Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Legolas role in The Hobbit?
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All


Apr 17 2011, 12:45am

Post #1 of 83 (2359 views)
Legolas role in The Hobbit? Can't Post

He will be in it, the question is to what extent he will be in it. I was just thinking about how Orlando bloom performed in lord of the rings. He almost had no dialouge! You hardly know anything about Legolas at all from watching lord of the rings.

All one knows is that he is an elf from where? One can't tell from watching the lord of the rings. How old is he? What is his history..? He is an unexplored character that was just used for action scenes...

He will be in the hobbit...what do you think his role will be? Since there won't be as many elfes as dwarves in the hobbit. Do you think there is a chance Legolas character will be explored further? Maybe there will be some kind of sub plot between him and his father?

One notices already at the council of elrond in the fellowship of the ring that Legolas has deep hatred for Gimli. Will we get an explanation to why he feels such angst against the dwarven race?

Maybe Legolas will be potrayed as an elf in conflict. Controlled by his father...and wanting to make his father proud. But realizes that his father is blinded by greed...I'm not sure if Itaril is a character that will be seen or not. But maybe Legolas character will be developed and explored further with the help of Itaril and Thranduil...or maybe...

He will take the role of the villain in the hobbit. The loyal prince of the greedy corrupt elven king of the woods? Or maybe he will just be there for the audience to better connect the two movies...which to me is the worst case scenario.

I don't think I'm alone in thinking Legolas got far too little dialouge in the trilogy. Legolas is an interesting character but was overshadowed in the lord of the rings by other characters...just like Gimli.

But we will get a good look at the history of the dwarves in this movie...what about Legolas? I'm a bit curious to how many subplots we will see in this film...

We got...

-Bilbo and his treasure, greedy dwarves.
-Thranduil/Legolas father son relationship, maybe conflict within legolas. Or villain O.o
-Gandalf behind the scenes, sending out Bilbo to kill the dragon because he fears the necromancer will use him as an ally...
-Bard and his people?
-Gollum and the ring?

This is brainstorming, but I'm interested to hear what you think about Legolas role and how much will be spent on each potential subplot. Bilbo's journey obviously being the main plot.

(This post was edited by Dalurtid on Apr 17 2011, 12:52am)

Grey Havens

Apr 17 2011, 1:16am

Post #2 of 83 (1205 views)
Legolas was always a bit of a mystery. [In reply to] Can't Post

Even in Tolkien's writings. We know he is a Sindarin elf from the Woodland Realm in Northern Mirkwood specifically, even though his father is not from Mirkwood originally. Thranduil is mentioned in the EE of FotR, and his hatred of the dwarven race is simply a product of the great tension between the dwarves and elves that existed since the ancient days, stereotyping if you will, before he got to know Gimli. He's an excellent marksman and hunter, so my guess is they may have him appear as a cameo in Thranduil's Halls, if there are any action sequences added into that part of the film, I would guess he would play some part in them, possibly taking a role in either the BoFA, or Dol Guldur siege (if there is one...). Some of the theories about his role in the film have been overblown lately, especially around here, with no real evidence to support them. Realistically, I wouldn't expect him to do anything more than taking a soldier role in some battle sequences. I doubt there will be any time for sub-plots to be developed with him, as the narrative needs to keep moving. Even if portraying his relationship with his father would be interesting, it's probably not likely because they just don't have time.

"I'm just a happy camper! Rockin' and a-rollin!"

(This post was edited by Maiarmike on Apr 17 2011, 1:24am)


Apr 17 2011, 1:31am

Post #3 of 83 (1177 views)
it will be only a little cameo [In reply to] Can't Post

Legolas is not in TH and Orlando Bloom wants only to act once again with PJ in his ME but as has been told before he won't have a main role (fortunately!!!) there will be Itaril and that is enough!



Apr 17 2011, 1:40am

Post #4 of 83 (1134 views)
Hmmm... [In reply to] Can't Post

I wish they could have skipped itaril and developed Legolas a bit more. One thing I think Peter failed with when it comes to the trilogy. Is the character development for some very interesting characters.


Would be nice to know a bit more about Legolas history that is all. As independent films...no Legolas isn't important. But one has to keep the trilogy in mind when making these. It would be nice if they could develop Legolas a bit more in this one.

So one knows a bit more of him when watching the trilogy. If Thranduil will be potrayed as the villain in mirkwood and at the battle of the five armies. Then a father son relationship with maybe some conflicts would be nice. Just so one knows a bit more of Legolas in the trilogy. Yeah you get my point ;)

Even Gimli is better developed than Legolas, he speaks more and a lot about his fellow dwarves...Legolas sais almost nothing. The only lines I can remember are...

-A balrog of morgoth
-There is a foul voice in the air
-He was twitching

Yeah that is about it, hopelessly underdeveloped character. Maybe Jackson could try to correct his wrongs with Legolas. Would be a perfect oppurtunity to spice the character up a bit.

Orlando got a lot of more experience when it comes to acting, so he should be able to deliver I think...

EDIT: PERFECT COMPARISON, Obi wan in the prequels and obi wan in the later three star wars movies. Much made sense when it came to obi wan after the prequels were made.

(This post was edited by Dalurtid on Apr 17 2011, 1:42am)

Grey Havens

Apr 17 2011, 2:33am

Post #5 of 83 (1095 views)
My feelings... [In reply to] Can't Post

...are that not everything has to have an origins story. Sometimes mysterious pasts help make characters and stories interesting. Take the Bourne trilogy for example. Speaking of Star Wars, the original ideas and mystery surrounding the "force" were enough to intrigue in the original trilgoy, then Lucas ruined the mystery with his godawful "midi-chlorians" Unsure. You mention Obi-Wan, his history as told by him to Luke, in Star Wars (1977) was enough, as he mentions the Clone Wars and taking Luke's father as his failed pupil. Then they had to go and completely ruin everything in that travesty of storytelling known as the prequel trilogy. Similarly, I think you understate Legolas' development in the series, as he comes to respect and appreciate Gimli, and overcomes his stereotypes. His relationship with Aragorn also plays a major part of his development as a character.

"I'm just a happy camper! Rockin' and a-rollin!"


Apr 17 2011, 2:53am

Post #6 of 83 (1104 views)
Force midi chlorians... [In reply to] Can't Post

What exactly could peter ruin by developing Legolas a bit. There is nothing to run! Yes he becomes good friend with Gimli. But...

-We don't know why he hates the dwarves...people who haven't read the books wouldn't know why elves have a hatred for dwarves.

-We get some hints that he is of noble blood, but a prince? I can't recall him ever saying he is a prince or any of the other characters saying he is a prince. I might be mistaken since I haven't watched the movies in years.

If he appears in the hobbit two things needs to be said or made clear to the audience.

1. That he is the son of Thranduil. One of the antagonists of the Hobbit.

2. His loyalty to his father...what he thinks of going to war against the dwarves for gold.

His behaviour in the movies suggests he was loyal to his father and followed him into battle. These things need to be made clear to the audience!

He can't just be sitting beside his father's throne doing and saying nothing. This is one of the big characters from the fellowship of the ring.

If Peter doesn't develop him at all, then what is the point of putting him in there in the first place? The two things above have to be answered in order for him to appear in the hobbit, which he will...

So there are two possible ways Peter decides to potray him.

1. As a loyal son.
2. As a son in conflict...like pochahontas...

Whatever way peter chooses to potray him there is still a mystery. What will be Itaril's role in both of the alternatives above.

-Lover of Legolas?
-Sister of Legolas?

Maybe Legolas will be loyal to his father but Itaril will not. Maybe Itaril will help the dwarves and Bilbo escape from Legolas and Thranduil.


Apr 17 2011, 3:16am

Post #7 of 83 (1105 views)
Poor Thranduil [In reply to] Can't Post

People now want to put a wife at his side, troubled kids at home and mad armadillos in the orchard. Give the elf some break. He is the single lasting First Age-like elf in the whole Middle-earth and people want him to be a family guy. What a waste. Leave the elf... alone.Wink

Regarding Legolas, I think Itaril was the original Mirkwood ambassador to Rivendell and Lorien (moviewise, at least) and she was replaced by him in LOTR because of events which will be seen in The Hobbit. Personally I would very much like to see a lady elf ambassador with her escort wandering through perilous lands, meeting Eldar noblemen in councils and helping Gandalf in his task of staying the wrath of her lord Thranduil before the Bo5A.

Itaril should have no part in the tale of Bilbo. She could perhaps set forward alone (against the wishes of Thranduil) in search of Gandalf because she overhears that he was the original guide of the imprisoned Company and she would know about him and his works.

Grey Havens

Apr 17 2011, 3:30am

Post #8 of 83 (1039 views)
Less dialogue doesn't mean less characterization. [In reply to] Can't Post

A little girl I used to babysit for got involved in a summer theater program. She got cast in a role with one line. She was upset, so I told her to watch some of Orlando Bloom's scenes in the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie and in the Lord of the Rings films. I showed her some clips of him acting, but not having any lines in those scenes, explaining to her that acting isn't just about lines. When she understood that, she really put herself into the role as a physical actor, and the director ended up giving her more lines because her acting without lines was so good.

I don't feel that Legolas' lack of lines makes his character less developed than others. In fact, I would imagine that an elf would probably be more likely to reserve sharing their thoughts unless necessary, considering their longevity may lead to more patience and less need to make sure people know who they are.

If they were making a movie about Legolas, then by all means, it would be great to see more character growth. But since they're adding him into The Hobbit, I think he should only be included in a minimal way... almost like how Galadriel was used in the LotR movies, possibly even less than that. I don't want to see them change the plot so much as to make Legolas such a big character that it takes away from the story of Bilbo and the dwarves.


Apr 17 2011, 3:35am

Post #9 of 83 (1107 views)
Woah woah waoah! [In reply to] Can't Post

Aren't you inventing a bit now, I'm fine with Istaril having a minor role. I reallly hope that is the case...is it even confirmed Itaril will be in the movie.

Anyway Itaril's presence in the movie isn't really justified other than that there are almost no females in the book...actually there are no females in the book.

Legolas could be in Mirkwood at this time though, it's very likely! Since he was in the trilogy I see no reason why instead of putting Itaril in the spotlight Peter couldn't expand Legolas role.

Yeah sure, who didn't like watching Arwen rescue Frodo. It was some nice eye candy alright...this is a film for all genders...but still.

What is most imporant, that Peter stays true to JRR Tolkien and his exceptional book.

I really don't mind having Itaril play a minor role...but she is invented!

If Peter don't want to stay true to the books, I see no reason why he couldn't come up with his own storyline...

If I would be in Peter's chair I would expand Legolas role instad of inventing a new female character. Removing Glordfindel was ok...since he didn't appear later in the books...introducing Arwen early on was a great oppurtunity to add a love story to the summer blockbuster.

Itaril and Legolas are fighting over screentime...if indeed Itaril is even going to be in it. Legolas should get more attention in my opinion.

(This post was edited by Altaira on Apr 17 2011, 4:16am)


Apr 17 2011, 3:38am

Post #10 of 83 (1034 views)
yup here we go... // [In reply to] Can't Post


Grey Havens

Apr 17 2011, 4:12am

Post #11 of 83 (1072 views)
What makes you so certain Itaril and Legolas are fighting for screen time? [In reply to] Can't Post

Unless the script got leaked out, none of us on the boards who aren't involved in the film would know what they're doing with both of these characters. We don't even know for certain what the plans are for Itaril at all... she could even be an idea that will be or already has been scrapped. It could be entirely possible as well that Itaril would be used in a totally different way than they would use Legolas, so the concern could be unfounded.


Apr 17 2011, 4:30am

Post #12 of 83 (1005 views)
I agree. [In reply to] Can't Post

If Itaril is supposed to be in love with an elf from Rivendell she must have a reason to find him. And perhaps the filmmakers want her as a means to expand the understanding of elvish fate and the difference there are between the ways of the Eldar and the ways of the Wood elves. I think Itaril will be mostly outside the main plotline and connected to the non canon part (Council, Dol Guldur and perhaps Bo5A.)


Apr 17 2011, 4:37am

Post #13 of 83 (1026 views)
He'll be in the Battle of Five Armies [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm sure PJ will give him a cool moment in the battle. Someone suggested on another board that Legolas should ride bear Beorn's back firing arrows. It could either be cool or really cheesy.


Apr 17 2011, 6:16am

Post #14 of 83 (1024 views)
Bilbo's Last Stand [In reply to] Can't Post

In Reply To
his father is blinded by greed...

The Elvenking wasn’t that bad, and he certainly wasn’t that greedy. Thorin was much, much worse. Remember this:
But the Elvenking said: “Long will I tarry, ere I begin this war for for gold...”
Which was very well said. Contrast that with those who did indeed begin this war over gold: it was the Dwarves who did so. The ones blinded by greed in this were Thorin and Company, who then, acting just like orcs, launched the first strike against the Elves and Men. No wonder Elves and Dwarves don’t get along! Only Gandalf’s sudden intervention with “Dread has come upon you all!” stopped a terrible slaughter. In the end, remember what Bilbo decided:
On all this Bilbo looked with misery. He had taken his stand on Ravenhill among the Elves — partly because there was more chance of escape from that point, and partly (with the more Tookish part of his mind) because if he was going to be in a last desperate stand, he preferred on the whole to defend the Elvenking.
Bilbo knew by then who the good guys were — or at least, the not-bad guys. I do not know any instance where the Elvenking acted wicked. Now Thorin, though, that’s another story. As Gandalf said to him, “You are not making a very splendid figure as King under the Mountain.”

It isn’t right to recast Thranduil as a villain in this: he didn’t loose the first arrows and attack: Thorin did so!

…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.
The Silmarillion, pp 150-151
while Felagund laughs beneath the trees
in Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.
The Lays of Beleriand, p 311

Hamfast Gamgee
Grey Havens

Apr 17 2011, 7:36am

Post #15 of 83 (995 views)
Maybe the Elven-king wasn't that bad [In reply to] Can't Post

But we don't know what his Captain were like! But possibly the Elven-king was a peace maker. Without his restraint a battle over the gold might already have started by the time the Goblins arrived. I don't suppose it's known for certain if the quarrel over the treasure would have lead to conflict but things didn't look promising. The Elven-kings restraining role might have been more important than Bilbo's role!

flying fish

Apr 17 2011, 8:11am

Post #16 of 83 (967 views)
well said [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't understand where the mania to portray the Wood-Elves as villains comes from; not from the book certainly, and i've made that point in another thread. There are enough orcs, goblins, trolls, spiders, bats, wolves and likely other assorted monsters in Dol Guldur (not to mention the Necromancer) to provide plenty of 'bad guys' for the movie.


Apr 17 2011, 9:32am

Post #17 of 83 (945 views)
.... [In reply to] Can't Post

How would they be able not to potray the elves as villains? Are you suggesting Biblo will be travelling with the main antagonists of the movie and not with his comrades in arms that are on a tresure hunt?

The elves will certainly be potrayed as greater evils until the end of the second film. Reading the book I always imagined the elves as evil or at least thranduil as a bit evil until the very end where he offered peace if he could get a share of the gold...I think?

Im resistant to the idea of potraying the necromancer as the main antagonist together with Smaug. Obvioulsy he will be an evil precense.

But I want to point out that it's a minor sub plot. It will probably be shown very much like Gandalf's meetings with Saruman was shown in the trilogy. The Gobllin King I think willl be also a minor precense...omg how do you spell that word. Have to look it up :p

Anyway the elves won't be good to the dwarves and Bilbo...putting them in jail and accuse them of being spies is not a friendly act...I'm looking forward to seeing evil elves...no race is perfect.

(This post was edited by Dalurtid on Apr 17 2011, 9:33am)

The Shire

Apr 17 2011, 10:41am

Post #18 of 83 (920 views)
In my opinion [In reply to] Can't Post

in my opinion PJ put back legolas because if the king's hall and the escape of bilbo...nothing more ...I can see clearly now that the hobbit has the main characters on it..meaning sure PJ will focus on that.. the hobbit movies is about of course the adventures of hobbits with some different creatures dwarf , elves , human, hobbit, etc..I mean there's a lot of characters in the movie...I agree with some of here saying " leave the elf alone" ..the hobbit is not all about the elf story..for me I just want to know more about the hobbit like how bilbo became friends with the elves and write songs for them to..

about king thrandul..he's not villian or evil like king as other..as I said I read some of the books LOTR and mention over there bilbo was captured in mirkwood because of stealing food in thrandul, and one thing more legolas is his father messenger, and absolutely he's single if not then they mention it on LOTR trilogy or hint about the end of the movies but the scenario in the end of the movie, he became the Lord of Mirkwood and he's father travel together with the other elves left and sailed to valinor ..and he's always welcome even in lothlorien , and there's writing that celebron has connected to king thrandul's or maybe some close knit or related blood . maybe PJ will set aside about info of legolas because the hobbit movies is not about the elves besides if you're going to watch the movie LOTR trilogy ( like I watch it 8 times ) you will catch some things and can get some info about the elves and legolas like what happened and some conclusion, and it is good the execution and the ending of the movie LOTR because we the viewers are going to put conclusion what kind of ending would want to be.. also in hobbit movies there are some other creatues to .there's a lot of things that will PJ explore each characters in the hobbit to make the movies will devide into 2 parts.

The Shire

Apr 17 2011, 10:51am

Post #19 of 83 (898 views)
not a big part [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree at some point putting Legolas in the hobbit doesn't mean he's making a big role on it..the fact that his big participation is in LOTR trilogy...legolas is just a some part of the hobbit movies and if itaril was true..I don't know how she will be connected to the movie since never heard about her and she's just invented...

The Shire

Apr 17 2011, 11:10am

Post #20 of 83 (939 views)
confused [In reply to] Can't Post

In Reply To
If Itaril is supposed to be in love with an elf from Rivendell she must have a reason to find him. And perhaps the filmmakers want her as a means to expand the understanding of elvish fate and the difference there are between the ways of the Eldar and the ways of the Wood elves. I think Itaril will be mostly outside the main plotline and connected to the non canon part (Council, Dol Guldur and perhaps Bo5A.)

if so call itaril will supposed to be inlove to legolas or fell inlove each other then it will conflict the original story of tolkien son writings about the unfinished tale where legolas fell inlove in one of the daughters of arwen and aragorn.

Tol Eressea

Apr 17 2011, 11:39am

Post #21 of 83 (921 views)
Thranduil is made to look bad to justify the actions of the characters the reader wants to like [In reply to] Can't Post

By this I don't mean Tolkien: he was very good at building conflict between characters without making the other one being entirely wrong and the other entirely right. He also knew how to show sympathy for villanous or antiheroic characters. Too bad many of his readers are less mature and good hearted, and love to bash and simplify his more controversial or harder-to-get characters. The shades of grey are turned into black and white for easier reading experience.

As for Thranduil, I'm afraid the fangirls are doing the same to him that PJ did to the poor Denethor. Turning Thranduil into a monster gives the poor angsty Legsy sympathy points! No worries, Mary Sue is there to comfort him!

I really, really hope they keep Thranduil as he is: good but not nice. After all, he has his own traumatic experiences and the constant fear of Dol Guldur burdening him. He shouldn't be all sunshine.

Tol Eressea

Apr 17 2011, 11:44am

Post #22 of 83 (887 views)
Antagonistic isn't the same as evil [In reply to] Can't Post

The Wood Elves never did any evil. They had every right to be suspicious of the Dwarves who refused to tell why they had entered their realm and caused uproar, even waking up the giant spiders. Remember these guys don't live in the pretty and peaceful Lórien, they live in the frikkin Mirkwood, the true lost woods full of monster and ever present death. They'd be suicidical not to be alert.

If you saw them as evil, then I'm afraid you just misinterprented them. Tolkien outright said that they are a good people. Did you miss that?

farmer maggot

Apr 17 2011, 11:56am

Post #23 of 83 (963 views)
I believe Tolkien's writings establish a history for the Elf/Dwarf emnity [In reply to] Can't Post

I wish my background knowledge and recollection of LOTR and The Hobbit were better but I think there are places in both books where this is mentioned. It seems that long previously several mis-understandings, disputes and grievances had grown up between them and escalated into ful scale mistrust and antagonism. This was established long before the time frame of The Hobbit and seems (I think) to centre around Dwarvish greed for gold and wealth. Perhaps others with more knowledge can fill this in.

I cannot recall any indication anywhere that Elves are capable of being 'evil' in general. The Rangers of the North, representing the best remnants of Men, are great freabd and allies of them adn have their aid in protecting The Shire. True Mirkwood is suposed to be a dangerous and untrustworthy place but not because of the presence of the Elves. It is the mistrust of the Dwarves that makes the Mirkwood Elves 'dangerous' to the expedition.

However, by the time of The Hobbit and LOTR the Middle Earth Elves have certainly become insular, isolated to only three protected enclaves and mistrusting of other races in general (Rangers apart), and that is without even the influence of Sauron's rise back to power.

It has always seemed a strange inconsitency to me that the Elves in The Hobbit were written as certanly less 'noble' than those in LOTR - being affected by desire for wealth. gold and for power in a way that makes them seem less admirable that the same immortal race only a century later.

I think that in the film, as in the book, we will see the whole mistrust and emnity area bewteen Elves and Dwarves treated much more subtly than just good/bad or hero/villain. In fact I believe that that The Hobbit has no real heros apart from Bilbo and no real villains apart from Smaug and Sauron - that is what makes the story so interesting. If anything the real villian is desire of wealth and greed itself but I am really keen to see how the films portray the Elves and particularly that strange desire for Gold and possessions.


Apr 17 2011, 12:29pm

Post #24 of 83 (897 views)
My english makes it hard for you to understand.. [In reply to] Can't Post

No I didn't miss anything, I know the elves are just as good as the dwarves. These are two kids arguing over the same toy...when I say the are evil I mean from the dwarves point of view.

I doubt the dwarves will be potrayed as evil...sorry for a lack of a better word. My english isn't perfect...it's much more likely that the dwarves and Bilbo will be potrayed as good men and the elves who capture them as "evil" men.

Of course they aren't evil...if one should compare Thranduil's actions with the dwarves actions the dwarves could probably be considersd more evil. But still...

We will be seeing the story from the dwarves point of view which leads me to believe the elves will have an "evil" role in the movie. And not be seen as the super good guys...

Ainu Laire
Tol Eressea

Apr 17 2011, 12:35pm

Post #25 of 83 (860 views)
Not evil, but they can have flaws [In reply to] Can't Post

And one of Thorin's greatest flaws is his greed and pride. That is a flaw of Thranduil too, I think, but Thorin is worse.

It is not evil to be prideful or greedy; that is human (or elven or dwarven) nature. I would like to see Thorin continue to have these stark character flaws. He can still be the good guy and not be perfect.

My LiveJournal ~ My artwork and photography

NARF since age 8, when I refused to read the Hobbit because the cover looked boring and icky.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.