The Lord Of The Rings' Legolas Problem
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 лип 2023
- The Lord of the Rings will forever be one of the greatest film trilogies to ever hit the silver screen. Not counting The Hobbit movies, The Lord of the Rings changed the landscape of adapting classic novels to the big screen. Though one member of the Fellowship didn't quite live up to his novel counterpart. Legolas, played by Orlando Bloom, didn't really have a whole lot to do in The Lord of the Rings, besides killing some orcs and looking cool while doing it.
#lordoftherings #legolas #nerdstalgic
SOURCES:
CBR - Legolas' Fate Explained
Screen Rant - Legolas And Gimli's Friendship - Розваги
![[柴犬ASMR]曼玉Manyu&小白Bai 毛发护理Spa asmr](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0TsXQ7z2Dh4/mqdefault.jpg)
I disagree. I think you are nitpicking this to oblivion. Legolas, according to estimates was 1000 to 2000 years old when the events of LOTR happened. What kind of character development do you expect from someone who lived for so long? I say he is very much developed already. No Elf shows any character development in the trilogy. They are mostly ideal paragons of wisdom or skill and this is fine. Not all characters need to be flawed and change to be interesting.
exactly... and ofcourse.. the fact that he DID have character development.. his relationship with gimli.. overcoming his 2000 years old prejudice.. what more do you want.. the suggestion that he could have had the story arc of struggling with accepting his legacy being the kings son is ridiculous because aragorn, the main character, already has that exact same storyline
for that matter.. what story arc did gimli have lol.. no more character development than legolas.. the exact same thing.. overcoming his prejudice about elves
Elves did have character development in these films - Elrond’s acceptance of Aragorn as King, that the strength of Men remains, and willingness to accept Arwen’s wishes to forgo her immortality to marry a mortal man were things Elrond did not approve of to begin with. Legolas also had character development, mostly with his bond with Aragorn and Gimli. The line “what about side by side with a friend” was simple enough complete his character arc with Gimli, who in the beginning expressed contempt with.
Absolutely. Saying that Legolas needed to have more character development is waaaay over thinking it, and looking for problems where there are none.
@@boletop6204they pointed out that gimli had the same problem in the movies. But at least he had some memorable, story relevant scenes.
The fact that Frodo might not even know Legolas’s name is so funny to me
He may have heard Legolas name from one of the other members of the Fellowship
I hated how Jackson had Legolas be able to jump around like a video game character in LOTR and The Hobbit.
@@anubusx I liked it in Lord of the Rings. I didn’t like it in the Hobbit.
@@biguy617
That still ony counts as one.
@@anubusx lol
I think it's okay to have Legolas there just to help. He's incredibly old, wise and skilled. He doesn't need an arc. He's like Brad Pitt in the Ocean's movies; he's done stuff like this before, he's good at it, he's unimpressed and not talkative. He's mostly there to show that the elves care about this cause which adds gravity to the story.
tbh if he had a more significant arc it would have over-crowded the movie more than people think it already was. He's as important as the sword Sting and I think that's okay because they both serve valuable and memorable roles but not main characters.
Agree that it's ok to just have Legolas there as a help to the other characters but even with just that narrower requirement for his character the script could have done better. He doesn't really offer any wisdom that is decisive for any action. For example, perhaps he could have given some battle tactics advice at Helms Deep but he doesn't. Perhaps with his great sight and awareness he could have been the first to notice the suicidal orc with the torch but in the film it was Aragorn that notices and tells him to shoot the orc. Perhaps he could have worked out immediately that the white wizard in the RotK was Gandalf through his people's knowledge but he was just as oblivious as the others. Perhaps he could have helped give advice to Aragorn in Two Towers on how to negotiate with the dead but he just looks around looking concerned.
I liked the movie arc fine for Legolas. Though I would not have minded a snippet of the Nimrodel (poem song) or “the song of the sea,” thrown into the mix. Book Legolas had a penchant for going into songs or stories. Guess I’m one of those old-fashioned gen-xers, who doesn’t get bored by poetry. Extra Tolkien Middle Earth poetry is fine by me!!Laugh.
That being said Legolas did read the inscription before entering the caves of the dead in Return of the King movie. Nice touch.
And the friendship with Gimli is endearing. Still think the right balance was made without having Legolas be too stoic and a little more bright and keen.
I can fill the poems in my head anyway. Whose to say they weren’t spoken in a day or hour not shown on screen! I do agree the LOTR movies stand the test of time.
And I’ll never stop loving the books.
Haha yes! And he has impeccable bone structure lol
He's like the other elves , he's there to assist but not directly .
Agreed. One thing this video seems to miss is that he's not a central character, and thus doesn't need much in the way of development. His friendship with Gimli and gradual acceptance of dwarves is all the development a side character really needs. Granted, they still should have kept his personality from the book.
I agree with many of the comments: Legolas doesn't need a character arc, -he's over a thousand years old and is a supporting character. Despite that, he does have heart-to-heart moments with other characters where he is often humble to confess personal error. The good trilogy definitely could have used some of his book humor to add character, however.
Even supporting characters can have arcs, to say nothing of really old ones.
Or they don‘t have one but then it‘s the environment that adapts or refuses to adapt to them. This is the case with Gandalf, for instance. But in Legolas‘ case, he can definitely have an arc, it‘s not hard.
@@raylast3873well he did have some character development which is his friendship with Gimli. He started out disliking drawfs and Gimli and at the end, he views Gimli as a close friend.
@@elisarwong1609 I know he has one in the books
I am reading the books, i dont see the "humour" part, except for the part he walks in the snow.
@@raylast3873 yeah but movies don’t work in the same way that books do, if Legolas had an “arch” that he didn’t even need it would’ve made the movies drag needlessly
Aragorn: "For Frodo"
Legolas: "Who?"
🤣
I mean presumably they have lots of time together in between moments of the film or even in the book I mean an account from the book or the film doesn't show the entirety of their relationship I mean if you want to be technical legless only seems to talk to Frodo directly one time when he tells them that he has his bow but in an actual scenario I'm sure there's plenty of times where Frodo in the hobbits talk to Legolas either behind the scenes or directly because how many elves have they ever met in their life but it is such a work of fiction you know that there's only so much screen time and character arcs for Provisions but have they gone with the series instead of a film we would have certainly seen more time or have these characters more adequately Diversified and spread out but it is kind of a challenge when you have a character that's supposed to be Millennial old how do you relate I mean where do you even begin what does that even look like I mean outside of Methuselah the female elf toriel from The Hobbit I thought she had so much potential and I think she's as good a character as anything Tolkien could have ever come up with but filmmakers don't seem to use her to Greater effect and have actually had a more richer backstory and implementation for her Beyond a potential non-existent love affair for Legolas the organic nature of filmmaking often leaves us wanting more and feeling disappointed on certain echelons
@@TheDogGeneral First: punctuation, please.
Second: I work with a lot of people and I don't talk to all of them, assuming that I do just by listening to me tell work anechdotes doesn't make it more real.
Third: If you want people to make an assumption, you show implications. You should see how FromSoft games are chafted, people assumes all of the story just with places and descriptions that insinuate stuff, not just by saying "they were frends".
@@dimwarlock wow somebody certainly has a personal investiture in fictional characters and fictional writing eccentric illustrative point that I was making was if the story were real there was certainly be moments where Frodo and Legolas in their tenure on their Journey would have conversed and built a friendship that's not innocuous that's simply a realistic mechanism of narrative and punctuation LOL I make no apology you know I don't live in a universe where the third Reich won World War II and I will post and write as I please:-) and that notion what you do in your personal life or professional life doesn't equivalate to a fictional character written in a book long before you were born.
@@TheDogGeneralyou live in an imaginary world with overlord Selen-sky takes over and creates 4th reich then?
I wish you would've touched on Legolas most emotional moment. Legolas shows real emotion when he witnesses Aragorn comforting a dying Boromir. He doesn't actually say a word but his face says everything.
Agree, a beautiful moment. Some characters are there to be the witnesses of grief and loss.
Yeah, maybe that's the reason this guy doesn't get Legolas in the films, because all of his moments are very subtle.
I think he also missed when Aragorn goes off the cliff in The Two Towers and everyone assumes he's dead. He finds Arwan's jewel in the hands of the orc who lies. The moment obviously hit Legolas the hardest. He also didn't point out Legolas' defense of Aragorn to Boromir in the Fellowship of the Ring when the counsel was discussing the ring. Legolas had fine character development in my opinion.
@@mjamitche5245 bro the look on Legolas' face when Theoden says to leave the dead still haunts me.
@@mjamitche5245 None of those examples are 'character development'. They are just things that happened and he reacted to them. Happy for you to say that you found his reactions very satisfying, well done, or they really did it for you but they are not character development.
You can't just say "He's a boring character other than his relationship with Gimli". That's like saying Hamlet is a boring character aside from the whole revenge thing. Legolas' prejudice-to-friendship with Gimli is just as important as Aragorn's reluctant king arc or Merry and Pippin's arcs of bravery. Diversity is one of the core themes of LotR, that's what Fellowship is.
Legolas and Gimli are a microcosm of Elven and Dwarven society, their friendship represents the rekindling of ancient alliances that are outside the scope of what the audience is show. We have 4 hobbits to represent their society, we have Aragorn, Boromir, Faramir, Théoden, Éowyn, and even Denethor to represent the relationships between various cultures of Men and how they see other races, but for elves we only get Galadriel in 1 scene (who is obviously very different from all other Elves), and Elrond in 2 scenes. There isn't that constant presence in the story like there is for the other races. And for Dwarves, it starts and finishes with Gimli.
Without Legolas, we'd have no idea how Elves perceive Dwarves for the vast majority of a story about how diverse Free Peoples have to learn to unite to defeat oppression.
Their friendship is just as important as Frodo's with Sam, or Gandalf's with Pippin, or Merry's with Éowyn.
What about Haldir's line about Gimli "The dwarf breathes so loud, we could have shot him in the dark." when the fellowship approached Lothlorien?
Doesn't THAT, and Gimli's aggressive/racist response to questioning, give some idea about the state of Elven/Dwarvish relations?
@@sterlingdennett I don't think so. The movies portrayed Haldir as just being a douchebag in general. If we took him as a representative of all elvendom, people who haven't read the books would just think that elves are all jingoistic assholes with a racial superiority complex. Which some of them are, but it isn't a planet of the hats.
Merry and Pippin's arcs of bravery... Honestly, I still mourn those two characters. The beginning of their arc was mangled, transforming them from the young intelligent hobbits who entered into the ring quest knowingly and willingly as they were described in the books, into a couple of ignorant country bumpkin troublemakers who fall into the whole thing completely by accident. And the end of their arc, the scouring of the Shire, was simply left out altogether. I understand that both were most likely done due to budgetary and/or runtime constraints (as well as the fact that the scouring of the Shire always was a bit weird, narratively speaking, as an extra climax after the main one), and I won't deny that the characters as portrayed in the movie actually work very well, but I still think it is a bit sad that movie Merry and Pippin have been somewhat reduced from their book counterparts.
@@Wishbone1977 personally, I think it was a brilliant move to have Mary and Pippin “fall “ into the adventure with no prior knowledge or commitment. We already have Sam to fulfill that role. And this gives Mary and Pippin a bigger story arc because it means so much more when they become committed to the cause and ultimately risk their lives for it.
Fun Fact: Orlando Bloom landed the role of Legolas two days before he finished drama school.
Steven Tylers daughter can't act and was chosen for the role because she is a NepoBaby.
He's also playing some young criminal in an episode of the Midsomer Murders and he's such an unknown they didn't even bother to credit him in the opening credits. That's cute...
@@CordeliaWagnerI mean, Sean Astin (Sam) is also a nepo baby, his mom was Patty Duke and his dad was John Astin.
@@CordeliaWagnershe’s alright in Armageddon
@@CordeliaWagner I have no idea what you're talking about; she killed it as Arwen. I don't think I've seen her in anything else, but her performance in LotR is enough to refute your assertion. I assume the term "NepoBaby" refers to nepotism, which if so is hardly specific to her. Nepotism seems to be the rule rather than the exception in Hollywood -- which obviously sucks, but it reflects poorly on the system not on individual actors.
You will never have a higher number of people disagreeing with your take, than you will get with this video. Legolas was spectacular, he didn't need to do extra. Him being an elf was already loud enough, getting him to do more will take away from the rest. He is a typical example of "show us, dont tell us". And that was just enough for all of us to fall in love with the character
Yes, he was not there to talk, he was there to do awesome elf stuff.
Sorry but on this i disagree, Legolas was a supporting character there to aid the main ones and a brilliant supporting one.
i agree, this story isn;t about him, or gimli, or gandalf...
These stunts never bothered me: you've got to put in something for everyone, and if action-fantasy isn't your thing wait a minute until the next beat brings something of your flavour.
Movies are a different medium than books, using Legolas this way seems a logical choice to spice up the combat. As a TTRPG player as well, Legolas is the most frequent reference I've heard for martial characters doing cool stunts. Serving the work is not always about character depth.
@@raegangarlitz5313 Seconded
Agreed
i mean, even as a supporting character you can still have more character traits than "elf that is good at fighting"
Legolas was too busy stacking combos and making up 90% of the Fellowship’s kill count to have a personality
I think his role in the films was one of action more than dialogue, to embody the incredible incredible skill of the elves in the story; showing style and personality through that.
I personally feel that you see plenty of his playful character in his interactions with Gimli.
Agreed on all.counts
Stacking combos 😂😂😂
True. I never really seen him as an "emotionless rock". His playfulness with Gimli stuck more with me.
Glorfindel
I understand your point but him killing 90% out of th fellowship is not that much, wasn't the orcs army in literal hundred thousands? That's why destroying the ring was important, in the end killing is just numbers that doesn't change the big picture.
I think the whole 11 hours of runtime is unfair. Frodo is only with Legolas for half of one movie, and establishing his relationship with Gandalf and Aragorn and Boromir is simply more important. Legolas on the other hand, has business with Gimli. Legolas doesn't hve a problem in LOTR, he does in the hobbit, which is where you got your thumbnail from
Still, not much of a fellowship
@@shinobi-no-buenoyes it disbands rather quickly, lol.
Fantasy world boy band.
Don't forget there was a few seconds in the last movie after Frodo recovers. But even then it was only smiling at one another for a job well done. And then there was the couple of minutes as they were boarding the boat and getting ready to leave middle earth.
@@KevinBenecke Legolas wasn't there as they boarded the ship.
But I think about that scene where everyone enters the room as frodo is in bed. Everyone that enters we are just so happy to see and our mind is flooded with memories. It's perfect. Then in the hobbit bilbo does one last goodbye to the dwarves and half of them we're like who are you
Legolas has excellent eye sight because he is an Elf. That is why he gives exposition in those scenes.
Exactly and that's one of the many reasons he's a useful member of the company. Think how useful he would have been going to Mordor. That's part of the story too, that Frodo and Sam didn't have the high XP characters with them, so they have to suffer way more, but also wouldn't have succeeded with them.
It's worth separating needing Legolas from a practical logistic perspective if you were considering whether this adventure were to work in real life (i.e. someone with great eye sight and combat abilities is extremely useful) against needing Legolas from a story narrative perspective. Although the video didn't make this distinction clear I'm pretty sure when he says Legolas is 'useless' he means the latter not the former.
Could have done without the red sun line.
No, Legolas is no main charakter. He is supporting, and for that he is like the silent friend, who is always there but doesnt take much attantion.
I love Legolas. He is loyal, brave and funny. This video took me by surprise. I really enjoyed him in the movies. To each his own 😊
Ofc omg he is my fav too and he is such an amazing person
To each his own. That's what I always say! - Cut Lawquane The Clone Wars
I think this is the first time I disagree with you.
For LOTR movies, Legolas worked. The Hobbit isn't LOTR (it's a different book).
nope he didn't, not nearly as well as others like cant even compare him to someone like Sam
@@buzzwithdrip6347 Who says that Legolas needed such a role? As far as I can remember, LOTR was the biggest trilogy of its time, Legolas was one of the most popular characters, and LOTR is one of the few movies that stood the test of time.
Some 2000s movies just needed a 'pretty boy' to make movie history.
@@buzzwithdrip6347Sam had one of the most important and unique roles in the movies though. Legolas didn't need to be more than what we got.
@@Luke_Go who says lotr is not great? I think they are some of the greatest films ever but that doesn't mean they are closed to criticism.
I think he is not a very developed character, now I hardly care because sam and frodo's journey is where the heart and soul of lotr but but Legolas wasn't developed that's what the truth is and we can't really say they didn't had time, this trilogy is like 10 hours long
@@buzzwithdrip6347 "He is not a very developed character" isn't the same as "this didn't work." Legolas in LOTR did work!
Not every character has to have a definitive character arc. Legalas has a minor character arc in the book to do with befriending Gimli - he realises that strong friendship can surpass race. That's the only character arc he needed to have. None of the elves have strong character arcs, and that was deliberate on Tolkien's part: the elve's time in Middle Earth was finishing - their time was finishing. Their arc was almost over. Had Tolkien put in strong character arcs for the elves, that would have belied that very important fact. Not every character has to have a character arc, sometimes the lack of an arc might actually be a deliberate feature, and you can usually find a reason for an author's choices, particularly an undisputed celebrated classic author such as Tolkein, if you look and think about it properly...
The main reason Legolas - and largely the elves seem so "bored" or almost "disinterested" in the happenings of LOTR and more - is their life span. Do remember, that besides being lightfooted, and skill full - they are literally Thousands of years old - even older than the wizards for example.
It is thus quite understandable that they have a solemn - almost detached, melancholic manner to how they perceive events and time, and they even age slower than the other ancient beings (like Ents)
As for Legolas's growth during the LOTR trilogy? He followed - clearly the least of the two beings the Elves had regard for at the time - Dwarves & Men.
Elrond literally says - "Men are weak", and "Dwarves are greedy, selfish" and yet Legolas - being a Prince of the Elves no less - chooses to follow them. With all the solemnity, "superpower" and everything - he puts his faith in them.
And Finally, Elves also possesses a rare gift - including Legolas - which explains their demeanor - which is: foresight. Legolas not only sees far but also possibilities in the future coming up - having lived thousands of years. Legolas's gift is his restraint, in all events, times, and places - and the rare times he does show emotion show how taken he is towards his Fellowship when they die or are lost. He's a watchful guardian, but probably the most mature amongst them in warfare for example.
Another way of interpreting it - as most of us did possibly during that time - is Legolas is a man of few words but heavy on action, and in that regard, I would say Peter Jackson knew exactly what he was doing with the character in the LOTR Trilogy.
Thoughtful and well written reply. I have just one quibble: wizards, being Maiar, were far older than elves, having been part of the Ainur who sang the Universe into existence.
@@jenniferbrent9025 Yes But wizards, and other Maiar - including Sauron - didn't have a bloodline/brethren community to really build or foster - hence why they were all - at a minimum eccentric, cunning - all the way down to being evil in certain cases. All Wizards lived alone and surrounded by endless knowledge to guide the other Races of Middle Earth, some - like Sauron and even Saruman - became too involved and desired power to control the races they were supposed to guide... others like Gandalf chose to remain as guides - while Radagast became the friend and guide to birds and beasts.
Without the cause of being a guide or in Sauron's case - a ruler - they all eventually left Middle Earth - with no progeny or race to foster of their own.
What I am getting at is - that despite Maiar having lived a lot longer, and being more powerful - served more like the "Politicians in Charge" and therefore fell prey to their own knowledge, prejudices, etc.
The Elves - were possibly the most open-minded of all the races in that regard - having joined with Men to defeat Sauron twice - and Dwarves in the Battle of the 5 Armies.
I agree, of course, that the Elves were the eldest and wisest of the peoples of Middle Earth, with the most experience, history, culture, lore, and development of character. And that the Wizards' incarnate time as guides was near infinitely shorter.
I have nothing you don't already know. I'm sure you know more.
It's just refreshing to have a conversation with someone who knows that Tolkien had created a Universe of its own, with languages and stories that began eons before Jackson's Trilogy was even conceived.
p.s. I also agree with your take on Legolas' character in the movie
Thank you! It's certainly a pleasure discussing such wonderful characters that Tolkien had created. In all sincerity, I am not a Tolkien enthusiast to the extent of having read all the books as such - rather delved deep into his world - after falling in love with the LOTR movies. Back then movies actually portrayed "growth" and how characters developed genuine respect and affection with people they didn't see eye to eye - a far cry from the modern interpretation where characters are "too quick" to "fall in line"
Tolkien and the LOTR movies inspired me to accept the world as it is - and yet hopeful towards progressive healthy acceptance ... and to think this is something he conjured up primarily during War Time is truly remarkable ...@@jenniferbrent9025
I think your conclusion is great, along with your assessment of the deterioration of the film industry.
In my case, I avoided the movies for a long time 'because I'd already read the Hobbit and the LOTR'.
Then remembered it had been decades since then, and decided to give the movies a try. Glad I did!
That led me to the many on-line sites done by experts, which is how I found information and stories from the Silmarillion.
I doubt I'll ever read that one!
Its odd how everyone seems to forget that elves being lightfooted comes from the books and many of the crazy super hero/unrealistic things he does in both hobbit and lotr are examples of how light footed works. Hes able to walk up falling stones walk ontop of the blizard, surf ect all cause of that
The light-footedness would certainly work with surfing down the stairs and walking on the snow, the snow thing even happened in the books, but the falling tower was beyond even the elves and completely unnecessary.
@alligatorscrublord no its not. If you are able to walk on water and snow without leaving even a foot print cause you impact no weight then you could step on somthing thats mid falling. Infact even without lightfootedness you can do this but yould push the item down as you impart your weight on it but as staed elves can step without doing that
@@theendofitelves absolutely can’t walk across water like Jesus though lol
@@themaninblack8271walking on snow isn't that far removed from walking on water.
@johnchukwuemekaagbaeze6473 thank you. Lol i feel like people dont get how insane it is to say somone could walk on top of extreamly light snow that others are literally neck deep in without even leaving a footprint on. They are acting like thats realistic and doesnt break the laws of physics. A feather would leave a impression on the snow hes lighter then a feather thus he would float standing up ie walking on water
Legolas has given us "They're taking the hobbits to Isengard".
And that's enough.
Legolas was WAAAAYYY more grounded in LOTR than in the Hobbit 😂
"More grounded." I see what you did there.
One thing that is brought up far too often when discussing characters in movies/novels or whatever is their "character arc" or lack there of. Just wanted to say that having a character arc is not mandatory in order to have a good or interesting character. Some character might be the same at the end of the "journey" and still be awesome, because the nature of the story is different. Legolas is a supportive, secondary character, he doesn't inherently need a character arc, he just needs to fullfill his role in the story (basically, an elf representative in the Fellowship and the Three Hunters that is kinda fun and cool). He does that and it's fine. Is like saying that James Bond for example is a "bad character" or that his movies are bad because of the lack of development... Thing is, he doesn't need one, the movie is about a cool dude doing cool things, and we follow along in the journey. That's fine too. Same with Legolas here. I don't think that's a valid criticism. Same with all the different dwarves in the Hobbit; although I dislike the movies with a passion, they didn't have "character arc" or relationship with Bilbo, in the books or in the movies, because they don't really need it. They are kind of a joke to be honest (I think that this is said by Tolkien himself btw). Bunch of dwarves with funny names that are somewhat irrelevant to the story, that is about Bilbo, Gandalf and Thorin.
I can't love this comment enough. The standard story elements tend to be present in the majority of novels/movies, just as common tropes are seen to some degree. They become "tropes" due to having been established over the centuries as the surefire formulas. What some fail to understand, even IN the business (which I know first hand) is that standards and tropes do not have to play out the same all the time. Furthermore, rules can and should be broken, that often being when the best story emerges. It is unexpected.
Character arc is one of the standard which, as you correctly detailed, does not have to universally apply to every character, including the main ones. And, even if there is an arc, it does not have to be a total 180 or wildly dramatic one.
As for Legolas, on top of all your points, he is an elf of unknown age but certainly well over 2000yrs. Elves mature at 100yrs and do not typically change. There is no "development" or "journey" for beings who are immortal! Besides, Legolas DID have a significant arc in his friendship with Gimli. To claim Legolas is this boring, useless character with no personality, and then brush aside the profound shift in his perception of dwarves so as to become BFFs with one, is a truly illogical and messed up take.
Ye
Yeah it's so annoying that everything has to be a college level thesis character study. Things can't just be for the sake of being
@@pheunithpsychic-watertype9881 That bullshit of Campbell's hero journey has done a lot of harm in how people and youtube critics perceive stories (have to say it fooled me too for a while). Not all characters need to have their perception of life changed to be interesting, this also applies to the protagonist.
Legolas is known to be a fan favorite. Orlando Bloom’s charisma allows him to act without words. He’s so good that he’s one of the characters that was included in the hobbit trilogy despite not being in the book.
🙌🏾
And he's extremely handsome
@@football_zone4774that’s the actual answer. His acting can be forgiven because he’s pretty
Legolas should have been left out of the hobbit trilogy, the way it turned out.
It made him into a cartoon character.
@@jedi_drifter2988 yeah but more people watch it with him
Only one other person asked for a strand of Galadriel's hair, the most powerful elf ever.. Feanor. and Galadriel refused. Gimli got it, and he got 3.
The maid who cleans her brushes has thousands of them...
@@CordeliaWagner😂😂
And thousands of hair bands/clips too
Remember, Feanor ask 3 times, each time rejected. Gimli only ask once.
Actually it was Celebrimbor that pestered Galadriel for her hair. Féanor was her uncle. Celebrimbor wanted to put it in the Ellesar and marry her, but she only loved Celeborn of the trees 🌳I forgot to mention that was one of Tolkien's later writings, but it makes much more sense than Féanor chasing her.
Ah Feanor was the one who did the Kinslaying , probably why.
I couldn't disagree more .Legolas has a great character development with is friendship with gimli, which is incredibly important seeing the tension between the two races and adds to the feel good ending of the movie. I think you have forgotten that one of the main takes from the movie is the value of friendship.
Yes friendship 🙏
one does not simply play the line "They're taking the hobbits to Isengard" without referencing the meme
I even hummed the meme song instinctively the very second I heard the line, here 🤗😂.
What's taters, precious?
I loved Legolas and his solemn portrayal. Maybe it’s just me but he was one of if not the best character imo.
1:12 that's not a plot hole. The elves are drinking especially strong wine there, and tones of it, specifically to get drunk. Whereas Legolas was drinking pretty standard ale or something.
Added for clarification: It's from Dorwinion, which is a place that has wine that Elves can get drunk to. It's too strong for mortals.
“LEGOLAS KILL HIM!” is one of the most memorable scenes in the entire trilogy. Even if he was not developed as much as I would have wanted, he definitely made an impact on me and the story as a whole.
I saw Return of the King in the theater like 3 weeks after it came out. It was packed. When Legolas came sliding down the trunk of the elephant, all the women screamed, whooped and hollered, like a bachelorette party. I didn't know Gimli said" that still only counts as one," until I saw it on video. You couldn't hear it in the theater. The women were still screaming
Yeah I now watch the “less extended cut” a guy made and cut a couple things that had been voted out, one of the them was that oliphant scene. It is the only part of LOTR I feel where the cartoonish physics that would define (and ruin) the hobbit movies were on display in the original trilogy. I still like the shield surfing though as that feels like an actual practical stunt vs the cgi extravaganza of the oliphant scene. Especially since they had already won the battle with the ghost army and that scene didn’t have any plot significance.
I’m sorry but if one thinks a character is lacking because they lack a personal relationship with the protagonist then I think you will miss out on a lot of fictions. The fact that Frodo may not even know Legolas by name goes to show how strangers in our lives can play a significant role in shaping our shared reality. How is that not a powerful message that is so easy to overlook in real life.
I jive with this
The funny thing is Frodo considers Legolas one of his closest friends in the Book ( that explains why he saw Legolas first while looking into Galadriel’s mirror)
There is nothing wrong with him or Lotr. Lotr is one of those exceptional movies that are done perfectly and does not require any change.
Agreed.
Saruman's death should be in the movie, he just disapears from the story
Except lord of the rings is actually trash
@@praizagabawrong.
@@praizagaba People don't care about your opinion 🤣
"He was tall as a young tree, lithe, immensely strong, able swiftly to draw a great war-bow and shoot down a Nazgûl, endowed with the tremendous vitality of Elvish bodies, so hard and resistant to hurt that he went only in light shoes over rock or through snow, the most tireless of all the fellowship." -J.R.R. Tolkien
I will never forget "Legolas Greenleaf, long under tree, beware of the sea, beware of the sea; if thou once hearest the cry of the gull, thy heart shall then rest in the forest no more".
That little subplot has provided it's fair share of existential dread over the years.
Legolas effectively plays the role of a near-perfect being in every way, including morally. He lacks a character arc as a result, but viewers are able to project on him and fill in the gaps. He is particularly unique and unlike any character in a truly compelling ensemble production, but his lack of influence on the plot and lack of character arc isn’t a flaw of the series but instead a feature that I believe adds to the story. I hate the hobbit movies tho…
He does have flaws and does have an arc. His flaw is his animosity towards dwarves and Gimli. His arc is overcoming that.
@@GeraltofRivia22 true but it also just seems to be resolved in the easiest way. Other than their first meeting, they are extremely friendly to one another. Also one could argue that Gimli hates Legolas but Legolas doesn’t hate gimli from what the movies show us…
Legolas is actually the closest to the book in some ways. In general the characters in the book are very biblical, they have their purpose they go through the journey and achieve it. The films add a lot of character development, which makes sense for a film but isn't necessarily true to the books
I think Legolas's funny moments are more impactful because of his overall reverent/solemn attitude. His race is leaving middle earth regardless of the outcome of the war. I think it's fitting he would be less playful at such a time. You feel the underlying sadness with all the elves, none of them express a lot of joy and I think it's meant to communicate the tone of it being the end for these people and it is very sad. So in a very sad time for the elves you see a more reserved Legolas who has fleeting moments of happiness where he can joke and smile and momentarily forget that his time here is ending. Would it have been nice to get more playfulness? Probably. There is definitely more to be desired, especially once you include the Hobbit. Legolas is pretty much the same in that movie, he's very serious and definitely hates dwarves but for some reason still thinks to help them even when Tauriel isn't with him. I think the Hobbit is probably what "ruins" his character when you look at as a whole because he is exactly the same person essentially. I think it would have made more sense for him to be less serious and more playful in the Hobbit since it's before Sauron's return and elves have not started fleeing the lands yet I don't think. This would have better communicated a different time for elves and shown a different side of Legolas that we didn't get before.
He brought alot to the movies. He saves people over and over again. One person can kill almost an army by himself. He is also a good friend and loyal. Because of him, i loved the movies even more.
Him looking like him literally helped make the movie what it is. He is the most memorable character in the fellowship with what i remember was one of the largest fanbases ever. Beauty is a virtue often desired in art, if you want me to get philosophical about something as simple as that. We all had our hearts fill with joy and awe, pausing the movie to stare at legolas as children, and here you are not even willing to mention him looking gorgeous and selling a literal elf. Without him the fellowship would be a bunch of lumberjacks of various height and age
Best comment, hands down.
In Tolkiens drafts glorfindel was supposed to take the part of legolas. Tolkien himself decided that this needs to be toned down since glorfindel, being incredibly ancient, having killed a balrog already and being basically reborn "gandalf style" would have taken way to much of a presence. Legolas is deliberately a toned down version of glorfindel so he wouldn't outshine other characters.
Imagine freaking Glorfindel beeing in the fellowship! I would not say it would make the task of destroying the ring easier but I would like to think that it would be easier. Him facing the Balrog instead of Gandalf or something. Imagine one of the oldest and mightiest of his kind just casually beeing there with our little friends. I know Gandalf falls into a similiair category but he always seems less ethereal. I really wish they would have kept the scene where Frodo sees Glorfindels "spirit form" from the books in the movies.
"You have my bow."
"Thanks, dog. Who are you again?"
Legolas is a fine supporting character. He is effective at what he does. For not having much to do he is a pretty well liked character.
An elf befriending a dwarf is the main point of his character. Elves were known to hate every race that isn't elf and he broke that barrier. Leading to a unified front between man, hobbit, elf, and dwarf against evil at the end.
One thing you didn't address though is that legolas brings the hunk factor.
And there is value in that too.
Little 13 year old me felt there was a space for me in the LotR fandom, even if it was only to lust after Legolas. Like I felt it was socially acceptable to watch a "nerdy boys movie" cause I could hide behind the pretty face of Orlando Bloom
Absolutely. He is very handsome 😊
Me too! I re-watched the Fellowship over and over just so I could squeal every time Legolas delivered a line... ☺
if peter jackson developed legolas as a character, the movie trilogy would be longer
What makes Galadriel's gift of 3 hairs to Gimli even more significant is that she refused to give them to Feanor, the creator of the Silmiarils in the Silmarillion. The friendship between Legolas and Gimli is so strong that they eventually sail into the west to Tol Erresea together.
I think it might also be hard to really have much of an arc in a character that's already thousands of years old. The whole timespan of both movie trilogies is a blink in Legolas' total lifetime, its like asking a human to change their entire personality in a day. Time as we experience it is a whole different things than what Elves experience, because of their immortality.
Legolas is literally a min maxxed DnD character that focuses entirely on combat.
There isn’t a problem with Legolas at all. In LOTR elves are angelic they bring wisdom, insight and protection to others around them. Elves aren’t suppossed to have character arcs at all because they are already divine. Legolas is a highly skilled demon slaying badass archangel who is happy to help the cause and he also brings more depth to the action scenes. I believe the movies nailed him perfectly.
When you have this large of a main cast, not every character needs a dramatic arc with "the" main character. He has plenty of interaction with the other characters - primarily Aragorn and Gimli. And it feels more believable that at least one character doesn't have a huge arc that revolves intently around the main character.
When 99% of people watch the movies, they don't feel the way you do about Legolas. I've never heard anyone describe not liking him or his character or him feeling 1-dimensional.
This video feels like you're trying to figure out "Why do we all feel this way?" when no one was saying they felt this way. There's just the running joke that Legolas has only the one line to Frodo, but very few people feel like that's an actual issue - just kind of like "Ha, that's funny." But it doesn't distract from the story in any way while you're watching it - just something funny to look back at later.
If you’re complaining about Legolas I can’t wait to see you tear into Rings of Power.
Tear being the word.
@@anni.68 ROP is the most expensive non fan fic ever made.
I agree with Jackson's portrayal of Legolas. Adding a development arc would've unneccessarily complicated the plot. I think he was perfectly balanced in the grand scheme of things in Jackson's trilogy. Look how badly a Legolas arc turned out in the Hobbit movies, oof.
Look I'll never forget Legless's legendary line: "They're taking the homeboys to lasertag!"
I’m glad to see most everyone disagrees with this video. My two cents(in agreement with many) is that we should expect much development from such an ancient character. His stoicism and skill are completely expected of a man that had millennia to hone himself. His arc with Gimli is enough. One way I agree with the video is their dialogue at the end of RotK still brings a tear to my eye.
In LOTR there had to be the man, elf, dwarf, hobbit coalition.That was the whole point - them all coming together to defeat the evil threat. Without Legolas (to another elf representative) the story would be incomplete, no matter who he did or didn't speak with. Anyway, I kinda liked his aloofness - it made him more ethereal.
Legolas's fighting scenes in the first film are fine. The speed with which he fires his arrows and even the improvisation of sticking an arrow in an orc's eye before pulling it out and using it for its designed purpose as a missile was good as it showed his inventiveness. Elves are, after all, supposed to be a lot more proficient than the other races. However, the shield surfing and oliphant scene just seem silly. It was as if Jackson was always looking to go one better, rather than sticking with what works.
The rest of the stuff is on the money. He doesn't really do a lot and his character doesn't develop. However, there is a suggestion that Tolkien did little to flesh out his character in the book. As you point out, most of what he does appears in the appendices. If I remember correctly, another video I watched posited the idea that Tolkien had been toying with Glorfindel being the elf member of the fellowship. On deciding against this ( probably because he was just too powerful ) he chose Legolas but he didn't really have much of a backstory for him and, consequently, not much of a story at all.
Couldn't you say that about his character in the book? As far as I remember he doesn't really develop apart from his relationship with Gimli which is what the film also focuses on. If the character is a poorer one in comparison to the others then that is an issue with the book if the film-makers were loyal to it, which they mostly were.
Agreed, and it also shows that elves are completely different compared to humans, hobbits and dwarves. They live so long that it takes a long time for them to “develop as a character”. His only growth is becoming friends with Gimil is actually huge but he’s not going to drastically change who he is.
Legolas is an archetype that works well in the film, and he represents a collective imagination around elves. His focus is on his relationship with Gimli... and that's it. But paradoxically, he's memorable, his name is remembered, his scenes hit the mark and... it works well as an archetype.
Interesting perspective, for sure. Hadn't really noticed it, but you bring out good points. Thanks for sharing.
Apart from his character arc with Gimli where they represent showing and overcoming the prejudice between elves and dwarves, Legolas is basically the "loremaster" of Middle-Earth for the viewers. He explains the world to the audience as he is one of the oldest beings - he is the one to reveal the true identity of Aragorn (given their longlasting friendship), he makes sure the audience knows what the horn of Gondor sounds like, he understands unlike anyone else who Balrog is and he tells us about the Dimhold Road. He is integral in making the audience believe the world they are shown and provides its necessary gravitas. He was always a favourite of mine and I loved Jackson´s portrayal of him - minus the oliphant scene, however, that is a problem that runs through the whole Return of the King.
I think he served his role very well in the LOTR trilogy as a supporting character. His athleticism and friendship with Gimli was sufficient as to not detract from the story revolving around the main characters. He has a flat arc for the most part, but that's okay. As for the Hobbit... that's another story. He shouldn't have been in there in the first place imo.
Orlando Bloom is known for not being able to say more than one line at a time. If he’s given a monologue, he might explode. I remember when I saw Two Towers in the theater. Girls behind me screamed when Legolas slid with his bow down the stairs. A guy stood up and shouted, “You know that can’t actually happen!”
It was a shield.
And Legolas isn't a human, he is very likely to do it.
And Orlando Bloom is super handsome, that's why girls in puberty freak out.
lol NONE of this can happen, it's a fantasy. Let this serve as a reminder to never be that guy :P
@@cameronlapp9306 He did it because the girls were making noise throughout the entire movie.
Book Legolas is the original deadpan snarker. He is constantly trolling the others, especially Gandalf. And his best moment is when Aragorn spends ages listening to the ground and says, 'There are riders coming', only for Legolas to say basically, 'Yeah, I can see them, this is what they look like...'
Legolas and Gimli were essentially their own thing. A buddy story within the story. Therefore the development between the two characters was all that was really needed. I have never read the books. But for the movies, that worked just fine.
I mean the dude is thousands of years old. How much character development would there be for him to do?
Funily enough. Orlando Bloom is currently the most succesful LOTR cast member, or at least is tied with Gandalf.
I have to add my disagreement to the many others here: I like Legolas just the way he is. He's like Spock (the 1960s Spock, not modern day versions.) Not every character has to be angsty and complicated. It's good to have one stoic, uncomplicated person who is there to do a job, and do it well, without a lot of messy emotional chaos. Those characters always become my favorites.
Legolas demonstrates fellowship with men, hobbits and dwarves. Other Elves are standoffish, and otherworldly. He jumps into the fray, and jokes and demonstrates the alliance of elves with other middle earth protagonists. He makes elven promises real and good.
When the elven host shows up to reinforce Helm's Deep, it is believable because Legolas has been the placeholder for the alliance between men and elves.
I always disagree when people say legolas didn't belong in The Hobbit. He was the son of the king and it was in his home.
The only reason he wasn't in the book was because he didn't exist as a character yet.
The love triangle sucked, that I agree with.
He shouldn't have been a main character. He had nothing to do with the story at all. A cameo would have been fine.
This is genuinely a fair point to raise and to an extend true... but I still wouldn't change anything about these movies.
Not all characters need to be dynamic. Static characters, especially when contrasting dynamic ones, can be incredibly valuable. The movies also contain a remarkably large ensemble to try to give every significant character a meaningful arc, and the ageless elf doesn't really need one in this snapshot of time.
On the other hand, I do wish he'd been written with more expressiveness in the movies, though-- I too would find it difficult to see this Legolas singing with overwhelming joy or sorrow. Just because the elves' emotions strike mortal races as unusual or unfollowable doesn't mean they're best communicated by a stoic lack of emotionality.
While it is a shame that they removed his jovial personality, I think he still plays an important role, because ultimately without him they'd all be dead. He offers plenty of things to the fellowship (They're taking the hobbits to Isengard -> his eyesight) and he's an important character. Also, Legolas is 2000-3000 years old. Hes been there and done that. Along with that, the books describe elves as feather weight (aka why he didnt sink on Carahadras), and the combination of feather weight and 2000 years of practise would lead to some pretty amazing stunts I'd think. And although it was ultimately unnecessary to have him in the Hobbit movies, I think they did that to really highlight his extreme hatred for dwarves (that he GREW UP with because of Thranduills bad relationship with the dwarves) and therefore highlight the character development of becoming friends with them (especially due to the line of "what is this? a goblin mutant?" "thats me wee lad gimli"). So while it could have been better, the way they portrayed him was still brilliant.
I'm not the biggest LOTR fan, but even for me he was epic
I’m glad LOTR didn’t come out now. The social media scrutiny would have been immense!
Maybe but most would realize they’re idiots.
Legolas is thousands of years old, he’s been through many wars. He’s skilled because of how long he’s been alive, these fights are just another day for him. He’s already grown and developed as a character. When you’ve lived for at least a couple thousand years you probably would be pretty strong and not as frantic as the other characters. He deserved more screen time
I felt like Legolas played his role in a way that mirrored the role of elves in Middle Earth. They were very old and slowly fading from the world. And like you said, Jackson leaned more into elves being aloof enigmatic beings of great age, wisdom, and power. And that's exactly how Legolas came off in the movies. Aloof, powerful, wise, and kind of "above" the comparatively ephemeral problems of the world.
I thought Legolas was fine with his BFF arc with Gimli and further development might’ve served to distract. Imagine if there were 2 mistrusting people in the fellowship (boromir and Legolas). Boromir dying and coming to terms with his folly was a perfect end to his arc. Idk how we would’ve been convinced Legolas would be won over other than some exposition, which probably would’ve left many of us unsatisfied.
The problem is you don't like Legolas.
He's the lancer.lancers usually shows up early already badass, doing badassery while the lead character is developing to give early excitement to the story.most of lancers don't even have an origin story,they just appear on a scene kicking the hell of bad guys.they don't really need deep story line, just kick a lot of ass
"They drink to excess."
Legolas: "I feel a slight tingle."
Legolas is, literally, the problem of my heart, psychologic and life.
"Sam carries the entire operation" truer words have never been said, Sam is the hero of the story
You've never read the books have you?
There is no one true hero of the story. Have you even read "The Lord of the Rings"?
The movie and the book are two separate things, this video talks about the movie and not the book
@@danielfittipaldi3705 Sam is a hero, but so is Frodo. I hate that Jackson made him a bit of a wimp in the films, but even then the films do show that he is literally just as self-sacrificing and brave as Sam which people tend to overlook because he stands around or falls down a lot.
We are told that the task was appointed to him, but it's not just by the council, but by fate being Bilbo's heir and therefore the heir to the Ring. Tolkien calls Frodo an instrument of providence, but he also made sure to point out that Frodo undertook this quest out of love and a desire to help save the world. Jackson understood this well and was shown to be the case in the films. He is the only one who could have taken the Ring and bring it as far as he did, and we are encouraged to show him the same mercy and patience he has extended to Gollum when his strength and will finally fails him. Because of Frodo's good intentions and mercy, his failure is set right.
Sam has a part, but so does Frodo and everyone else. They all carried the entire operation because the operation doesn't just involve getting the Ring to Mount Doom, it's also about keeping Mordor's forces at bay and keeping Sauron occupied to give Frodo and Sam their chance. To say Sam is the definitive hero shows a lack of understanding of the whole story told in either the books or the films, because in that part, they say the exact same thing.
My biggest red flag against this narrative is that ain’t nobody not only complains about Legolas role but that he in fact is one of the most popular characters in the 11 hours of film
So popular in fact that he was put into a whole ‘nother trilogy where, as you rightly point out, has no (middle) earthly business being in.
Fact is, his minimalist presence and arc served as the enigmatic less is more kinda impact.
Face it, Legolas is beloved.
2:02 contrary to your proposition, there is nothing wrong with elegant etherial elves, he is the strongest link in the entire trilogy to my daughter 😂
And to a being that will live for thousands of years.. if there is an event that made a drastic change to their character with a period of a couple years, it is called a trauma 😅 at least he and Gimli forms an unbreakable and unconventional bond.. that is a huge process that has effects ripple through the ages
that is why is called fantasy
???????????????????????/
I agree with this; the shield surfing and olephant takedown always made me cringe because it was like, yes, we get it, he's bada**, we know. It was far more fun just to have him and Gimli have their little counting rivalry to demonstrate that, rather than CGI superhero stuff.
Not every single character needs to go though carefully constructed character development, with a full arc.
Is it a perfect performance?
No.
Is it silly in places.
Yes.
But compared to what Amazon did with the franchise, the LORT trilogy really is a masterpiece.
As a character, Legolas could've been arc'ed better re doubting Aragorn's capabilities, I'll grant that. But he's hardly a failed character. Maybe they should've had an everyone-tells-a-short-story-of-their-race's-past infodump around the campfire just after the Fellowship gets on the road, which helps get the hobbits -- and the audience -- up to speed about the broader context of what's going on.
I have to disagree about Legolas having no business being in the Hobbit. A significant part of the story takes place in/around Mirkwood, which is his home and his father is the elven king. He was clearly put in for fan service but it made sense for him to be there, unlike how they initially wanted to have Aragorn show up. The part where Thranduil tells Legolas that he should find the ranger named Strider has no business being in the film since Aragorn was like, 12 during the events of the Hobbit
Guillermo del Toro should have directed The Hobbit.
"Master of squinting pensively into the distance."
So true 😂
Not everyone liked the LOTR movies. But there were plenty who did enjoy them, myself included. And yes I was perfectly aware of the changes made. Went back to the books and reread them. Then filled-in the missing places in the movie. As though they were just beyond sight. I know there are still a lot of back criticisms for these movies and I had other issues with The Hobbit unnecessary bathroom jokes *gag* Yet the Misty Mountain song was spot on.
All this being said, after seeing ROP, I doubt that anything going forward will be even as close as LOTR films even with all the changes made to them.
There was at least a continuity moving from the Shire to Bree and by the second movie Rohan and 3rd Gondor and Mount Doom. And direct quotes were included from the book. “A wizard is neither late nor early.” Noticing also how these lines are blended with scenes painted for the calendars and art inspired directly from Tolkien’s books. John Howe/Alan Lee. To me this felt seamless.
Plus today there is a trend to cut out mysticism for believability and gaining a larger non-fantasy audience.
The one thing I do agree with above is that Tolkien’s elves are multifaceted not just one thing.
They are Ethereal and Elemental and some are rapscallions and a little greedy like Legolas’s Dad.
And yes I really hoped that they would have included more poetry and allow Legolas to recite or sing those songs.
Yet note at the end how “Into West” borrows both from Bilbo’s song and Legolas’s “song of the sea?”That Always seemed intentional to me. The whole “why do the white gulls cry?” Annie Lennox sings is a direct clue. “To the sea to the sea the white gulls are crying...”
The sad thing is I think the team knew that there were a section of fans who were “cringing” over “singing elves.” (Sigh) And that again proves why the point is missed that these beings are multifaceted, mysterious yet flawed, but still fascinating.
For me Legolas’s response to Gimli when Gimli tells him about Galadriel giving him
Three hairs from her head is very sweet...it’s just a smile and that’s all that is needed there but it fits.
And the other instance that for a brief moment reminds of the book is when Legolas brightly asks Gimli if he should describe the battle scene to him since Gimli cannot cannot see over the wall.
I don’t have “a Spock impression at all. Legolas expresses an in the moment enthusiasm with a “keen brightness” that does remind of book Legolas.
It’s just a glimpse and yes I felt there should be more of that. And not just for battle scenes.
It reminded of “shall I sing you the story (my paraphrase) of The Nimrodel?”
I feel people were already becoming more impatient then (the ending is too looong etc) and now we live in even more of an instant tik tok generation. But people also have less time (to be fair) So brevity is a “plus” in our modern generation.
I’m glad there are still old fashioned (ha ha) people like me who still enjoy the poetry. So that’s good to know!!
But I feel more the love of poetry and description is what is really growing thin today.
Not sub sub sub plots though laugh! They will be thrown in at the drop of a penny!
Everyone has a right to have different opinions about the movies but there were enough elements in the movies, especially with the combination between the music and scenery, at least for me it made it very easy to dream in the landscape of middle earth.
Personally, I feel the ROP artistic choice to make Galadriel the whole catalyst for bringing Sauron back is generating the fiercest debates at this time. All because there has to be a reason for her “dark queen line.”
Yes, I wish Legolas could have been given more. I wanted to hear him at least speak that poem but I can acknowledge it in the Annie Lennox song.
However, I do not see this as a major fail.
Also considering going forward there is a take that elves need to have less mysticism to make them more relatable again missing the entire point that they were And/Both...mysticism and flawed. Enthusiastic... Elemental...Powerful...Rapscallions. Mischief and Wisdom. Some were psychos like Feanor.
And some were warrior scholars like Finrod and Elrond.
I am just thankful for the joy the movies brought and how they also brought people back to the books. I may be the only one but felt there were enough glimmers of the inspiration which inspired Tolkien...The Norwegian Violin/Eowyn/Rohan NZ backdrop brings tears every time.
And to be fair I really enjoy the dwarves too in Tollkien’s stories. Hey speaking of which Thorin needed his harp back!! Ok enough.
You forgot Legolas's most important role in the LOTR movies: making all of us question our sexuality.
As a kid, I didn’t like Boromir because, well his betrayal. Now as an adult, he’s one of my favorite characters in the series, and someone I’m constantly defending to my wife and friends.
I love the extended editions fleshing out Boromir, and showing his heroic nature, and the pressure he was under because of his father.
Love Legolas character just the way it is. Enoyed his actioned scenes big time! Made me smile many times during this fantastic trilogy.
Legolas is perfect. Not every character need to be a main character. He is important to show the relationship between the Dwarves and the Elves and they did it perfectly by showing his relationship growing with Gimli. They fought at the councel of Elrond but were ready to die side by side like friends at the Black Gate.
And thats why Legolas is one of my favorite LOTR characters.
He is badass and his brother relationship with Aragorn and how he becomes best friends with Gimli even when both their races hate each other and went to war is perfect.
I just realized Legolas has endless bows as if they magically refill themselves.
Having a sexy elf in the mix is never a bad thing. Plus the levity between gimly and Legolas personalise the whole thing, they give audiences something to connect with
There was no time to develop him more. And so what if he's not more developed. His character was reliable and not needy. That is his ultimate virtue.
Legolas is a Boba Fett esk character. He's just kinda there to look cool and do cool things. But not meant to have much to do in the story.
Tolkien said in a letter that Legolas was the least important member of the fellowship because the age of elves was over.