The second Hobbit movie

[Vilu Daskar]

Yesterday we saw a trailer for the Second Hobbit it had Legolas in it with some red haired elf. My mom told us that they tried to get Aragorn but he told them "have you read the hobbit Aragorns not in it."

[Kitsune]

I can't wait for it to come out!!

[Buzz_Bumble]

they tried to get Aragorn but he told them "have you read the hobbit Aragorns not in it."

I read about the actor playing Aragorn telling them that somewhere this week too (could have been the local TV Guide).

[Rainshadow]

they tried to get Aragorn but he told them "have you read the hobbit Aragorns not in it."

I read about the actor playing Aragorn telling them that somewhere this week too (could have been the local TV Guide).

  Hmm, I hadn't heard that, but that's probably because I'm not following the Hobbit too closely.  I want to be surprised when I see the movie!
  Anyway, I think it makes sense that Viggo wouldn't want to come back for the Hobbit.  Wasn't he the one who read the Lord of the Rings to his child, who then told him to try out for a part?  Or have I got this wrong?

[WoodlandWarrior]

The Hobbit movies unfortunately are extremely different from the book, more so than the Lord of the Rings films.  But, good to have them regardless.

[Tam and Martin]

I don't think the Hobbit has Aragorn and Legolas in it.

[Lily]

You're right, neither of them were in the original book. They brought Legolas back for the movie, though, and they also created a completely new female elf to balance out the otherwise completely male cast. What do you guys think of that? They've already changed so much that I don't think her addition is going to make a huge difference. Plus, I'm all for more females, being female myself. I'll reserve my final judgement until I've seen the movie, though.

[DanielofRedwall]

I'm not a fan of the new additions. The changes they're making have gotten ridiculous. I know, they've "taken things from the appendices", but they've changed the appendices too. Azog died in that war in the appendices, he was beheaded! I understand why they'd put in the council of Elrond and the quest of Gandalf, in fact I like that addition, but it is the unnecessary ones like Azog and the female elf that annoys me. I'll still go to see it, but I'll have very low expectations and won't expect it to be much like the book, because it is no longer The Hobbit, really. Still, it will probably be entertaining enough and have enough references to the source material to keep me satisfied, like the first one.

For those who might not have seen it yet:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnaojlfdUbs
(Youtube tags not working for some strange reason.)

[WoodlandWarrior]

I agree quite a bit with what Daniel said.  Generally, I think the LOTR and Hobbit movies are good fantasy/action movies but they are not Tolkien movies.  So much is changed or added that it become very different from the source.  The Hobbit as I said above took even more liberties with the story.

Also, I have a problem with the addition of the female elf, Tauriel.  Tolkien wrote the Hobbit as a children's tale and it is meant to be just that.  Now, I'm not mad that they are adding a female character because she is female but because of the reasons why.

It has been stated that the addition is to make it more accessible to female fans.  That is what upsets me.  I don't think Tolkien's work has to be changed to be more accessible, it stands on its own merits.  I'm not a fan of Hollywood pandering.

I hate movies that have a female lead that is either way over the top or added just for the sake of it.  I like strong female characters/leads that make sense and are believable within the genre of the movie.  I think Hollywood could benefit more from those...thoughts?

Edit-

One of my favorite actresses is Michelle Yeoh.  She is an excellent actress who portrays strong female leads in much of what she does. 

[Redwaller]

Agree. Why should it be more accessible? Don't they have girl books/movies too? It is written like this, and it will stay like this. No need to meddle with it unnecessarily just for the sake of it.

[WoodlandWarrior]

Agree. Why should it be more accessible? Don't they have girl books/movies too? It is written like this, and it will stay like this. No need to meddle with it unnecessarily just for the sake of it.

Well, I don't want to turn it into a issue of girls versus boys, that is not my intent.  But you are right about meddling just for the sake of it.  I'd have the same problem with taking a book that is comprised of mostly females and turning into a movie and adding a male figure or turning one of the leads into a male to make it more accessible to me.  As a man, I am more than capable of appreciating the author's work on solely just that.  To me, pandering to an audience, insults its audience.

Let us take "Little Women" by Louisa May Alcott. (Granted there are men in the book)  If they turned it into a movie and changed it where a man is added to keep my attention solely for that sake, I feel like I am being insulted.  That I cannot appreciate Alcott's work unless there is a "dude I can relate too" in it.  Little Women stands on its own in my opinion!

Perhaps I am looking too into this whole thing, but being a sibling of a strong sister I get a bit heated!

Edit- 

I guess my main point is I can appreciate the artist on their work alone, male or female, I don't have to be given a reason based on my gender to like it.

[Redwaller]

Right. It doesn't mean that there's a lot of male characters in a book/movie that it will be better. It depends on the storyline, how the story goes. I read the Anne Series, and even if it's a girl, the book is good. I wouldn't have liked it any better if it was a boy.

[Ungatt Trunn]

I can't wait to see it! I saw the last one, it was AWSOME, and I know this 'un will be great as well!

[Blazemane]

I hate movies that have a female lead that is either way over the top or added just for the sake of it.  I like strong female characters/leads that make sense and are believable within the genre of the movie.  I think Hollywood could benefit more from those...thoughts?

My first thought is this: We need Redwall movies, already!

[Ungatt Trunn]

My first thought is this: We need Redwall movies, already!

Yes!!!