# Behold, Dwarves



## Big Don (Aug 10, 2011)

Cast of The Hobbit


----------



## Big Don (Aug 10, 2011)

Nori has weird hair, Thorin looks Bad ***.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

I posted a link to the pic on my facebook. One of my short friends commented that it is only bad *** if you're a midget. I said: "Lucky for you"


----------



## MA-Caver (Aug 11, 2011)

The poster is incomplete... no hobbit, to give the dwarves a better perspective of their size.  True, the focus is on the 13 for the poster, yet I'd like to see all together in a portrait like that. 
All the dwarves look like not a good idea to get on their bad-side. But given the written nature of the characters they'll fall over themselves, and each other trying to kill you. Yet they were one of the winners in the battle of 5 armies (THAT scene I'm looking forward to as well as a certain Dragon)... curious have they cast the voice? Connery perhaps, though he's done dragons before ... his voice, well, ya'll know what I mean ... (most of ya'll anyway :asian: ).


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

Is it me, or does Thorin have a somewhat Klingon appearance?


----------



## stickarts (Aug 11, 2011)

Very much looking forward to the movie(s) and seeing what they do with Smaug!


----------



## Carol (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> Is it me, or does Thorin have a somewhat Klingon appearance?



Its not just you!  I thought so as well!


----------



## crushing (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> Is it me, or does Thorin have a somewhat Klingon appearance?



A Klingon appearance isn't necessarily mutually exclusive, so both of you may have it.


----------



## Archangel M (Aug 11, 2011)

Thorin was supposed to be the oldest and have a greybeard. I also hear that they are inserting characters like Galadriel, Legolas and Frodo into the story.....Jackson.

There are also far too many fancy weapons there. Where are the Axes?


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Thorin was supposed to be the oldest and have a greybeard. I also hear that they are inserting characters like Galadriel, Legolas and Frodo into the story.....Jackson.
> 
> There are also far too many fancy weapons there. Where are the Axes?


It has been a few years, but, I don't remember Kili being an archer.


----------



## MA-Caver (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> Is it me, or does Thorin have a somewhat Klingon appearance?


 He, the actor, has probably played a Klingon at one point in his career. 
... umm nope none that I could see.. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0035514/ He just has that look.

http://s1133.photobucket.com/albums...The Hobbit - Sets/The Hobbit - Cast and Crew/

http://www.movieinsider.com/m3760/the-hobbit/


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2011)

You&#8217;re all wrong&#8230;.. Klingons have a somewhat Thorin appearance


----------



## HammockRider (Aug 11, 2011)

MA-Caver said:


> The poster is incomplete... no hobbit, to give the dwarves a better perspective of their size. True, the focus is on the 13 for the poster, yet I'd like to see all together in a portrait like that.
> All the dwarves look like not a good idea to get on their bad-side. But given the written nature of the characters they'll fall over themselves, and each other trying to kill you. Yet they were one of the winners in the battle of 5 armies (THAT scene I'm looking forward to as well as a certain Dragon)... curious have they cast the voice? Connery perhaps, though he's done dragons before ... his voice, well, ya'll know what I mean ... (most of ya'll anyway :asian: ).



Connery would be a great idea! I know Richard Boone did the voice of Smaug in the cartoon from the 70's. Ancient, powerful, menacing, I thought his performance was the best thing about that movie.

The IMDB says that Smaug's voice will be played by Benedict Cumberbatch. He plays Sherlock Holmes in Sherlock, a BBCseries.( It's pretty good.) Overall the cast looks stellar.


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

HammockRider said:


> Connery would be a great idea! I know Richard Boone did the voice of Smaug in the cartoon from the 70's. Ancient, powerful, menacing, I thought his performance was the best thing about that movie.
> 
> The IMDB says that Smaug's voice will be played by Benedict Cumberbatch. He plays Sherlock Holmes in Sherlock, a BBCseries.( It's pretty good.) Overall the cast looks stellar.



What came first the Thorin or the Worf?

Cool pic any way. Thanks.
Now bring on the Dragon!


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Now bring on the Dragon!



Closest I can get is the voice of Smaug will be Benedict Cumberbatch


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

Xue Sheng said:


> Closest I can get is the voice of Smaug will be Benedict Cumberbatch


I was thinking a *James Earl Jones* type voice, but that may have to much of a sith influence.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> I was thinking a James Earl Jones type voice, but that may have to much of a sith influence.



I read a rumor awhile back it was going to be Tom Waits&#8230; and to be honest I was not sure what to think about that...


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

Xue Sheng said:


> I read a rumor awhile back it was going to be Tom Waits&#8230; and to be honest I was not sure what to think about that...


You could go the other way with it, have someone that sounds like Pokey (Gumby's friend) but, menacing...


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> You could go the other way with it, have someone that sounds like Pokey (Gumby's friend) but, menacing...



Mike Tyson?


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

Sorry Don I couldn't resist


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Mike Tyson?


 Tyson is only menacing when you can see him and remember those quick knockouts...


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> Tyson is only menacing when you can see him and remember those quick knockouts...



LOL, true. I was thinking of the voice that didn't match.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> Tyson is only menacing when you can see him and remember those quick knockouts...



So your a dwarf...standing there in front of Smaug... and he speaks like Tyson.... and that is not menacing... ok you might giggle for a second but then...you run


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

Xue Sheng said:


> So your a dwarf...standing there in front of Smaug... and he speaks like Tyson.... and that is not menacing... ok you might giggle for a second but then...you run



Headline elfin news: Thorin wise elder Dwarf warrior dies of...Laughter.


----------



## MA-Caver (Aug 11, 2011)

MaxiMe said:


> Headline elfin news: Thorin wise elder Dwarf warrior dies of...Laughter.


 Add on headline... Bilbo Baggins found in corner of treasure cave giggling insanely, space reserved at belview mental hospital.


----------



## billc (Aug 11, 2011)

I hope they get an unkown to do smaugs voice.  Nothing takes you out of a movie more when the fantasy creature makes you say, Hey, that's Sean Connery.  An unkown voice, nice and deep perhaps, or something lizardy,but powerful would be nice.


----------



## billc (Aug 11, 2011)

You know, maybe they should go a different way with Smaug's voice, I've heard Pee Wee Herman is trying to make a comeback...


----------



## MaxiMe (Aug 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I hope they get an unkown to do smaugs voice. Nothing takes you out of a movie more when the fantasy creature makes you say, Hey, that's Sean Connery. An unkown voice, nice and deep perhaps, or something lizardy,but powerful would be nice.


Kind of where I was going with the JEJ voice. Low and kind of booming.


----------



## billc (Aug 11, 2011)

They will have a talking Smaug won't they?   I think Shelob, the spider was a talker, but they didn't do it in the movie.  Smaug, and the trolls, need to talk.  That scene with the dwarves and trolls at the start of the Hobbit is an important little piece of writing.


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 11, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Thorin was supposed to be the oldest and have a greybeard. I also hear that they are inserting characters like Galadriel, Legolas and Frodo into the story.....Jackson.
> 
> There are also far too many fancy weapons there. Where are the Axes?



Depends on how they insert them.  I can see inserting them as a framing piece, something to tie viewers unaware of the book to the Lord of The Rings.  Something like the scenes in *The Princess Bride* where the grandfather is reading the story...  Maybe Frodo reading Bilbo's book to Galadriel and Legolas.


----------



## MA-Caver (Aug 11, 2011)

billcihak said:


> They will have a talking Smaug won't they?   I think Shelob, the spider was a talker, but they didn't do it in the movie.  Smaug, and the trolls, need to talk.  That scene with the dwarves and trolls at the start of the Hobbit is an important little piece of writing.


 Shelob had freak out quite a few arachnophobes and having a TALKING giant spider probably would've had 'em running out of the theater screaming. 
Agreed that Jackson knows enough Tolkien lore (and the fans) to ensure that Trolls and Dragons will be able to articulate. It was probably easier for them that the Trolls featured in the trilogy didn't speak. Would'nt have much to say anyway... like a lot of the Orcs. Yet specifically, yes I'd imagine he'll have the 3 mountain trolls arguing over the best way to cook 13 dwarves and a hobbit. As for Smaug, Bilbo (using the ring) did carry on a conversation with the dragon for a couple or more pages. They'll have time on screen as well.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> Thorin was supposed to be the oldest and have a greybeard. I also hear that they are inserting characters like Galadriel, Legolas and Frodo into the story.....Jackson.
> 
> There are also far too many fancy weapons there. Where are the Axes?


Orlando Bloom would be fine, if he played Legolas' father, or if Legolas was portrayed as VERY young and NOT NAMED
Galadriel? NO
Frodo? Hell No. That whiny little so and so


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 11, 2011)

Legolas is very old compared to the other characters in the LOTR, Don.  Altho' no exact figure is given in the texts themselves, the consensus is that he was born in the Second Age.  Throwing a hat in the air that would make a reasonable guesstimate of his age of about 1000.

This quote shows that at a bare minimum he is more than 500 years old:

"Five hundred times have the red leaves fallen in Mirkwood in my home since [the building of the Golden Hall of Edoras],' said Legolas, 'and but a little while does that seem to us"

Here's an interesting, if hard to read due to the formatting, article on the Elven prince:

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/tolkien/36517/1


----------



## Archangel M (Aug 11, 2011)

I don't have an issue with the age thing (as Suk said the Elves in Tolkien are immortal and depending on his birth could be thousands of years old). My issue is that Legolas isn't mentioned in the story...although he IS the son of the king who takes Thorin captive..so it's at least his presence is within reason. Adding in Frodo and Galadriel though?? WTF??


----------



## Blindside (Aug 11, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> I don't have an issue with the age thing (as Suk said the Elves in Tolkien are immortal and depending on his birth could be thousands of years old). My issue is that Legolas isn't mentioned in the story...although he IS the son of the king who takes Thorin captive..so it's at least his presence is within reason. Adding in Frodo and Galadriel though?? WTF??



If they address the larger issue of the Necromancer/Sauron being driven from southern Mirkwood by The White Council it makes sense, Galadriel being part of that Council.

Not really sure on the Frodo bit, perhaps him reading out of the Red Book, or Bilbo reading it to him.


----------



## Blindside (Aug 11, 2011)

Big Don said:


> It has been a few years, but, I don't remember Kili being an archer.



Nor do I, but I don't really remember much in the way of any mention of archery, something about hunting squirrels in Mirkwood, but that isn't specific to a character.


----------



## jks9199 (Aug 11, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> I don't have an issue with the age thing (as Suk said the Elves in Tolkien are immortal and depending on his birth could be thousands of years old). My issue is that Legolas isn't mentioned in the story...although he IS the son of the king who takes Thorin captive..so it's at least his presence is within reason. Adding in Frodo and Galadriel though?? WTF??



The only way Frodo could be fit in would be either as a child, at the end (a glimpse, maybe a "Well, and here's my little nephew Frodo" to be picked up on)... or in an expository manner, introducing the story.  Galadriel could be squeezed in as visiting the Mirkwood, I guess...    But, again, an expository piece, probably set in Lothlorien, makes the most sense.  For example, Galadriel or Legolas ask Frodo about Bilbo's adventure, and he begins to explain "in a whole in the ground, there lived a hobbit..."


----------



## MA-Caver (Aug 11, 2011)

Hollywood always seems to think they know what fans and readers of popular novels want or need and then they guess what newcomers to the genre/story-line want and need. They'll throw in familiar faces to provide a comfort level with a "familiar face"... not realizing just how VAST the Tolkien world really is... or giving a damn... if it'll make money then that's what counts, after all the money spent making those films they need to show a profit. It's a business, pure and simple. Producers will not get studio backing (read $$$$$) if they consistently have films that tank at the box office. Directors don't always have a "free hand" unless they're putting up the $$$$ or they agree to no salary just to get their films made, but how many directors do we know that have done that... a few. 

For me, as long as the original story line is kept as closely as possible then I'm okay with it. I can understand deviations, i.e. Frodo and Sam meeting/fighting Shelob at the end of The Two Towers rather than the beginning of ROTK. Also Sam didn't knock himself out charging the door where the Orcs took Frodo, and other I guess minor story deviations throughout the trilogy. 

As for the Hobbit... they know they got huge expectations to meet up to. Everyone is confident however of Jackson and the WETA crew to do the best and improve upon their past work(s). I'm hoping for an extended DVD set that'll help flesh out the story even more. Either way I'm excited for it just bummed that such a long time between films.


----------



## Archangel M (Aug 11, 2011)

I thought that Jackson did an acceptable job in its portrayal of Dwarves (read they looked kind of how I imagined them) in the LOTR movies. These Dwarves don't quite match up to that image somehow. Thorin looks far too young and "Klingon" for my tastes and the rest have too wide a range of appearance IMO. I get the need to create individual "characters" of them, but they seem a bit too "edgy" to me.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> Legolas is very old compared to the other characters in the LOTR, Don.  Altho' no exact figure is given in the texts themselves, the consensus is that he was born in the Second Age.  Throwing a hat in the air that would make a reasonable guesstimate of his age of about 1000.
> 
> This quote shows that at a bare minimum he is more than 500 years old:
> 
> ...


Thanks. Although, using him in the movie when he wasn't named in the book, is tacky at best.
One of the great novels of the genre, why screw with it anymore than absolutely necessary to make time/medium constraints?


----------



## Archangel M (Aug 11, 2011)

The thing that really irked me with Jacksons "rewrite" of the LOTR series was the whole re-characterization of Faramir. Followed by the "Aragorn goes over a cliff battle scene"...and taking up the rear; Arwen in general and the Elven warrior company showing up at Helms Deep.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 11, 2011)

Honestly, the best translation of books to movies with NO major changes made are the Harry Potter movies. Right up until Part One of Deathly Hallows...


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 12, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> The thing that really irked me with Jacksons "rewrite" of the LOTR series was the whole re-characterization of Faramir.



Darned straight, my friend :nods vigorously:.  They turned the noblest Captain of the White City into a lesser brother pining for his fathers approval.  Faramir did not lead the doomed charge into the face of the orcs because he was fretting for his fathers love - he did it because it was his duty to do so, regardless of consequences.

Even worse than that mangling of a character tho', was what they did to Denethor, his father!  They made him almost unrecognisable and vile to me, whereas he was considered to be amongst the wisest of Men and nearly the equal of the Maiar (like Gandalf) in Lore.  Yes he was twisted into despair by tangling with Sauron through the Palantir but he was still a 'better' man than the films showed.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Aug 12, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I hope they get an unkown to do smaugs voice. Nothing takes you out of a movie more when the fantasy creature makes you say, Hey, that's Sean Connery. An unkown voice, nice and deep perhaps, or something lizardy,but powerful would be nice.



Actually it does appear that Benedict Cumberbatch is the voice of Smaug


----------



## billc (Aug 12, 2011)

From the hobbit, which I haven't re-read in over twenty years, I didn't get the feeling that the dwarves were warriors.  I remember a scene from the book where thorin explains that the survivors of the dragon attack, his guys, had all become successful in their own rights, and he pulled out a gold chain or something as a display of wealth(?), but that it ate at them to have their old home occupied by smaug.  I don't remember them as being armed as warriors before they left the shire, more as just travelers.


----------



## Blindside (Aug 12, 2011)

billcihak said:


> From the hobbit, which I haven't re-read in over twenty years, I didn't get the feeling that the dwarves were warriors.  I remember a scene from the book where thorin explains that the survivors of the dragon attack, his guys, had all become successful in their own rights, and he pulled out a gold chain or something as a display of wealth(?), but that it ate at them to have their old home occupied by smaug.  I don't remember them as being armed as warriors before they left the shire, more as just travelers.



The Hobbit was written as a book for kids, it sort of "grew up" when Tolkien went to write the sequel.  Thorin Oakenshield was a badass (look at the origin of the name from the Appendices in ROTK), but wasn't written that way in the Hobbit.  Certainly it is hard to imagine 12 Gimli's (book Gimli not movie Gimli) being captured by trolls, orcs, spiders, AND elves with barely a whimper.


----------



## zDom (Aug 12, 2011)

Grammar Cop is going to have to issue a warning for punctuation.

"Behold, Dwarves" = asking dwarves to look at something.

What you mean, I believe, is "Behold: Dwarves!"

No ticket this time but don't forget to use your colon!

(heheheh.. I said "use your colon")


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2011)

jks9199 said:


> Depends on how they insert them. I can see inserting them as a framing piece, something to tie viewers unaware of the book to the Lord of The Rings. Something like the scenes in *The Princess Bride* where the grandfather is reading the story... Maybe Frodo reading Bilbo's book to Galadriel and Legolas.



ya, given that Frodo would not be born yet for some 50 years...

More Edits:  Bilbo was about 50 years old when he had his adventure that lasted for about one year.

His 111st birthday opened The Fellowship of the Ring, so about 60 years had passed.  At that time, I believe Frodo was about 30-33 years old, in Hobbit terms he was just becoming a full adult.  Bilbo left the shire after his birthday, and Frodo became master of Bad End.  Frodo stayed there for about 17 years, I believe, before he set out on his adventure.  That would have made him also about 50 years old.

The LTR movie really failed to show this passage of time.  The younger hobbits: Sam, Merry and Pippin would have been quite young at the time of Bilbo's birthday.  The passage of another 17 years brought them barely into adulthood, old enough to accompany Frodo on the quest.  According to the movie, maybe only a few weeks or months passed.  In reality, during this 17 years was when Gandalf and Aragorn were riding all over middle earth, acquiring information and hunting Gollum.

After the war of the ring, upon leaving Middle Earth, Bilbo had reached I believe 130 in age.  So another 19 years passed while Frodo dwelt at Bag End.  So Frodo was now about 70 years old.  Again, the movies failed to show that passage of time.  It looked like only a couple years might have passed.


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2011)

Big Don said:


> Orlando Bloom would be fine, if he played Legolas' father, or if Legolas was portrayed as VERY young and NOT NAMED
> Galadriel? NO
> Frodo? Hell No. That whiny little so and so



Legolas was probably a fully adult elf at the time the 13 dwarves and one hobbit visited them in Mirkwood. Keep in mind the Elves do not die of old age. They just continue on. I don't know that Legolas' age was ever established in the written works, but it's entirely possible that he was already many centuries, even thousands of years, old at the time of the Hobbit.

edit: sorry, looks like Suk already hit some of these points

Elrond was several thousand years old at the time of this story, and Galadriel was much older (she was actually Elrond's mother-in-law). Galadriel was among the first Elves in the world, she was truly ancient.

I'll say that I think Kili doesn't have a beard, just whiskers. I think that's an odd choice. I think a Dwarf without a full beard is essentially unheard of in Middle Earth, and that goes for the Dwarf women as well.


----------



## billc (Aug 12, 2011)

I think to assume it was a mistake in gramar may be a little off.  How do you know he wasn't addressing several dwarves and pointing out to them the pictures of the Hobbit dwarves?


----------



## Big Don (Aug 12, 2011)

zDom said:


> Grammar Cop is going to have to issue a warning for punctuation.
> 
> "Behold, Dwarves" = asking dwarves to look at something.
> 
> ...


That's a little anal retentive isn't it?
(hehehe... I said "anal")
By the way, when you use the ellipsis, it is three dots, not two, not four.
Don't mess with me, man, I used to date an English teacher.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 12, 2011)

Flying Crane said:


> I'll say that I think Kili doesn't have a beard, just whiskers. I think that's an odd choice. I think a Dwarf without a full beard is essentially unheard of in Middle Earth, and that goes for the Dwarf women as well.


Maybe Kili is the Tolkien version of Dopey...


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2011)

billcihak said:


> From the hobbit, which I haven't re-read in over twenty years, I didn't get the feeling that the dwarves were warriors. I remember a scene from the book where thorin explains that the survivors of the dragon attack, his guys, had all become successful in their own rights, and he pulled out a gold chain or something as a display of wealth(?), but that it ate at them to have their old home occupied by smaug. I don't remember them as being armed as warriors before they left the shire, more as just travelers.



grr... I had typed up a thorough reply to this and it got lost in the netherworld....here goes again

I felt the same way.  When they all left the Shire they were surprisingly poorly supplied, with aparently no weaponry.  That doesn't sound like the planning of a seasoned group of warriors.

The story was written as a children's book, so I think there's room to forgive.

Later, Tolkien realized he needed to tighten some of these issues up when he wrote LOTR.  He never intended to write it, but his fans wanted a Hobbit sequel so he began something that he thought would be short, and some 17 years later he finished LOTR.  

Some re-writing needed to be done on the Hobbit.  The first edition has Gollum GIVING the ring to Bilbo as a prize for winning the riddle game.  In subsequent editions this was re-written so that Bilbo found the ring, Gollum accused him of cheating in the game, and stealing the ring.  Without this re-write, the later LOTR would have had some serious problems....

Some of these issues were dealt with in the appendixes at the end of The Return of the King.  Tolkien wanted to flesh some of this out, and I believe this is where you can find some background story behind setting up the Bilbo/Smaug quest.  Thorin wanted to regain his home, and Gandalf realized that Smaug represented a serious problem in the world that he needed to deal with before Sauron might rise again to power.  So there was some engineering behind the scenes and this quest developed that ended with the death of Smaug.

If this isn't in the appendix, then it's in some of the later volumes published by Christopher Tolkien.  I don't remember exactly where I read it.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 12, 2011)

FC, check to see if the site hasn't saved a copy of your post for you - the new software does that :tup:

Also, kudos to the pretend Grammar Nazi and general pun attacks above :bows:


----------



## Flying Crane (Aug 12, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> FC, check to see if the site hasn't saved a copy of your post for you - the new software does that :tup:
> 
> Also, kudos to the pretend Grammar Nazi and general pun attacks above :bows:



Ah, it doesn't matter now, I retyped most of what I wanted.  Good to know for the future, tho.


----------



## Archangel M (Aug 12, 2011)

True fans really need to read the appendix in LOTR. The book "Morgoth's Ring" (Christopher Tolkien) also fleshes out a lot of the legendarium.


----------



## Big Don (Aug 19, 2011)

Big Don said:


> It has been a few years, but, I don't remember Kili being an archer.


As I am rereading the Hobbit, I stand corrected.


> Thorin was the only one who had kept his feet and his wits. As soon as they had landed he had bent his bow and fitted an arrow in case any hidden guardian of the boat appeared. Now he sent a swift and sure shot into the leaping beast.


Most, if not all of the dwarves had bows, as they tried to shoot the white deer a few paragraphs later. Beorn gave them the bows.


----------



## Sukerkin (Aug 19, 2011)

:chuckles:  I too am lining up the Hobbit for a re-read after a few decades on the shelf .  But I have a couple of Harrington books to get through first ...


----------



## Steve (Aug 19, 2011)

Big Don said:


> That's a little anal retentive isn't it?
> (hehehe... I said "anal")
> By the way, when you use the ellipsis, it is three dots, not two, not four.
> Don't mess with me, man, I used to date an English teacher.


Four dots is acceptable if the ellipses is at the end of a sentence and followed immediately by a period (that's a full stop for Brits).  You're right with the number two.  Two dots will never do.  (Hehe.  I said "number two" and "do) 

And on topic, I was checking out a modern day version of Sherlock Holmes from the BBC on Netflix.  Sherlock is played by Cumberbatch and Watson by Martin Freeman.  I've enjoyed the two episodes I've seen so far.  Well written and enjoyable.  I thought it was an interesting coincidence that only a few days after hearing the casting for the Hobbit, both Smaug and Bilbo are in a different series together.


----------

