I don't expect a great answer till all parts are released, but at least, as per the current knowledge, what elements (plot, characters, events, ideas, dialog, items etc..) are known to be in Peter Jackson's "Hobbit" movie(s), which are taken from Tolkien legendarium (e.g. LOTR, Silmarillion, letters etc...) but NOT in the original "Hobbit" novel?
Just saw it! Many Tales are woven together that are only barely mentioned in The Hobbit. I'll just quickly write that a lot of the expanded material comes from the writings that were still about Middle Earth and mostly the Appendices of LOTR. I'm not sure how much they were able to use from The Silmarillion and The Unfinished Tales It seems some of the material may also have come from earlier drafts of both The Hobbit and LOTR and other items (for example, the material used to feature Radagast must have at least in part, come from prior drafts of LOTR and The Hobbit where he had once played a larger role in the story of the ring. Radagast the Brown gets a much more extensive treatment than I would have ever expected and liberties were definitely taken with the timeline Tolkien indicates in his writing vs. what is depicted in the movie.) There were also additional bits that needed to occur in order to cohesively string together the other tales.
In the book, there is only a tiny piece written about Gandalf's acquiring of the key and map and the book only mentions the necromancer twice as well as only mentions a council between the elves and wizards - these events are greatly expanded in the movie/movies. I believe that additional piece comes from combining a short bit in the LOTR Appendices titled, "Journey to Dol Guldur" with items from the second age in The Silmarillion. There is more info about Durin and the fall of his people as well. Though, again I am only working from memory here.
When the movie is depicting scenes from the book The Hobbit it stays fairly true to the book throughout (with the exception of a "hunt" and related additions I will allow you to watch to find out more about.) There are changes here and there such as where exactly Bilbo gets stuck and loses his buttons and some of the dialogue, but the story is definitely there. I was disturbed somewhat by a mismatch with Tolkien's timeline of events and the one used to piece together the movie and still can't really decide whether I am glad for the additions or not. Film making is just such a different beast than writing a story in books after all.
The movie version delves into the rich complexities that make Middle Earth so engaging a place, but I do feel the loss of some of the simplicity of the original story sort of made the story lose a little in that Bilbo almost seems to lose his innocence and naivete just a little too soon for me. When I watched all three of the LOTR movies, I felt the changes made were necessary to move the story forward and even, in some cases, were better (like the additional complexity in Faramir's character). I enjoyed watching the movie - it was beautiful and was a great story and I'm glad I went, but I would argue that you should definitely not go expecting to see The Hobbit.
Frodo isn't in the original text, though he might be in later versions, I'm not sure. He's listed on the IMDB page though.
|show 1 more comment|