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:
pallantir in the hobbit?

boldog
Rohan


Apr 23 2013, 9:05am

Post #1 of 18 (840 views)
Shortcut
pallantir in the hobbit? Can't Post

with the whole dol guldur plotline being strongly emphasised throughout the trilogy, who believes that we might get a glimpde of the notorious pallantir, which brainwashed saruman. could he have retrieved it after the escape of the necromancer? could it have been given to him by the necromancer?
personally im not sure about it. id rather see a one on one scene with saruman and the necromancer, where he joins him in secret possibly out of fear.
besides people who dont understand much of the lore, would merely had thought that it was a form of communication to the dark lord in the lotr trilogy and not the actual source of corruption, as it actually was.
what are your thoughts though? should we see the pallantir or not?ShockedUnimpressed

"fingolfin looked up in grief to see what evil morgoth had done to maedhros"


Arannir
Valinor

Apr 23 2013, 9:15am

Post #2 of 18 (385 views)
Shortcut
No, we shouldn't imho. [In reply to] Can't Post

Saruman's double play might be hinted at via looks and phrasing, so that those who know can draw their conclusions, but anything more than that might get too complicated at some point for a part of the audience and build up story-arcs that will not play a role anymore until FotR.

This is also why I liked the Balrog was hinted at via the "flaming gate" of Moria, but not mentioned (at least yet).

The same goes for the Dwarven Rings.


Elizabeth
Valinor


Apr 23 2013, 9:15am

Post #3 of 18 (378 views)
Shortcut
Certainly not. [In reply to] Can't Post

There was not one at Dol Guldur, and we don't expect any scenes in Isengard. The palantir had no role in The Hobbit. It would be a useless distraction. Moreover, they have to be very careful not to cast doubts on Saruman's loyalty in these films, because that would make Gandalf look like a fool at the beginning of FotR.

It's a classic fallacy of "prequels" to think they have to foreshadow everything in the "sequel". They don't, and the whole series would suffer from such shallow thinking.








Smeagol Bagginsess
Rivendell


Apr 23 2013, 10:30am

Post #4 of 18 (329 views)
Shortcut
Cannot agree more. [In reply to] Can't Post

1. There was no palantir at Dol Guldur.

2. First thing to keep in mind is this "hobbit" and not a "LOTR prequel".

3. I am not very impressed by Saruman's portrayal in AUJ (not Lee's fault though). His disagreements are pretty obvious to the audience. Saruman's betrayal is one of the "surprises" of LOTR and I'm afraid foreshadowing this in the hobbit will ruin that experience.

4. What's this with Saruman joining the Necromancer? And because of fear? First of all Saruman is the one who defeats the Necromancer. So he has no cause of fear ... yet. And why would he join the Necromancer? He always wanted the Ring for himself and collaborating with Sauron was just by accident.

5. "besides people who dont understand much of the lore, would merely had thought that it was a form of communication to the dark lord in the lotr trilogy and not the actual source of corruption, as it actually was. "

Well the palantir was NOT a source of corruption. Saruman was corrupted because he came across Sauron. Denethor was not corrupted because he looked into the palantir. But because he also came across Sauron. So, the actual source WAS Sauron.

And I think it's sufficient to know that it was a form of communication for the story POV. If they can't understand the Palantiri, the books are always there.


In short, the things you want should never never never be in the movies.

I am the Grandson of Samwise Gamgee. My grandpa loved Frodo uncle and Frodo uncle loved his pet, Smeagol. So I am named Smeagol Bagginsess! Ain't I cute?


dormouse
Half-elven


Apr 23 2013, 10:49am

Post #5 of 18 (302 views)
Shortcut
No [In reply to] Can't Post

There's absolutely no need for it, it would just be something else to explain, diverting attention from the real story.


xxxyyy
Rohan

Apr 23 2013, 3:48pm

Post #6 of 18 (245 views)
Shortcut
Might be good, might be bad. Continuity. Hobbit a sequel to LOTR. [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd say, if they pay attention to continuity issues, I see no problem in adding the palantir.
I also consider the Hobbit a sequel to LOTR, so I would have absolutely no problem with it, including all other stuff, like, in particular, the Rings of Power (all of them), which I think, would be a tremendous error not to put them in The Hobbit.

http://energyfromthorium.com/


Eleniel
Grey Havens


Apr 23 2013, 4:46pm

Post #7 of 18 (210 views)
Shortcut
Canon reasons why not... [In reply to] Can't Post

Firstly, as Sméagol Bagginses has said, there was never a Palantir at Dol Guldur.: Sauron only came into possession of one when he returned to Mordor in 2951, after the Palantir of Minas Ithil was relocated there from Minas Morgul, the Nazgul having seized in 3rd Age 1980...

and the stone which Saruman had in his possession was already in Orthanc when he took up residence there in 3rd Age 2759. Tolkien categorically states in the Tale of Years in Appendix B of LotR that Saruman only dared to look into the Palantir of Orthanc around the year 3000 of the Third Age.


"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
¯ Victoria Monfort




Avatar: Elwing by art-nouveau-club on DeviantArt


Rostron2
Gondor


Apr 23 2013, 4:49pm

Post #8 of 18 (214 views)
Shortcut
There's a tendency here [In reply to] Can't Post

To want to link every single LOTR reference back to Hobbit. It's simply not necessary. The 'mystery' of who the Necromancer is, is really no mystery to us. To the characters investigating, they're not 100% sure.

No palantir

The only place it would have been nice to show the palantir again was with Denethor, it would have explained and justified his character so much more.


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Apr 23 2013, 6:36pm

Post #9 of 18 (182 views)
Shortcut
It would have been so great [In reply to] Can't Post

to have just one short scene showing Denethor looking into the Palantir (and would have provided some foreshadowing and a counterpoint to Aragoryn's (EE) scene). It really would have lent his character a lot of depth and complexity, and it would have given John Noble one more scene to be brilliant.


cats16
Tol Eressea

Apr 23 2013, 6:41pm

Post #10 of 18 (182 views)
Shortcut
For me [In reply to] Can't Post

The line "I have seen more than you know" in ROTK worked to represent the palantir. I assumed that that was what they were referring to, even without explicitly showing/talking about it. But don't get me wrong, seeing it would definitely have been cool, as well. I guess it just wasn't something that I thought about very much.


StoneHex104
Rivendell

Apr 23 2013, 8:24pm

Post #11 of 18 (168 views)
Shortcut
No... just no [In reply to] Can't Post

 


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea

Apr 23 2013, 9:46pm

Post #12 of 18 (145 views)
Shortcut
Yeah, i got that from that line too. [In reply to] Can't Post

Though i think it took a few views before i picked up on it. Still would have been nice to actually see him use it, struggle with it.


cats16
Tol Eressea

Apr 23 2013, 10:37pm

Post #13 of 18 (137 views)
Shortcut
I'm with you on that [In reply to] Can't Post

Because, like you said, it does take several viewings to pick it up. I remember that I actually didn't pick it up until I had it on dvd, and really analyzed the film piece by piece. Seeing is always niceSmile


IdrilofGondolin
Rohan

Apr 23 2013, 11:54pm

Post #14 of 18 (133 views)
Shortcut
And it would have explained his character [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
The line "I have seen more than you know" in ROTK worked to represent the palantir. I assumed that that was what they were referring to, even without explicitly showing/talking about it. But don't get me wrong, seeing it would definitely have been cool, as well. I guess it just wasn't something that I thought about very much.


Denethor is a noble man. His character was trashed in ROTK. we know he changed because of his interactions with the Anor Stone. We needed to see this so we could understand his fall. Without this Denethor becomes a feckless, unkind, heartless father. Most disappointing.


cats16
Tol Eressea

Apr 24 2013, 12:54am

Post #15 of 18 (125 views)
Shortcut
I agree about the great difference in character. [In reply to] Can't Post

I suppose that, in the way that the films present him, it wasn't something that I felt was necessary to see. I think his overall negativity suggests quite a bit.

But if he had been portrayed similar to the book, then yes I do agree the palantir's presence is necessary to understand his character arc.

On a side note, I wonder which palantir Aragorn picks up in the ROTK EE? Are we to assume that it is the one Saruman possessed? It seems pretty ambiguous, and I could see it being both. Especially because it would make sense for them to have found/taken Denethor's after his death. Isn't it sitting on the chair of the steward when Aragorn picks it up?


xxxyyy
Rohan

Apr 24 2013, 1:08am

Post #16 of 18 (133 views)
Shortcut
enethor and palantir, biggest plot hole, as Sam and the Ring at Cirith Ungol [In reply to] Can't Post

Thank God they did not choose to use a palantir in Minas Tirith. Denethor would have revealed, unwillingly to Sauron, that the Ring was not there but on it's way to Mordor.
I prefer a "dumb down" version of Denethor (who I learnt to appreciate with time) than a non consistent Denethor plot hole.
I have no idea how they could include a palantir in The Hobbit, but if it's done well (that's to say NOT a la "Star Wars prequels), without destroying the continuity of the story... who cares? I don't.

http://energyfromthorium.com/


Eleniel
Grey Havens


Apr 24 2013, 6:50am

Post #17 of 18 (114 views)
Shortcut
I think this is probably the main reason The Arnor Stone wasn't included... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
.

On a side note, I wonder which palantir Aragorn picks up in the ROTK EE? Are we to assume that it is the one Saruman possessed? It seems pretty ambiguous, and I could see it being both. Especially because it would make sense for them to have found/taken Denethor's after his death. Isn't it sitting on the chair of the steward when Aragorn picks it up?







Despite the fact that it went a long way to explaining Denethor's flawed character and subsequent actions in RotK, I guess PJ felt the audience would be confused by seeing more than one palantir. t's a crying shame, particularly because we could have had a far better death scene for Denethor, as he jumps on the pyre clutching the Arnor stone. I'm sur ePJ would love to have given us a close up shot of the palantir with Denethor's withered hands reflected in it!


"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
¯ Victoria Monfort




Avatar: Elwing by art-nouveau-club on DeviantArt


Darkstone
Immortal


Apr 24 2013, 3:53pm

Post #18 of 18 (114 views)
Shortcut
Raiders of the Lost Arkenstone [In reply to] Can't Post

I can’t see how Jackson could resist putting in a large palantir, along the size of the giant palantir of Osgiliath, rolling down the stairs of Dol Guldur as soldiers of the White Council charge up.

******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”


 
 

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.