not TH.
Thread: WHITE COUNCIL WILL WRECK HOBBIT
Planet Tolkien is archived and no longer updated, but the forums remain browseable. We have established a Telegram group for old and new visitors to stay connected and discuss all things Tolkien.<< [1] [2] [3] [4] >>
Ah! Sanity has returned to this Forum! Fight on Mr Tyrant, fight on!
[b:19nhn07n]GB[/b:19nhn07n]
I've come to terms with the White Council even if I don't like it, but including Frodo's childhood would simply be nonsensical. Even with the 17 years cut from the timeline in the film Frodo was decades from being born at the time of [i:1nk40k07]The Hobbit[/i:1nk40k07]. I really hope that this doesn't happen, but word on TORn is that they're casting Primula Brandybuck...
Where'd my optimism go?
Where'd my optimism go?
As I just posted on the "Clues to the Hobbit" thread regarding Frodo's back-story:
"I was thinking they might most likely be brief cut-scenes rather than extended sequences--much like the few very brief scenes with Isildur in LotR--not much more than a few minutes altogether really. If so, it's not really worth anyone getting their Purist knickers in a bunch ."
[b:2fa88rjj]GB[/b:2fa88rjj]
"I was thinking they might most likely be brief cut-scenes rather than extended sequences--much like the few very brief scenes with Isildur in LotR--not much more than a few minutes altogether really. If so, it's not really worth anyone getting their Purist knickers in a bunch
."[b:2fa88rjj]GB[/b:2fa88rjj]
You are missing the point GB- doesn't matter how long or short the sequences are- they don't belong, they are not part of the TH. Its just the Coven at it again, thinking htey can 'improve' Tolkien. Millions of books sold world wide show they can't and don't have the right. Adapt yes, wilfully rewrite no.
The sweet sound of Reason.... 
I can understand and appreciate the Prologue scenes in LotR because its telling the essential backstory, but Primula isn't part of the backstory to The Hobbit. She's not even relevant until [i:24pvptpr]later[/i:24pvptpr] in the timeline.
She's only [i:3lk2rck6]technically[/i:3lk2rck6] important - in that without her there's no Frodo. Call her Gerty, or Prunella, or Patsy - she is just a name, not a personality - some poor bird who drownded in a boating accident.
Hey! Maybe they're going to explore the psychological ramifications it might have had on Frodo later in life. Hey! This lead to an extended extended version of the LotR movies:
Frodo: [i:3lk2rck6]"Oh if my Dear Mother had only lived, I wouldn't have ended up burdened with this #*^+#*@ ring!!!!" [/i:3lk2rck6]
Sam: [i:3lk2rck6]"Yes, Mr Frodo - and if you're old Dad had lived, he woulden'na let you go orf in the #*^+#*@ first place."[/i:3lk2rck6]
Hey! Maybe they're going to explore the psychological ramifications it might have had on Frodo later in life. Hey! This lead to an extended extended version of the LotR movies:
Frodo: [i:3lk2rck6]"Oh if my Dear Mother had only lived, I wouldn't have ended up burdened with this #*^+#*@ ring!!!!" [/i:3lk2rck6]
Sam: [i:3lk2rck6]"Yes, Mr Frodo - and if you're old Dad had lived, he woulden'na let you go orf in the #*^+#*@ first place."[/i:3lk2rck6]
True, Odo. I wonder if they'll try to include Drogo in [i:1hq6qd5q]The Hobbit[/i:1hq6qd5q], though he's in the same situation you mention.
Darn tootin'!!! 
Actually, this Primula Baggins business must be a furphy. I wonder who is spreading the rubbish? And why?
Actually, this Primula Baggins business must be a furphy. I wonder who is spreading the rubbish? And why?
No, I think all you guys are missing the point. Of course it's not "in the book". But it IS part of Frodo's back-story. And given that The Hobbit provides some essential back-story to LotR, it's fair game to include it.
Again, it's an artist's prerogative to shape an adaptation.
[b:1cswonxo]GB[/b:1cswonxo]
Again, it's an artist's prerogative to shape an adaptation.
[b:1cswonxo]GB[/b:1cswonxo]
I disagree with how you see the job of adaption GB.
Feel free to check a dictionary
but for me it means that techniques and devices used in writing differ from the techniques and expectations of a film audience. The job therefore is to, as successfully as possible, move the characters, story and setting across from one medium to another. Its a matter of finding out what will work using film narrative and seeing if you can find ways to make what won't work, work. If you can't make it work then, [b:3ta80a3g]and only then[/b:3ta80a3g] should it be discarded. At this junction it may be necessary to create a scene or instance which does not occur in the written version to bridge the loss.
What the Coven and PJ did with LotR and now it seems with TH, is to reach that junction before even bothering trying to get the original story to work in film. In fact the WC idea has been bubbling along pretty much since the film was announced, or at least was present in very early versions of their story for TH. That means they planned to add and change all this before even trying to adapt the actual book. Which I doubt they ever even intended to do. They would rather massage their own egos and make it [i:3ta80a3g]their[/i:3ta80a3g] story. We've all felt like that about LoTR, that's its somehow special to us, that we want to be a part of it somehow, but it's not an excuse to bugger the films!
Changes made in LoTR to characters and plot have no basis in either necessity or the source material. It is an entire contrivense. When you deviate as far as they did from these basics of adapting then you are no longer engaged in adapting. You are engaged in invention.
Thats not your job if you are seriously adapting someone elses work, especially as long a processed work as LoTR and TH were for their author. It is disrepecful to the origianl work and its creator. (and its fans)
Feel free to check a dictionary
but for me it means that techniques and devices used in writing differ from the techniques and expectations of a film audience. The job therefore is to, as successfully as possible, move the characters, story and setting across from one medium to another. Its a matter of finding out what will work using film narrative and seeing if you can find ways to make what won't work, work. If you can't make it work then, [b:3ta80a3g]and only then[/b:3ta80a3g] should it be discarded. At this junction it may be necessary to create a scene or instance which does not occur in the written version to bridge the loss.What the Coven and PJ did with LotR and now it seems with TH, is to reach that junction before even bothering trying to get the original story to work in film. In fact the WC idea has been bubbling along pretty much since the film was announced, or at least was present in very early versions of their story for TH. That means they planned to add and change all this before even trying to adapt the actual book. Which I doubt they ever even intended to do. They would rather massage their own egos and make it [i:3ta80a3g]their[/i:3ta80a3g] story. We've all felt like that about LoTR, that's its somehow special to us, that we want to be a part of it somehow, but it's not an excuse to bugger the films!
Changes made in LoTR to characters and plot have no basis in either necessity or the source material. It is an entire contrivense. When you deviate as far as they did from these basics of adapting then you are no longer engaged in adapting. You are engaged in invention.
Thats not your job if you are seriously adapting someone elses work, especially as long a processed work as LoTR and TH were for their author. It is disrepecful to the origianl work and its creator. (and its fans)
[quote="Gandalfs Beard":2onmfc8a]No, I think all you guys are missing the point. Of course it's not "in the book". But it IS part of Frodo's back-story. And given that The Hobbit provides some essential back-story to LotR, it's fair game to include it.[/quote:2onmfc8a]
By that logic they should, or at least reasonably could include all sorts of other parts of the backstory from the Appendices. The history of the Northmen and the Wainriders is at least as relevant to the story of [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] (telling part of the history of the Men of Dale) as Frodo's parentage, which has only the connection of his father being related to Bilbo. While the historical passages are not in the same timeframe as [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a], neither is Frodo's parentage, though there is of course a difference of scale.
My point goes beyond faithfulness to the book. [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] should tell a story. If they want to just make [i:2onmfc8a]The Backstory to The Lord of the Rings[/i:2onmfc8a] they should make a miniseries with a different topic each week (who knows? it might even be good). What they shouldn't try to do is shove all sorts of unrelated stories into one pair of movies.
Considering faithfulness, the filmmakers, any filmmakers, definitely have a right to interpret and make cuts, changes, etc. It's quite simply necessary - you can't just use the book in place of a screenplay. There are even some cuts and changes to [i:2onmfc8a]The Lord of the Rings[/i:2onmfc8a] that I'm okay with (sorry petty). When I object is when the changes go beyond making the story fit a new medium and start trying to tell a new story. That's why I think the addition of new subplots to [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] (Dol Guldur and perhaps Frodo's backstory) would be "worse" than just about everything PJ did with LOTR. He was, in general, telling the same basic story. TH appears to be shaping up to tell a very different kind of story - a prequel to LOTR that covers what was happening to all the different characters - than the straightforward and wondrous Quest of Erebor that made the book a classic.
By that logic they should, or at least reasonably could include all sorts of other parts of the backstory from the Appendices. The history of the Northmen and the Wainriders is at least as relevant to the story of [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] (telling part of the history of the Men of Dale) as Frodo's parentage, which has only the connection of his father being related to Bilbo. While the historical passages are not in the same timeframe as [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a], neither is Frodo's parentage, though there is of course a difference of scale.
My point goes beyond faithfulness to the book. [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] should tell a story. If they want to just make [i:2onmfc8a]The Backstory to The Lord of the Rings[/i:2onmfc8a] they should make a miniseries with a different topic each week (who knows? it might even be good). What they shouldn't try to do is shove all sorts of unrelated stories into one pair of movies.
Considering faithfulness, the filmmakers, any filmmakers, definitely have a right to interpret and make cuts, changes, etc. It's quite simply necessary - you can't just use the book in place of a screenplay. There are even some cuts and changes to [i:2onmfc8a]The Lord of the Rings[/i:2onmfc8a] that I'm okay with (sorry petty). When I object is when the changes go beyond making the story fit a new medium and start trying to tell a new story. That's why I think the addition of new subplots to [i:2onmfc8a]The Hobbit[/i:2onmfc8a] (Dol Guldur and perhaps Frodo's backstory) would be "worse" than just about everything PJ did with LOTR. He was, in general, telling the same basic story. TH appears to be shaping up to tell a very different kind of story - a prequel to LOTR that covers what was happening to all the different characters - than the straightforward and wondrous Quest of Erebor that made the book a classic.
You know, I went onto another Hobbit Forum and raised the idea that True Fans want a True Adaptation (as far as humanly possible) and that Casual Fans (or Non-fans who just want to watch a good movie) don't really care about Tolkien and don't even know what True Fans mean when they use the words "respectful to the author." The upshot was, people got peeved with me (poor harmless goodwilled never critical Odo!) and went so far as suggesting I wasn't a Fan of the upcoming movies - I WILL BE if they make it right! Someone even put up a cartoony thing of a Troll with a caption: [i:16pbzr19]"Don't feed the troll", [/i:16pbzr19]which I found both deeply offensive and hilarious 
Ha! My point is: those damn Liberals showed just how Fascist they really were! Don't agree with us and we'll make veiled threats to kill you! (That was the subliminal meaning of the troll cartoon, you see). You know, I hope GB won't crush us down like some Fascist Tyrant, while pretending to be open minded! The hypocrisy! I suspect [size=150:16pbzr19][b:16pbzr19]HE[/b:16pbzr19][/size:16pbzr19] put that Primula Baggins business on the Netosphere and is in the [size=150:16pbzr19][b:16pbzr19]pay of [/b:16pbzr19][/size:16pbzr19]certain Warlocks and Witches! Let's face it, we can't trust Liberals! (Look at what's appening in Britain - Liberals merging with Tories... cunning... Labor people voted for those Liberals.... yes, very cunning...)
Mmmm... anyway, I agree with Mr Tyrant and Eldo - absolutely! -and that makes you wrong, GB (as usual! ) Wrong, wrong, wrong! My goodness you cause us some trouble on this forum... now where's that troll cartoon.... could use it just now...
NB: I'm also still trying to get my brain around the fact there was a Primula Brandybuck/Baggins who became Frodo's Mum - that's weird! I had no idea! But maybe I did, after all?
Ha! My point is: those damn Liberals showed just how Fascist they really were! Don't agree with us and we'll make veiled threats to kill you! (That was the subliminal meaning of the troll cartoon, you see). You know, I hope GB won't crush us down like some Fascist Tyrant, while pretending to be open minded! The hypocrisy! I suspect [size=150:16pbzr19][b:16pbzr19]HE[/b:16pbzr19][/size:16pbzr19] put that Primula Baggins business on the Netosphere and is in the [size=150:16pbzr19][b:16pbzr19]pay of [/b:16pbzr19][/size:16pbzr19]certain Warlocks and Witches! Let's face it, we can't trust Liberals! (Look at what's appening in Britain - Liberals merging with Tories... cunning... Labor people voted for those Liberals.... yes, very cunning...)
Mmmm... anyway, I agree with Mr Tyrant and Eldo - absolutely! -and that makes you wrong, GB (as usual!
) Wrong, wrong, wrong! My goodness you cause us some trouble on this forum... now where's that troll cartoon.... could use it just now...NB: I'm also still trying to get my brain around the fact there was a Primula Brandybuck/Baggins who became Frodo's Mum - that's weird! I had no idea! But maybe I did, after all?
Trying to analogize the back-story of the Men of the Dale to Frodo's is pretty specious. LotR and The Hobbit are, for all intents and purposes, the stories of the Baggins family as Ringbearers and their key role in the Wars of the Ring. As such, Frodo and Bilbo's story are LITERALLY intimately connected. And making time in the Hobbit films to establish that continuity is (as I've already said) fair game, and not at all detracting from the main story of The Hobbit.
Hysterically pouting about it "ruining" your visions of the perfect adaptation isn't going to change that
. Again, you guys are always welcome to do what others have, create your own version if you think you can do it better. The Fan Films created thus far show that it can be done. And I mean that sincerely without malice. Your opinions are always welcome, even though the relentless Purism can occasionally become tiresome , so perhaps we could lay off the "Liberals=Fascists" statements . We have quite enough of that sort of rhetoric here in the US at the moment without having it spill over into Middle Earth.
I, for one, trust Jackson and Del Toro to create another brilliant set of adaptations that capture the heart, the essence, and the imagery of Tolkien's works. And the fact is, as Odo found out, there are plenty of long-time and serious Tolkien Fans of the Books who agree with me (even if they are all at other forums ).
[b:2kmi7ixz]GB[/b:2kmi7ixz]
Hysterically pouting about it "ruining" your visions of the perfect adaptation isn't going to change that
. Again, you guys are always welcome to do what others have, create your own version if you think you can do it better. The Fan Films created thus far show that it can be done. And I mean that sincerely without malice. Your opinions are always welcome, even though the relentless Purism can occasionally become tiresome , so perhaps we could lay off the "Liberals=Fascists" statements . We have quite enough of that sort of rhetoric here in the US at the moment without having it spill over into Middle Earth. I, for one, trust Jackson and Del Toro to create another brilliant set of adaptations that capture the heart, the essence, and the imagery of Tolkien's works. And the fact is, as Odo found out, there are plenty of long-time and serious Tolkien Fans of the Books who agree with me (even if they are all at other forums
).[b:2kmi7ixz]GB[/b:2kmi7ixz]
Long Time Fans are not necessarily True Fans, GB...
That's where we differ, GB. I don't want The Hobbit to be more integrated into the broader legends. It works just fine as its own story, and I with it would be allowed to remain its own story and not just the prequel to LotR. That's just a personal preference, though.
BTW, I don't think I've implied or stated that you're a Fascist (or not a true fan - I think there are many true fans who are not purists), so I'd appreciate it if you don't imply that I'm hysterical.
BTW, I don't think I've implied or stated that you're a Fascist (or not a true fan - I think there are many true fans who are not purists), so I'd appreciate it if you don't imply that I'm hysterical.
If you go agreeing with Liberals too often, Eldo, Purists may easily think you hysterical. We True Purists are people who say, "Yes," and mean "Yes." In relation to PJ and the Coven, when we say, "NO!" we mean, "NO!!!" (Eldorion, I give you fair warning, fence sitters only get splinters in the end - and we know which end that is, don't we! 
)(That's if it's a wooden fence... )
)(That's if it's a wooden fence... )Did I call you fascist GB? Don't recall it but if so I apologize, you are clearly not. A salad munching, sandal wearing, wishy washy PJ apologist yeah sure, but fascist?
I was answering several posts at once Eldo and Petty. The Anti-Liberal fellow who made the vulgar statement "Liberals=Fascists" knows who he is (and he's the only one who hasn't denied it 
).
And who gets to be the Arbiter of "Truth" when it comes to Fanhood? I've been a "True" Tolkien fan longer than some of you have been alive.
[b:lpoppein]GB[/b:lpoppein]
(and he's the only one who hasn't denied it ).And who gets to be the Arbiter of "Truth" when it comes to Fanhood? I've been a "True" Tolkien fan longer than some of you have been alive.
[b:lpoppein]GB[/b:lpoppein]
I have no doubt that you are a huge Tolkien fan, GB. You have demonstrated it time and again on this forum.
I'm not really sure whether to take what Odo says as serious or not. It seems like he's just being silly most of the time, though who am I to judge a Banks? They're odd creatures, those ones.
I'm not really sure whether to take what Odo says as serious or not. It seems like he's just being silly most of the time, though who am I to judge a Banks? They're odd creatures, those ones.
Eldo did you say 'Odd'?! I'll give you odd, young lad!
Silly? How insulting! I try to bring the sweet rhyme of reason to this Forum, and what do I get? Abuse!
As to Liberal-Fascists (I'm not sure, but it might have been me who said it, I at least agree with the view!) I am indeed a Purist and will call a spade and spade, a shovel a shovel, and a Puerilist-Liberal-Fascist a Puerile-Liberal-Fascist when it's called for (I will also call a fish an underwater bird with fins not wings, but that's another story altogether! )
Now GB, whilst I love you dearly, I just as dearly hate, despise and detest you - passionately (it's only natural I should feel that way). I'll have you know, I have loved Tolkien from since long before I was born, indeed, long before Middle-earth was even a twinkle in Tolkien's eye. It was preordained that I be a True Fan (Wise Odo even channelled a poem about it, which I won't repeat - as you'll know by now I think Wisey's poems are shite). So you see, I have no choice but to be a True Fan. My point is: relatively speaking, you're a new comer GB, and not only that, a Liberal-Fascist as well. Remember, this was your choice, not mine!!!
Dear GB, I'm trying to [i:3g6vgbny]help [/i:3g6vgbny]you... Come back to the Light...
Silly? How insulting! I try to bring the sweet rhyme of reason to this Forum, and what do I get? Abuse!
As to Liberal-Fascists (I'm not sure, but it might have been me who said it, I at least agree with the view!) I am indeed a Purist and will call a spade and spade, a shovel a shovel, and a Puerilist-Liberal-Fascist a Puerile-Liberal-Fascist when it's called for (I will also call a fish an underwater bird with fins not wings, but that's another story altogether!
) Now GB, whilst I love you dearly, I just as dearly hate, despise and detest you - passionately (it's only natural I should feel that way). I'll have you know, I have loved Tolkien from since long before I was born, indeed, long before Middle-earth was even a twinkle in Tolkien's eye. It was preordained that I be a True Fan (Wise Odo even channelled a poem about it, which I won't repeat - as you'll know by now I think Wisey's poems are shite). So you see, I have no choice but to be a True Fan. My point is: relatively speaking, you're a new comer GB, and not only that, a Liberal-Fascist as well. Remember, this was your choice, not mine!!!
Dear GB, I'm trying to [i:3g6vgbny]help [/i:3g6vgbny]you...
Come back to the Light... [b:zza7nzx6]GB[/b:zza7nzx6]
Your eye rolling makes me think of Galileo, GB :- I mean, isn't that exactly what the Pope did when Galileo suggested the Earth wasn't actually the centre of the Universe (and indeed, not necessarily the Jewell in the Crown of God's Creation). Curiously (and not all that tangentially when you decide to think deeply about it) Tolkien never thought of himself as the Centre of the Universe either - but Peter Jackson... mmmm.....?
Apparently, if your previous post is any indication, YOU are the center of the Universe. 
[b:33nhpq5i]GB[/b:33nhpq5i]
[b:33nhpq5i]GB[/b:33nhpq5i]
Mmm... it hadn't occurred to me but... [b:palinhvy]Hey! [/b:palinhvy]Whether true or not, that was a bit below the kilt!
Hmmm, the Banks family seems a bit obsessed with kilts (and what's beneath them) lately.
[b:33ir3f7h]GB[/b:33ir3f7h]
[b:33ir3f7h]GB[/b:33ir3f7h]
[i:3as8gpr1]Oh we all love a shortened kilt,
Sing along dong-derrio!
Oh a pretty kilt of finest silk,
Oh bongalong the merrio![/i:3as8gpr1]
[i:3as8gpr1]Who is that dapper Charlie, lads?
Who is that jolly Glaswegian?
Who is that bonny long haired lad?
Is he from the lowhung regions?[/i:3as8gpr1]
(Chorus)
[i:3as8gpr1]Who can that rugged redhead be?
Wearing a silken kilt like that?
Is that a sporran 'neath his kilt?
Or a furry one eyed cat?[/i:3as8gpr1]
(Chorus. Repeat twice).
Traditional Ballad of Scothobbitland.
Wise Odo
Sing along dong-derrio!
Oh a pretty kilt of finest silk,
Oh bongalong the merrio![/i:3as8gpr1]
[i:3as8gpr1]Who is that dapper Charlie, lads?
Who is that jolly Glaswegian?
Who is that bonny long haired lad?
Is he from the lowhung regions?[/i:3as8gpr1]
(Chorus)
[i:3as8gpr1]Who can that rugged redhead be?
Wearing a silken kilt like that?
Is that a sporran 'neath his kilt?
Or a furry one eyed cat?[/i:3as8gpr1]
(Chorus. Repeat twice).
Traditional Ballad of Scothobbitland.
Wise Odo
Ah the memories Odo, I remember singing that on the annual haggis hunts, (alongside 'a haggis can do it for hours you know(running round the hillside)). Happy times.
Surely everyone knows what's beneath a Scotsman's kilt; a spare sporran, a fold out camping chair, an umbrella in case of a sudden need for respectability and some lemon drizzle cake for emergencies.
Surely everyone knows what's beneath a Scotsman's kilt; a spare sporran, a fold out camping chair, an umbrella in case of a sudden need for respectability and some lemon drizzle cake for emergencies.
I don't even have to channel this one, Mr Tyrant - we did this in British History at school (though some of the other Forumers may not be familiar with it).
[i:18v8zl9c]"A haggis can do it for hours, you know,
(Running round the hillside!)
Kilt a'flying in the breeze,
(The weight all on the frillside);
With one leg short and one leg long,
The haggis runs all the day,
Around about and down the hill,
Some say he's happy, some gay!
A haggis can do it for hours, you know,
With a smile and glinting eye,
But what goes roiling in his head?
Well, heathered hills and sky!
What can he do for hours and hours?
The people ask in dismay,
Well, he runs all day on his uneven legs,
Canoodling all the way!
Sing!
Canoodling all the way!"[/i:18v8zl9c]
You know, I've always wondered what [i:18v8zl9c]canoodling[/i:18v8zl9c] meant. Do you know, Mr Tyrant?
Wise Odo
[i:18v8zl9c]"A haggis can do it for hours, you know,
(Running round the hillside!)
Kilt a'flying in the breeze,
(The weight all on the frillside);
With one leg short and one leg long,
The haggis runs all the day,
Around about and down the hill,
Some say he's happy, some gay!
A haggis can do it for hours, you know,
With a smile and glinting eye,
But what goes roiling in his head?
Well, heathered hills and sky!
What can he do for hours and hours?
The people ask in dismay,
Well, he runs all day on his uneven legs,
Canoodling all the way!
Sing!
Canoodling all the way!"[/i:18v8zl9c]
You know, I've always wondered what [i:18v8zl9c]canoodling[/i:18v8zl9c] meant. Do you know, Mr Tyrant?
Wise Odo
Think its a type of fish.
Could it be the famous Wizard Fish?
Is that not the one you need to dangle a wizard on the end of a line to catch?
Ah! At last, something we can use GB for....
That would be a liberal use of bait. Sounds like a Gnostic fish - what better bait than a Gnostic beard?!Poor GB - what would we do without someone to bully... ahh... share a joke with....
I agree with Gandalfs Beard. I always wanted to know more about what Gandalf was doing. He is my favorite character. I think it is funny the way you guys throw jokes at each other btw. But I still agree with Gandalfs Beard. I don't see why some of you dislike the idea so much. A lot of fans would like to see the White Council I think. 
Hip Hip Hooray ! Finally...some moral support.
[b:2nxpg9ih]GB[/b:2nxpg9ih]
! Finally...some moral support.[b:2nxpg9ih]GB[/b:2nxpg9ih]
Everyone has a right to their opinion. I really don't know why people worry so much about adding things. So long as they don't put things in that are not consistent with Tolkien's world. I don't mean adding totally made up things, but Tolkien did talk about the White Council in other parts of his works. It would also help strengthen the link with the Lord of the Rings movies. 
[quote="Grey Pilgrim":1ocng5s1]It would also help strengthen the link with the Lord of the Rings movies. [/quote:1ocng5s1]
I won't disagree with you there; I think that's in large part the purpose of adding the White Council. I don't think that the [i:1ocng5s1]The Hobbit[/i:1ocng5s1] should be more linked to [i:1ocng5s1]TLotR[/i:1ocng5s1] though, I'd rather it be left more or less its own (very good) story instead of being made into a more mature "prequel to LOTR".
[/quote:1ocng5s1]I won't disagree with you there; I think that's in large part the purpose of adding the White Council. I don't think that the [i:1ocng5s1]The Hobbit[/i:1ocng5s1] should be more linked to [i:1ocng5s1]TLotR[/i:1ocng5s1] though, I'd rather it be left more or less its own (very good) story instead of being made into a more mature "prequel to LOTR".
I don't think I can agree about that. People who have not read the books will need it to help explain what happens in the Lord of the Rings movies. Remember we are talking about movies, not books now.
I thought the [i:owjis8k1]LotR[/i:owjis8k1] movies did a pretty good job of explaining their stories themselves, actually. I'm not sure why [i:owjis8k1]The Hobbit[/i:owjis8k1] would have to go back and fill in miscellaneous plot details.
This is the trouble with people like Gandalfs Beard - they attract others with wishy-washy ridiculous ideas!
Anyhow, welcome Mr Pilgrim. It's good (I guess ) to have a fresh face here. Though this [i:1ftetwc2]"looking at the forum for a cupla months"[/i:1ftetwc2] business sounds suspiciously like 'spying' to me, my good lad. But what would you expect from an obvious Liberal! Be warned! I'm not going to take it easy on you! No way, son! I'm trying to turn this into a [i:1ftetwc2]Respectable [/i:1ftetwc2]forum! Ship up or ship out, I say.
Anyhow, welcome Mr Pilgrim. It's good (I guess
) to have a fresh face here. Though this [i:1ftetwc2]"looking at the forum for a cupla months"[/i:1ftetwc2] business sounds suspiciously like 'spying' to me, my good lad. But what would you expect from an obvious Liberal! Be warned! I'm not going to take it easy on you! No way, son! I'm trying to turn this into a [i:1ftetwc2]Respectable [/i:1ftetwc2]forum! Ship up or ship out, I say. 
Yeah... sounslike 'eneeds a good ol internetwedgie, Odo! Persnally ide showim tha door iv I waz u! Bloomin' Jonnycumlatelee!
Persnally ide showim tha door iv I waz u! Bloomin' Jonnycumlatelee! While I can't deny the cogency of your argument, Biff, we do have to get over to Wisey's and fix his thatching this morning... Perhaps we can deal with Mr Pilgrim (in the traditional Downunder Stoor way ) when we get back this evening.
Err... never mind Biffo, Mr Pilgrim, we'll have a nice [i:14brtv4b]chat [/i:14brtv4b]with you later, what! That's if you decide to hang around - and that's[i:14brtv4b] totally [/i:14brtv4b]up to [i:14brtv4b]you[/i:14brtv4b]...
) when we get back this evening. Err... never mind Biffo, Mr Pilgrim, we'll have a nice [i:14brtv4b]chat [/i:14brtv4b]with you later, what! That's if you decide to hang around - and that's[i:14brtv4b] totally [/i:14brtv4b]up to [i:14brtv4b]you[/i:14brtv4b]...
Thank you for the welcome Odo and Biffo - I think.
This Biffo is the oddest of the lot - and that's saying something! 
Gotta scoot again, Eldorion, but I'll be back to deal with you soon enough, don't you worry about that!
If they are going to make The Hobbit in a whimsical way, perhaps the White Council might fit after all!
