Join us on Facebook!
Join us in our forums!
Get your tickets to Tolkien today!
Join us on Instagram

Latest Tweets


  2. Guys what's stopping you from dressing like this 24/7

  3. So what you’re saying is my idea of a date is NOT unique 🧙🏻‍♂️

News Alerts

Get emailed with every new post!

Stephen Colbert to Cameo in The Hobbit?

October 18, 2012 at 6:11 pm by deej  - 

Empire magazine reports that Stephen Colbert has hinted he may have a cameo role in ‘The Hobbit’. 

Colbert, who is a self-professed Tolkien geek, was invited down to New Zealand by Sir Peter Jackson for a set visit. 

“”I flew out and watched them shoot some scenes and went to some locations,” he explains of the trip. “I saw a 25-minute cut, and it was amazing. Jackson knows I’m a big fan of the films.”  

The writer adds:   As any good journalist would, the interviewer wonders whether there isn’t more to this than meets the eye. Could, for instance, Colbert be cameoing in the movie? “Could be,” replies the comedian enigmatically.

Hmmm,  perhaps he can moderate between Bard and the Mayor of Lake-town!

To read the rest of the Empire article,  click here.



Posted in Casting Rumors, Hobbit Movie, The Hobbit on October 18, 2012 by

Key to Erebor

15 responses to “Stephen Colbert to Cameo in The Hobbit?”

  1. Gildor says:

    that would be awesome.

  2. Churchill4President says:

    Stephen Colbert is boring, one trick pony, political hack disguised as a comedian. As a conservative, I’m sick and tired of him mocking my traditional values. Deeply held traditional and religious values that J.R.R. Tolkien held. It’s sad that Peter Jackson has nothing better to do with his time than to invite this creep down to New Zealand. What a tragedy that today’s young generation gets their news from comedians posing as news anchors on comedy cable networks.

  3. Timo says:

    Sounds like you are the boring one. Colbert is consistently delivering the sharpest political satire America has ever produced. It’s lucky that some sections of U.S. society have the whit to appreciate Colbert’s subtle, nuanced performances. Just because your tired and outdated values are the butt of his jokes doesn’t make them any less funny to the rest of us.

  4. Mark Cameron says:

    I agree with you wholeheartedly.

  5. Truthiness says:

    Best. News. Ever. And lulz at the longwinded bore of a conservative that commented. It’s sad that The Daily Show and The Colbert Report provide more accurate news coverage than Fox and MSNBC.

    I for one think Colbert would make a merry mirth drunk of an elf 🙂

  6. James says:

    So-called “tired and outdated” values are what slow the decline of society. They are the bedrock of the success and freedom the United States has enjoyed throughout its history. I’d be glad for Colbert (a big Tolkien fan) have a cameo in The Hobbit if he would learn something from the author of the books he loves.

  7. Manwe says:

    lol Timo, I guess that means Tolkien’s right up there with Churchhill4President, complete with “tired and outdated” values, eh? And without whit to boot, I’m sure, as Tolkien would not have found Colbert’s antics very amusing at all.
    FWIW, if Tolkien lived today (or at least into today), I think it’s quite possible he’d be demonized/villified by at least some partisans (without question the far left), he’d be called lots of things, everything from “right wing fundamentalist”, “sexist”, “racist”, “homophobe” (anyone who does not support “gay rights” like ssm gets labeled this nowadays), “backwards”, “zealot”, oh you know the drill. Oh wait! He has already been accused of many of those things! Tolkien was a deeply devoted Catholic, a traditionalist, a monarchist at heart, and a lover of the old world for sure, not to mention a man who disdained modernism. The Vatican II changes alone caused him great grief (like the drastic changes in the Mass). He was what today we would probably refer to as a “reactionary”, though that is not really a fair term in and of itself (but that is another story). He was a man of the old world in the truest sense, it is weaved into everything he created, it is the force behind his creation, it was integrated into his very being, inseperable.
    So think on this before the next time you make snarky comments: without those “tired and outdated” values, you would not have many, many things, Tolkien’s Legandarium included. Had Tolkien been a modernist, rather than (what we would call) a reactionary, it never would have been made, period. The Middle-Earth saga is a swan song to a world that no longer exists.

  8. Jack L. says:

    *sigh* Not Colbert, the comedian, err I mean ‘newsman’ of comedy central.

    He’s just a political tool, nothing so special about him, so why does he get a

    cameo and others not? Heck I’d give David Bowie a cameo before him, at least he

    looks like an elf! (Plus the fact that he tried to get the part of Elrond before

    PJ ultimately gave it to Weaving).
    What about Enya? One of the fair folk still living to thus day I believe 🙂

    And please PJ no more uber partisans in the films, you already have enough

    there as is (heck, McKellen, vanguard of the sexual left, alone is enough!). I

    want to see Middle-Earth…not the people that spit at me all night and day.

    Look I know the guy loves LOTR, but really? The guy can’t even do a british

    accent (which everyone seems to have in these films). I hope whatever cameo he

    gets, it doesn’t goof up the films, fingers crossed.

  9. Timo says:

    What a confusing reply/defence of Churchill4 Manwe. I have read and reread it a few times and it still makes no sense. Are you trying to say something along the lines of: to appreciate and enjoy Tolkein’s works (which take place in an alternative uinverse), one has to subscribe to old fashioned ideals of homophobic misogyny, zealous fundamentalism, fuedalism and modernism? Allow me to use the modern vernacular – utter bollocks mate!

  10. The Dovahkiin says:

    What’s nonsensical about it? I get what he’s saying: you bash the things that ultimately made Middle-Earth and the man behind it. There is an irony there, you hate the things that gave birth to the works you love.
    And given the vitriol with which you use to describe traditional beliefs (not to mention the massive misrepresentation), I’m guessing your the only zealous fundamentalist on this page. Who else would say things like that other than a true believer (of the left)?
    BTW don’t peg me for a right winger, I’m what you’d call a moderate, middle-of-the-road kind of guy. BUT I married into a family full of traditionalists, and they don’t seem a bit like how they’d be if how your description of their beliefs was true.
    Didn’t mean to get testy in this post, but I’m not a fan of bile spewing, regardless of which side it comes from. Get to know a few before you curse them all to hell.
    On a lighter note: you said Toller’s works take place in an alternative universe, they don’t actually. They are meant to be our prehistory. This earth IOW. It’s not like D&D or WOT or Warcraft or whatever. But I’m not holding that against you, that seems to be a common fallacy running around, I’ve heard it many times over, even read it in a book or two.

  11. The Dovakhiin says:

    Colbert you say? He is a major Tolkien geek, so this must be thrilling for him!
    While I’m not really a fan of his comedy (and that is what it is, it sure as heck ain’t news, unless massive one sided spin is what you consider reporting), I’m happy that a fellow ringer can have a dream come true moment!
    Maybe if I start up my own comedy show and get PJ’s attention he’ll let me get a cameo in The Silmarilion! 😉

  12. Mattwe says:

    Tolkien was undoubtedly a conservative in the true sense of the word, but not in the sense of current American politics where “conservatism” seems more about confusing reality with fantasy, being intolerant of others, and desiring to impose one’s will upon others. Tolkien obviously felt very ambiguously about the industrialization and modernization of the world; he was almost a “green” in his desire–showing through the pages of his fiction–for a world that embraced the natural beauty of the universe and rejected the technologies that were destroying the world’s natural beauty. In this way, Tolkien’s conservatism wasn’t far from the conservatism of current American progressives who want to find clean sources of energy, want to preserve the forests and rivers, and want to move the economy away from the destructive and polluting wastefulness of consumer capitalism run amok.

  13. Timo says:

    You seem to have alot of issues…

  14. The Dovahkiin says:

    This comment deserves a response, unlike Timo’s last remark, which was just juvenile. Tolkien was undoubtedly a conservative in the true sense of the word, but your missing something important here. There are two different types of “conservative” out there, two different “rights”. I, nor Manwe, nor Churchill4 claimed Tolkien as a Republican (American style conservative), which is undoubtedly what your getting at. He was not, in fact he was a monarchist, which is to say he surely was neither a republican nor a democrat! An “American style conservative” (as you called it) will have things in common with Tolkien, but will differ strongly on some very important issues, more on that later. But first: you characterize (American) conservatives as being lost in a fantasy, as well as being intolerant and imposing its will on others. Intolerance and imposing ones will upon others are not particular to any one side, I’ve seen people use these very same things against the left, convincingly too. What is really important is what you mean when you say those things. And that is the point I’m going to use here, in relation to Tolkien. Depending on what you mean when you say those things, Tolkien himself could very well have commited those things in your eyes.
    If by intolerance you mean of homosexuality and other “alternative” sexualities, then I’m sorry but Tolkien would have be an intolerant bigot in your eyes. Tolkien would have seen these things as deviant, against nature, thus ultimately sinful, of course he would not be tolerant of them! And if by imposing your will on others you mean defending and holding to the traditional way of life, the ways of ones people, nation, culture, religion etc…again that’s Tolkien in a nutshell. Truth be told, it’s not really the traditionalist that is the imposer on this, he is not in the position to be. It’s a defensive position to hold, as that way of life is under attack…by the progressive. His stance is naturally offensive, he is the one trying to get his views to become the dominate ones. He’s more likely to be the imposer in this case, as most people are not just going to up and drop their way of life. If one looks at law, this is obvious. From the late 1800s onwards its a long line of progressivist changing, repealing, diminshing of the laws to suite his own beliefs. To call the traditionalist the imposer is just a farce, the prog would fit that description better, I think.

    With that out of the way: like I said earlier there are two different ‘rights’, and there is a big difference between the two. As someone who has married into a family of traditionalists (and they are trads to be sure), I can tell you that the American style ‘right’ is really just a ‘right on the left’, a “classical liberal” as it were. The ‘right’ left and the ‘left’ left are just two sides of the same coin, the liberal coin that is, the coin of the liberal order. The liberal order? Yes, the order that overthrew the ancien régime. The order essentially established in the late portion of the period we call the “enlightenment” (though it’s origin in thought is older than that). That order. You remember the whole revolution thing, right? That’s a good summary of it. The liberal order and the Ancien Régime were two very different orders. Tolkien was a man of the old order, not the liberal one. IMHO, those who defend that “right”, are realyl the only one’s worth calling conservative, because they are actually conserving their heritage, where as the classical liberal really just picks and chooses what he likes and spits out what he doesn’t.

    I like Manwe’s line here, “man of the old world”, that is a good description of Tolkien. Tolkien was on that side. What does that mean exactly? Well alot, more than I want to get into here, but let me give you a few examples. Your right that Tolkien wanted to preserve the natural world, but his methods and “greens” would differ enormously, even their reasons for doing so. Tolkien saw the earth as a garden, given to men by God, and that he ought to be stewards of it rather than rapers. I rarely here “greens” talk like that. And it should be noted that this is totally in keeping with Tolkien’s conservatism; the idea of man dominating the natural world was Francis Bacon’s brainchild, and a part of the coming order, not the prior one. The old world had a very, very different view of nature and man’s relationship with it. Your also right about capitalism. Tolkien was no lover of it! But again, that is in keeping with his conservatism, his old world flavor. Capitalism was a thing of the enlightenment, it’s a part of the liberal order, not the prior order. It, like socialism, was a materialist ideology, so it was a no-go for old J.R.R. On most other things, like morality, religion, philosophy, etc he would have little to nothing in common with progressives. In all honest truth, I cannot for the life of me imagine Tolkien had, or would have much love for progressivism. It stands against almost everything the man believed in.

  15. Timo says:

    Blimey, I stand by my previous statement… I wrote, what?, 6 sentences and you have argued for pages, to yourself, about a subject you evidently feel highly qualified to articulate – the life and thoughts of JRR T. Very odd. And, FWIW, it is “you’re” not “your”.

Leave a Reply