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:
My Dear TheOneRing kindred, how fast thou dost retreat from the lines you draw in the sand, concerning The Hobbit
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 18 2012, 2:34pm

Post #1 of 85 (1755 views)
Shortcut
My Dear TheOneRing kindred, how fast thou dost retreat from the lines you draw in the sand, concerning The Hobbit Can't Post

Some of the fleetest progression through stages from Denial to Anger and depression to acceptance (and then to praise and defense!) ever seen.

I have not come to throw hateraid all over Sir Peter, but I think a reality check, or at least a reminder with a hint of intervention is called for here, for some of my fellow TheOneRing kith and kin.

I have heard proclamations against any notions of three films for The Hobbit. . . and I have watched them recede with an almost alarming swiftness. While I will not call out names of some who may not wish to be called out, I have also heard fervent assertions against things that may now be proving true (and some that few if any of us imagined we would have to worry over). I have heard the strict declarations that Bolg should be at Mt. Gundabad, and should absolutely not be made to seem like a henchman of The Necromancer (that he would actually dwell in Dol Guldur seemed beyond the wildest fears of those in that camp), and that Sauron should not seem to have any role in The Battle of Five Armies, etc. etc. etc.

Now it looks as if those things, and many others besides, may well be coming to pass. Peter et al may, it seems, be stepping boldly over the lines that some here have drawn in the sand. . . and the general response has been to back away from those lines at a speed that would embarass a cheetah, and to pretend as though they had never been drawn in the first place. Unimpressed

We are all entitled to change our minds, I suppose. For my part, however, as hopefull as I am about these films, I will say the following things.

1) While I don't mind the notion of Bolg et al being subtly prodded from afar by the designs of Sauron, the notion of him living in Dol Guldur seems a bit much. . . the notion of Azog re-living as a zombie variant of himself seems that much worse.

2) While I am heartened that Gandalf will have visited Dol Guldur prior to The Hobbit timeline, as is proper, to recieve Thrain's key, I rather strongly dislike the notion of Gandalf only discovering The Necromancer's identity IN The Hobbit. It up ends the entire timeline, including the century of delay caused by Saruman, which allowed Sauron time to adjust his plans against the possiblity of an assault from The Council. The notion of Gandalf and Galadriel working against Saruman's wishes in secret makes sense and seems appropriate, but the notion that they are working towards finding out the identity of The Master of Dol Guldur is exactly the sort of major change to the narrative that I and others have long been concerned about.

3) I certainly hope it isn't Bolg who has Gandalf on the run in Dol Guldur. . . not even going to get into how ridiculous that would be, I don't care how damn tough of an orc he is.

4) I've not forgotten the possibility of Nazgul sealed in crypts by Dunedain. . . shamen??? Aside from being (if confirmed, which it hopefully never will become Wink. . . everMad) yet another dirty slight to Glorfindel it is also yet another event that completely reconstructs the actual history of The Third Age. Say what you will about fan fiction, but most fan fictions do not dare that much blatant revisionism.

5) I can see this Necromancy business going about 12 ( yes tweleve) steps too far. A muddying of The Dwarf/Goblin wars in which known deaths are suddenly matters of speculation? A re-animated Azog??? Suddenly the rumours of an undead Smaug assailing The Allies in The Battle of Erebor becomes horrifyingly plausible. . . and what an awful notion that is.

I won't be surprised if some here who would have vomited spears over these potential changes just a few months ago, are defending them with zeal before this post is even pushed to the next forum page, but I think it all deserves a pause and a clear eyed review . . . hopefully it is all just speculation.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Gorbag
Rivendell


Aug 18 2012, 2:55pm

Post #2 of 85 (813 views)
Shortcut
Everything is pure conjecture. Same happened with LOTR. [In reply to] Can't Post

The first thing you need to accept is this is PJ's view of Middle Earth, not Tolkiens. You have to accept there will be changes. The EXACT same thing happened with LOTR Trilogy, when hints of changes came out, there were people who were upset/people who didnt mind/people who liked it. Look how the films turned out in the end. Brilliant. Subjective i know, but you know what i mean.

The process you described is a perfectly normal, and a repeated process for works like these. It shouldnt be suprising. People are going to change their views when info is released, re-think views on bits, and flat out hate ideas that may happen.

Anyway none have us have seen the film yet, so anything we take from scraps of info here and there we dont even know if its true or not. Lets just wait till the film comes out till outrage begins Wink.

Discussion on the Hobbit and speculation on whats going to happen is great fun, and people changing views is part of that.

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve. - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Aug 18 2012, 2:57pm

Post #3 of 85 (732 views)
Shortcut
People don't like to say they don't know. [In reply to] Can't Post

I wouldn't say it's specific to TORN and nor to any particular perspective.

There is a multi-stage decision making process to be found all across the interent. If there is information but we don't know the context, let's make up our minds quick. If there are only scraps of information then let's still make up our minds quick. If there is no information, then let's guess some and we can get on with making up our minds quick.

Why worry about swapping one bit of supposition for another?

LR


MatthewJer18
Rohan

Aug 18 2012, 3:02pm

Post #4 of 85 (723 views)
Shortcut
People have a right to change their minds based on new information, and their reasons should be their own, not subject to a speculative "reality check" [In reply to] Can't Post

Having said that, most people around here seem to be the same. There's a group supporting most of the changes, a group not supporting most of them and then a group squarely in the middle. I don't pay enough attention to specific members to notice when they change their minds, and even if they have I will trust that they had good reasons to do so until I'm shown specific evidence to the contrary.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 18 2012, 3:06pm

Post #5 of 85 (714 views)
Shortcut
I will admit... [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
I have heard proclamations against any notions of three films for The Hobbit. . . and I have watched them recede with an almost alarming swiftness. While I will not call out names of some who may not wish to be called out [..]


I was the first person to report the rumours of a 3rd Hobbit film that were going round ComicCon. Straight away I didn't like the idea. I didn't see any reason why they needed to expand The Hobbit book into a massively long trilogy. While I found all the news and rumours exiciting, I openly said I didn't want a trilogy. And it was actually dormouse that convinced me on the very same day as the trilogy announcement, that if done well, it could be brilliant. I don't see any problem with changing one's opinions. Once you form an opinion, you don't have to stick with it. Wise words from dormouse:


Quote

All I'm trying to say is, consider the possibility that however many episodes TH is divided into, the adaptation will be improved and the result will be more enjoyable if PJ and his co-writers have the time they think they need to develop the story in whatever way they choose. At this stage they have to be in the driving seat. We can only judge the finished film.



I'm glad we agree:


Quote
We are all entitled to change our minds, I suppose.


Tongue

As for everything else you said, I'll make my final judgment when I see the finished film. It's still far to early to worry about these things. Not only do we have 4 months left, but we know very little of how the film will be structured, what will and will not be included in the trilogy, and it's still 2 years until we've seen all 3 films. People will form opinions right now. They will change. Nothing wrong with that.


(This post was edited by DanielLB on Aug 18 2012, 3:07pm)


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 18 2012, 3:17pm

Post #6 of 85 (700 views)
Shortcut
I thought 3 films was a great idea from the beginning [In reply to] Can't Post

So I am safe from your rage. Smile


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 18 2012, 3:24pm

Post #7 of 85 (684 views)
Shortcut
well we dont need a reality check ..noooo thank you! [In reply to] Can't Post

"We are all entitled to change our minds, I suppose"

Yes, we most definitely are, all suppositions aside...and if members are persuaded to change their minds on certain aspects about the movies...theres nothing wrong with that...on the contrary, just make sthings more enjoyable and interesting...if people changed their minds as quickly as a cheethah then thats because the arguments and possibilities open by the convingcing side were strong, well put and spot on.

Doesnt mean some are being a bit of a turn coat...

But i see the rumour season has already begun..


Spaldron
Rivendell


Aug 18 2012, 3:27pm

Post #8 of 85 (689 views)
Shortcut
I think they should make ten films [In reply to] Can't Post

And have Morgoth resurrected by twelve Balrogs during the Battle of Seven Armies before being defeated by Beren (resurrected) using the remains of the Tree of Light as a spear after the bit where Hurin kills himself in front of one of Smaugs children.

"A single dream is more powerful than a thousand realities."


Kassandros
Rohan


Aug 18 2012, 3:30pm

Post #9 of 85 (703 views)
Shortcut
PJ's The Hobbit will be very different from Tolkien's [In reply to] Can't Post

Just a fact. Look at Lord of the Rings. Compare the movies to the book. Very different, in terms of details and how things are handled. Almost everything is at least a little different. Does the movie capture the spirit of the books? Well, people disagree on that one. I would say yes.

But the point is, for a long time, I've felt people have been expecting The Hobbit movies to follow the book more closely than they will. PJ will change things. Some he'll have to, just to make it work. Some he'll try to make better. It's his way. He's also expressedly adapting Hobbit + Quest for Erebor, essentially, and so it's going to be really, really different.

None of the leaked changes have terribly surprised me. Do I like them? I have no idea. I haven't seen the movie yet!

I, for one, would much rather wait and see all of these changes in context to decide how I feel instead of just rushing to judgment now.

When I heard Tom Bombadil was removed from FotR, I decided immediately it wouldn't be any good. Didn't really learn anything else about it. Went to see it anyway and it turned out to be the best movie I had ever seen in my life. I'm kinda glad I didn't learn lots of details in advance like I am for The Hobbit, but, on the other hand, I find it hard to resist. So I read them but I don't process them too heavily and I don't make any judgments about what I like and I don't. Just too soon for that.

all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us...


Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor

Aug 18 2012, 3:31pm

Post #10 of 85 (683 views)
Shortcut
I think PJ's films [In reply to] Can't Post

Capture most of the thematic beats of the book, but almost completely miss the spirit.


DanielLB
Immortal


Aug 18 2012, 3:50pm

Post #11 of 85 (644 views)
Shortcut
Can we have Bombadil on an Oliphaunt as well? / [In reply to] Can't Post

 


kzer_za
Rivendell

Aug 18 2012, 3:54pm

Post #12 of 85 (658 views)
Shortcut
I agree with some of what you say, but [In reply to] Can't Post

I would prefer to just wait and see how it all turns out. I don't like the idea of an undead Azog(or possibly merely surviving Azanulbizar) at all. But we don't really know how the pieces will fit together or how prominent a role these changes will play in a plot. It's possible that this stuff could really hurt the movies, but it's also possible it could be a storm in a teacup like Lurtz.


(This post was edited by kzer_za on Aug 18 2012, 3:58pm)


Aragorn the Elfstone
Grey Havens


Aug 18 2012, 5:42pm

Post #13 of 85 (615 views)
Shortcut
...and what of us who started off with praise? [In reply to] Can't Post

Tongue

PJ's movies will be what they are. The only issues I've had concerning this production have been the decisions to shoot in digital 3D and to expand 2 films into 3 films - and those concerns, for me, are more film craft related than adaptation related. I have small quibbles concerning the appearance of some of the dwarves, but I have long considered those minor. But as to the kinds of things you listed, I just don't care that much. I'm on the record as loving PJ, Fran, & Philippa's work on LotR, and I have a lot of confidence in them for The Hobbit. If I want strict adherence to the books, well, I can sit down and read the books.



"All men dream; but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds awake to find that it was vanity; But the dreamers of day are dangerous men. That they may act their dreams with open eyes to make it possible."
- T.E. Lawrence


(This post was edited by Aragorn the Elfstone on Aug 18 2012, 5:44pm)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 18 2012, 6:11pm

Post #14 of 85 (586 views)
Shortcut
Well, of course, shame on you from beginning to end and at all points between lol [In reply to] Can't Post

WinkTongueLaugh
So. . . you have come under the corrupting influence of The Film and have unmasked yourself at last. lol

Many people won't sit down and read the books, and will trust that they have gotten the true tale from the movies. And that could end up being a damned shame.

In Reply To
Tongue

PJ's movies will be what they are. The only issues I've had concerning this production have been the decisions to shoot in digital 3D and to expand 2 films into 3 films - and those concerns, for me, are more film craft related than adaptation related. I have small quibbles concerning the appearance of some of the dwarves, but I have long considered those minor. But as to the kinds of things you listed, I just don't care that much. I'm on the record as loving PJ, Fran, & Philippa's work on LotR, and I have a lot of confidence in them for The Hobbit. If I want strict adherence to the books, well, I can sit down and read the books.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Lusitano
Tol Eressea


Aug 18 2012, 6:22pm

Post #15 of 85 (568 views)
Shortcut
yes [In reply to] Can't Post

But at least they experienced middle earth ...otherwise, they might never do it...


Aragorn the Elfstone
Grey Havens


Aug 18 2012, 6:22pm

Post #16 of 85 (573 views)
Shortcut
On that note, I heartily agree... [In reply to] Can't Post

It breaks my heart when I hear of people who won't bother with the books. It's not because of the regard in which I hold the films - because, as I said, I love them. In terms of cinematic offerings, I consider them rare jewels - and I don't think I'll ever place another film above them. However, the simple fact is that they cannot hold a candle to what Professor Tolkien created in his written works. Nothing ever could. It's not just the content of his stories - it's the way he tells them. I feel fully confident in saying that his prose is unmatched. I just about tear my hair out when I hear that someone will deny themselves that because they think a film adaptation could come close to equaling the experience.



"All men dream; but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds awake to find that it was vanity; But the dreamers of day are dangerous men. That they may act their dreams with open eyes to make it possible."
- T.E. Lawrence


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 18 2012, 7:05pm

Post #17 of 85 (531 views)
Shortcut
Indeed. [In reply to] Can't Post

Well said.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Bladerunner
Gondor


Aug 18 2012, 7:28pm

Post #18 of 85 (557 views)
Shortcut
My Scribbles in the Sand.... [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Always Preferred:
    Inclusion of Legolas;
    Inclusion of Tauriel;
    Inclusion of Gandalf's White Council/Dol Guldur storyline;
    Talking animals! Stone giants!! (rumors of talking spiders and wolves is promising, but I'm also hoping for talking eagles and raven);
    Singing elves (hoping that singing children would be a nice interpretation & compromise);
    DAIN!! (I would have been sorely disappointed had he been excluded);
    Expanded role for Bard;
    3D, 48 FPS options!!;
    Three films made sense to me, as long as we didn't have to wait another year between release of Films 2 & 3.

Fears Averted:
    That scenes from the book would be cut from the films but this doesn't seem to be the case based on information revealed to date;
    How Beorn would be interpreted, but so far so good;
    That the Azog, Bolg, or Great Goblin characters were going to be merged into one alternate combination or another, but this also did not come to pass; however see new concerns below :-(.

Grown on Me:
    Dain and Iron Hill dwarves riding boars;
    Radagast riding a jack rabbit sled
    (my initial reactions to these revelations were negative, but they actually helped broaden my perspective of what could be possible, and I hope there are other surprisingly interesting twists in the films).

We are Not Amused:
    Potential interpretation of Radagast (I hope this Istari gets some respect);
    Talk of killing Radagast;
    Potential for cliched fat jokes involving Bombur. (The breaking chair scene is not promising, - I hope it gets deleted from the film);
    A beardless Kili;
    I still don't want Tauriel helping Bilbo and the dwarves to escape;
    Potential lack of independence of goblins by conflating their motives with Necromancer's (What happens in Dol Guldur should stay in Dol Guldur);
    Azog beyond Azanulbizar? Bolg in Dol Guldur instead of Gundabad? What the what what?!?;
    Hoping for no artificially inseminated ;0) love interests between any of the characters!



dormouse
Half-elven


Aug 18 2012, 7:34pm

Post #19 of 85 (534 views)
Shortcut
Er.... well... [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't think I've drawn any lines in any sand and if I had, sand is very changeable stuff. Lines disappear with the first incoming tide. Wink

I just want to see the film, as is, without preconceived ideas. Haven't a clue right now about what they're doing with Azog, Bolg, the Necromancer and all points east, but once I've seen it, I'll judge. And if, when, I've heard their reasoning for whatever it was they did, I'll think about it again. What I won't do is start getting excited over ideas people come up with on the forum, entertaining though they are, because no one here knows what will happen, it's all guesswork.

And if someone does come out with a definite view on something, and changes their mind later, why is that a problem?


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 18 2012, 7:37pm

Post #20 of 85 (538 views)
Shortcut
A very detailed consideration [In reply to] Can't Post

Lol. And amusing near the end. And, with the exception of the Three Film businessI mostly share your sentiment. I was always fine with Legolas, The Council vs Dol Guldur etc., and certainly things in the book like singing Elves.

The sled of Radagast doesn't bother me, though I share your fear about them portraying him as an asinine buffon. Saruman's contempt of him should not be read to mean that he was actually simple or a fool. Even as a quiet, dignified sage, communing with wild things and living quietly, never seeking levers of power, Saruman would have viewed him as foolish. To have him actually come across as a clown, however, would be a mistake, as would showing Gandalf treating him with even a trace of Saruman's contempt.

In Reply To
Always Preferred:
    Inclusion of Legolas;
    Inclusion of Tauriel;
    Inclusion of Gandalf's White Council/Dol Guldur storyline;
    Talking animals! Stone giants!! (rumors of talking spiders and wolves is promising, but I'm also hoping for talking eagles and raven);
    Singing elves (hoping that singing children would be a nice interpretation & compromise);
    DAIN!! (I would have been sorely disappointed had he been excluded);
    Expanded role for Bard;
    3D, 48 FPS options!!;
    Three films made sense to me, as long as we didn't have to wait another year between release of Films 2 & 3.

Fears Averted:
    That scenes from the book would be cut from the films but this doesn't seem to be the case based on information revealed to date;
    How Beorn would be interpreted, but so far so good;
    That the Azog, Bolg, or Great Goblin characters were going to be merged into one alternate combination or another, but this also did not come to pass; however see new concerns below :-(.

Grown on Me:
    Dain and Iron Hill dwarves riding boars;
    Radagast riding a jack rabbit sled
    (my initial reactions to these revelations were negative, but they actually helped broaden my perspective of what could be possible, and I hope there are other surprisingly interesting twists in the films).

We are Not Amused:
    Potential interpretation of Radagast (I hope this Istari gets some respect);
    Talk of killing Radagast;
    Potential for cliched fat jokes involving Bombur. (The breaking chair scene is not promising, - I hope it gets deleted from the film);
    A beardless Kili;
    I still don't want Tauriel helping Bilbo and the dwarves to escape;
    Potential lack of independence of goblins by conflating their motives with Necromancer's (What happens in Dol Guldur should stay in Dol Guldur);
    Azog beyond Azanulbizar? Bolg in Dol Guldur instead of Gundabad? What the what what?!?;
    Hoping for no artificially inseminated ;0) love interests between any of the characters!


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Buchanicus
Lorien


Aug 18 2012, 8:46pm

Post #21 of 85 (487 views)
Shortcut
Speculation is just that... [In reply to] Can't Post

Speculation...it can be fun to guess and to assume and to predict and there's even room for concern and disappointment and all that...but I really don't understand all of this deciding that something is going to be "awful" because it is "different". A LOT of people have made up their minds that if it is a change they hate it...and I find that really bizarre. I'm not going to say anyone is foolish that they are concerned that things might be changed that they don't agree with...but this whole movement it seems to make judgement on guesswork about potential changes and differences is something that usually comes off as people trying to sound superior because they have such a vast knowledge of the book.

None of us know what is going to be changed from the books...it's all speculation at this point. I've read The Hobbit once a year for the last 26 years, and I had read the LotR a dozen times before I saw the films, and although there were some things I wish would've been like what was in the book, the was NOTHING that I hated just based on the fact that it was new, changed, consolidated, or whatever. I think that's cheating yourself potential enjoyment. Again, not saying that people don't have the right or the reason to dislike something...but for reasons other than "it's different".

I understand that there is different perceptions and point of views, but a lot of this " I hate it because its different from the book" stuff (4 months before the movie is even out) seems very pretentious and anger for the sake of anger to me. Not from all parties, but definitely some of the louder posters.

TORn member formally known as ryan1976.

(This post was edited by Buchanicus on Aug 18 2012, 8:50pm)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Aug 18 2012, 9:08pm

Post #22 of 85 (464 views)
Shortcut
Not if a change is made. Lots of minor changes are just fine. [In reply to] Can't Post

However, if a change alters the entire timeline of the story, or creates a ripple/dominal effect wherein the entire history can no longer be accurately represented, it is a problem.

As I said to Lacrimae, there are changes and then there are CHANGES. The former are to be expected, the latter are another matter entirely.

Galadriel meeting with Gandalf in Rivendell to discuss things of which Saruman would not approve is a small c change. It is not only allowable within the timeline of known events, it is entirely plausible and even highly probable. Galadriel going to Erebor, bending Smaug's mind to her will, and flying him to Mirkwood to burn Dol Guldur to cinders would be an all caps CHANGE, and I will leave it to you to decide whether or not it would be a digestable one.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens

Aug 18 2012, 9:28pm

Post #23 of 85 (460 views)
Shortcut
They are both changes. But I wouldn't object to either on that basis. [In reply to] Can't Post

If your latter example happened to turn out to be genuinely fantastic for the story of TH, which on the face of it sounds unlikely, then I have no urge to protect the world from "false lore!" If it left the audience in rapturous praise why should I object? It would clearly be a less literal and more abstract interpretation, however.

Can you picture a situation where that would do a fantastic job of telling the story?

It also seems really quite unlikely in the context. All of the suggestions at the moment involve the back stories of minor characters.

LR


Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Aug 18 2012, 10:58pm

Post #24 of 85 (419 views)
Shortcut
It seems that these films continually confound out expectations (for better or worse) [In reply to] Can't Post

Personally, now what I've gotten used to the idea of three films (of which I'm still not a fan), I'm just kind-of going for the ride. It seems that new information or rumors about how PJ and Co. and tackling the world and characters of TH keeps coming to light and throwing our assumptions out the window; I suppose now, it's just a matter of taking in the film(s) they ARE making, and not the films which we thought or hoped they were making. Smile

Goblins as the henchmen of the Necromancer? Zombie Orcs and Dwarves? IMO, if handled well, these alterations could work (IMO, as was the case with Lurtz), or...not (IMO, as was the case with Gothmog, for whom I really didn't care). Or at the least, they could be realized in a passable way which wouldn't ruin the film anytime they appear. We'll have to wait to see how it all plays out on the big screen...

BTW, personally always hoped and expected we'd see Gandalf's discovering the identity of the Necromancer during the films: it's such a powerful, potentially cinematic moment (and important part of the narrative), how could they NOT include it? Additionally, it doesn't make sense to me that they'd call the master of Dol Guldur "the Necromancer" all the time if they've known it was Sauron for quite some time. Wink

My Top 5 Wish List for "The Hobbit"
5. Legolas will surf down Smaug's neck
4. Bilbo will be revealed to a Robot
3. Naked PJ cameo as Ghan-Buri-Ghan
2. Use of not only 3D, but smell-o-vision, plus the inclusion of axes coming out of the seats and poking the audience when appropriate
1. Not only keep the claim that Thorin & Co. ran amok in Mirkwood "molesting people", but depict said incident in vivid detail!!!!!


Ziggy Stardust
Gondor


Aug 18 2012, 11:41pm

Post #25 of 85 (407 views)
Shortcut
Undead orcs, undead Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

Undead, undead, undead! (Sorry, Bauhaus reference).
Those are probably the things I'm most concerned about. I also don't like another slight to Glorfindel, but at least it's not involving undead. While there are undeads in Middle-Earth, there were no undead orcs in The Hobbit, and Smaug did not become undead. If they have to put it the undead, can't they just have some random reanimated corpse at Dol Guldor? It would make more sense, especially since it's the home of the Necromancer.
The dead travel fast. With all the undead talk, I had tot say that. Laugh

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.