I hope you are right ForgottenLore, and I haven't heard anything about this either.

_________________
The love of Arda was set in your hearts by Ilúvatar, and he does not plant to no purpose.

I don't believe Sauron will be present at the BofA... having a huge burning eyeball flying around the battlefield wouldn't be all too beneficial for "epicness".
On second thought, PJ came up with the most anticlimatic battle in the history of film (Army of the Dead at the Pelennor...) so I maybe shouldn't put it past him...
In a way he's caught in a cleft stick of his own doing, actually. Sauron as "The Necromancer" obviously has a body of some sort (I think the GW Model fits quite nicely), and would work great as a movie villain, but seeing as PJ (or another script writer) had the glorious idea of inventing that "He cannot yet take physical form."-living-lighthouse garbage, it will be interesting to see how they portray him in The Hobbit. I vote for a retcon.

_________________
Rohan - as it should have been. A house rule project.

actually I am rather fond of the pelennor battle in the films. Exciting stuff.


Except that is exactly how I and everyone else I know visualized Sauron in LotR for the past 30 years. I'm pretty sure I have even seen artwork that was basically exactly what was in the movie. The only times I've seen depictions of Sauron as a physical entity instead of a spirit were in pictures of the Last Allance, so I don't know where all this backlash people have about the depiction in the films comes from.

Firstly, why on earth would Jackson be stupid enough to have Sauron turn up for the BoFA, he obviously won't be there, he will be in the FotN (Fall of the Necromancer) part(s) of the film.

Secondly, the AotD are the only part of the Battle of Pellenor Fields that were rubbish, although it would've been better if the Gondor Fiefdoms, Rangers of the North, Men of Khand etc turned up...

_________________
"I am the Flying Spagetti Monster. Thou shall have no other monsters before me"
-FSM.

Benedict Cumberbatch (who is voicing the Necromancer) leaked i an interview that he will be portraying him during the BotFA. Here is a link:

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=32799

As a history student I have been taught that no two historical documents are the same. Details of events will always differ. I see Tolkien's and Jackson's works in the same way and it is up to the audience to decide which version of events they believe.

Uh huh. This is taking a lot away from someone who apparently doesn't know what's in the book. I mean, he's a great actor, but this is your source?

PJ may do some weird things on us (ever see the way the spiders died in the cartoon version?), but he had the good sense to take Sauron back out of the scripted battle at the Black Gate. He's not going to undercut that by tossing him in the middle of this ragtag coalition.

And dramatic license isn't the same thing as differing points of view in historical sources.

_________________
I hate Black Hat SEO!
Smite the iron, shape the pewter, sculpt the putty.
My DeviantArt Page

I don't actually think that having Sauron appear at the Battle of the Five Armies is such a bad idea. Since they are doing the Dol Guldur stuff in the movies, this would help tie everything together. It is nowhere near as bad as Sauron at the Black Gate. Maybe it could be somewhat linked to Sauron seeking alliance with Smaug, and retreating from Dol Guldur towards Erebor, only to find out about Smaug's death. If you have read the Unfinished Tales, Gandalf talks about his own reasons for helping with the dragon quest. Gandalf was afraid that Smaug and Sauron might combine forces, and was eager to try and kill Smaug off before this could happen. Also, since Smaug dies before the climax of what will be the second film, having another equally powerful and evil character lead the evil forces and be defeated will make it more intense.

I'm thinking that the first movie ends with the Dwarves past Beorn's house and going into Mirkwood or already being in there, while the real climax of the first movie would be the defeat of Dol Guldur. Sauron, the real main baddie in the whole overarching story, being defeated in the first movie is not that cool. Having him return in the second movie will make it better in my opinion. You can't have the story be exactly the same when adapting to film, especially when you are taking things that really were not that important (Fall of the Necromancer) and making them part of the main plot.

Thanks!

Maermaethor.

_________________
(insert awesome signature here)

I agree Maermaethor. As much as I love the original tale of the Hobbit, PJ knows how to make a film exciting! I wouldn't be at all surprised if we saw Ents fighting in the Dol Guldur scenes despite none being documented as living in Mirkwood.

Sauron is the master of all baddies, so I'd much rather see him in a spirit/wraith form than some fat orc on a wolf! There will ofcourse be issues concerning the One Ring which is present on the battlefield, hopefully Bilbo won't succumb to the temptation. Perhaps a last stand finale with the Heroes protecting Bilbo from Sauron. Will there be Nazgul there too I wonder...

The Hobbit has many more exciting chapters woven into it than the LOTR trilogy and so PJ won't have to change too many things you wouldn't have thought. The trailer looks fantastic and I for one cannot wait!

_________________
The Southern Fiefdoms: http://www.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21928

Reading the article that's been linked to, I think it's more of a case that the actor doesn't know what he's talking about and the article writer's blown a mistatement out of proportion. Wouldn't suprise me if Cumberbatch has gotten his facts mixed up and is actually talking about the ousting of Sauron from Dol Guldur rather than the BotFA.

Umm, yes, it's my source, it's from the horses mouth and it's the only thing that we have to go on at the moment so I can't see how anybody can disregard it.

The point is, the quote makes it look like Cumberbatch doesn't really know what he's talking about - note the 'which is a character in the Five Legions War or something which I’m meant to understand.' part. that sentence implies he hasn't taken an interest/learned about what's going on, and as such means he's not a realiable source.

The ring? Damn it, I forgot the ring. Scratch everything I said, Sauron being at the Battle of the Five Armies is more retarded than him at the black gate! If he was that close to the ring, and Bilbo puts it on, he would immediately feel it's presence and even if he doesn't get it, the whole premise of Sauron NOT knowing about the ring at the beginning of LotR would be ruined.

Also, I wouldn't want to see ents, as there is really nothing that they would contribute to the story, and it makes no sense why they would be there. The fight against Saruman was a fight for environmentalism vs industrialization. They only care about their forest, and Treebeard says that "The ents have not troubled about the wars of men and wizards for a very long time," and a very long time in an ent's mind is a VERY long time indeed.

If they did manage to somehow get Bilbo to not be at the battle, then Sauron would work, but he is the protagonist of the story, and not having him there would screw things up much more than having one of the main villains not be there.

Thanks!

Maermaethor.

_________________
(insert awesome signature here)

Sauron was mentioned as having a THRONE. I doubt a giant eye could comfortably sit on a throne. Yes, he did appear as an eye, but to the best of my knowledge that was only through the Palantir. PJ and most everyone else took the whole Eye thing too literally. Especially if the Necromancer had a physical body, which he almost certainly did. Sauron isn't supposed to be the main bad guy in this, Smaug is. No matter how much license a director takes with a movie, there's a point where it destroy's what he is trying to make better. Like the AotD at PF, or the elves at HD.

_________________
"Leave Sauron to me."
If you're in the Raleigh, NC area, let me know.

Indeed, 100% agreement.

There actually is a letter by Tolkien about Sauron's appearance during the War of the Ring which pretty much makes the entire eyeball-discussion moot:
So the way they portrayed him at the beginning of Part I is pretty much spot on for how Tolkien imagined him to be during the WotR.

Anyways, there is loads of evidence in the books that he had a body, such as Gollum noting that he has only four fingers on his black hand (How can an eye have hands?!), Pippin seeing him in the Palantír, Aragorn asking him to 'come forth' (He even does that in the movie! That was the second time that I face-palmed in RotK, the first being the appearance of the AotD at the PF), etc.

Sure, most movie-goers, especially those who haven't read the book, won't care if PJ screws Tolkien's universe over, but to those who see the bigger picture some changes just make no sense at all. Especially Elves at HD, when one of the (if not the) main points of the LotR is that Man has to deal with the problem and the Elder race can't help anymore... Also, it was called The Last Alliance for a reason - not The Last but one Alliance.

Aaaanyway, back to topic. As Draugluin said, there's artistic license to make the movie flow smoothly, and then there's changing stuff that needn't (or shouldn't) be changed because it causes inconsistencies - as would Sauron's presence at the BofA. Having Sauron and the Ring so close to each other? Doesn't work. Especially since Bilbo wore the Ring during 99,9% percent of the battle.

Oh and as for the depiction Battle of the Pelennor Fields: though not nearly as epic as the book version, it was one really cool battle - until the arrival of the Army of the Dead pulled a deus-ex machina on the Mûmakil's heinies. Hence why I called it 'anticlimatic' in my previous post.

_________________
Rohan - as it should have been. A house rule project.

Good points! It really wouldn't be wise to include Sauron in the Battle of the Five Armies. Hopefully Sherlock just made one of his rare mistakes

As has been pointed out, Smaug is the lead villain, perhaps we will see a Troll Cheiftain type hero leading the forces of evil much like in the ROTK showdown at the Black Gate. Ents were superbly well done in TTT and because Dol Guldor is deep within Mirkwood they could make an appearance. I understand your points by the way, but PJ has his own ideas, he goes against what Tolkien wrote about the AOTD and the idea that men were isolated (no elves to the rescue!).

Sauron should make a show at Dol Guldor but not at the Bo5A.

Just while people are on the point about the Army of the Dead, I actually didn't mind them showing up at the BOTPF. The significance of Aragorn arriving wasn't overshadowed. If PJ had gone by the book it wouldn't have made much difference, there would have just been lots of men killing men. That doesn't mean the Fiefdoms shouldn't have been there in the first place! PJ screwed up on that decision.

_________________
The Southern Fiefdoms: http://www.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=21928

I think it's unlikely that Legolas will appear in the centre of the battle itself, but seeing as we know Thranduil will be present at a battle of some kind in ruined Dale, it's likely Legolas will join him there.

Also, to put to rest the idea that PJ brought Legolas into the Hobbit, this is not strictly true. While Tolkien did not mention Legolas in the Hobbit book, as he did not exist as a character, he does correct himself slightly in the Fellowship of the Ring, probably after realising Legolas' age would mean he was alive during the events in the Hobbit. At the Council of Elrond, Legolas is discussing how the elves set Gollum free from the Mirkwood prisons, to which Gloin says directly to Legolas 'You were less tender to me' - so Tolkien does correct himself somewhat here, but claiming that Legolas was involved in the Hobbit narrative, possibly even one of the Elves who imprisoned the Dwarves.

_________________
Wise Old Elf