Reading and Watching The Middle Earth Stories

[JD]

Watching The Rings of Power has inspired me to give reading the Middle Earth books another go starting with The Hobbit, both the book and the movies.
It's already been interesting reading the book and watching the movies at the same time.
The thing that stands out is that there is a lot of stuff that is taken almost word for word from the books, like Bilbo and Gandalf's conversation in the first scene after the prologue in An Unexpected Journey, stuff that is only similar but different, like the whole scene with the Trolls, and stuff that's totally new like the Azog and the Orcs chasing Bilbo and the Dwarves.
I was surprised by the references to the Necromancer and Azog, I had assumed they were either totally made up for the movies, or came from the LOTR appendices. I was surprised that in the book Gandalf had apparently already run into the Necromancer before he showed up at Bag End with the Dwarves.
How much of the story arc did Tolkien have planned out when he was writing The Hobbit? When put in the reference to The Necromancer, did he know he was Sauron and would be the big bad of LOTR?

 

[FPAlpha]

To be honest the Hobbit movies were just bad - the whole production process was marred by studio interference from the start, they wanted to milk Tolkien's work as much as they could, inflated the story needlessly and we got what we got - a huge mess.

The Hobbit started out as a children's book, a simple adventure story about a group of dwarves wanting to regain their home being helped along by a Wizard and a Hobbit. By the time he wrote The Hobbit he had created a huge world with a rich backstory detailed in The Silmarillion, which was published officially much later than the release of The Lord of the Rings, but Tolkien started on it even before he wrote The Hobbit.

As with most writing it evolves and it also applies to Tolkien - what was originally the plan may change when it is actually written and he said so himself but much of what's shown with Azog ( completely new invention for the movie) and the Necromancer ( never happened in the book) has been put in by Hollywood to extend the running time of the trilogy and add some spectacle into it.

 

[DigificWriter]

It's both baffling and sad that, even after 11 years, people are still spreading misinformation about the Hobbit films and the creative decisions that led to said films becoming a Trilogy, especially when the truth is easily accessible and has been documented in great detail through the behind-the-scenes material that is available via the home releases of the films in their Extended Edition format.

 

[JD]

I love The Hobbit movies just as much as the LOTR movies. Yeah, there are a ton of additions since they were turning a 304 page book (at least in the addition I have) into 3 2.5 to 2.45 hour movies. I liked most of the additions to be honest.
Just out of curiosity, are there any women in The Hobbit novel? Because the only two women with prominent roles in the movie were not in the book. Not a criticism, I'm just curious since most of the stuff I read is filled with badass women.

 

[Smiley]

Belladonna Took is not seen but is mentioned in the book of The Hobbit. Other than that, nobody is really springing to mind. The Lord of the Rings does not have too many female characters, either.

 

[fireproof78]

How much of the story arc did Tolkien have planned out when he was writing The Hobbit? When put in the reference to The Necromancer, did he know he was Sauron and would be the big bad of LOTR?

Not much. He had the broad strokes in terms of story beats but other than that it was very much a process for him. In his letters he discusses that going from the Hobbit to the Lord of the Rings was an interesting exercise because he had to figure out how to bridge the two together. So, the ring went from a magical ring of invisibility to "The Ring" and the Necromancer became the Dark Lord.

After than he began to unpack the lore even more, moving from idea to idea, with Strider becoming a "surprise" in the inn at Bree that he enjoyed exploring. Tolkien was less a planner and more a feeler. If things felt right he kept the story going. If not, he destroyed whole manuscripts.

 

[JD]

OK, that's pretty interesting actually. I always like learning about creatives processes.

Belladonna Took is not seen but is mentioned in the book of The Hobbit. Other than that, nobody is really springing to mind. The Lord of the Rings does not have too many female characters, either.

That's what I thought.

I have to admit, I completely forgot that Orlando Bloom came back for The Desolation of Smaug and The Battle of The Five Armies, so I had a bit of a holy shit moment when he showed up.
For a while now I've tended to get Orlando Bloom and Luke Evans mixed up, and having both of them in The Hobbit movies does not help.

 

[fireproof78]

OK, that's pretty interesting actually. I always like learning about creatives processes.

I recommend grabbing a copy of his letters if you get the chance (library is how I started), for further insight. They are organized by date, and there are annotations that give some context to what Tolkien is responding to in his letters. It has a decent index if there are particular subjects, because he discusses his process to different people in different letters. It is quite fascinating to me.

 

[JD]

One thing I'd forgotten about with The Hobbit book, is just how much fun it actually is.

 

[JD]

In the LOTR movies, I've never been real clear on if the firey eye that they on top of the tower in Mordor is meant to actually be Sauron, or if it's him using his powers to search for the Ring.

 

[fireproof78]

In the LOTR movies, I've never been real clear on if the firey eye that they on top of the tower in Mordor is meant to actually be Sauron, or if it's him using his powers to search for the Ring.

In the films I think it is meant to be a personification of his presence and his searching rather than actually Sauron. But, I think it is also open to interpretation.