Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: doc1019

The trilogy held very close to the book.

Yes, there were some scenes cut like Tom Bombadil, but most of those scenes would have been either unnecessary or just plain confusing to the non-LOTR fan.


22 posted on 12/20/2011 9:58:49 PM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Jonty30

BS. The movies were great, but nothing like the books. Have you read them? I have read the trilogy over 50 time in the past 30 years. The movies were somewhat close but not near what was portrayed in the books.


30 posted on 12/20/2011 10:10:40 PM PST by doc1019 (Romney will never get my vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Jonty30

The trilogy did not hold close to the book. Jackson admitted as much.

“Sure, it’s not really THE LORD OF THE RINGS ... but it could still be a pretty damn cool movie. “ — Peter Jackson

http://www.theonering.com/page3-25/TheMoviesTheCompleteListofFilmChanges


61 posted on 12/20/2011 11:58:00 PM PST by Altariel (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Jonty30
"The trilogy held very close to the book."

No it didn't. Example: Elves at the Battle of Helm's Deep. That and other instances would have been forgivable however the 2nd and third film were DUMBED DOWN so much and "Hollywoodized" to such an extent that it was actually painful to watch in parts. I'm really hoping that The Hobbit is done in the spirit of the first flick and avoids the cliche lowest common denominator drek of the others.

77 posted on 12/21/2011 3:43:33 AM PST by KantianBurke (Where was the Tea Party when Dubya was spending like a drunken sailor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson