Missing scenes in the Hobbit

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I was surprised how "short" the first Hobbit movie actually turned out and how few of the scenes were not directly from the book - especially considering the amount of information we had about non-book-scenes in the video blogs. Many of these obviously didn't make it to the final movie... I still hope they make it to the Extended Editions (or a later movie).

Some examples:

- many, many Shire scenes outside Bag End. The video blogs were full of Hobbits, in market scenes stuffed with extras (e.g. the "Bilbo hides from Gandalf" scene) or also more scenes from Bilbo's birthday. None of this turned up in the movie - we hardly saw any Hobbits at all, which I find quite regrettable. I kind of doubt we will see much more of them when Bilbo returns.

- more Radagast scenes: there were reports about verbal Radagast-versus-dwarves battles, or Radagast meeting Gandalf in the Witchking's grave.

- Gandalf exploring ruins, whether Dol Guldur (zombie dwarf?) or Witchking's grave. Might be part of the next movie?

- More dwarf introduction: weren't we supposed to learn more about the dwarves' backgrounds (apart from the single sentence about how they're toymakers and so on), see why/how they decided to join the quest, see the dwarves' individual characters? One could argue that some of it could be inferred from the given dialogue, but I'm sure they produced more.

- More Rivendell, in particular misbehaving Dwarves. PJ hinted that we may expect more of this (and more Great Orc dialogue) in the Extended editions. Also, more "Bilbo in Rivendell": the video blogs had pictures of Bilbo talking to Elrond alone, or Bilbo discovering Narsil.

- More villains: Azog's son Bolg was supposed to be the main villain of the first movie; and the Lego warg set seems to show yet another villain (the flayed guy with shoulder decoration).

Any other scenes you missed? Do you think we'll yet get to see those mentioned above?

I'm not quite sure as to Bolg's role, since Azog has made an apperance he definitely shouldn't have made if it were for chronological accuracy. I think these two have been merged to make the story feel more straight forward and continuous. A questionable decision, but helps the plot progressing in a film. Now we have a clear antagonist and another motif for Thorin's actions.

I wonder why they didn't feel like they had to keep Azog alive as an antagonist in the 2-movie-version, but do now in the 3-movie-version... or maybe it has nothing to do with the new splitting at all and the decision to cast Azog instead of Bolg just happened at the same time.

But Azog certainly didn't die in the movie at the end, did he? So there's no apparent reason yet why they should build up Bolg instead in the next movie? (Not sure whether they will at all, or whether he was just dropped completely - I suppose the latter).

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.