Any reason why he can't be Legolas? Wasn't he from around Mirkwood which Bilbo and company do visit and encounter elves?

Here you go (from Wiki):

Way to exaggerate on the 14 years in the works thing.

The article forgot the MGM/New Line negotiations that dragged on forever, along with MGM's bankruptcy.

And yeah, I assumed Bloom would be playing Legolas.

I could also see him having more of a role in the other half of the story, since Dol Guldur was located in Mirkwood. He could have worked with the White Council to track and report on the Necromancer's activities.

By the way, any idea if the movie is going to refer to the "Necromancer" as Sauron? I mean Tolkien wrote The Lord of the Rings after The Hobbit so he basically just gave the "Necromancer" a name in the Lord of the Rings but it was still the same dude in both stories. He really doesn't have much impact on The Hobbit but he is referenced at least. I think it would be silly to actually call him the Necromancer when everybody in Middle Earth has known who Sauron is for thousands of years.

I am remembering that correctly right? The Necromancer is Sauron and also went by that name...it's not like he was around in the times of the Hobbit but nobody actually knew that he was Sauron and they only discovered that he actually is Sauron 60 years later or whenever the Lord of the Rings takes place.

Jackson did confirm over the weekend that both

I remember reading in the book of "Unfinished Tales" (just a collection of Tolkien's rough drafts and material that didn't make it to the actual novels) that It would be cool if that gets acknowledged in some way.

I lost interest in this movie when I kept reading cameos of LOTR characters appearing, little by little they take the integrity away from it.

Isn't he kind of like the Eagles in a way though? Incorruptible? Or maybe already so corrupt that nothing could sway him? Except for one weakness I guess and that weakness wasn't the One Ring.

You mean take the integrity away from a story that was written for children under 10 years old?

It's a but early to cry about ME characters appearing in... ME, isn't it?

That's like saying it's okay for Dirty Harry to appear in Amistad. They're both about humans, right?

Does Dirty Harry live forever in the world of Amistad? And did he live in a location that both stories occur?

You're right. It's the exact same thing.

Just because Tolkien didn't name Legolas in The Hobbit doesn't mean he wasn't there in Mirkwood with his father (the Elvenking).

Bilbo's story existed for Frodo to read. Having it appear as a narration will distract you for five minutes.

Writing off these movies for these reasons is just asinine Interneting. Enjoy staying home.

The Lord of the Rings was "messed with" too. Certain characters were added and deleted, fused together or replaced. It's a total non issue. Like others have said, all characters that have been mentioned were alive during the time that events in The Hobbit took place. They were all in the area too. Just because they weren't mentioned doesn't mean they weren't there.

Sorry. I forgot people get worked up about these stories.

ETA: I wasn't going to see it, anyway: I don't care much for the subject matter and even littler for Peter Jackson.

Thanks for popping in and checking on us

While it's difficult to get excited about the casting of Orlando Bloom in...anything, it's perfectly reasonable (and expected, really) for Legolas to show up in a post-LOTR film of The Hobbit.

I'm sure Sauron would promise him a % of whatever got sacked in conquering ME.

In terms of Bloom, I fully expected his character to pop up whenever they made The Hobbit.

Orlando Bloom was funny in those 7-Up commercials and Office Space, but everything else he's done has been meh. He seems out of place in this film, but I'll reserve judgement until I see the final film.

^ Seriously man, it's getting old.

leave him alone, it's all he's got.