Hobbit movie progressing

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Strip the story of its elegant simplicity and linear quality by adding a fan-fic rendition of the White Council (which Tolkien didn't even waste words on), and you eliminate the qualities of the book. Smaug and the greed Smaug engendered are the antagonists of the story, not the Necromancer. Throw in a bewildering array of nonessential characters and lose the heart of the tale.

Leaving aside for the moment the subject of non-essential characters, Professor Tolkien himself elegantly summarized the essential story of The Hobbit with two Third Age calendar entries in Appendix B of The Lord of the Rings:

2941 Thorin Oakenshield and Gandalf visit Bilbo in the Shire. Bilbo meets Sméagol-Gollum and finds the Ring. The White Council meets; Saruman agrees to an attack on Dol Guldur, since he now wishes to prevent Sauron from searching the River. Sauron having made his plans abandons Dol Guldur. The Battle of Five Armies in Dale. Death of Thorin II. Bard of Esgaroth slays Smaug. Dáin of the Iron Hills becomes King under the Mountain (Dáin II).

2942 Bilbo returns to the Shire with the Ring. Sauron returns in secret to Mordor.

In other words, little Bilbo Baggins found the Ring -- or the Ring found him. Then Bilbo returned with the Ring to the Shire -- or the Ring escaped from underneath the Misty Mountains. Everything else that happened in Middle-earth during that one year concerned the geopolitical machinations of Wizards vs Sauron, a.k.a., the Necromancer. As Gandalf said to Bilbo at the end of The Hobbit:

"You don't really suppose, do you, that all your adventures and escapes were managed by mere luck, just for your sole benefit? You are a very fine person, Mr. Baggins, and I am very fond of you; but you are only quite a little fellow in a wide world after all!"

Yes, The Hobbit tells the linear tale of the "little fellow" and one could leave it that -- as the children's magic adventure narrative originally published in 1937. But Professor Tolkien did not leave it at that, and instead revisited and rewrote key parts of The Hobbit so that it would fit appropriately into the story of "the wide world" as well. Consequently, one finds references to both the Necromancer and his stronghold at Dol Guldur in the very first chapter of The Hobbit: "An Unexpected Party," and the final chapter, "The Last Stage." So, I don't think one can accurately maintain that Professor Tolkien "didn't even waste words" on the White Council, Dol Guldor, and the Necromancer, by which he understood the larger Manichean struggle between Good and Evil that backgrounds the charming story of Bilbo Baggins' atypical -- for a hobbit -- adventure.

The Appendices to The Lord of the Rings has a wealth of information dealing with Gandalf's strategy for using the Dwarves of the Iron Hills as a counterbalance to Sauron who might use Smaug the Dragon to possibly attack the Elves in Rivendell. Here, Gandalf's "chance meeting" between Gandalf and Thorin at Bree shows how Gandalf appeals to the Dwarves' notorious craving for vengeance as well as their greed for treasure. In this larger strategy, the Dragon Smaug figures only as a possible weapon that needs neutralizing in the North while the main struggle against Sauron takes place elsewhere. Bilbo and the Dwarves, therefore, have their parts to play, but the larger picture remains essentially hidden from their limited perspectives.

In short, Peter Jackson has a wealth of genuine Tolkien material to exploit if he wishes to do so. Everything will hinge on whether he brings Tolkien's world to life -- both microcosm and macrocosm -- or falls willing victim to hackneyed Hollywood cliches, latest-and-greatest computer graphics gimicks, and fanboy slaughter extravaganzas to give Orlando Bloom something to do in a story that doesn't need him.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Just as a follow-up for those who may not have read Tolkien's background history of the Dwarves in the Appendices to The Lord of the Rings, I've excerpted below that portion which explains the significance of Smaug the Dragon in Gandalf's larger geopolitical strategy vis-a-vis Sauron, a.k.a., the Necromancer. Not for nothing does the Wizard and a pack of wandering Dwarves show up unexpectedly at Bag End looking for the accomplished burglar rumored to live there:

But at last there came about by chance a meeting between Gandalf and Thorin that changed all the fortunes of the House of Durin, and led to other and greater ends beside. On a time, Thorin, returning west from a journey, stayed at Bree for the night. There Gandalf was also. He was on his way to the Shire, which he had not visited for some twenty years. He was weary, and thought to rest there a while.

Among many cares he was troubled in mind by the perilous state of the North; because he knew then already that Sauron was plotting war, and intended, as soon as he felt strong enough, to attack Rivendell. But to resist any attempt from the East to regain the lands of Angmar and the northern passes in the mountains there were now only the Dwarves of the Iron Hills. And beyond them lay the desolation of the Dragon. The Dragon Sauron might use with terrible effect. How then could the end of Smaug be achieved?

It was even as Gandalf sat and pondered this that Thorin stood before him, and said: 'Master Gandalf, I know you only by sight, but now I should be glad to speak with you. For you have often come into my thoughts of late, as if I were bidden to seek you. Indeed I should have done so, if I had known where to find you.'

Gandalf looked at him with wonder. 'That is strange, Thorin Oakenshield,' he said. 'For I have thought of you also; and though I am on my way to the Shire, it was in my mind that is the way also to your halls.'

'Call them so, if you will,' said Thorin. 'They are only poor lodgings in exile. But you would be welcome there, if you would come. For they say that you are wise and know more than any other of what goes on in the world; and I have much on my mind and would be glad of your counsel.'

'I will come,' said Gandalf; 'for I guess that we share one trouble at least. The Dragon of Erebor is on my mind, and I do not think that he will be forgotten by the grandson of Thror.'

The story is told elsewhere of what came of that meeting: of the strange plan that Gandalf made for the help of Thorin, and how Thorin and his companions set out from the Shire on the quest of the Lonely Mountain that came to great ends unforeseen. Here only those things are recalled that directly concern Durin's folk.

The Dragon was slain by Bard of Esgaroth, but there was battle in Dale. For the Orcs came down upon Erebor as soon as they heard of the return of the Dwarves; and they were led by Bolg, son of that Azog whom Dáin had slew in his youth. In that first Battle of Dale, Thorin Oakenshield was mortally wounded; and he died and was laid in a tomb under the Mountain with the Arkenstone upon his breast. There also fell Fili and Kili, his sister-sons. But Dáin Ironfoot, his cousin, who came from the Iron Hills to his aid and was also his rightful heir, became then King Dáin II, and the Kingdom under the Mountain was restored, even as Gandalf had desired. Dáin proved a great and wise king, and the Dwarves prospered and grew strong again in his day.

In the late summer of that same year (2941) Gandalf had at last prevailed upon Saruman and the White Council to attack Dol Guldur, and Sauron retreated and went to Mordor, there to be secure, as he thought, from all his enemies. So it was that when the War came at last the main assault was turned southwards; yet even so with his far-stretched right hand Sauron might have done great evil in the North, if King Dain and King Brand [grandson of Bard the Bowman] had not stood in his path. Even as Gandalf said afterwards to Frodo and Gimli, when they dwelt together for a time in Minas Tirith. Not long before news had come to Gondor of events far away.

'I grieved at the fall of Thorin,' said Gandalf; 'and now we hear that Dáin has fallen, fighting in Dale again, even while we fought here. I should call that a heavy loss, if it was not a wonder rather that in his great age he could still wield an axe as mightily as they say that he did, standing over the body of King Brand before the Gate of Erebor until the darkness fell.'

'Yet things might have gone far otherwise and far worse. When you think of the great Battle of the Pelennor, do not forget the battles in Dale and the valor of Durin's Folk. Think what might have been. Dragon-fire and savage swords in Eriador, night in Rivendell. There might be no Queen in Gondor. We might now hope to return from the victory here only to ruin and ash. But that has been averted – because I met Thorin Oakenshield one evening on the edge of spring in Bree. A chance-meeting as we say in Middle-earth.'

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

In short, Peter Jackson has a wealth of genuine Tolkien material to exploit if he wishes to do so. Everything will hinge on whether he brings Tolkien's world to life -- both microcosm and macrocosm -- or falls willing victim to hackneyed Hollywood cliches, latest-and-greatest computer graphics gimicks, and fanboy slaughter extravaganzas to give Orlando Bloom something to do in a story that doesn't need him.

I know which one I'm betting my remote dwarven hold on...just the fact Orlando Bloom is there at all should tell one all one needs to know.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Leaving aside for the moment the subject of non-essential characters, Professor Tolkien himself elegantly summarized the essential story of The Hobbit with two Third Age calendar entries in Appendix B of The Lord of the Rings....

In other words, little Bilbo Baggins found the Ring -- or the Ring found him. Then Bilbo returned with the Ring to the Shire -- or the Ring escaped from underneath the Misty Mountains. Everything else that happened in Middle-earth during that one year concerned the geopolitical machinations of Wizards vs Sauron, a.k.a., the Necromancer. As Gandalf said to Bilbo at the end of The Hobbit...

Yes, The Hobbit tells the linear tale of the "little fellow" and one could leave it that -- as the children's magic adventure narrative originally published in 1937. But Professor Tolkien did not leave it at that, and instead revisited and rewrote key parts of The Hobbit so that it would fit appropriately into the story of "the wide world" as well....

In short, Peter Jackson has a wealth of genuine Tolkien material to exploit if he wishes to do so. Everything will hinge on whether he brings Tolkien's world to life -- both microcosm and macrocosm -- or falls willing victim to hackneyed Hollywood cliches, latest-and-greatest computer graphics gimicks, and fanboy slaughter extravaganzas to give Orlando Bloom something to do in a story that doesn't need him.

I was going to write a rather long, ultimately tedious, diatribe in response to your well-researched post, TMT, with circles and arrows and a paragraph description on the back of each illustration, but to paraphrase the good professor for my warped agenda, "Keep it simple, keep it safe."

When you state that Tolkien "revisited and rewrote key parts of The Hobbit so that it would fit appropriately into the story [LotR]", that is, of course, true. Here is an excellent site that does a side-by-side analysis of the actual emendations:

http://www.ringgame.net/riddles.html

It is of note that the majority of edits deal solely with a single chapter, "Riddles in the Dark", and revolve around one character, Gollum. When Tolkien set about to rewrite The Hobbit in 1960, he eventually abandoned the project, as any wholesale revision would ultimately eliminate the humor and inherent enchanting nature of the story. Therefore, we have a few, short summarizations of other events that happened during Bilbo's adventure, and a chapter in Unfinished Tales ("The Quest of Erebor") which is under copyright by Christopher Tolkien and cannot be used in the film.

Therein lies my abhorrence for grafting the "White Council" sequences to The Hobbit. A skeletal summation of other events does not a canonical plot make, particularly when referring to the sub-par fan-fictionalizations of Peter Jackson. Based on The Marring of the Ring films, there is ample justification for my loathing this addition. Simply put, when Peter Jackson strayed from Tolkien's original intent and plot, the movies suffered. I could offer up a litany of such character assassinations, ****-poor dialogue and film sequences for special effect's sake, but that dead horse has been flogged beyond a bloody pulp and has been analyzed down to an equine cellular level.

Is there an opportunity to exploit brief summaries for larger aggrandizements? Certainly, the vampire has been invited into the room, and a word-wraith such as Jackson has evidently had this in mind all along. But it will be fan-fiction. And based on PJ's previous fan-fiction, he certainly will not be selected for a Middle-earth Fanfiction Award (MEFA).

You, yourself, have bemoaned the mere mention of that Xenarwenish character, Itaril. One can already picture the shield-surfing contest between her and Orlandolas.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Thank you for your lengthy reply, Morthorond. I did not find it at all tedious. And I fully appreciate your paranoia regarding Peter Jackson and his "Bad Taste" proclivities. As the old saying goes: "Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that real people aren't out to get me!"

However, at the risk of seeming pedantic, I would like to reiterate my somewhat modest contention that film renditions of Tolkien's own references in the published texts do not necessarily constitute "fan fiction" as would, for awful example, the completely invented and ludicrous elf-chick security guard "Itaril" secretly in love with a young Elf lord while simultaneously kicking butt and taking names all over the place for no comprehensible reason. Again though, as concerns what Tolkien specifically wrote about the White Council and the Necromancer:

From The Hobbit, Chaper One: "An Unexpected Party":

"'I don't understand,' said Thorin, and Bilbo felt he would like to say the same. The explanation did not seem to explain.

'Your grandfather [Thror],' said the wizard slowly and grimly, 'gave the map to his son [Thrain] for safety before he went to the mines of Moria. Your father [Thrain] went away to try his luck with the map after your grandfather was killed; and lots of adventures of a most unpleasant sort he had, but he never got near the Mountain. How he got there I don’t know, but I found him a prisoner in the dungeons of the Necromancer.'

'Whatever were you doing there?' asked Thorin with a shudder, and all the dwarves shivered.

'Never you mind. I was finding things out, as usual; and a nasty and dangerous business it was. Even I, Gandalf, only just escaped. I tried to save your father, but it was too late. He was witless and wandering, and had forgotten almost everything except the map and key.'

'We have long ago paid the goblins of Moria,' said Thorin; 'we must give a thought to the Necromancer.'

'Don’t be absurd! He is an enemy quite beyond the powers of all the dwarves put together, if they could all be collected again from the four corners of the world. The one thing your father wished was for his son to read the map and use the key. The dragon and the Mountain are more than big enough tasks for you!'”

From The Hobbit, Chaper Nineteen: "The Last Stage":

"… but every now and again [Bilbo] would open one eye, and listen, when a part of the story which he did not yet know came in.

It was in this way that he learned where Gandalf had been to; for he overheard the words of the wizard to Elrond. It appeared that Gandalf had been to a great council of white wizards, masters of lore and good magic; and that they had at last driven the Necromancer from his dark hold in the south of Mirkwood.

It seems to me from the textual evidence that Tolkien fully intended these references to matters above and beyond the immediate concerns of Bilbo and the dwarves, and if the upcoming Hobbit films make use of this material, they have defensible reasons for doing so without necessarily committing fan-fiction heresy. As for what Tolkien wrote about the changes that he made to Chapter Five, "Riddles in the Dark," I'll address those in another comment. Suffice it to say at this point that featuring Christopher Lee as Saruman -- hoodwinking Gandalf and the High Elves as to his ultimate allegiances and purposes -- does not constitute "fan fiction" in the slightest. Therefore, I have no up-front objections to the White Council and Necromancer having a suitable -- although subordinate -- place in support of Bilbo Baggins' excellent adventure.

Keeping things simple and safe: Christopher Lee -- Yes; Orlando Bloom -- No!

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Keeping things simple and safe: Christopher Lee -- Yes; Orlando Bloom -- No!

Itaril - double no!

I mean, Legolas was already born then, and he could have taken some part in the Battle of 5 Armies, even though he wasn't mentioned in TH (because he didn't exist as a character at that time yet). Orlando just takes out all the spirit out of that character, though. But Itaril!... urgh. It's not even a proper Tolkien name! There was Idril, and there was Itarille.

So maybe:

Legolas - possssssibly
Oldando Bloom - DEAR GOD NO!
Saoirse Ronan - *runs away from movie theatre*

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Itaril - double no!

A separate thread already exists for disparaging -- and dispensing with -- this dreadfully stupid fan-fiction abomination. And since the teenage actress most mentioned for the role has publicly announced that she will not take part in The Hobbit movies, then perhaps we have mercifully escaped the execrable ...

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Legolas - possssssibly

As for Legolas, Tolkien first mentions him at "The Council of Elrond" (Book II, Chapter Two of The Fellowship of the Ring):

"[Elrond] then pointed out and named those whom Frodo had not met before. There was a younger dwarf at Glóin's side: his son Gimli. ... There was also a strange Elf clad in green and brown, Legolas, a messenger from his father, Thranduil, the King of the Elves in Northern Mirkwood."

Legolas -- although non-existent as a character in The Hobbit -- first has a role to play in The Lord of the Rings by bringing up some unwelcome news:

"Alas! alas!" cried Legolas, and in his fair elvish face there was great distress. "The tidings that I was sent to bring must now be told. They are not good, but only here have I learned how evil they may seem to this company. Sméagol, who is now called Gollum, has escaped."

"Escaped?" cried Aragorn. "That is ill news indeed. We shall all rue it bitterly, I fear. How came the folk of Thranduil to fail in their trust?"

"Not through lack of watchfulness," said Legolas; "but perhaps through over-kindliness. And we fear that the prisoner had aid from others, and that more is known of our doings than we could wish. We guarded this creature day and night, at Gandalf's bidding, much though we wearied of the task. But Gandalf made us hope still for his cure, and we had not the heart to keep him ever in dungeons under the earth, where he would fall back into his old black thoughts."

"You were less tender to me," said Glóin with a flash in his eyes, as old memories were stirred of his imprisonment in the deep places of the Elven king's halls."

Now, if Peter Jackson seizes upon Tolkien's use of the pronoun "you" (in the singular) as meaning Legolas personally and not just the Mirkwood Elves in general, then Gimli's father Glóin could have had dealings with Prince Legolas previously, say, in getting arrested in Mirkwood Forest for the crime of disturbing the elves at their merry-making. Thin. Pretty damn thin, but some Elf has to bag the dwarves in the forest and haul them before King Thranduil and then off to their dungeon cells. Why not Prince Legolas himself? Thus, Peter Jackson could imaginatively claim that Tolkien did, after all, use the word "you" in reference to Legolas in The Fellowship and that therefore, extrapolating backwards to The Hobbit film, Orlando Bloom can have something to do in the movie -- aside from the wind-up fan-boy Orc slashing thing, of course.

Just saying ...

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Now, if Peter Jackson seizes upon Tolkien's use of the pronoun "you" (in the singular) as meaning Legolas personally and not just the Mirkwood Elves in general, then Gimli's father Glóin could have had dealings with Prince Legolas previously, say, in getting arrested in Mirkwood Forest for the crime of disturbing the elves at their merry-making. Thin. Pretty damn thin, but some Elf has to bag the dwarves in the forest and haul them before King Thranduil and then off to their dungeon cells. Why not Prince Legolas himself?

What? Have Legolas do the dirty work? No, I think he'll gallantly lead the Elf-warriors into battle!

[Lalaith]

Freeman as Bilbo at Bag End, dwarves in the background

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

... the vampire has been invited into the room

Just an interesting (to me) aside about the vampire invitation business that you mention: It seems only too obvious that Professor Tolkien ripped off Bram Stoker's Dracula (1897) for that scene in The Two Towers (1954) where Smeagol-Gollum crawls "head first" down a rock precipice -- "like a nasty crawling spider on a wall" -- following Frodo and Sam, just as Jonathan Harker had witnessed the Count emerging from a window over a "dreadful abyss" and then crawling "face down" the sides of the castle, "just as a lizard moves along a wall."

As much as we love to give Peter Jackson deserved grief for his use of purloined film clichés, it only seems fair to note where literary authors such as Professor Tolkien have succumbed to the same temptation.