Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
BTW I read LOTR in hard cover in the library before anyone ever heard of it, then again in the revised Ballantine Books version in the mid-1960s and several times more in a single volume leather bound and boxed collector's edition from the early 1970s on. I have the complete boxed 12 disc Extended Edition of the movies. (And I have no problem with the changes in the movies, except the too awkward death of Saruman. Oh and yes, I am in the extended credits.)
Interesting. Did any of the extended versions include the Tom Bombadil episode?
Interesting. Did any of the extended versions include the Tom Bombadil episode?
No. That, like the cleansing of the Shire (one of my favorite episodes) is cut and they only appear as cameos, as the enslaving of the shire by 'Sharkey' and his men is shown in Galadriel's mirror as what could happen if they fail and the episode of the tree roots engulfing the Hobbits but released by Bombadil is shifted to Fangorn with Treebeard doing the releasing.
Jackson was right to cut Bombadil as it was a bit of an irrelevant self -indulgence by Tolkien. It was probably harder to cut the shire, but probably right. There are enough extra endings as it is. As soon as you are back in the green dragon with Sam going off to propose to Rosie, you can grab your coat and annoy everyone pushing your way out.
BTW I read LOTR in hard cover in the library before anyone ever heard of it, then again in the revised Ballantine Books version in the mid-1960s and several times more in a single volume leather bound and boxed collector's edition from the early 1970s on. I have the complete boxed 12 disc Extended Edition of the movies. (And I have no problem with the changes in the movies, except the too awkward death of Saruman. Oh and yes, I am in the extended credits.)
Indeed, autograph?
I read it in my teens when my sister came back with a pirated version from the US and i read the trilogy in a weekend and have loved it ever since. The radio version was a great step forward and I never saw the animation. I heard some moans about it.
The making of the film had me sacrificing a Pizza a night to Athe and the FSM that they didn't ruin it and while one can carp at the details, generally Jackson and his understanding of the book and his love of it being the priority rather than just cashing in on a market, meant that he did it full justice. I approve his ....look I'm sorry, I know this is not the film thread, but you are talking about the film of my Holy Book...brave takes like giving Galadriel far more to do than just being a maiden in the tower waiting for Aragorn to return with her garter on his spear.
And it is often not realized that the Wood elves coming to the Hornburg is in the book. It is Aragorn's rangers summoned by Galadriel, but her sending her wood elves makes far more sense and how Right it is.
In a way, Saruman has to die there, and at the hand of Grima as in the Shire. No ending at the door of Bag End, it has to be on top of Orthanc. And I rather prefer that Tolkien is just allowed to defeat him and is not allowed to reduce him to a tramp first. And of all the endings falling onto a spike thoughtfully set into one of his wheels (for no other purpose that I can see) is almost as good as hanging himself, falling and bursting open.
Lecture over.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-03-2015 at 10:27 AM..
BTW I read LOTR in hard cover in the library before anyone ever heard of it, then again in the revised Ballantine Books version in the mid-1960s and several times more in a single volume leather bound and boxed collector's edition from the early 1970s on. I have the complete boxed 12 disc Extended Edition of the movies. (And I have no problem with the changes in the movies, except the too awkward death of Saruman. Oh and yes, I am in the extended credits.)
I disagree. The treatment of Faramir was unconscionable! Other than that, I believe Peter Jackson made the movie of a generation.
Expansion on Faramir. Tolkien devoted a fair amount of space to the meeting of two strangers in hostile territory, and to the process of establishing trust. The scenes are incredible pieces of writing. Jackson glosses over all of this.
Fine. I get that the modern movie audience wants action rather than dialogue. Still, isn't there room at all for intellect?
Last edited by chuckmann; 02-03-2015 at 03:56 PM..
No. Tom Bombadil and Goldberry do not make an appearance.
Bombadil does not appear in any LOTR production I know about, and if you think about it, you know why. Some guy in a yellow suit prancing around singing about Goldberry. Really Metro, if you get my drift.
PS Bomabadil is the one character in LOTR who does not fit. Why? Because he is the one character based upon Finnish mythology, rather that general European mythology. Think Vainamoinen.
The scene where Pippin gets eaten by a tree gets transplanted to Fangorn. Treebeard rescues him instead of Bombadil.
I guess it's time to read it again. I didn't note that when watching.
A Catholic priest gave me his copy of The Hobbit in the 60s and I'm ashamed to say it took me a couple of years to get around to reading it. By the time I did, he was no longer assigned to that parish* and I'd stopped attending church.
I toted a London-purchased copy of LOTR around with me as a hitchhiking hippie in Europe in 1971. I've read it perhaps four times since but not since the late 80s.
*I learned a few years later he left the priesthood.
I disagree. The treatment of Faramir was unconscionable! Other than that, I believe Peter Jackson made the movie of a generation.
Expansion on Faramir. Tolkien devoted a fair amount of space to the meeting of two strangers in hostile territory, and to the process of establishing trust. The scenes are incredible pieces of writing. Jackson glosses over all of this.
Fine. I get that the modern movie audience wants action rather than dialogue. Still, isn't there room at all for intellect?
The alteration of some characters grated a bit. In a way, Tolkien's Faramir is just too good. His claim that he wouldn't pick up the ring even if he found it lying by the roadside would get a belly laugh in the cinema. Like someone who denies that he'd never go under to hypnotism and is soon doing chicken impressions around the stage. Faramir has to want the ring. through the pretext of earning his father's respect, but he would take it for himself in the end.
The only thing that made me shake my head in disbelief was his absurd frontal cavalry charge on orc -held defences of Minas Ithil. Maybe he sought suicide, but sacrificing hos men? But I guess it was theatre there, not anything like military sense.
Denethor is disappointingly nasty, but then Tolkien's Denethor is too much like a Theoden who cannot be rescued bu a spell.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
