Reading The Lord of the Rings after watching the extended version of the movie

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by PeterLewis1709

I always thought that the Hobbit was ripe for an epic movie as it ticks all the right boxes.

Absolutely! You've seen the trailer for the first film? Looks good.

[PeterLewis1709]

I think this will be an excellent movie. I was captured at an early age by the hobbit. I had the book and also an excellent audio version by Nicol Williamson. I am now training my lad up to enjoy also...

[Namekuseijin]

What I don't like about movies: the scale of time is completely lost. Years and months look like mere days, indistinct. The ring is lost for centuries, then Gollum finds it, then Bilbo takes it, than it's his birthday party, then he goes and Gandalf takes a quick trip to read some old books, then he's back and discovers it's indeed the evil ring, then no preparations are made and he puts Frodo on the dangerous road and flees, then Frodo stumbles upon his friends and of they all go fleeing from shadow until they quickly reach Bree and are in for some much deserved beer. It's almost comedic. Frodo took years to finally decide to leave The Shire. It took them months to reach Bree, yet there they are in a few minutes worth of movie. I don't think the extended version is any better in this regard.

Point is that Hollywood is all about big showmanship. It's all about showing grand battles against evil to boost morale, and in this the book had little to offer. The book, like all epics, focus on the journey and the decisions and motives of heroes in long dialogues. Battles took a mere paragraph or 2.

This is something that bothered me about Troy too...

[mewmartigan]

Originally Posted by WillAdams

Removing Bombadil and the Barrow Downs seriously detracts from how moving Merry's part in the slaying of the Lord of the Nazgul is --- I'm sorry, tossing a bundle of swords onto a bed is a cheap substitute.

``So passed the sword of the Barrow-downs, work of Westernesse. But glad would he have been to know its fate who wrought it slowly long ago in the North-kingdom when the Dunedain were young, and chief among their foes was the dread realm of Angmar and its sorcerer king. No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will.''

I think the movie handled it pretty well but they definitely didn't focus on the sword. The movie made a big deal about "no man" being able to defeat the Witch King. The Witch King even said so in the movie.

We see Merry stab him and hurt him, then we see Eowyn kill him. Neither of these characters is a man (hobbit and woman) so I think it makes sense in the context of the movie.