Official The Hobbit thread

[MadVillainy]

could be worse

 

[Angel_Faerie]

I think a better idea would be having Ian Holm tell the story as older Bilbo

 

[Whiskey Tango]

What's the problem, exactly?

 

[Octoberist]

I'm all for Frodo being in this.

Especially if it's just pretty much a cameo with the film starting with him and ending with him, in which you'll probably forget all about him by the story gets going. Not a big deal.

 

[AndThePickles]

Please tell me I'm not the only one annoyed by this.

It is annoying. My main complaint is that it's completely unecessary.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Lord Of The Rings changed a ton of things from the book, didn't stop it being excellent.

 

[terry78]

I'm sure he's in for a reason. Don't fly into a nerd rage just yet.

 

[AndThePickles]

No nerd rage for me It's annoying, but certainly not rage inducing.

 

[Spider-Who?]

I'm down with it. I like having a few key characters making tasteful cameos to bridge the gap.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

They're just using him as a framing device to tell Bilbo's story. It doesn't hurt anything to have a few appearances by characters the audience is already familiar with.

 

[Marx]

Don't worry, Doctor Jones. I've got your back:

I really think, of all else, Elijah Wood's role would be minimal and would be only a cameo. I'm assuming he's in Hobbiton already, much younger of course. But I don't know how Hobbits age, so I don't if they need to alter Elijah's looks to make him look even younger than the way he looked in Lord of the Rings.

BUT I think the best approach is to not show Elijah until the very, very end to cap off the movie in Part 2. As a nod to the fans.

http://www.deadline.com/2011/01/warner-bros-taking-worldwide-distribution-on-the-hobbit/

The Hobbit takes place sixty years before The Lord of the Rings.

Frodo isn't even born yet.

That's my concern Boom. It's one thing if they're going to do a Titanic-style storytelling (Gloria Stuart appearing throughout telling the story), it's an entirely different thing if it's a major rewrite.

 

[terry78]

It may just be Bilbo regaling Frodo with the story.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

It may just be Bilbo regaling Frodo with the story.

Or Frodo reading Bilbo's book before he gives it to Sam.

 

[Marvolo]

It may just be Bilbo regaling Frodo with the story.

That or what the poster above me said would be neat.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

Or Frodo reading Bilbo's book before he gives it to Sam.

That sounds pretty awesome! I'd love that.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I have no problem with this. It will be nice to see Elijah step back into the feet again after nine years.

 

[Octoberist]

And physically he hasn't changed much either.

 

[regwec]

I have a problem with it, because it is completely unnecessary. What can Wood's Frodo really add to The Hobbit? Nothing- he will just be a rather distracting utensil for stitching this movie to the LOTR trilogy.

Lame.

 

[Kud-Dukan]

Or Frodo reading Bilbo's book before he gives it to Sam.

I've never heard that suggest before, but it sounds like an awesome idea.

It doesn't bother me at all, and everyone should relax about it (especially since TORN specifically says he will be featured in the beginning of the film only). It was a long time ago but if you remember when the details about LOTR were first coming out during filming, fans were raging quite often about one change or another, and look how it turned out.

 

[Arc-Light]

It is annoying. My main complaint is that it's completely unecessary.

Agreed, it makes absolutely NO SENSE for the character Frodo to be in the Hobbit....odd. I trust Jackson to make sense of it BTW.

 

[Drizzle]

I see no need for Frodo to be in the movie. They shouldn't have to shoehorn anyone from "Lord of the Rings" into "The Hobbit" that isn't in the book. No cameos necessary. Otherwise it'll be like the "Star Wars" prequels. "Look, it's Boba Fett!" "Chewbacca's here too!"

 

[Silver Knight]

Why is Legolas going to be in this?

At least have Aragorn show up for a bit.

 

[Octoberist]

Well, according to TheOneRing.net, Frodo won't obviously be involved with the main story, but will serve as the opener, or possibly the narrator, ala the Peter Falk character from 'A Princess Bride'.

Also, may I point out that while this Frodo thing is a surprise to many, what isn't is how The Hobbit is bridging itself to Jackson's Lord of the Rings. Because that info has been around since the days of del Toro's involvement. You can disagree or agree with Frodo's role, but people shouldn't be shocked if Legolas has a role (among other new/old characters), or the new scenes with the White Council.

 

[Octoberist]

Why is Legolas going to be in this?

At least have Aragorn show up for a bit.

Because he's the son of the Elf King, who is actually in The Hobbit (book). So despite Legolas not being mentioned, it was assumed he was present during the events of the book. Remember, when Tolkien wrote the Hobbit, he didn't think of the mythos until his later Middle-Earth books. Because of that, the other books tie in everything together (including the Hobbit) where as The Hobbit itself is viewed as a stand alone tale. If that makes sense.

Aragorn, on the other hand, would be stupid because I don't think he's even born yet.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Aragorn is 87 in LOTR right? And The Hobbit takes place 60 years or so before LOTR? So he would be a young man.