Question: I am resubmitting my question because the posted answer is incomplete and/or irrelevant. In FOTR, Bilbo says something like "There has always been a Baggins living at Bag End, and there always will be." Presumably he thinks Frodo, and Frodo's descendants, will always live there, but Frodo goes to the Undying Lands, leaving no heirs behind. In the book, Sam and Rosie move into Bag End, but this does not happen in the movie - at the end of ROTK, you can see that the hobbit hole Sam goes home to is not Bag End. My question is, why did the filmmakers change these 2 things? In other words, if Bilbo's line is included to make it important who ends up in Bag End, why not show who does end up there in ROTK? If it is not important who lives there (thus explaining why Sam and Rosie don't appear there), then why have Bilbo make a fuss over it in FOTR? Someone answered that "Bilbo is simply stating the way things have always been", but this is not what I'm asking. I'm not asking "why would Bilbo say this?", I'm asking "why did Peter Jackson think it was important to have this line in the movie?" Why make a scene about who Bilbo thinks will end up in Bag End, and then not show who does end up in Bag End? I want to know what dramatic or story-telling purpose the juxtaposition of these 2 scenes (Bilbo's line and showing that Sam and Rosie do not move into Bag End) serves.
wizard_of_gore
2nd Feb 2009
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Answer: Peter Jackson and the writing team made an effort to put lines of all the books in the movies. Can't remember if this line was actually in the book or if that was some kind of implicit statement. But I think Jackson chose not to place Sam in Bag End because it could be unpopular for the audience (at least some). It gives you no hope that Frodo will be back. It would be like admitting he was dead, and he would never ever come back. On another point of view you might consider that keeps the integrity, honesty and simplicity of Sam's life as gardener, and not as someone who is now part of the upper class. Not sure but I think we also do not know exactly when Sam actually took Bag End in his possession and actually started living there. I would imagine, if I was him, I would keep Bag End in neat condition but prefer to live in my cosy known family house. As his family grew bigger with Rosie, then he would move to Bag End for more space. They had thirteen children and you only see 2.
Join the mailing list
Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.
Answer: I think the point is that, at the time he speak the line, Bilbo has NO WAY to know the events that are to come. Clearly, he thinks that the Baggins' will always live at Bag End. How can he possibly know the way things will turn out? Even in the book, at the beginning of the story, Bilbo has no way to know that Sam and Rosie will move into Bag End and that Frodo will not. Also, you might be attaching far too much significance to this one line. We cannot assume that the line was included for the express purpose of "making it important who ends up in Bag End". All that matters is Bilbo is making an assumption that Baggins' will always live there.
wizard_of_gore ★