Should the Trolls keep their names?

H

Hamfast Gamgee

Tol Eressea
Should the Trolls refer to themselves by name in the film, or should they be represented as simple hungry and fearsome Trolls? I presume that PJ isn't going to keep to the dialogue word for word as it is in the Hobbit but would having names add to the situation or maybe just been Trolls would be better?
 
why wouldn't they be called by their names? The troll scene is actually one where I could see much of the original dialogue from the novel being used, since it such an iconic scene from the book.
 
there are different breeds of Trolls, so it shouldn't be hard to sell these three as being more intelligent but bumbling than those we've seen in the original trilogy.
 
Is your concern that, since PJ set up the LotR films to be more realistic (as much as you can make the stories realistic, that is) than fantastical, that he may decide to make the trolls match the other trolls in the LotR films? Also, do you personally think that the trolls wouldn't work in the film if they are done as written?

Personally, I'd love to see the trolls represented in a similar way to how they are in the book, because it's one of the most entertaining and memorable parts of the book to me (I'm sure many would agree, though.) Also, you'd have to pretty dramatically change the scene so that it would work without them talking and being who they are. That would take a lot away from the story.
 
up to this point........ Trolls have been considered Wild, Wierd Otherworldy-thingies...with no realWorld Names?
Having names?
like your nextdoor neighborhood guys? just does present a problem.

This kind of takes you off the Bree-n-path with TheseTroll-someGuys who ARE ancient
and From the Northern Kingdoms,
hoarding Swords from Ancient Wars..yet have survived any Light of Any Day?
IT's a very complex consept that Will, Bert, and Tom be dealt with soon.

Poor PJ and Stafff, they have much Explaining to do.

p.ps. If? I OldBombadil don't confound and Corn-fuse you ...I'm not doing a good Job...immm jus' wanta... to make you LOL
xoxo"Mostly Harmlesss" your-everPresent Odd-lately? OldUncle....Bombadil
 
The lord of the rings movie was not ment to be an all incompassing example of middle earth. For every tiny sliver you see in the film, there are compenduims of information that exist in the cannon of the realm.

The reason its important to keep this in mind is the LOTR trilligy was ment to follow bilbo and the ring, for the sake of time. Due to that fact, there is no way you can say because it wasnt in the trillogies, that it cannot exist in the hobbit, or really even in the LOTRs (Movie) universe.

Middle earth is a HUGE place, there are many lands, people, creatures, and cultures. If you are going to only use the LOTRS (Movie) as your base of knowledge you can't make the Hobbit.

By this logic Smaug shouldn't even exist in the hobbit as he was never even mentioned in the Trilogy.

This is part of the reason I wanted GDT do direct this movie. A different look and take will help alleviate the confusion of those who haven't read the books, which there is no excuse for.

To put it simply: If the first thing you think of when you see a troll in the hobbit that doesn't look like the ones from the trilogy is "OMG THEY CHANGED THE WAY THEY LOOK".... Your missing the point entirely.

I hope PJ and Co do right by the Hobbit. I totally understand why they made the changes to the movies, well not all of them but most; however the changes in the movies were based on time constraints, of which the Hobbit should have few. For all intents and purposes this movie should mirror the book far better then the LOTRS Trilogy did. If not... I shutter at the thought of what this movie could become.
 
. . .feel that the names Bert, Bill and Tom are too campy.
Campy to the point that mentioning their names would take the casual viewer out of the story a bit. Lovers of the books like us will just have to take comfort that we know full well that we are looking at Bert, Bill and Tom.
 
Last edited:
otherwise the account of the event that Bilbo tells the kiddos at the Party would make no sense. I only mention that because PJ is far-too-obviously going for continuation between TH and LotR, which I can't help but worry about a little.

I am really looking forward to some goofy troll banter, as well as hearing Gwaihir's voice. He better have the eagles talk!
 
These manufactued issues are helping us pass the time until we get some more juicy nuggets from PJ. Besides, this is a valid question, I think. It is fun to take wild guesses as to what changes, omissions or total fabrications PJ and co. will make to the book.

I am willing to bet that the issue of naming the 3 trolls on screen is something that PJ, Fran, Phillipa and GDT had discussions about during scripting sessions. And if they might have talked about it, it is certainly worth a thread on this board [;)]
 
Fan of the book or not, I have heard J.R.R. Tolkiens work described many ways, but never campy.

People lets not forget a master whos genius cannot be overstated is the source of this material. Calling anything he put down, campy, is like looking at the Mona Lisa and saying Di Vinci was old fashioned cause he didn't use a digital camera.

This isn't twilight. This isn't Harry Potter. This is the work of J.R.R. Tolkien, arguable one of the greatest, and most influential fictional writers to have ever lived.

You don't criticize the classics for being old, you revere them for what they are. This book deserves more respect then to be picked apart by people who can't appreciate a masterpiece when they see it.

I promise you, with the same conviction you claim to know how Peter Jacksons brain works, that he doesn't look at things like Bert, Bill, and Tom, and say "ho hum, you know thats just a little bit silly for my taste, what were you thinking Tolkien, lets change that."

Again I sight the trilogy, if that was the case they would have renamed the whole cast. I mean Bilbo? Frodo? GANDALF? What kind of names are those? What about that ridiculous part about the elves, don't people know they aren't real?

If you start picking at threads, you might not stop, its best to revere the classics for what they are, and celebrate them. If you change them, you dishonor them.

*Please understand I am talking about changes for the sake of pleasing the masses. Obviously there are time constraints (Two movies at best 6 hours) And technological limitations, after all dragons and goblins and magic rings don't exist in real life either .

I will leave you with a quote that seems fitting: 'Needless were none of the deeds of Gandalf in life.' ~Galadriel

The same can be said about Tolkien, he is enough of a master of the art to give him the benefit of the doubt and say if he wrote it, he did it for a reason.

Campy.... Come on.
 
[pirate]Ouch. Thanks for prompt scolding, lol! I honestly meant no disrespect.
Hopefully we can offer our honest opinions on this board without feeling like we have colored on the Holy Bible with Crayolas.

All I am saying is that Bert, Bill and Tom are not exactly the most initimidating names out there. I think of "Bert and Ernie" from Sesame Street, "Bill the Pony" and "Tom Sawyer".

This scene will be one of the first times in the movies where Bilbo and the dwarves face real peril. PJ will be surely be building the tenson big time. My thought was that the casual viewer (who mind you has never read the book), will give a quick chuckle when he hears those names. This would kill the scene's tension, IMHO.

Let's not kid ourselves. . . these movies are being made as much for commercial success ($1 Billion dollars anyone) as much as they are being made out of respect for the genius of Tolkien (which I do respect, by the way).

Am I alone on this? If so, maybe I should just stick to reading these message boards and keep my blashemy to myself.
 
Last edited:
I'm just saying there are certain things you change, and certain things you don't.

Please please continue to post! Or else I will have no one to pontificate at!
 
Also, this book is really very funny, I just re-read it recently and found my self laughing all the time (BTW Martin Freeman is going to NAIL Bilbos Humor)

Part of the wonder of the Hobbit is that it catches you off guard, both with humor, boldness, fear, and suspense, its a very balanced piece.

I would venture to guess if the Trolls were more frighting Bilbo wouldn't have tried to *SPOILER* Sneak up and pick their pockets, and thus almost getting himself, and the rest of the dwarves killed! Thats part of his development, he is very naive to start the book.

Three dumb looking and sounding trolls didn't really scare him, that is until he found out what trolls are REALLY like. It's all part of the story! Its all in there for a reason.
 
I hope Peter cuts all that nonsense with the talking trolls.It's a silly and childish thing which Tolkien, unfortunately, didn't get to mend in the unfinished revised edition of The Hobbit.This isn't Narnia.
 
those trolls were awesome and I hope they keep their names and talk just like in the book. it was pretty childish but I thought it was awesome and will probably be funny as hell in the movie
 
Judging by some of the replies i see already the resistance is out in force- drop the names and you're committing sacrilege and all that. I mean i don't want to completely poo-poo their defensiveness (it's valuable as a moderating force), but preparing for battle over a set of names is a bit of a waste of time if you ask me. Preparing for battle over the expulsion of all humour from it entirely would be a far more defensible stance and one i could back too.

Obviously the situation is perilous but it is also funny, and PJ is rather famous for that combination. My instinct is that the trolls themselves shouldn't speak english or have english names, but that through the use of subtitles, body language, sound effects and the framing narration the humour can be successfully translated. The names could for instance could be an interpretation of words or sounds Bilbo heard in the trolls' discussion (much like Gollum comes from the sound Smeagol started making since he came into possession of the Ring), alternatively the narration could make clear that they're names Bilbo just came to use when he tells the story to people to differentiate the three antagonists; a bit like Tom, Dick and Harry- most likely well appreciating the light comic effect of the names when applied to savage trolls. If i'm not much mistaken this is how Tolkien chose to explain the inconsistencies of tone between the two books, where the lighter elements are basically Bilbo's literary embellishments, and so in treating them as such through the medium of the framing narration you can please 'both camps' showing both the 'actual' turn of events as it were while also telling Bilbo's somewhat more glossy recounting.

Dr Death
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top