Why was 🧝Legolas in The Hobbit?

[Daniel Thomas]

I personally love the book more than the movies of the hobbit. So it makes me super mad when they change the plot of the books and put Legolas in it. Don't get me wrong I love Legolas but it just wasn't the same with him in there. Does anybody no why they did that?

 

[octoburn]

The Hobbit films' problems go way beyond adding Legolas to the narrative. Hell, you could easily have him in there without changing the plot an ounce. The fact is, Legolas was probably present for many of the events in the Hobbit, simply because his father, Thranduil (the Elvenking in the Hobbit) was a fairly major secondary character. He was likely present during the Dwarves captivity as well as the Battle of Five Armies.

I had zero problems with them including Legolas in the Hobbit films, it is the manner he is incorporated into it that is an issue.

 

[Daniel Thomas]

The Hobbit films' problems go way beyond adding Legolas to the narrative. Hell, you could easily have him in there without changing the plot an ounce. The fact is, Legolas was probably present for many of the events in the Hobbit, simply because his father, Thranduil (the Elvenking in the Hobbit) was a fairly major secondary character. He was likely present during the Dwarves captivity as well as the Battle of Five Armies.

I had zero problems with them including Legolas in the Hobbit films, it is the manner he is incorporated into it that is an issue.

I see what your saying but the fact is he was not mentioned in the book that is the only reason why I have a problem with him. I loved his part in the movie I was just asking if the director thought the movie would be more liked if he was in it.

The Hobbit films' problems go way beyond adding Legolas to the narrative. Hell, you could easily have him in there without changing the plot an ounce. The fact is, Legolas was probably present for many of the events in the Hobbit, simply because his father, Thranduil (the Elvenking in the Hobbit) was a fairly major secondary character. He was likely present during the Dwarves captivity as well as the Battle of Five Armies.

I had zero problems with them including Legolas in the Hobbit films, it is the manner he is incorporated into it that is an issue.

Also I know he was alive then. p.s. What is your faviorte part in the hobbit mine was when gloin pulled out the photos of his son(Gimli) and his wife.

 

[octoburn]

I see what your saying but the fact is he was not mentioned in the book that is the only reason why I have a problem with him. I loved his part in the movie I was just asking if the director thought the movie would be more liked if he was in it.

The reason for that was simple: Legolas did not exist in Tolkien's world yet. When he wrote the Hobbit, he was years from imagining Legolas even existed. Even his father did not have a name at that point. He did not "discover" either character until he wrote LOTR.

I'm sure that Jackson knew that putting Orlando Bloom in the film would definitely be a draw for a specific demographic

 

[Azrubêl]

Effective use of caps lock, and I will add to it -- why did they make him look like a CGI ripoff of himself?

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

Effective use of caps lock, and I will add to it -- why did they make him look like a CGI ripoff of himself?

I agree, here's my addition - Why does Legolas look older than he becomes 60 years later?

(Sure, actors age, so I'm just nitpicking, but he just felt off aesthetically during the two movies.)

CL

 

[Azrubêl]

I agree, here's my addition - Why does Legolas look older than he becomes 60 years later?

(Sure, actors age, so I'm just nitpicking, but he just felt off aesthetically during the two movies.)

CL

Haha exactly, he actually does look older. Do they just not notice these things? Or not care? Honestly, I think it's just a Hollywood problem. I hate the aesthetic rut we are stuck in, taking away from the content.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

I hate the aesthetic rut we are stuck in, taking away from the content.

Devoid of life, it is. I agree so much with this.


CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

DT: With all due respect, I can't believe you really needed to ask the question, but just in case you found Octoburn's last sentence too oblique, the answer is:

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

DT: With all due respect, I can't believe you really needed to ask the question, but just in case you found Octoburn's last sentence too obscure, the answer is:

CL

 

[Alcuin]

A woman named Lindsey Ellis has set forward what seems a convincing reason for three Hobbit films in the second part of a three-part series on Jackson’s Hobbit trilogy. Part 1 is here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 (which I’ve not seen) here. In Part 2, Ellis posits that an ever-increasing number of hands in the till (that is, Hollywood studios demanding a cut of the revenues), the filmmakers were first forced to increase the number of films from two to three (face it: it’s difficult to present The Hobbit even if faithfully to Tolkien in one 2½ hour film), then fire their first (and preferred) director Guillermo del Toro and replace him with a reluctant Peter Jackson, and finally introduce a love triangle involving the Elf Tauriel, a character concocted by the filmmakers.

Film producers apparently follow a formulaic system: so many minutes of gore and gratuitous violence, so many minutes of (goblin or Nazgûl or rabbit-sled) chases (in standard films, cars and motorcycles; in Western oaters, horse and train chases), an of course the obligatory evil villain explaining his evil villainous plans. Which is why the schlock coming out of that place is as awful as the people who inhabit it: unwatchable and unentertaining for the most part, IMO.) They don’t give a hoot if you enjoy their films: they just want to show a profit, if not through sales, then through Hollywood accounting, which is said to put Enron and Bernie Madoff to shame.

DT: With all due respect, I can't believe you really needed to ask the question, but just in case you found Octoburn's last sentence too oblique, the answer is:

Besides teenage fan-girls. Here are some similar examples from the first Beatles tour of the US in 1964. (Hint to younger TTF-ers: these are your grandmothers. The more things change, the more they stay the same.)

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

A woman named Lindsey Ellis has set forward what seems a convincing reason for three Hobbit films in the second part of a three-part series on Jackson’s Hobbit trilogy. Part 1 is here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 (which I’ve not seen) here. In Part 2, Ellis posits that an ever-increasing number of hands in the till (that is, Hollywood studios demanding a cut of the revenues), the filmmakers were first forced to increase the number of films from two to three (face it: it’s difficult to present The Hobbit even if faithfully to Tolkien in one 2½ hour film), then fire their first (and preferred) director Guillermo del Toro and replace him with a reluctant Peter Jackson, and finally introduce a love triangle involving the Elf Tauriel, a character concocted by the filmmakers.

Film producers apparently follow a formulaic system: so many minutes of gore and gratuitous violence, so many minutes of (goblin or Nazgûl or rabbit-sled) chases (in standard films, cars and motorcycles; in Western oaters, horse and train chases), an of course the obligatory evil villain explaining his evil villainous plans. Which is why the schlock coming out of that place is as awful as the people who inhabit it: unwatchable and unentertaining for the most part, IMO.) They don’t give a hoot if you enjoy their films: they just want to show a profit, if not through sales, then through Hollywood accounting, which is said to put Enron and Bernie Madoff to shame.

Besides teenage fan-girls. Here are some similar examples from the first Beatles tour of the US in 1964. (Hint to younger TTF-ers: these are your grandmothers. The more things change, the more they stay the same.)

These pictures are just horrible to view.

Do not be offended, but even though I agree with your post, I cannot "like" it.

Excuse me while I go vomit.

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Whassa matter, CL? Not into Beatlemania?

Alcuin: did you ever see "I Want to Hold Your Hand"?

I thought I read that the delays led del Toro to leave for another project, BTW, but I could be wrong.

Edit: Oops, it's "I Wanna Hold Your Hand", from 1978. First film directed by Robert Zemeckis.

 

[Alcuin]

These pictures are just horrible to view.

Do not be offended, but even though I agree with your post, I cannot "like" it.

Excuse me while I go vomit.

CL

No offense taken! They are awful pictures, but at least they’re (mostly) teenage girls looking forward to seeing their idols, rather than teenage boys training for combat making war-faces. There is a reason marketers (and other unscrupulous purveyors of schlock) prey upon teenagers: youth in well-ordered societies are as yet uncalloused and unaware of the predators in their midst who seek to take advantage of them, like the Hobbits of the Shire who were unprepared for The Boss and his Big Men, much less for Sharkey. The archaic (those who preceded those whom we generally call “ancient”) Athenians were proud of their youth, who grew up in a rough and tumble society full of risks and hazards: Theseus was a teenager when he killed the Minotaur; but as Athens grew rich and powerful, Athenian society seemed more secure, and their youth became surely and rude. In short, I chose those photographs because they are disquieting; but compare them to the one Squint-eyed Southerner posted: identical facial expressions: only clothes, backdrops, and color photography are different.

…Alcuin: did you ever see "I [Wanna] Hold Your Hand"?

No: I was never a huge Beatles fan, and the university cinema rarely played first-run movies in those days.

I thought I read that the delays led del Toro to leave for another project, BTW, but I could be wrong.

You could be right, too: Ellis’ explanation makes for an interesting YouTube video, though, and fits the narrative she’s spinning, which in turn rationalizes the (entertaining but awful) cinematic results.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

No offense taken! They are awful pictures, but at least they’re (mostly) teenage girls looking forward to seeing their idols, rather than teenage boys training for combat making war-faces. There is a reason marketers (and other unscrupulous purveyors of schlock) prey upon teenagers: youth in well-ordered societies are as yet uncalloused and unaware of the predators in their midst who seek to take advantage of them: much like the Hobbits of the Shire, who were unprepared for The Boss and his Big Men, much less for Sharkey. The archaic (those who preceded those whom we generally call “ancient”) Athenians were proud of their youth, who grew up in a rough and tumble society full of risks and hazards: Theseus was a teenager when he killed the Minotaur; but as Athens grew rich and powerful, Athenian society seemed more secure, and their youth became surely and rude. In short, I intended the photographs to be disquieting because they are disquieting; but compare them to the one Squint-eyed Southerner posted: identical facial expressions: only clothes, backdrops, and color photography are different.

Very good point. I hadn't thought about that.

The point about marketing is a nail on the head.

Nice Alcuin!

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

I have to confess I don't see anything inherently horrible or awful about any of those pictures.

No time for a discussion now-- my wireless service has been offline for the past 3 days. I'm online briefly only because I'm sitting in the grocery store parking lot in town. They're supposedly working on the problem, but no date when it will be fixed. Until then, my presence here will be intermittent.

Cheers all.

 

[Alcuin]

...my wireless service has been offline for the past 3 days. I'm online briefly only because I'm sitting in the grocery store parking lot in town. They're supposedly working on the problem, but no date when it will be fixed.

Technology is wonderful until it doesn’t work.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

Technology is wonderful until it doesn’t work.

Or until it pulls a Skynet.

*Cough Alexa, Siri, Cortana, cough*


CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Well,well, on my return home, service was restored. I'm sure it was pure coincidence. And no, CL, my smartphone hasn't tried to Terminate me (yet!).

There don't appear to be any clips from the movie, Alcuin, but here's the trailer:

I don't have any objection to Legolas being in the movie; my views on it follow Octoburn's, especially in his first sentence! My OP was intended to be light-hearted, not condemnatory.

Ellis may well be right about what happened in the making of the movies; film production is notoriously a mish-mash of inputs from all kinds of sources. I'm reminded of William Faulkner's advice to authors tempted to write for Hollywood: write your script, go to the California state line, and gingerly push it across. Then go home.

Sometimes the mixed sources, budget limitations, confused and contradictory direction, and general stumbling in the darkness yields a Casablanca; sometimes it results in the Hobbit movies. The bottom line is, well, the Bottom Line: if they made money, the Bosses feel justified. And I can't blame them for that; that's what they set out to do.*

Junk Food is a big money maker too, because people like it. I just try to avoid it where I can.

*I see that the number of cinemas in China has just passed the number in the United States. China is a big consumer of Hollywood films. Any guesses as to what sort of actors will soon be getting more film work?

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

Well,well, on my return home, service was restored. I'm sure it was pure coincidence. And no, CL, my smartphone hasn't tried to Terminate me (yet!).

There don't appear to be any clips from the movie, Alcuin, but here's the trailer:

I don't have any objection to Legolas being in the movie; my views on it follow Octoburn's, especially in his first sentence! My post was intended to be light-hearted, not condemnatory.

Ellis may well be right about what happened in the making of the movies; film production is notoriously a mish-mash of inputs from all kinds of sources. I'm reminded of William Faulkner's advice to authors tempted to write for Hollywood: write your script, go to the California state line, and gingerly push it across. Then go home.

Sometimes the mixed sources, budget limitations, confused and contradictory direction, and general stumbling in the darkness yields a Casablanca; sometimes it results in the Hobbit movies. The bottom line is, well, the Bottom Line: if they made money, the Bosses feel justified. And I can't blame them for that; that's what they set out to do.*

Junk Food is a big money maker too, because people like it. I just try to avoid it where I can.

*I see that the number of cinemas in China has just passed the number in the United States. China is a big consumer of Hollywood films. Any guesses as to what sort of actors will soon be getting more film work?

Only actors and actresses off the top of my head, is Jet Li, Liu Yifei, Gong Li, and Donnie Chen. I don't know if this is important or not, but all four are appearing in Disney's Live Action Mulan.

And you know China will be all over that one.

CL