Hobbit's and trolls. .
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Hobbit's and trolls

+700
Views: 38246
Favorited: 91
Submitted: 02/18/2013
Add to favorites Subscribe to branzohales Edit Image E-mail to friend
Share on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend
Show:   Top Rated Newest Per page:
Order:
Show All Replies
User avatar #2 - leglesslegolegolas ONLINE (02/18/2013) [-]
Rivendell was in the book though. It was a major part of the story. Silly trolls.
#4 - Mebeshe (02/18/2013) [+] (2 replies)
The dwarves are better then the ones I saw in my head when I read the books. I just love how each of them is distinctly different. I can't decide if my favorite is Bofur or Ori. Bofur's got that hat, while Ori uses a slingshot and is covered in hand-knitted awesomeness.
The dwarves are better then the ones I saw in my head when I read the books. I just love how each of them is distinctly different. I can't decide if my favorite is Bofur or Ori. Bofur's got that hat, while Ori uses a slingshot and is covered in hand-knitted awesomeness.
User avatar #1 - pebar (02/18/2013) [+] (1 reply)
Actually, Legolas is the son of the elf king that captures the party in Mirkwood
#20 - sonda (02/18/2013) [+] (2 replies)
"Bombed"
#54 - netic (02/18/2013) [+] (2 replies)
Comment Picture
#56 - jibjabkid (02/18/2013) [+] (3 replies)
To all the hobbit haters
To all the hobbit haters
User avatar #14 - lalakiller (02/18/2013) [+] (6 replies)
Was this dude from a deleted scene or something. Don't remember him
#19 to #15 - N. Korean citizen (02/18/2013) [-]
Mouth of Sauron, I think
#9 - biggathy (02/18/2013) [+] (3 replies)
The depiction of Radagast was bad IMO, but the movie as a whole was brilliant.

Pic related, Radagast in the movie ( with bird shit on his fucking head)
User avatar #76 - dementedllama (02/19/2013) [+] (5 replies)
The Hobbit movie was seriously different from the book, and I would have preferred a more accurate film adaptation.

..but was still a good movie on it's own.
User avatar #77 to #76 - paiwithapple (02/19/2013) [-]
true, it was different from the book, but i read that it contains stuff tolkien wrote down but never put in the hobbit.
#64 - thehatchetjack (02/18/2013) [-]
peter is love, peter is life....
User avatar #47 - neptuneport ONLINE (02/18/2013) [-]
I am an avid fan of Tolkien. I have read the Lord of the Rings books at least 5 times, and the Hobbit another 3. I am currently working my way through the Silmarillion (great book if you haven't read it.) I was worried when I heard Peter Jackson was splitting it into three movies. However, the first movie for a fan of the lore was perfect. It renewed my faith in Peter Jackson. I can't wait for the other 2.
tl;dr: Peter Jackson is love. Peter Jackson is life.
#40 - novus (02/18/2013) [+] (1 reply)
Indeed, Jackson did take the movie beyond the realm of Tolkien. However, Rivendell was in the book. That is where the moon runes were read (by Elrond).

Heretics shall be burned
#50 - graphenz ONLINE (02/18/2013) [-]
As much as I hate Twilight, Robert Pattinson is a pretty good actor also a pretty cool guy
User avatar #10 - Edrosty (02/18/2013) [-]
I actually watched The Hobbit today. The movie is amazing...
User avatar #109 - azraelthemage (02/19/2013) [-]
That awkward moment when Rivendell actually was in the book.
User avatar #45 - auraguardian (02/18/2013) [-]
rivendell is the last homely house, the bit about gandalf, galadriel and saruman isn't mentioned though because guess who narrates the book? Bilbo does. and guess who wasn't with Gandalf? Bilbo wasn't.
User avatar #26 - darknesking (02/18/2013) [-]
Dont understand the big dead about the hobbit i loved the movie and the people who didn't are just those types of people that you cannot impress.
User avatar #13 - spawnconnery ONLINE (02/18/2013) [-]
Haha Jersey Shire
 Friends (0)