Stephen Colbert cameo

Uh huh, okay

my issue with Colbert being in the hobbit is the fact that he basically walked on set and because of who he is they gave him a cameo. THAT's the only problem I have with him being in the film. If he wanted a part he should of had to audition just like anyone else in a role other than the crew (they have earned the right to small cameo's IMO) and Peter Jackson himself.

That and I don't think Colbert is talented but that's only personal opinion

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2012/11/29/66280-hobbit-week-on-the-colbert-report/

Awesome to hear! I'll have to make sure to watch those episodes, either on Comedy Central or when they go up on Colbert's website. Looking forward to it!

Pretty fun so far.

http://www.colbertnation.com/video

I would have liked to have watched that Halfwise ! but it said I cant view it from my location Il find another way round.

Gangalf the gay. lol

"Oh Gracious me"

Martin Freeman was on tonight, and they discussed how Stephen BEAT Boyens in a geek off. Some Tolkien expert she is...

Though to be fair, Colbert is pretty damn learned in all things Tolkien!

I would SO love to find that quiz and find out exactly what she missed.

here you can see the three episodes (and more when they come) where Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen and Andy Serkis are in.
http://www.colbertnation.com/full-episodes/tue-december-4-2012-martin-freeman

Peter Jackson again raises the idea, with Stephen Colbert, that the Appendices were Tolkien's notes to revise The Hobbit. First Jackson says something like, this is the case as he understands things, and then that he 'heard' this, but in any case asks Mr. Colbert about it.

Stephen does not specifically note that Jackson is wrong, but gives an explanation that does not confirm Jackson's idea at least. Mr Colbert, while wearing his 'Hobbit feet' incidentally, explains about The Quest of Erebor (the text), but at the end I think he confuses this a bit with the 1960 Hobbit.

Tolkien explained that The Quest of Erebor was cut from the Appendices to lighten the boat. Stephen's explanation was that Tolkien's publishers sort of 'rejected' it, or at least gave the opinion that it was nice but not The Hobbit -- but that rather seems to be the response from an unknown critic to Tolkien regarding the later 1960 Hobbit.

I'm a fan of Stephen but he seems to have mistakenly taken the response to Tolkien's [abandoned] 1960 Hobbit and given it to Tolkien's publishers as a response to The Quest of Erebor. Although he does add that he thinks the entire scenario he described is the case, implying that he is not wholly certain about all of it.

In any case The Quest of Erebor itself was intended for the Appendices, not as a revision to The Hobbit, one revision having already taken place in 1951, most especially concerning the chapter in which the riddle game occurs.

Sneaky PJ and Co cant get past our Lore Masters!

That's a shame Colbert got confused, though I'm sure he's plenty busy with his show so maybe he's just a bit rusty on the Lore front. I'm still glad he did his Hobbit week, I need to catch up and watch the rest of it.

What's shocking to me is Jackson's admission that he's never known if Tolkien wrote the appendices as a sort of guide to a revised Hobbit, and yet has been repeating that blarmey to the press! He actually asked Stephen if that was true!

If somebody says something stupid based on false information that's one thing, but to be saying it as fact without the slightest bit of certainty shows a real lack of respect.

Yeah that seems a bit odd to me too...

... I wonder if it was Jackson's way of tying to pull back from earlier statements, realizing that they weren't true, or not necessarily true.

Again, why not crack open John Rateliff's book about writings that concern The Hobbit in some measure (to the relevant parts anyway), or something from Hammond and Scull -- or have someone else do it if you're busy with film stuff, and check things -- before you go speaking to the press.

Elthir wrote:
Again, why not crack open John Rateliff's book about writings that concern The Hobbit in some measure (to the relevant parts anyway), or something from Hammond and Scull -- or have someone else do it if you're busy with film stuff, and check things -- before you go speaking to the press.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, Jackson has always seemed to me more of a LOTR, than a Tolkien fan, attracted more by the monsters and wizards, than the language and culture of the book (though, to be fair that is probably true of a lot of people, the latter wouldn't really translate into an action adventure film aimed at the mass market anyway) I highly doubt he has the time or frankly, the interest to peruse dense background and biography books he has no rights to use (books relatively few of the fanbase will have read themselves), there's a reason he (apparently) employs Tolkien experts to do stuff like this for him.

Ironically Richard Amritage seems to be the biggest Tolkien nerd in the cast (he's read BOLT and The History of The Hobbit at least), and perhaps the most dedicated actor in the trilogy, but everyone knows how I feel about his Thorin

Yay For bumping Old Threads radomly!