The opposite. The Hobbit was written first, and then LOTR was kind of a follow up. That's why there's no ring-wraiths in The Hobbit; He hadn't come up with them yet.Frotality said:
Peter Jackson Writes Legolas Into The Hobbit
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
In other news, Paul the Apostle has been added to the movie rendition of the book of Matthew.
Yeah, not a big fan of this. Of course, if they're keeping the "two movies, one of which focuses on Gandalf's off-screen adventures" approach, it's nothing new, but... seriously, Peter, didn't you learn from the Trilogy? Don't mess with the book more than you have to, and people will love you for it!
Yeah, not a big fan of this. Of course, if they're keeping the "two movies, one of which focuses on Gandalf's off-screen adventures" approach, it's nothing new, but... seriously, Peter, didn't you learn from the Trilogy? Don't mess with the book more than you have to, and people will love you for it!
Both of you are correct. After the success of the LotR, Mr. Tolkien did change (some) chronology of events, added dialogue, and edited some passages from the original publication of the Hobbit.Futurenerd said:
At first I was like "what?" and then I calmed down and said "Jackson's got this." Which I bet is true.
.....I didn't hate him in LOTR, and frankly, Bloom is a decent actor, though he gets by far, far too much on looks. However, this seems like blatant pandering to attract the fangirl audience. I'm hoping to hell Jackson can pull this off, but it seems...doubtful, to say the least. As long as they don't try to have him steal every scene with Captain Obvious lines, and excessive camera focus, it might actually be good.
Legolas was a Woodland Elf, not a Mirkwood Elf... how did they get that one to slide together? Though I do understand that on a side part, they are giving the FULL story of "The Hobbit", which will include Gandalf's other business, which did involve the elves a fair bit. I imagine that it will in some part involve Legolas as he was a Prince of the Woodland Elves.
(Someone correct me if I am wrong, I have not read up on my Tolkien as much as I should have; and I call myself a writer -.-).
(Someone correct me if I am wrong, I have not read up on my Tolkien as much as I should have; and I call myself a writer -.-).
we'll probably see gimli too as his father is gloin and gloin was one of the dwarves in the party.
Hm...interesting. I must admit, I'm more curious about the movie each time he announces a character that's not supposed to be there. Not that I wasn't going to see it to begin with, but this is just another reason to.
Wasn't he actually mentioned in The Hobbit? Though not by name, can't remember, it's been awhile.
Isn't there an extended sequence in The Hobit where the dwarves are imprisoned in the Elf King's fortress in Murkwood? Isn't that where Legolas, you know, lives? I feel like they really don't have to change anything to stick him in there somewhere, seeing as he's immortal and all...
Also: Just a thought, but what if this isn't the real Peter Jackson and they got the character of the same name from the Illuminatus! Trilogy to direct by mistake?
Also: Just a thought, but what if this isn't the real Peter Jackson and they got the character of the same name from the Illuminatus! Trilogy to direct by mistake?
Canid117 said:
Ah yes, you guys are right. I forgot about that since I haven't read The Hobbit in about 12 years... the way things slip right?Lionsfan said:
*insert obligatory gay elf joke here*
Seriously, what's the problem? It has been many a moon since I read The Hobbit, but I doubt Legolas would seem out of place in a brief role. Meh, I'll go see it anyway, even if everybody's pretty-boy-who-hangs-around-stout-hairy-men is overly featured.
Seriously, what's the problem? It has been many a moon since I read The Hobbit, but I doubt Legolas would seem out of place in a brief role. Meh, I'll go see it anyway, even if everybody's pretty-boy-who-hangs-around-stout-hairy-men is overly featured.
Well my immediate guess would be that Legolas will just show up in some of the fight scenes and never be mentioned. Tolkien has never been big on describing the fight scenes, with the details glossed over, or the heroes coming accross the aftermath of things like Gandalf throwing down with the Ring Wraiths. In fact, if you take Tolkien's descriptions accuratly where they apply, it actually sounded a lot like Gandalf was grappling with The Balrog literally... which I suppose is possible given that he's an Istari and a being of equal supernatural power, but given the portrayal of him as a little old man that occasionally brings some odd images to mind when I read it.
At any rate Peter Jackson is big on developing the fight scenes, and that will probably include the whole bit where the Dwarves eventually get themselves captured by the elves.... understand in The Hobbit these Dwarves get captured and need to be rescued by pretty much everything, trolls, spiders, goblins, elves... but despite all of these they are supposed to be some truely vicious warriors and heroes. Bringing out Legolas might be a way of sort of justifying how it happened....
Though to be honest Peter Jackson has never done much justice to dwarves, using Gimli as pretty much a comedy relief character, it might have as much to do with the chosen actor and the difficulty of finding a stunt double, but one thing to consider is that in the books Gimli is supposed to be just as kick ass as Legolas in his own way, indeed when they are fighting at Helms Deep they are actually having a contest to see who can kill more Orcs, and I seem to remember their personal kill ratios get up to around a hundred apiece (it's been a while) Gimli's comments about being slowed down because "one orc was wearing an iron collar" isn't supposed to be impotent bluster/humor, but a literal truth, the guy is pretty much the prototype for "Dwarf fighter as axe wielding death machine" of D&D fame.
So basically it could be done, Tolkien was vague enough with some of the details in The Hobbit where he could have been there, and going by what he wrote later it sort of does make sense that he would have been.
He could also be present during "The Battle Of Five armies"... though personally the guy I'm hoping actually gets a bit is Beorn. Basically a barbarian that turns into a giant semi-invulnerable bear who gets mentioned very briefly. Tolkien's writing when I read it reminded me a bit of like a norse Saga where the list of honors as to who was present in the battle trumps the actual action, though in some cases there might be sagas dedicated to each individual hero that explain what they did to warrent mention seperate from the original.
There is an old joke from when I was in school where we were looking at some REALLY bad stuff from Norse mythology and such (in my opinion) about how we'd have some great warrior king making breakfast with each implement and dish getting it's own line, and then each having it's own poem explaining things like how he came into possesion of the epic butter knife of Yasala and how it once buttered a hundred muffins in a single breakfast!
At any rate Peter Jackson is big on developing the fight scenes, and that will probably include the whole bit where the Dwarves eventually get themselves captured by the elves.... understand in The Hobbit these Dwarves get captured and need to be rescued by pretty much everything, trolls, spiders, goblins, elves... but despite all of these they are supposed to be some truely vicious warriors and heroes. Bringing out Legolas might be a way of sort of justifying how it happened....
Though to be honest Peter Jackson has never done much justice to dwarves, using Gimli as pretty much a comedy relief character, it might have as much to do with the chosen actor and the difficulty of finding a stunt double, but one thing to consider is that in the books Gimli is supposed to be just as kick ass as Legolas in his own way, indeed when they are fighting at Helms Deep they are actually having a contest to see who can kill more Orcs, and I seem to remember their personal kill ratios get up to around a hundred apiece (it's been a while) Gimli's comments about being slowed down because "one orc was wearing an iron collar" isn't supposed to be impotent bluster/humor, but a literal truth, the guy is pretty much the prototype for "Dwarf fighter as axe wielding death machine" of D&D fame.
So basically it could be done, Tolkien was vague enough with some of the details in The Hobbit where he could have been there, and going by what he wrote later it sort of does make sense that he would have been.
He could also be present during "The Battle Of Five armies"... though personally the guy I'm hoping actually gets a bit is Beorn. Basically a barbarian that turns into a giant semi-invulnerable bear who gets mentioned very briefly. Tolkien's writing when I read it reminded me a bit of like a norse Saga where the list of honors as to who was present in the battle trumps the actual action, though in some cases there might be sagas dedicated to each individual hero that explain what they did to warrent mention seperate from the original.
There is an old joke from when I was in school where we were looking at some REALLY bad stuff from Norse mythology and such (in my opinion) about how we'd have some great warrior king making breakfast with each implement and dish getting it's own line, and then each having it's own poem explaining things like how he came into possesion of the epic butter knife of Yasala and how it once buttered a hundred muffins in a single breakfast!
The only 2 things I wished they would've had in the films were Tom Bombadil (Bombidil? Bombodil? Bombedil?) and the other rangers. Its been a while but if I remember the books correctly there were a group of 3 rangers that aragon bumps into serveral times and I believe they accompany him to the ghosty mountain and they (all?) die in the battle of Minas Tirith. But idk, as far as I'm concerned the lotr movies have been pretty accurate so I'm not THAT worried that the hobbit movies won't shine.
