[quote
ost_uid0="SSJKarma"]sorry, but without the HOBBIT book, most of how FRODO got the ring wouldn't even have any sense !
THE HOBBIT is the starting point in LOTR.
sure it doesn't necessarely about the ring itself, but it is still a big part of the history of LOTS which makes the book part of the trilogy !
one question...
why do we still say trilogy about star wars when there are lots of books and 5 movies up until now ?
the same happens here...
there are 4 books but peoples don't think about the faqct that THE HOBBIT starts the whole story !
people think TRILOGY, so they say THE HOBBIT isn't part of it... which he still is ![/quote]
What else can I say. How can you not understand that The Hobbit IS NOT part of the TRILOGY. Star Wars is NOT refered to as a trilogy anymore because there are soon to be six episodes. The Simarillion has much to do with the history of Middle Earth. It has a lot to do with how the ring was obtained from Sauron after the great war. This also touches base on the ring, but it has NOTHING to do with Frodo on his quest to destroy the ring at Mt. Doom, as the Hobbit doesn't. So please, believe me, The Lord of the Rings is a trilogy-the three books are the Fellowship of the Ring, the Two Towers, and The Return of the King. These books may be a sequel to the Hobbit, but the Hobbit DOES NOT belong in the series. JRR Tolkien never intended The Hobbit to be in the series either.