Thereās a thing I do: I check tags on my posts. 98% of the time they make me smile. The other 2% make me feel annoyed and ??? (???? is the only description that suits my feelings in some cases)
Ā Now I read some things that push my feelings into annoyance and the ???, and that is the fact that people comment things like āIām sad this was left out bc it actually shows the audience that Thranduil is an greedy asshole!!ā (the wording changes, the meaning is essentially this).
The necklace plot was added for two reasons.
a) To explain why Thranduil actually bothers to bring an army to Erebor in the first place, for the reasons in the book are weak and not even properly spelled out (and therefore hard to make a casual audience understand and relate to)
b) To create a relatable loss and to make Thranduil more dynamic beyond ācold and unfeeling elfking causing trouble for the protagonistsā)
And hence my confusion about peopleās annoyance that this wasnāt added to show that Thranduil āwas a bad person.ā Did we see the same movies? I was infuriated at DoS bc Thranduilās character was solely portrayed as an antagonist in the sense that he opposed every character he spoke to (Thorin, Tauriel, Legolas). AUJ did the same; Thranduilās character was used to explain Thorinās hatred of elves (we all know that the dwarf/elf conflict has nothing to do with Thranduil and Thorin, it started thousands of years earlier). Up until BoFA, all Thranduil got was screentime focusing negatively on his character.
After AUJ especially, the general audience hated Thranduil. I remember this very clearly bc it was a constant nail in my eye and I spent a copious amount of time browsing his tumblr tag and stumbling over youtube comments and the like. In fact, the movies portrayal made him seem so dislikable that the general audience couldnāt see past his flaws. Which is understandable, since all we got were flaws.
In BoFA, they also push him as the āunreasonableā (I will not get into this now, read more here) party, where Bard took the mantle of the ānobleā person in the conflict. We all know that their roles are shifted in the books, where Thranduil is the one NOT wanting to start a war over the treasure.
ANYWAY, to combat this rather flat and dislikable character, and to give his complexity some spotlight, Philippa Boyens and co added the necklace plot. In short: The necklace Thranduil is after belonged to his wife. She died. Thranduil has succumbed to grief (which actually suits canon fairly well) and is madly obsessed with getting this necklace back, hence the massive army. They used this emotional pull to show that he IS NOT greedy in the sense that Thorin is (and Thorin is, OF COURSE, also at first driven by a strong, just goal that goes awry), but driven by a strong feeling of love for his deceased wife. He wants one thing, which rightly belongs to him, and not the treasure itself. Simple enough.
I speak a lot about this in my Thranduil meta from last year, but the necklace plot wasnāt added to show that Thranduil was greedy and a ābadā person. It was added to combat it, and to show how twisted he has become by letting the grief from the past shape his whole life and current relationships. It is a typical case of not being able to combat loss and sorrow in a healthy manner, and instead letting it poison your thoughts until you can barely feel anything anymore. For me, that is uncomfortably relatable.
There is another deleted scene following this one, and I plan to gif it in the future jus to put it out there, where Gandalf confronts Thranduil after his argument with Legolas and Tauriel. Here, Gandalf has taken hold of the information granted to him in the scene above, and he acts on it. He tells Thranduil that the necklace isnāt the only thing left from his wife: Legolas is still there. The dialogue is ended with him appealing to the feelings of Thranduilās wife if she knew he (Thranduil) valued a necklace more than their own son. Scene ends with a heartbroken and bewildered Thranduil. Here, basically quoting PJ from the extras, Thranduil realizes that he is so choked up by this grief that he has allowed his relationship with his son to deteriorate so much that they barely have any contact at all anymore.
His last scene with Tauriel is him, quoting Philippa, once again finding the kindness and compassion that has ALWAYS been in him, that has been pushed back by his grief. He lets himself, finally, feel these things again, to awaken anew. His last scene with Legolas was written solely as an act of love, and apology. Thranduil realizes his mistakes towards both the younger elves, and he shows compassion and love (as I pointed out in my meta last year). In the end, Thranduil MOVES ON from the necklace conflict and finds his buried kindness, and he grants it to the people closest to him. Just as Thorin moves on from his greed in his final moments and ask for Bilboās forgiveness. Both are stories of grand men falling to their own emotions and then regaining control of said emotions again, truly becoming the persons they always were, buried under all this grief, revenge and anger.
The last things said about Thranduil in the extras is that after the last movie, he is a changed person. He decides that the loss of his wife canāt control his life anymore, and he more actively starts to take part in Middle-earth politics. He fights in the War of the Ring. Ā He opens up communications with Lothlorien. He handles Gollum for Gandalf (although poorly). In book canon, he sends Legolas to the Council of Elrond. The plot in the movie was added to show this change in character. Thatās why Iām disappointed this (and the other scene) was left out, since it bridges into this character development.
So, what Iām trying to say is that Thranduil was never a bad person. Just as Thorin never was a bad person. And both of their arcs end with them moving on from their most corrupt character traits. Thorin defeats the greed that overtakes him. Thranduil allows compassion and love into his heart again.
Nerd rant written in a fit of passion and therefore filled with mistakes over
