|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Erally
Bree
Jul 3 2014, 9:16am
Post #1 of 17
(1557 views)
Shortcut
|
Anyone else thinks we will see how Saruman becomes corrupted by Sauron ? And how will it be ? I think there is a possibility because all of the other things they included in the Hobbit.
|
|
|
CillBosby
The Shire
Jul 3 2014, 9:51am
Post #2 of 17
(1192 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Saruman? You must mean Aruman?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Grownups say the darndest things!
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Jul 3 2014, 9:56am
Post #3 of 17
(1165 views)
Shortcut
|
... that might be cool (though more for the EE of Bot5A) is a scene that could play out nicely after Sauron pulls back from DG. During or after a conversation in which we will learn that the WC does not believe that this was a true victory (which simply has to be there, imho): after such a conversation the One and its loss could be mentioned, maybe indicating a particular interest by Saruman (without implying any form of corruption, yet).
A scene in which Sauron corrupts him... hm, not a fan, to be honest. After all, it was Saruman's own lust for power and knowledge that corrupted him, not some sort of spell cast by Sauron. It happened slowly, over years of his own ring-studies.
So I think it might be a nice thing for the EE to do to hint at Saruman's ring-studies and interest in the One. But no direct linking to Sauron.
At this point Saruman should be shown as a fierce enemy of Sauron.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
(This post was edited by Arannir on Jul 3 2014, 10:00am)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
Jul 3 2014, 12:44pm
Post #4 of 17
(1056 views)
Shortcut
|
The point-of-no-return in Saruman's corruption, in the legendarium, seems to have been when he used the Orthanc-stone for the first time and had his mind captured by Sauron (although it started long before that). In Peter Jackson's movie-verse, the palantir of Isengard might have been stolen by one of Sauron's agents and installed at Dol Guldur. Saruman might discover it after Sauron withdraws, setting himself up for his own doom once the Dark Lord returns to Barad-dur.
'There are older and fouler things than Orcs in the deep places of the world.' - Gandalf the Grey, The Fellowship of the Ring
|
|
|
Lindele
Gondor
Jul 3 2014, 12:56pm
Post #5 of 17
(1058 views)
Shortcut
|
that FOTR comes after BOTFA, it would spoil the reveal of Saruman's evil when Gandalf goes to seek his help in the beginning of FOTR. So I'd rather not see something unless it is very subtle....like showing an interesting the ring.
|
|
|
Eleniel
Tol Eressea
Jul 3 2014, 1:28pm
Post #6 of 17
(1007 views)
Shortcut
|
"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
¯ Victoria Monfort
|
|
|
Guert
Rivendell
Jul 3 2014, 1:43pm
Post #7 of 17
(1045 views)
Shortcut
|
It has already been said here before... But I could very well see a scene where Saruman finds the Palantir in DG and keeps it hidden from the others... as simple as that. It could work very well in the movie-verse.
More than that, I agree, would spoil the Saruman treachery in FOTR.
|
|
|
Bumblingidiot
Rohan
Jul 3 2014, 2:50pm
Post #8 of 17
(1007 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't mind something a bit ambiguous, but I think these films should be viewable in chronological order without too many plot give-aways in previous films.
It has already been said here before... But I could very well see a scene where Saruman finds the Palantir in DG and keeps it hidden from the others... as simple as that. It could work very well in the movie-verse.
More than that, I agree, would spoil the Saruman treachery in FOTR.
"Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear."
|
|
|
Name
Rohan
Jul 3 2014, 2:58pm
Post #9 of 17
(1025 views)
Shortcut
|
Consisting of......................um....................red.......
How many Tolkien fans does it take to change a light bulb?
"Change? Oh my god, what do you mean change?! Never, never, never......"
|
|
|
Guert
Rivendell
Jul 3 2014, 5:43pm
Post #10 of 17
(974 views)
Shortcut
|
In that case I hope there will be something that will explain's Legolas change of personality from the Hobbit to LOTR... 
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Jul 3 2014, 7:58pm
Post #11 of 17
(942 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Pretty sure this is why they decided to invent the Tauriel/Kili nonsense...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Can't remember which one of the writers said it, but apparently this whole business with Kili and Tauriel is supposed to show us why Legolas hates Dwarves in LotR (even though he clearly already hates Dwarves in TH movies). I guess the fact that Legolas' father had a falling out with Thror's people over jewels wasn't enough, they felt they had to have one of the Dwarves steal Leggy's woman.
IMO, just another completely unnecessary tie-in to Jackson's own LotR films.
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Jul 3 2014, 8:02pm
Post #12 of 17
(905 views)
Shortcut
|
I hope they don't go having Saruman find a Palantir amidst the rubble of Dol Guldur.
This is also why I feel Saruman should play a large role in routing the Necromancer, maybe the largest among the members of the WC. Having Saruman kick some major tail in Dol Guldur would lend his later defection much more weight.
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 3 2014, 11:52pm
Post #13 of 17
(853 views)
Shortcut
|
My favorite line of his. 
Silverlode
"Dark is the water of Kheled-zâram, and cold are the springs of Kibil-nâla, and fair were the many-pillared halls of Khazad-dûm in Elder Days before the fall of mighty kings beneath the stone."
|
|
|
Elizabeth
Half-elven
Jul 4 2014, 1:29am
Post #14 of 17
(888 views)
Shortcut
|
The Hobbit is not intended to be a "prequel" that explains everything that's going to happen in LotR. It should be its own story, with its own integrity and purpose. Aside from introducing the new viewer to Middle Earth and some of the characters, it shouldn't "spoil" LotR any more than necessary. I would resent any "plot points" from LotR appearing here.
|
|
|
Michelle Johnston
Rohan
Jul 4 2014, 8:34am
Post #15 of 17
(843 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Agree but for slightly different reasons &. What defines a prequel
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Elizabeth I watched the AUJ directors commentary of AUJ last night and what comes over constantly is very good scenes are left out because of the pressure of time not drama or side routes just time.
Therefore to dwell on Saruman (other than the head of the council who comes to the aid of his old friend Gandalf and admits he was wrong in Rivendell) is unnecessary and takes up valuable screen time.
I fully accept PJ has to place emphasis on action, for the reasons John Cleese recently talked about with Bond, but you and I and the other deep fans want the slowed down moments and for each of those resolutions we want them fully lit. There is plenty for Bilbo,Thorin and to a lesser extent all the other political figures (Bard, Thranduil) to do without adding more and more cameo/signpost LOTR moments.
You mention it should not be a prequel for me there are three elements which are back story two of which are Tolkien and one Jackson which i am enjoying :-
1) The ring is invested with its post hobbit book significance.
2) The necromancer is not the excuse of the book but Sauron taking shape.
3) Legolas he would have been there so give him something interesting to do, take him from his fathers isolationist view to the world view of the LOTR. The effect of Tauriel's outcome will not be love sick puppy legolas but to show by example that it is our fight and we sometimes have to sacrifice all to achieve it, echoing Tolkien's friends who died on the Somme, though he will resent the dwarves in a more personal way because Tauriel's sacrifice is motivated by a Dwarf (thats a supposition but a good deal of investment has made in that potential outcome).
My Dear Bilbo something is the matter with you! you are not the same hobbit that you were.
(This post was edited by Michelle Johnston on Jul 4 2014, 8:35am)
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Jul 4 2014, 8:35pm
Post #17 of 17
(861 views)
Shortcut
|
|
That ship has clearly sailed...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It should be its own story, with its own integrity and purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
