(Original post by Hylean)
So he goes from a mention, with very little characterisation, to a full-blown character? There's no justification for that, not really. I mean, they might be using the info in Unfinished Tales
, but that can't really be considered "canon" in regards to characters or even plot points.
Assuming Radagast took an active part in the attack. He is described as having abandoned his quest in favour of looking after animals and plants. Even his message from Saruman to Gandalf was considered a burden. I don't really see him being there.
Legolas isn't in the book at all. Don't talk crap.
Galadriel may be part of the White Council, but she's nothing to do with Mirkwood. Obviously, if they're dealing with the attack on Dol Guldur, they can include her, but that part is only alluded to in The Hobbit
, which is half the point. It's not relevant to the story, not even for a Lord of the Rings
tie-up. The two books are popular precisely because Tolkien mentions happenings elsewhere and doesn't clarify, it gives the notion of depth. Jackson is robbing the tales of that depth and needlessly complicating the narrative by including all these extra details.
As for making them feel part of the same story, no one has ever complained about such things with the books.
Like I said before, it's all about getting more money at the end of the day.