Do you agree with the pag-ibig tatsulok of Kili, Tauriel and Legolas?

NO.

1. Tauriel is a very stupid character. She wasn't needed, she is just a piece of meat used for romance.

2. pag-ibig Triangles are always horrible, they are never done right.

3. We didn't need a female character. Who cares if it's just males. They are amazing characters and heros to look up too. I know I don't see a role model is a useless Mary-Sue character.

4. Romance wasn't needed. The story is about family and loyalty, bravery and strength. Fili and Kili's relationship needed to be shown, brotherly love. Not romance.

No!!! I disagree and however, it's like happen in Disney's nagyelo that Anna has a pag-ibig tatsulok as well but I don't want that happen here (either the segundo part or third or both) and you know, it will be ruling of Legolas' storyline in LOTR.

I don't think it's a pag-ibig triangle, Legolas and Tauriel are just friends. The romantic connection just happens between Kili and Tauriel. I don't dislike this addition to the plot of the films. I'm a hardcore tagahanga of the books and Tolkien, but I'm not mad with those things that weren't in the book because we can't forget it's an adaptation from the book, it won't be the same, exactly as it is in the book. I trust Peter and I think he's doing the best job he can do with the films, I'm deeply grateful for that.

I'm mixed: I agree and disagree, in a way. I'm disliking it purely out of disliking almost any twisting of canon. It feels like romance thrown in for the sake of it. But I can't think of any reason to dislike it apart from it not appearing in Tolkien's writing.

Yes as this is a adaptation of the book its always going to be different from the book. I think the tatsulok allows Legolas to sumali in with the story madami instead of them being a one off cameo in Mirkwood.
It will be interesting to see how the relationship pans out :)

No. It's ridiculous. All the detail they could have put into Murkwood... and instead, they chose to pad the film out with a stupid pag-ibig triangle. What annoys me is that they missed things out that WERE in the book, and put things in that WERE'NT in the book. I think it was a mistake to make The Hobbit into three films. After the EPIC job he did on the Lord of The Rings films, I would never have thought Peter Jackson would make a big blunder like that. Back to the pag-ibig tatsulok problem, though, I wonder if they just wanted to appeal to the female audience sa pamamagitan ng adding a pointless woman character. If so, then they should have included the (I don't remember the book at all well, so I'm sorry if I sound stupid, now) river woman. The one who was with Tom Bombadil. Not this walang tiyak na layunin elf they've invented.

Please correct me on the 'river woman' bit of this rant, if you can. My memory is very poor. Thanks in advance. :P

I have learned to pag-ibig the books and the pelikula separately. While they haven't stayed absolutely true to The Hobbit (I really wanted to see Bilbo taunt the spiders :( ), I can't help but pag-ibig the pelikula as their own thing.

I pag-ibig the books and I pag-ibig the movies. Details that aren't included in the pelikula that were in the books or details included in the pelikula that weren't in the books just don't ruin either for me.

That aside, I totally ship Tauriel and Kili. I mean, COME ON. "Do you think she could ever pag-ibig me?" I'm totally fangirling. Don't judge me.

I like the element because there's so much anger and hate between the dwarfs and the elves. For the two to shed all of that aside and find pag-ibig in each other appeals to the romantic in me that is hidden very, very deep.

I can't decide if Tauriel has real feelings beyond friendship with Legolas. It seems like she doesn't, except for the scene with Legolas' father when he tells her he thinks Legolas has developed feelings for her, but that he'd never approve of the relationship. She seemed kind of hopeful and happy in that scene upon finding out that Legolas has feelings for her, but at the same time, in the rest of the movie, she seems kind of annoyed with him.

That and she has a definite connection with Kili and she risked her life to save him. I have a feeling they might kill her off, though, but maybe not. I can't remember if Kili was one of the casualties in the big war. Though even if he died in the book, they may not kill him in the movie. Who knows? I'm just enjoying the ride.

Also, side note: Was it just me or are Orlando's eyes like super intense in the movie?

I don't like it... Actually, there is no pag-ibig triangle. And besides, Peter Jackson has confirmed that there will be no romantic connection between Legolas and Tauriel. But I don't mind if Kili and Tauriel get together. And Tauriel did call Leggy "mellon".

I don't even see how this tatsulok exists. Tauriel can't turn down Legolas! He's gorgeous.

I'm fine with it.

I hate this trilangle, it destroyed whole trilogy!

It disrupted the flow of the movie. Basically it ruined much of it.

Tauriel was not a needed character, though, I agree with Legolas being in it. The problem with The Hobbit, and later LOTR stories was that Tolkein did not yet create Legolas in The Hobbit. Later, he must have decided, "it'd be neat to have someone representing his people, but the king cannot leave his trono --I know! Thranduil has a son! A prince!" So try to make a movie, knowing Legolas isn't home. It just doesn't make sense.