shoesbing
bing shoes
puma shoes
nike shoes
nike RT1 shoes
adidas shoes
puma Ferrari shoes
gucci shoes
ugg boots
supra shoes
ed hardy shoes
womens shoes
mens shoes
shoes
supra skytop shoes
shoesbing
bing shoes
puma shoes
nike shoes
puma Ferrari shoes
nike RT1 shoes
adidas shoes
gucci shoes
ugg boots
supra shoes
ed hardy shoes
womens shoes
mens shoes
shoes
supra skytop shoes
etopshoes
nike shoes
mens shoes
womens shoes
nike shoes store
nike shox shoes
nike air max shoes
nike air yeezy shoes
nike air jordan shoes
nike tn shoes
nike blazer shoes
nike air force one
nike r4 shox
discount shoes
Wedding Cake Toppers
Personalized Gifts

nike shoes
god nike
bizaaa
replica sneakers
replica purse
replica apparel
replica hats
replica nfl jerseys
replica armani sunglasses
replica mac cosmetics
gifts
shawls
pashmina
scarves
plaid scarves shawls

do cameos count...if so, where do i begin...;P....

But...but...CRT HATED the movies....

Well Glorfindel was according to the 'Final intent' theory of canon the same as the Glorfindel of Gondolin. He is not however an important character in the tale of the Lord of the Rings and so i think that cutting him from the films was entirely justified. Whatever you think of his replacements in cinematic ventures past and present (Legolas in Bakshi, Arwen in Jackson) his contribution to the plot of Lord of the Rings is minimal.

I am rather suspicious of 'cult characters' in that regard- characters who gain a following disproportionate to their role and who then attempt to justify why they're vital to the plot. It's always great when such characters do appear, but to shoe-horn them into the story is to my view wrong. Peter Jackson and the other script writers did an admirable job of incorperating a number of them (notably the orcs which are by far the funnest of those cult characters ) but many had to face the axe. Regrettable but fair enough.

Dr Death

Well, he never abandoned the idea, so I'd assume it's true

The HOME is not canon as far as I'm concerned. I don't know the specifics, but I'm sure that JRR did not publish that stuff for a reason. All that stuff is the brainchild of Chris Tolkien after his fathers death.

But it does say so somewhere in one of the first four books of HoMe

I'm too old school. I don't trust the internet. Look at all the freaks on it..... (myself included) : )

wikipedia is the most reliable sorce other than the books!

Never get involved in a land war with Asia, never go against a Sicillian when death is on the line, and never trust what's on wikipedia. : )

Look up Glorfindel on wikipedia! it was one and the same!

That's not true Luthien. I do like the character and even his dubious "resurrection" (I'm still not convinced, but then again, I've never read Tolkien's "History of Middle Earth" manuscripts). All I know of him is from the Appendix in ROTK and I don't recall Tolkien indicating that he was the "original" Glorfindel and I could swear that I read somewhere that he was in facted "named" after him.

From what I remember, Earnur (or Earnir, I can't remember) did more for the history of Middle Earth than (the second?) Glorfindel did. Even though his horse gave way before him (prompting the famous Glorfindel chase), he still challenged the Witch King to fight, leaving his Steward to care for Gondor. Thus changing the line of Gondor until Aragorn reunited them. It's been a while and I probably should whip out my old books to verify, but I think that's what happened.

Compared to Fingolfin however, Glorfindel ain't nothin! : )

YMN, you have no respect for Balrog Slayers!

that's what I meant YMN, too minor in the ring plot, yet too major for purists

Glorfindel Smorfindel. Glorfindel had such a minor role in the LOTRs that to explain his character fully and give him justice in a film version of FOTR would be a waste of time and bore the masses to tears. PJ was correct to omit him in the adaptation.

And I totally agree, PJ failed in his portrayal of Legolas. From everything from look to prowess.

Del Toro is bound to be worse! How dare they put our Precioussss in the hands of an MTV dude?!?!?!?

I agree with blair. Glorfindel would have been a huge character and to replace his part with Arwen was silly.. remember Glorfindel was on his second return to life. He passed fighting the Balrog in Gondolin. so to merely push him out of the way was rude. Orlando bloom I disliked not in his actions but in his manor and facial expressions.. Legolas is not 32 years old.. he's very old and should have had a more Elrondish presence with a hint of arrogance and fun in his voice.. This Sindarin elf walked on snow he should be more magical than he was and he had black hair or dark hair not blonde.. PJ fail.

Yes! I HATE Orlando Bloom! He was extremely sexy beyond the measurement of Men in LOTR, but they over-did him, Hell, he's NOT a High Elf, Aragorn had the blood of the High Elves in him and in the Book Aragorn was of higher position then Legolas, but in the movie...Legolas just wasn't the same!

Of course there must be difference between the books and the movies adapted from them.I know that.But those differences would be existed when there isn't any choices.(at least about great books)I think Blair is right.Characters like Glorfindel,Tom Bombadil,Prince Imrahil or Erkenbrand has a little part in the LOTR books.I mean they usualy role on one or two chapter of the books.They certainly are important character in theirselves stories,but their roles don't continue in the LOTR.Then I can understnad why PJ omited their roles in the movie.When I said Glorfindel must came to help Frodo in the movie I just want to show my ideal for that scene,not anymore.

I completely agree with you on Glorfindel Joker, but iyt would have meant an extra minor character, so I can see why it wasn't him.