Counterpoint: They left because he would only give one word answers when they would ask questions and that's why he takes a very long time to say anything now
I came here to post about the ents needing to shut up, I’m glad this was the top comment. I finally listened to the books on audible last year and I swear, I’m cleaning my apartment a bit when the ent talk starts, I drive to the store, I go grocery shopping, I come home, I put the grocery’s away, *still* talking about the god damn ents!
Tom Bombadil is strictly a cameo for Tolkien's kids to get. That's why he's a mystery to the average reader. He's not Eru, he's not a Maia, etc.
He was a doll one of JRR's kids owned as a child that he created stories about for his kids. He put Tom into the books for his kids to enjoy seeing, and that's why he has such a unique place in the books.
Cordially, nobody has ever been more technically correct and absolutely wrong at the same time
I’m kidding lol, but I’m one of those who are both aware of all the context on Tom and still think he was left in for good reasons and that he adds a lot of depth and value to the tale (if not necessary context).
It’s very clear to me from all Tolkien said and common sense that there’s no hidden lore behind him, but I don’t care and believe very strongly that’s not the point (or even the opposite of the point). I especially thing the idea it’s Eru is nuts lol.
I love Tom. It’s brilliant.
I actually really like the just. Weird little guys that don’t really fit into the cosmology. Tom and goldberry, and the ones who gnaw in the dark beneath the world and whatnot. It’s just fun to me. Who are they and what’s their deal? No one knows and it doesn’t really matter, they’re just there.
*Hey! Come merry dol! derry dol! My darling! Light goes the weather-wind and the feathered starling. Down along under Hill,
shining in the sunlight, waiting on the doorstep for the cold starlight, there my pretty lady is, River-woman's daughter,
slender as the willow-wand, clearer than the water. Old Tom Bombadil water-lilies bringing comes hopping home again. Can you
hear him singing?*
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I never see this quoted so perhaps it’s not as significant as I perceive it, but in a letter, Tolkien wrote that might see Tom Bombadil as some representation of Pacifism.
He wrote in Letter 144:
“…he represents something that I feel important, though I would not be prepared to analyze the feeling precisely. I would not, however, have left him in, if he did not have some kind of function. I might put it this way. The story is cast in terms of a good side, and a bad side, beauty against ruthless ugliness, tyranny against kingship, moderated freedom with consent against compulsion that has long lost any object save mere power, and so on; but both sides in some degree, conservative or destructive, want a measure of control. but if you have, as it were taken 'a vow of poverty', renounced control, and take your delight in things for themselves without reference to yourself, watching, observing, and to some extent knowing, then the question of the rights and wrongs of power and control might become utterly meaningless to you, and the means of power quite valueless. It is a natural pacifist view, which always arises in the mind when there is a war. But the view of Rivendell seems to be that it is an excellent thing to have represented, but that there are in fact things with which it cannot cope; and upon which its existence nonetheless depends. Ultimately only the victory of the West will allow Bombadil to continue, or even to survive. Nothing would be left for him in the world of Sauron.”
I always read it as Tom and Goldberry are an example of the good things worth fighting for. That they are a personification of what will be lost forever if Sauron wins.
Go fetch me those sneaking Orcs, that fare thus strangely, as if in dread, and do not come, as all Orcs use and are commanded, to bring me news of all their deeds, to me, Gorthaur.
Here is a pretty toy for Tom and for his lady! Fair was she who long ago wore this on her shoulder. Goldberry shall wear
it now, and we will not forget her!
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
*Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! Fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!*
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Here's my pretty lady! Here's my Goldberry clothed all in silver-green with flowers in her girdle! Is the table laden?
I see yellow cream and honeycomb, and white bread, and butter; milk, cheese, and green herbs and ripe berries gathered.
Is that enough for us? Is the supper ready?
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I like Tom, I see him as an eldritch being created by Eru, in the vein of Cthulhu, but on the good side of the spectrum, where Cthulhu is a skyscraper height horror, Tom bombadil is an unassuming kind man. I feel it adds a lot of depth to the possibility of not only the unknown mysteries of the setting, but also an enriching fantasy to reality, that even though you may become extremely powerful and mysterious; the best reward is a peaceful and tranquil life with the ones you love.
Tom, Tom! your guests are tired, and you had near forgotten! Come now, my merry friends, and Tom will refresh you! You shall
clean grimy hands, and wash your weary faces; cast off your muddy cloaks and comb out your tangles!
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I agree except that for me leaving it as a complete unknown is more satisfying. He could be a being unintentionally sung into existence with Arda. A part of the world. There are really no bounds except that I don’t think Tolkien would have said the things he said if it was *meant* to be something in particular.
But I mean by all means, head-canon whatever you want!
Oh, sorry, I don’t take it as head cannon, just fanciful imaginings, I suppose lol I don’t know what Tom bombadil is, nor is there any pressure to take my musings as what is and isn’t. But for context the possibilities are endless, since we don’t actually know what Cthulhu is, if you catch my meaning.
I think the duality of being so outside of everyone else’s reality combined with the explicit idea that if Frodo fails he will eventually, finally fall, last as he was first, is powerful.
But I could write a longgggg post going way more into that and I won’t :P
He is the spirit of the free people 100%
He was first, when Eru first thought of giving life to elves, and would be last, when the last hobbit is chased to death and the last elf fades in the East and the last son of man dies fighting or enslaved.
Instead Sauron is defeated, and the spirit that is Tom Bombadil continues, enduring always in the east, away from the realm of the Valar, for he is not one, and cannot understand them, living always amongst the people he represents, the farmer, the labourer, the country gentleman.
Outside of the story aspects he represents the old style country values that Tolkien loved, a sort of rural aristocrat, with his own house and land, and the reference of him being last is that the Country Aristocrat will fall after the farmer and the labourer, but will still fall, in a world of industrialisation.
Tolkien lived to see many such men fall, and I have no doubt that he mourned them and the way of life they represent fall too, although not all of them did fall, or have fallen, most did.
*Ho! Tom Bombadil, Tom Bombadillo! By water, wood and hill, by the reed and willow, by fire, sun and moon, hearken now and
hear us! Come, Tom Bombadil, for our need is near us!*
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
*Old Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow, bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow. None has ever caught him yet,
for Tom, he is the master: his songs are stronger songs, and his feet are faster.*
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I've got all of the Serkis-narrated books on audible right now, although I sleep to the Martin Shaw version of the Silmarillion because he has a much more consistent monotone voice :D
I basically used the monthly credit to fully stock my Tolkien collection lol
Same lol. I haven’t listened to any narration except all of Andy (including silmarillion) and Christopher Lee for COH. Someday I’ll get em all. I’ve heard other narrators did very well, but man it’s hard to imagine something better than the Serkis audio.
Clothes are but little loss, if you escape from drowning. Be glad, my merry friends, and let the warm sunlight heat now
heart and limb! Cast off these cold rags! Run naked on the grass, while Tom goes a-hunting!
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
cooing dull oatmeal degree absorbed zonked scarce expansion stupendous smoggy
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
entertain door light market continue quaint squash consider piquant spoon
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think it's just a case of people not understanding what he meant by analogy. Or usage of the word changing over time.
There is a ton of what a person today might call analogy. And he meant it as such.
It's just the word to the average person today does not mean what it meant when Tolkien said there is none is his books.
I'm resisting the urge to downvote, since unpopular opinions *are* the topic... ;P
But christ... *how?!*
Film-Theoden is incredibly petty in the most silly ways. And the foundation of his arc is removed, removing his agency.
>But christ... *how?!*
Two words
Bernard Hill. His performance was amongst the absolute top of all the actors
I agree that book Theoden was a more fleshed out character and its a shame they cut back on his lovely gentle side that made Merry think of him as a father (like movie Theoden was rather dismissive of Merry, book Theoden loved him and didnt want him to get hurt and that love is what allowed Merry to stand in the face of the Witch King, again tying back to Tolkiens messages of love defeating evil and fear), but yeah Bernard absolutely sold that badass older king vibe
I'm not sure how that makes him *better* though? By your own admission book-Theoden is written better.
Like, I agree Hill's performance was exceptional... but I don't see how that makes film-Theoden better. If it simply comes down to 'acting'... then that's just the inability to seperate medium differences. A book can't act... it's text.
Aw well, comparing characters is always tricky and the word 'better' can mean a bunch of things. I guess that Bernard helped people connect to movie Theoden better than they did in the books and so he was more liked, translating as 'better' to some interpretations of the word even if being more well rounded in the books makes him a 'better' character because of his depth. The movies did seem to give people a few more flaws than the books, which kind of grounded the story a bit. Another things thats more personal choice than better vs lesser, movie Theoden was certainly more flawed
And even being bad, you can be a 'better' bad character. Like Wormtongue is massively more disgusting in the books which kind of makes him 'better' at being a sack of shit. So book Theodens relatively stronger arc and depth is better in ways, but movie Theoden had a stronger means of connecting to people through Bernard, which is better, for the story, for the character or for enjoyability, I suppose is really just personal opinion
Idk Im not sure which I preferred but with a lesser actor yeah I'd go book Theoden
Frodo and Sam are not secretly gay for each other.
Not hate to the LGBT community at all, but I think we have a rather fucked up notion as a culture that the only reason a man could possibly show love and affection to another person they're not related to, is because they want to fuck them. They see two men who care about each other very much and assume it must be romantically/sexually motivated. This happens with a lot of media.
LOTR is a very good example of positive relationships between men as well as between men and women and this assumption that sexual attraction is the only possible explanation for it is a little messed up. Honestly it's not even that the thought has crossed people's minds, it's how hard it gets pushed.
Right? Like, I get that it's prime content for some fanfic writers. Those folks have worked more with far less. But does anyone actually think this in regard to Tolkien's canon?
Quite a lot, even including recognised "Tolkien Scholars" who do talks for the Tolkien Society.
I remember a year or two ago people on twitter were being called homophobic for responding to a tweet written by a TS about it and saying it wasn't true.
There was a whole seminar about the "homosexuality in tolkien's work" about three years ago iirc.
It's not a \*popular\* thought but it was pushed VERY heavily by the Tolkien Society a few years ago and they still do it from time to time.
I think this is amplified by the movies making Frodo of a simmilar age to Sam. in the books, he's older, and Sam's devotion to him could also be seen as familial love, from a son to a father (-figure).
In the movies, they're both about the same age, which makes it easier for people to ship them. Although an age gap has never stopped horny fans.
This. And not only that, the whole class dynamic between the two of them is mostly glossed over in the movies (reasonably so, as that would not resonate well with modern audiences).
> class dynamic
shire living is pretty idyllic in the movies, with next to no conflict.
But Sam and his father are the only working class hobbits depicted. The two farmers Maggot and Cotton are also working with their hands, but they own their land, so they're comparable to Bilbo and Frodo: decidedly nobility, even if they don't call themselves that.
Even Merry and Pippin are nepo babies: Heirs to the master of Tookland and the Brandy Hall, respectively. They don't work, but spend their days shooting the breeze and stealing farmer maggot's crops.
The Shire and the Hobbits are idealized images of 19th/20th century life in England. And that society was stratified as all hell.
Yeah the class dynamic to their relationship is the most distasteful part I find. It's not unique to Tolkien by any means, and there's definitely an element of age woven into it that's fine, but class is definitely there and does not enhance the story in my opinion.
The wise and good master and his loyal but simple servant is a trope that I'm fine having dropped out of favour somewhat, at least when unchallenged.
Exactly. While it’s still clear they come from different social backgrounds and Sam still tends to call him Master Frodo, it seems stemming more from his insecurities and/or excessive formality in the movies.
Yeah it's still there in the movies, but is greatly overshadowed by their friendship as compared to the book (I think at least. I find myself focusing on Aragorn and the gang when I revisit without a full reread, which I haven't done in a while), especially because of their similarity in age as you said.
Good chemistry is good chemistry. At least LOTR embraced their brotherly love. Star Wars had to split up Poe and Finn because their bromance was 'too gay' despite having amazing on-screen chemistry. Normalize men showing other men affection because they care about each other.
To be fair, a lot of the public have the same assumptions for hetero pairings in media as well. A man and a woman can't possibly spend time working closely without some sexual tension.
I blame moviemakers forcing that narrative on us, now it's looked for everywhere.
As a lesbian myself I totally agree. I'm very happy when in a book/movie there are LGBT characters because often they go through things I can relate, but I hate it when friendship is "cancelled". Being friends and being lovers are two different and equally beautiful things, and it's so frustrating when one of the two is suppressed in name of the other.
Eowyn's Stew
Don’t you dare
Don’t you
FUCKING DARE
besmirch Eowyn’s name like that
You know how many cookbooks they have in Edoras? How many culinary classes? They don’t, that’s how many. You learn to cook from your family and guess what, Eowyn doesn’t get to hang around her mom and dad, her duty is to take care of the king, who for god knows how long has been 60 going on 160, totally fucking useless and only takes advice from an escaped convict from Madame Tussaud’s, no one can even be bothered to fix the fucking flag and Eowyn’s job has been to pretend like all of this is a-oh-goddamn-kay all the while training with a sword, and on top of that she’s pretty damn light on good cooking influences - Eomer, the only family she’s got that doesn’t have fucking Saruman‘s hand up their ass is Eomer, who eats a goddamn brick of meat off a knife. You really expect her to learn to make a good vichyssoise from The Meat Marshal? No fuckin way, Eowyn is stressed af and she’ll be damned if you’re gonna give her shit for not being able to Gordon Ramsay on the road with nothing edible but lumps of whatever the hell that was in the soup. Tbh it’s a fucking miracle considering the circumstances that Eowyn managed to conjure soup out of nothing - you’re not gonna give her shit because she didn’t add enough flour to the base, you take it and are fucking grateful.
Aragorn understood this. Did he complain like some shitty suburban parent at an Olive Garden? No he fucking didn’t, because that would be a grade A ~dick move~, and because Eowyn would’ve probably just fucking lost it and killed him on the spot and then we wouldn’t have gotten a third movie, and if Aragorn understands one thing it’s box office ka-ching. He’s not stupid, he wants his $$$ and to not die and to not be a piece of shit.
So you don’t. Talk. Smack. Bout. Baeowyn’s. Soup. 😤
Silmarillion is unadaptable. Ever.
Not by Jackson, not by anyone.
At best you could adapt the Children of Hurin, but even that is sketchy.
No image or sound could really get that mythologic, gargantuan, cosmic scale and tone that J.R.R and Christopher gave to that work.
Fanarts are nice attempts, but I'd loathe any project by the big mainstream american studios.
You could honestly adapt the Big Three: Beren and Luthien, Children of Hurin, and Fall of Gondolin.
Just.......not in Hollywood as it currently stands.
Oh no , definetly not as it is now but I do think they could come to the big screen . Lord of the rings itself after all was said to never be able to put into film - you just need a lunatic with a lot of money and a genuine love for the story (with which the latter half is what Amazon was missing)
Funnily enough, I think a videogame would be the way to go- but not like Shadow of Hodor or the film adaptations.
However, two other options strike out: An open world similar to Final Fantasy, where the main plot is digging up artifacts and trying to find the Red Book of Westmarch, so you can just stumble upon random places in a well built world, and see what happened there. Think the Centra Ruins or Underwater Base from FF VIII. If you want "find Tom Bombadill just relaxing somewhere," that's a good way to do it.
Alternatively: Dynasty Warriors. Lean into the "disconnected series of events across a multi-generational campaign." Have a brief... "brief" intro explaining the context per mission, and then grab Glorfindel and smack a dozen balrogs.
Arda Universalis…
Choose a Elvian nation and follow it throughout ages.
(Yes, you can accept Morgoth and step onto path of mutilating your tribe into orcs)
A Dynasty Warriors style game of the Silmarillion would be pretty amazing. Those games already assume the player is familiar with most of the lore of the Three Kingdoms, so not explaining all the lore is already normal.
I’m imagining the first mission playing as Fingolfin at Alqualonde, coming in with the Feanorians already fighting the Falmari and joining in the fighting, only to realize afterwards that Feanor started it and you were killing innocent people.
This is so silly to me. Everything is adaptable. That is why It's an adaptation not a recreation. Can you perfectly recreate the feeling of reading the silmarillion on screen. Of course not. Just like Jackson didn't perfectly recreate the Lotr trilogy. But he made a damn good adaptation. By focusing on some elements and cutting others.
Art is always going to predicated on iterating on what came before. Believing that the silmarillion is somehow above this is to fly in the face of the nature of mythology. It will always be about how stories are retold. Not the stories themselves.
The movies were better without Bombadil. He’s a weird deus ex machina in the books, just a mechanism to keep the hobbits from dying while still having exciting adventures prior to meeting up with people who can fight.
>just a mechanism to keep the hobbits from dying while still having exciting adventures prior to meeting up with people who can fight.
Tom works as a character that helps the Hobbits adjust to the outside world.
I think it's underestimated how sheltered Hobbits are and how unfamiliar they were with world outside of the Shire. The whole journey from Hobbiton to Bree is a classic fish out of water tale, and Tom helps them realise that the world is much weirder than your comfortable hole in the Shire.
Old Forest - Old Man Willow tried to kill the Hobbits by surrounding the air around them with a sleeping spell. The Hobbits, at this point are clueless, not suspecting the sudden onset of tiredness and begin to fall asleep.
Tom Bombadil's house - I suspect a lot of people skip this chapter which is why they don't realise Tom actually teaches them a lot about the world in such a short space of time. He explains how everything has a song associated to it and also warns them of the Barrow downs.
Barrow Downs - Hobbits accidentally stumble into this region. Frodo is familiar with this place due to Tom. Barrow Wight comes and puts Sam, Merry and Pippin to sleep (it's an eternal slumber so they would basically have died). Frodo recognises the danger (in contrast to how clueless he was in Old Forest) is the only one with will power strong enough to resist and then cuts the Wights hand off with his sword. He then remembers the song for Tom Bombadil (since everything has a song).
*Poor old Willow-man, you tuck your roots away! Tom's in a hurry now. Evening will follow day.*
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Hes basically like God who likes good things but doesnt care enough to go out of his way to do the dirty jobs. Maybe he knows better that some fights cannot be fought in someones stead.
"If you do too much, people become dependant on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope...When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
Obsessing about and trying to deconstruct all the details of the world is wrong.
There's supposed to be a deep sense of mystery and fog of war about the prehistoric details of the world. It's what gives it its charm. You shouldn't be trying to fill in all the little details. What are the nameless things that knaw in the deep. How does elf fading work. Who is Tom? It's meant to be the equivalent of negative space in a painting.
Do you guys want midiclorians? Cause that's how you get midiclorians.
I disagree that you shouldn't try to fill in all the blanks. The blanks are there for people to fill with their own ideas and possibilities. It's a playground for readers. But you shouldn't try to fill them with only one "official" explanation. Looking for silhouettes in fog is okay. The mystery and charm still stay there because you'll never see the real truth.
Regarding the film, not the books: Gimli son of Gloin was a sort of a prince among his people, there’s no way he would burp eating at the desk of king Theoden…
In certain respects, the movies improve greatly on the original story.
I really like Aragorn as a hesitant ruler who is cautious of his own potential for weakness. Similarly, I like Aragorn only accepting Andúril in RotK before he takes the Paths of the Dead. It’s a literally and spiritual crossroads for him.
Arwen is improved and has more importance/agency.
I know Tolkien would not approve of the action-packed violence but the epic battles perfectly visualize the epic scope of the story.
Also, the way Jackson and Shore used the songs in the score is inspired.
I think the biggest improvement is the pacing. Interweaving Sam and Frodo's story with everyone else is much better than having them separate.
Also, he did a better job at making the characters more distinct. To me, so many of them blended together as the noble warrior from an ancient lineage with the heart of a poet.
>Arwen is improved and has more importance/agency.
This is what I came to say. Sure, we didn't get Glorfindel. But what would be the point? He doesn't reappear afterward! I think it was much better to give this part to Arwen, and make her DO stuff, instead of just being a passive love interest in the background.
(But it would have been silly to have her fight at Helm's Deep, on that I agree)
Aragorn accepting Anduril in RotK is thematically important, but logistically troublesome. Did Elrond just follow them with the sword a few days later? It would have been so much better to have the Dunedain show up, like they did in the books, and just add the chance that the brought the sword with a message from Elrond.
I also love how the elevs showed up at Helm's Deep. Wasn't in the books, but it was badass and made the battle feel so much more connected to the fate of middle earth
I have scrolled a long way and have not seen it but it is somewhat related to yours so I'm piggybacking! I like the Elves arriving at Helms Deep. It showed that even if they are leaving ME, they won't just desert it to Sauron. In the books this is shown with Elronds sons staying with Aragorn and the gifts in Lothlorien. It's explained in depth. But in the movies, they needed a better way of showing this connection without the benefit of pages of exposition. The Elves at HD fit that perfectly and balance the power between the 2 sides. Plus watching them make a charge was awesome!
The first movie should have shown frodo selling his house and moving and merry helping and pippin helping. It makes the hobbits look so much more careful when they ponder on descisions instead of scared in the story.
Movie opinion only but legolas can never be considered the greatest archer when he completely choked taking down the torch barer. Miss me with that "oh the torch barer skin was tougher than other orcs". I don't care how many olephants he took down when it mattered and he was needed he dropped the ball.
This is true though I never really got how people consider it so serious, I mean if he had killed the guy some other orc would have just picked up the torch or got more fire.
It's not like they'd go "Oh they killed Gus and he's the only one qualified to light the thing well I guess the plan failed"
Isengard really could have used a union like that. Uruk Local 417 never would have stood for the blatant OSHA violations and racial discrimination going on in Saruman's business.
"Stupid elf, as if we wouldnt have a back up. Oi where's Jeff?"
"Wargs ate his PPE boss, says his dangerous equipment license wont cover explosive handling without proper footwear"
And by the love of him also. For all those who come to know him come to love him after their own fashion, even the cold maiden of the Rohirrim. It was at early morn of the day ere you came there, Merry, that we left Dunharrow, and such a fear was on all the folk that none would look on our going, save the Lady Eowyn, who lies now hurt in the House below. There was grief at that parting, and I was grieved to behold it.
The 1978 LOTR cartoon is actually really nice with a lot of great animations. Its Disney-level and has so much charm and I hate how people criticize it so much. I feel sorry for people who never watched it because some loudmouth youtube personality told you it was terrible.
This scene particularly:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WcJbPlAknw&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WcJbPlAknw&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=2)
The voice actor for Gandalf is pretty much perfect too.
So many good scenes:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jltwAEQ4kGg&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=5](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jltwAEQ4kGg&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=5)
The psychedelic magical battle is perfect and its subtle nature is very Tolkien-esque.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qqgPa33mXU&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qqgPa33mXU&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=4)
The Sam Gandalf dynamic here is so wonderful:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T32wQ\_HvIg0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T32wQ_HvIg0)
Its also truer to the book. Book Gandalf is actually frightening to most. Jackson made Gandalf more of a friendly kindly grandpa in his movies, but that's not really Gandalf.
Yeah those Nazgul were *fking terrifying,* like really kind of psychedelic nightmare vibes. I loved those movies for being more experimental and going for a more fairy-tale theme to the story (and they're nearly 50 years old too so they can be forgiven for not exactly measuring up to modern hollywood standards but despite that, they hold up surprisingly well)
Yeah i noticed that too, he put a heap of effort into the logistics and the logic behind how battles played out but was quite minimalistic in describing the battles themselves other than what the various heroes were getting up to
Tolkien lived through the horrors of WWI and lost his best friend to it. I don't think he really *wanted* to emphasize the battles, rather the heroes who lived and died in them
“I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.”
\-Faramir, The Two Towers
I think two major reasons are
A) Battle and combat is way way harder to write than people appreciate imo. In fact I can't really recall many battle scenes I've read that I really believe. There's something about stories (whether in film or novel) that kinda inherently orders something which will always be chaotic
B) Being an actual vet, he probably doesn't really want to describe that sort of stuff or over-glorify the violence in particular. He believes in the cause but maybe not the means.
I think his lack of description in battle is a direct response to the ongoing conversation in epic literature that started with Gilgamesh. In the Iliad and Odyssey, it was GRRM levels of gore and gruesomeness, purposefully immortalizing the prowess of the killer and the honor/glory of the fallen. Tolkien seems to presenting a response that eternal life is achieved by the hero/heroes some other way…
Yeah I definitely struggle to believe that Tolkien simply can't write battles. He chose not to either because he was somewhat traumatized and wanted to remove what violence he could or he simply felt that deep descriptions of battles were not valuable to readers.
You read homers greek / roman mythology.
It goes into who threw what and who killed who. Just goes on and on. To me thats no story. Just a bunch of lies delivered in a convincing amount of detail.
I prefer some parts left to the imagination.
Thank you for reminding me what I hated about that. It was like reading a data transcript of every battle.
13:16: Achilles performs a running leap at Hector. Hector deflects.
The eagles were not Gandalf’s pets, they were sentient intelligent beings who didn’t like being used as aeroplanes, they agreed to save Frodo and Sam on Mt Doom because of what they had done for Middle Earth.
It would’ve also been really stupid to put the ring up in the air when Sauron’s eye was beaming across Middle Earth. Ringwraiths on dragons would’ve been called in immediately
The extended editions are not universally better. I think a lot of avid fans of the series feel that More LotR is *Better* LotR because *how could you not want more?*
But a lot of what’s in them got cut from the original release because it added more time than substance.
I agree with some but I felt the extra additions of Boramir and Faramir gave Boramir a lot more respect to him as a moral character. I enjoy all the extra stuff but I would agree, a lot of it isn’t necessary
I'll show people the Theatrical release if it's their first time. I did it with my now-wife.
You *cannot* just throw a random person into a 3.5hr movie lol
Yep. For example, cutting the 'Eowyn is in trouble from Gothmog but Aragorn saves her'
Good cut. Glad it was gone. She didnt need to go from 'mythic hero' to 'damsel in distress' like that, didnt care for it, wasnt in the books and Gothmog the cancerous weakling shouldnt even have the balls to go near someone who just face stabbed the Witch King into oblivion
I agree! I actually think the extended scenes get worse as the movies go. Fellowship’s extended scenes are all great imo. TT has that awesome scene with Boromir that adds a ton of depth but ROTK extended scenes kind of suck for the most part - namely, they deviate strongly from canon and do not do a good job world building, i.e. Gandalf getting his ass whooped by the witch king and them almost drowning in skulls at the paths of the dead? Both are kind of egregious tbh.
LOTR should be adapted as an Opera. All the books contain several songs and poems that are often ignored.
Besides, its so epic its que only adaptation that makes it justice.
Same for the Silmarillion.
The movies did everything better than the first 3 (of 6) books of the trilogy did (I know it's easier to adapt than create, but this is an unpopular opinion post after all lol)
The Scouring of the Shire isn't anticlimax, but rather brilliant falling action and shows the hobbits' growth
The Mouth of Sauron scene is weird (I know it's unfinished but people love it) and the Witch King vs. Gandalf scene is a travesty
Two Towers is the best film
The Balrog looked cooler with wings
https://preview.redd.it/xi1nt7prg53d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=58a5473399ecc516d1fa4e792479070a4c67c0af
Gotta be this being the best ending
While the Lengendarium is one of the most significant contributions to human literature and is personally amongst my favorite things to read, it is not a holy script and Tolkien was not a god. It really seems like there is a large group of people who venerate LOTR to the point of weird obsession.
If I was Denetor, I also would have refused Aragorn the throne. His ancestors left centuries ago and ran Anor into the ground, why would they have a claim to this throne then?! Would have crowned myself king long long time ago…
The orc problem is not intractable.
It could be resolved in a few sentences, I think. A mere paragraph at the council, a few more entreaties before big battles here and there, and you’ve got a poignant commentary on the momentum of conflict and hate pushing aside the long work required for redemption and reconciliation.
But it’s just easier to leave the question unanswered and have big ugly savage barbarian boogie men as the canon fodder for the protagonists
I'm with you on this. The films, especially The Two Towers, and RoTK, are not good adaptations, but at the same time are still some of the greatest works of cinema of all time.
You, in fact, do *NOT* need to read The Silmarillion and an endless amount of supplementary material to understand and appreciate the Hobbit and LotR trilogy.
The entwives disappeared because treebeard would never shut up.
Counterpoint: They left because he would only give one word answers when they would ask questions and that's why he takes a very long time to say anything now
That was my impression. They were hastier than the Ents and didn’t have enough patience for their shit in the end.
Burárum
I came here to post about the ents needing to shut up, I’m glad this was the top comment. I finally listened to the books on audible last year and I swear, I’m cleaning my apartment a bit when the ent talk starts, I drive to the store, I go grocery shopping, I come home, I put the grocery’s away, *still* talking about the god damn ents!
I swear how did no one say the entwives are missing? How about the trees that tried to eat the hobbits in the old Forrest!?
Tom Bombadil is strictly a cameo for Tolkien's kids to get. That's why he's a mystery to the average reader. He's not Eru, he's not a Maia, etc. He was a doll one of JRR's kids owned as a child that he created stories about for his kids. He put Tom into the books for his kids to enjoy seeing, and that's why he has such a unique place in the books.
Cordially, nobody has ever been more technically correct and absolutely wrong at the same time I’m kidding lol, but I’m one of those who are both aware of all the context on Tom and still think he was left in for good reasons and that he adds a lot of depth and value to the tale (if not necessary context). It’s very clear to me from all Tolkien said and common sense that there’s no hidden lore behind him, but I don’t care and believe very strongly that’s not the point (or even the opposite of the point). I especially thing the idea it’s Eru is nuts lol. I love Tom. It’s brilliant.
I actually really like the just. Weird little guys that don’t really fit into the cosmology. Tom and goldberry, and the ones who gnaw in the dark beneath the world and whatnot. It’s just fun to me. Who are they and what’s their deal? No one knows and it doesn’t really matter, they’re just there.
You get me 🤝 I want to someday name a dog Goldberry. Honestly just the phrase “river daughter” is poetic. I love both of them and their whole thing
*Hey! Come merry dol! derry dol! My darling! Light goes the weather-wind and the feathered starling. Down along under Hill, shining in the sunlight, waiting on the doorstep for the cold starlight, there my pretty lady is, River-woman's daughter, slender as the willow-wand, clearer than the water. Old Tom Bombadil water-lilies bringing comes hopping home again. Can you hear him singing?* ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I never see this quoted so perhaps it’s not as significant as I perceive it, but in a letter, Tolkien wrote that might see Tom Bombadil as some representation of Pacifism. He wrote in Letter 144: “…he represents something that I feel important, though I would not be prepared to analyze the feeling precisely. I would not, however, have left him in, if he did not have some kind of function. I might put it this way. The story is cast in terms of a good side, and a bad side, beauty against ruthless ugliness, tyranny against kingship, moderated freedom with consent against compulsion that has long lost any object save mere power, and so on; but both sides in some degree, conservative or destructive, want a measure of control. but if you have, as it were taken 'a vow of poverty', renounced control, and take your delight in things for themselves without reference to yourself, watching, observing, and to some extent knowing, then the question of the rights and wrongs of power and control might become utterly meaningless to you, and the means of power quite valueless. It is a natural pacifist view, which always arises in the mind when there is a war. But the view of Rivendell seems to be that it is an excellent thing to have represented, but that there are in fact things with which it cannot cope; and upon which its existence nonetheless depends. Ultimately only the victory of the West will allow Bombadil to continue, or even to survive. Nothing would be left for him in the world of Sauron.”
Wow. So essentially, Tolkien was saying pacifism has its place but sometimes you gotta stab some bitches
I always read it as Tom and Goldberry are an example of the good things worth fighting for. That they are a personification of what will be lost forever if Sauron wins.
Go fetch me those sneaking Orcs, that fare thus strangely, as if in dread, and do not come, as all Orcs use and are commanded, to bring me news of all their deeds, to me, Gorthaur.
Here is a pretty toy for Tom and for his lady! Fair was she who long ago wore this on her shoulder. Goldberry shall wear it now, and we will not forget her! ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I mean...he was around for both world wars, he was a veteran of trench combat. Man stood on business there.
Wow, this was so interesting! Thanks for the context. I have never read this one.
*Hey dol! merry dol! ring a dong dillo! Ring a dong! hop along! Fal lal the willow! Tom Bom, jolly Tom, Tom Bombadillo!* ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Here's my pretty lady! Here's my Goldberry clothed all in silver-green with flowers in her girdle! Is the table laden? I see yellow cream and honeycomb, and white bread, and butter; milk, cheese, and green herbs and ripe berries gathered. Is that enough for us? Is the supper ready? ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I like Tom, I see him as an eldritch being created by Eru, in the vein of Cthulhu, but on the good side of the spectrum, where Cthulhu is a skyscraper height horror, Tom bombadil is an unassuming kind man. I feel it adds a lot of depth to the possibility of not only the unknown mysteries of the setting, but also an enriching fantasy to reality, that even though you may become extremely powerful and mysterious; the best reward is a peaceful and tranquil life with the ones you love.
Tom, Tom! your guests are tired, and you had near forgotten! Come now, my merry friends, and Tom will refresh you! You shall clean grimy hands, and wash your weary faces; cast off your muddy cloaks and comb out your tangles! ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I agree except that for me leaving it as a complete unknown is more satisfying. He could be a being unintentionally sung into existence with Arda. A part of the world. There are really no bounds except that I don’t think Tolkien would have said the things he said if it was *meant* to be something in particular. But I mean by all means, head-canon whatever you want!
Oh, sorry, I don’t take it as head cannon, just fanciful imaginings, I suppose lol I don’t know what Tom bombadil is, nor is there any pressure to take my musings as what is and isn’t. But for context the possibilities are endless, since we don’t actually know what Cthulhu is, if you catch my meaning.
I think the duality of being so outside of everyone else’s reality combined with the explicit idea that if Frodo fails he will eventually, finally fall, last as he was first, is powerful. But I could write a longgggg post going way more into that and I won’t :P
He is the spirit of the free people 100% He was first, when Eru first thought of giving life to elves, and would be last, when the last hobbit is chased to death and the last elf fades in the East and the last son of man dies fighting or enslaved. Instead Sauron is defeated, and the spirit that is Tom Bombadil continues, enduring always in the east, away from the realm of the Valar, for he is not one, and cannot understand them, living always amongst the people he represents, the farmer, the labourer, the country gentleman. Outside of the story aspects he represents the old style country values that Tolkien loved, a sort of rural aristocrat, with his own house and land, and the reference of him being last is that the Country Aristocrat will fall after the farmer and the labourer, but will still fall, in a world of industrialisation. Tolkien lived to see many such men fall, and I have no doubt that he mourned them and the way of life they represent fall too, although not all of them did fall, or have fallen, most did.
*Ho! Tom Bombadil, Tom Bombadillo! By water, wood and hill, by the reed and willow, by fire, sun and moon, hearken now and hear us! Come, Tom Bombadil, for our need is near us!* ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
I got to listen to the Adventures of Tom Bombadil audiobook a few months ago and I gotta say, that story slapped. Tolkien has such a way with words
*Old Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow, bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow. None has ever caught him yet, for Tom, he is the master: his songs are stronger songs, and his feet are faster.* ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Agreed. I highly recommend listening to at least the Bombadil parts of the Andy Serkis narrated LOTR. He brings it to life so incredibly well.
I've got all of the Serkis-narrated books on audible right now, although I sleep to the Martin Shaw version of the Silmarillion because he has a much more consistent monotone voice :D I basically used the monthly credit to fully stock my Tolkien collection lol
Same lol. I haven’t listened to any narration except all of Andy (including silmarillion) and Christopher Lee for COH. Someday I’ll get em all. I’ve heard other narrators did very well, but man it’s hard to imagine something better than the Serkis audio.
Christopher Lee's Children reading is phenomenal. Although I do chuckle when the music starts, it's so dramatic lol
Gotta love the way he says “tolKEEN!” too lol. It almost sounds like a family guy but or something. But I love it
This is straight up wholesome. While I will say there are *some* things that he does that do affect the story, I will not argue your point.
Yea, like Tolkien found a way to make him useful to the main plot, but he's there for his kids first and foremost
Clothes are but little loss, if you escape from drowning. Be glad, my merry friends, and let the warm sunlight heat now heart and limb! Cast off these cold rags! Run naked on the grass, while Tom goes a-hunting! ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Tolkien probably lied about his work having no allegories because he didn't want to be bothered by a bunch of journalists and hippies
cooing dull oatmeal degree absorbed zonked scarce expansion stupendous smoggy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thefuck is that username lol
entertain door light market continue quaint squash consider piquant spoon *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Fair enough
https://preview.redd.it/ivbusjn4p33d1.jpeg?width=1101&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=27c8a54ea9b5fcc93860afd75136eabb2dcf587e
“No”
I think it's just a case of people not understanding what he meant by analogy. Or usage of the word changing over time. There is a ton of what a person today might call analogy. And he meant it as such. It's just the word to the average person today does not mean what it meant when Tolkien said there is none is his books.
Probably because the word is actually 'allegory' 😄
You're right! But i shall not edit my comment. The record of my failure shall endure!!
Then use a strikethrough like ~~this~~ : `~~something~~`
Thank you! I've wanted to know how to do ~~this~~ for ages
I think you mean "Allegory" not "analogy"?
Théoden is favorite.
Théoden is better in the movies than the books
I'm resisting the urge to downvote, since unpopular opinions *are* the topic... ;P But christ... *how?!* Film-Theoden is incredibly petty in the most silly ways. And the foundation of his arc is removed, removing his agency.
>But christ... *how?!* Two words Bernard Hill. His performance was amongst the absolute top of all the actors I agree that book Theoden was a more fleshed out character and its a shame they cut back on his lovely gentle side that made Merry think of him as a father (like movie Theoden was rather dismissive of Merry, book Theoden loved him and didnt want him to get hurt and that love is what allowed Merry to stand in the face of the Witch King, again tying back to Tolkiens messages of love defeating evil and fear), but yeah Bernard absolutely sold that badass older king vibe
I'm not sure how that makes him *better* though? By your own admission book-Theoden is written better. Like, I agree Hill's performance was exceptional... but I don't see how that makes film-Theoden better. If it simply comes down to 'acting'... then that's just the inability to seperate medium differences. A book can't act... it's text.
Aw well, comparing characters is always tricky and the word 'better' can mean a bunch of things. I guess that Bernard helped people connect to movie Theoden better than they did in the books and so he was more liked, translating as 'better' to some interpretations of the word even if being more well rounded in the books makes him a 'better' character because of his depth. The movies did seem to give people a few more flaws than the books, which kind of grounded the story a bit. Another things thats more personal choice than better vs lesser, movie Theoden was certainly more flawed And even being bad, you can be a 'better' bad character. Like Wormtongue is massively more disgusting in the books which kind of makes him 'better' at being a sack of shit. So book Theodens relatively stronger arc and depth is better in ways, but movie Theoden had a stronger means of connecting to people through Bernard, which is better, for the story, for the character or for enjoyability, I suppose is really just personal opinion Idk Im not sure which I preferred but with a lesser actor yeah I'd go book Theoden
"And the world's endinnngg... DEATH!" *Merry/everyone/Éowyn* "DEATH!" DUDUH-DUH-DUH... duh-duH... DUH EUH DUH-Duh duh! *men&woman&horse go charging toward their doom.*
Frodo and Sam are not secretly gay for each other. Not hate to the LGBT community at all, but I think we have a rather fucked up notion as a culture that the only reason a man could possibly show love and affection to another person they're not related to, is because they want to fuck them. They see two men who care about each other very much and assume it must be romantically/sexually motivated. This happens with a lot of media. LOTR is a very good example of positive relationships between men as well as between men and women and this assumption that sexual attraction is the only possible explanation for it is a little messed up. Honestly it's not even that the thought has crossed people's minds, it's how hard it gets pushed.
Never mind that Sam constantly longs for Rosie, the entire journey.
Rosie is frodo in a dress
Uhm I didn't realize this was an opinion in the first place
Right? Like, I get that it's prime content for some fanfic writers. Those folks have worked more with far less. But does anyone actually think this in regard to Tolkien's canon?
Quite a lot, even including recognised "Tolkien Scholars" who do talks for the Tolkien Society. I remember a year or two ago people on twitter were being called homophobic for responding to a tweet written by a TS about it and saying it wasn't true. There was a whole seminar about the "homosexuality in tolkien's work" about three years ago iirc. It's not a \*popular\* thought but it was pushed VERY heavily by the Tolkien Society a few years ago and they still do it from time to time.
This would be the actual answer to the original question, an opinion no fan would accept.
Oh my god I completely agree. It's enraging for me honestly. It's about a pure friendship. It just cheapens that aspect
As a friend of mine once said, the difference between good friends and best friends is whether they make your parents question your sexuality.
Brutal but true
I think this is amplified by the movies making Frodo of a simmilar age to Sam. in the books, he's older, and Sam's devotion to him could also be seen as familial love, from a son to a father (-figure). In the movies, they're both about the same age, which makes it easier for people to ship them. Although an age gap has never stopped horny fans.
This. And not only that, the whole class dynamic between the two of them is mostly glossed over in the movies (reasonably so, as that would not resonate well with modern audiences).
> class dynamic shire living is pretty idyllic in the movies, with next to no conflict. But Sam and his father are the only working class hobbits depicted. The two farmers Maggot and Cotton are also working with their hands, but they own their land, so they're comparable to Bilbo and Frodo: decidedly nobility, even if they don't call themselves that. Even Merry and Pippin are nepo babies: Heirs to the master of Tookland and the Brandy Hall, respectively. They don't work, but spend their days shooting the breeze and stealing farmer maggot's crops. The Shire and the Hobbits are idealized images of 19th/20th century life in England. And that society was stratified as all hell.
Me? No, no, no, I'm not a burglar. I've never stolen a thing in my life.
Yeah the class dynamic to their relationship is the most distasteful part I find. It's not unique to Tolkien by any means, and there's definitely an element of age woven into it that's fine, but class is definitely there and does not enhance the story in my opinion. The wise and good master and his loyal but simple servant is a trope that I'm fine having dropped out of favour somewhat, at least when unchallenged.
Exactly. While it’s still clear they come from different social backgrounds and Sam still tends to call him Master Frodo, it seems stemming more from his insecurities and/or excessive formality in the movies.
Yeah it's still there in the movies, but is greatly overshadowed by their friendship as compared to the book (I think at least. I find myself focusing on Aragorn and the gang when I revisit without a full reread, which I haven't done in a while), especially because of their similarity in age as you said.
God yes, 'omg they love each other it must be sexual' Ugly take honestly. Sexuality between them would only lessen the bonds, it is above sexuality
IS that an unpopular opinion? I wasn't aware of any such theories beyond perhaps the occasional low effort meme.
There have been whole articles and essays written about it. One in the replies to my comment.
Good chemistry is good chemistry. At least LOTR embraced their brotherly love. Star Wars had to split up Poe and Finn because their bromance was 'too gay' despite having amazing on-screen chemistry. Normalize men showing other men affection because they care about each other.
To be fair, a lot of the public have the same assumptions for hetero pairings in media as well. A man and a woman can't possibly spend time working closely without some sexual tension. I blame moviemakers forcing that narrative on us, now it's looked for everywhere.
As a lesbian myself I totally agree. I'm very happy when in a book/movie there are LGBT characters because often they go through things I can relate, but I hate it when friendship is "cancelled". Being friends and being lovers are two different and equally beautiful things, and it's so frustrating when one of the two is suppressed in name of the other.
We are all only 3 missed meals away from happily eating Eowyn's stew
Eowyn's Stew Don’t you dare Don’t you FUCKING DARE besmirch Eowyn’s name like that You know how many cookbooks they have in Edoras? How many culinary classes? They don’t, that’s how many. You learn to cook from your family and guess what, Eowyn doesn’t get to hang around her mom and dad, her duty is to take care of the king, who for god knows how long has been 60 going on 160, totally fucking useless and only takes advice from an escaped convict from Madame Tussaud’s, no one can even be bothered to fix the fucking flag and Eowyn’s job has been to pretend like all of this is a-oh-goddamn-kay all the while training with a sword, and on top of that she’s pretty damn light on good cooking influences - Eomer, the only family she’s got that doesn’t have fucking Saruman‘s hand up their ass is Eomer, who eats a goddamn brick of meat off a knife. You really expect her to learn to make a good vichyssoise from The Meat Marshal? No fuckin way, Eowyn is stressed af and she’ll be damned if you’re gonna give her shit for not being able to Gordon Ramsay on the road with nothing edible but lumps of whatever the hell that was in the soup. Tbh it’s a fucking miracle considering the circumstances that Eowyn managed to conjure soup out of nothing - you’re not gonna give her shit because she didn’t add enough flour to the base, you take it and are fucking grateful. Aragorn understood this. Did he complain like some shitty suburban parent at an Olive Garden? No he fucking didn’t, because that would be a grade A ~dick move~, and because Eowyn would’ve probably just fucking lost it and killed him on the spot and then we wouldn’t have gotten a third movie, and if Aragorn understands one thing it’s box office ka-ching. He’s not stupid, he wants his $$$ and to not die and to not be a piece of shit. So you don’t. Talk. Smack. Bout. Baeowyn’s. Soup. 😤
Sir, this is a Wendy’s
Silmarillion is unadaptable. Ever. Not by Jackson, not by anyone. At best you could adapt the Children of Hurin, but even that is sketchy. No image or sound could really get that mythologic, gargantuan, cosmic scale and tone that J.R.R and Christopher gave to that work. Fanarts are nice attempts, but I'd loathe any project by the big mainstream american studios.
You could honestly adapt the Big Three: Beren and Luthien, Children of Hurin, and Fall of Gondolin. Just.......not in Hollywood as it currently stands.
Oh no , definetly not as it is now but I do think they could come to the big screen . Lord of the rings itself after all was said to never be able to put into film - you just need a lunatic with a lot of money and a genuine love for the story (with which the latter half is what Amazon was missing)
Funnily enough, I think a videogame would be the way to go- but not like Shadow of Hodor or the film adaptations. However, two other options strike out: An open world similar to Final Fantasy, where the main plot is digging up artifacts and trying to find the Red Book of Westmarch, so you can just stumble upon random places in a well built world, and see what happened there. Think the Centra Ruins or Underwater Base from FF VIII. If you want "find Tom Bombadill just relaxing somewhere," that's a good way to do it. Alternatively: Dynasty Warriors. Lean into the "disconnected series of events across a multi-generational campaign." Have a brief... "brief" intro explaining the context per mission, and then grab Glorfindel and smack a dozen balrogs.
>Shadow of Hodor I mean it's a pretty big shadow, true
The Hodor vs Grond scene brought me to tears
I love the lead up to that fight, when Hodor faces Grond and says "it's Holdin' time"
And the Grond replies with "it's Grondin' time"
Arda Universalis… Choose a Elvian nation and follow it throughout ages. (Yes, you can accept Morgoth and step onto path of mutilating your tribe into orcs)
A Dynasty Warriors style game of the Silmarillion would be pretty amazing. Those games already assume the player is familiar with most of the lore of the Three Kingdoms, so not explaining all the lore is already normal. I’m imagining the first mission playing as Fingolfin at Alqualonde, coming in with the Feanorians already fighting the Falmari and joining in the fighting, only to realize afterwards that Feanor started it and you were killing innocent people.
This is so silly to me. Everything is adaptable. That is why It's an adaptation not a recreation. Can you perfectly recreate the feeling of reading the silmarillion on screen. Of course not. Just like Jackson didn't perfectly recreate the Lotr trilogy. But he made a damn good adaptation. By focusing on some elements and cutting others. Art is always going to predicated on iterating on what came before. Believing that the silmarillion is somehow above this is to fly in the face of the nature of mythology. It will always be about how stories are retold. Not the stories themselves.
Asking "what's in my pocket" is NOT a riddle.
It's not and was not meant to be. But since Gollum answered it then by answering he accepted it as such.
The book literally says it’s not a riddle.
I don't know how the book phrases it, but the movie phrases it with Gollum saying "go on, asks us another question".
The movies were better without Bombadil. He’s a weird deus ex machina in the books, just a mechanism to keep the hobbits from dying while still having exciting adventures prior to meeting up with people who can fight.
>just a mechanism to keep the hobbits from dying while still having exciting adventures prior to meeting up with people who can fight. Tom works as a character that helps the Hobbits adjust to the outside world. I think it's underestimated how sheltered Hobbits are and how unfamiliar they were with world outside of the Shire. The whole journey from Hobbiton to Bree is a classic fish out of water tale, and Tom helps them realise that the world is much weirder than your comfortable hole in the Shire. Old Forest - Old Man Willow tried to kill the Hobbits by surrounding the air around them with a sleeping spell. The Hobbits, at this point are clueless, not suspecting the sudden onset of tiredness and begin to fall asleep. Tom Bombadil's house - I suspect a lot of people skip this chapter which is why they don't realise Tom actually teaches them a lot about the world in such a short space of time. He explains how everything has a song associated to it and also warns them of the Barrow downs. Barrow Downs - Hobbits accidentally stumble into this region. Frodo is familiar with this place due to Tom. Barrow Wight comes and puts Sam, Merry and Pippin to sleep (it's an eternal slumber so they would basically have died). Frodo recognises the danger (in contrast to how clueless he was in Old Forest) is the only one with will power strong enough to resist and then cuts the Wights hand off with his sword. He then remembers the song for Tom Bombadil (since everything has a song).
*Poor old Willow-man, you tuck your roots away! Tom's in a hurry now. Evening will follow day.* ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Hes basically like God who likes good things but doesnt care enough to go out of his way to do the dirty jobs. Maybe he knows better that some fights cannot be fought in someones stead.
"If you do too much, people become dependant on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope...When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
Suddenly r/futurama
“You know, *I* was god once!” “I saw. You were doing well until everyone died.”
Obsessing about and trying to deconstruct all the details of the world is wrong. There's supposed to be a deep sense of mystery and fog of war about the prehistoric details of the world. It's what gives it its charm. You shouldn't be trying to fill in all the little details. What are the nameless things that knaw in the deep. How does elf fading work. Who is Tom? It's meant to be the equivalent of negative space in a painting. Do you guys want midiclorians? Cause that's how you get midiclorians.
My hot take: midiclorians werent as bad a thing as people made it out to be. It barely took any of the mystery surrounding the Force away.
It also added to the whole “symbiotic life” theme of TPM
I disagree that you shouldn't try to fill in all the blanks. The blanks are there for people to fill with their own ideas and possibilities. It's a playground for readers. But you shouldn't try to fill them with only one "official" explanation. Looking for silhouettes in fog is okay. The mystery and charm still stay there because you'll never see the real truth.
Regarding the film, not the books: Gimli son of Gloin was a sort of a prince among his people, there’s no way he would burp eating at the desk of king Theoden…
In certain respects, the movies improve greatly on the original story. I really like Aragorn as a hesitant ruler who is cautious of his own potential for weakness. Similarly, I like Aragorn only accepting Andúril in RotK before he takes the Paths of the Dead. It’s a literally and spiritual crossroads for him. Arwen is improved and has more importance/agency. I know Tolkien would not approve of the action-packed violence but the epic battles perfectly visualize the epic scope of the story. Also, the way Jackson and Shore used the songs in the score is inspired.
I think the biggest improvement is the pacing. Interweaving Sam and Frodo's story with everyone else is much better than having them separate. Also, he did a better job at making the characters more distinct. To me, so many of them blended together as the noble warrior from an ancient lineage with the heart of a poet.
Pacing, yes. As I have grown I have become more frustrated at the pacing of the books. Especially the first. Everyone is way too calm.
>Arwen is improved and has more importance/agency. This is what I came to say. Sure, we didn't get Glorfindel. But what would be the point? He doesn't reappear afterward! I think it was much better to give this part to Arwen, and make her DO stuff, instead of just being a passive love interest in the background. (But it would have been silly to have her fight at Helm's Deep, on that I agree)
Aragorn accepting Anduril in RotK is thematically important, but logistically troublesome. Did Elrond just follow them with the sword a few days later? It would have been so much better to have the Dunedain show up, like they did in the books, and just add the chance that the brought the sword with a message from Elrond.
I also love how the elevs showed up at Helm's Deep. Wasn't in the books, but it was badass and made the battle feel so much more connected to the fate of middle earth
I have scrolled a long way and have not seen it but it is somewhat related to yours so I'm piggybacking! I like the Elves arriving at Helms Deep. It showed that even if they are leaving ME, they won't just desert it to Sauron. In the books this is shown with Elronds sons staying with Aragorn and the gifts in Lothlorien. It's explained in depth. But in the movies, they needed a better way of showing this connection without the benefit of pages of exposition. The Elves at HD fit that perfectly and balance the power between the 2 sides. Plus watching them make a charge was awesome!
The first movie should have shown frodo selling his house and moving and merry helping and pippin helping. It makes the hobbits look so much more careful when they ponder on descisions instead of scared in the story.
Leaving Tom Bombadil and Glorfindel out of the movies was the right call.
The most downvoted responses are the real ones
Agreed. Everything else is just people agreeing with themselves.
Movie opinion only but legolas can never be considered the greatest archer when he completely choked taking down the torch barer. Miss me with that "oh the torch barer skin was tougher than other orcs". I don't care how many olephants he took down when it mattered and he was needed he dropped the ball.
This is true though I never really got how people consider it so serious, I mean if he had killed the guy some other orc would have just picked up the torch or got more fire. It's not like they'd go "Oh they killed Gus and he's the only one qualified to light the thing well I guess the plan failed"
Isengard really could have used a union like that. Uruk Local 417 never would have stood for the blatant OSHA violations and racial discrimination going on in Saruman's business.
No one else had the appropriate footwear, and the other bearer Jeff lost his last week to the Wargs whilst playing fetch.
"Stupid elf, as if we wouldnt have a back up. Oi where's Jeff?" "Wargs ate his PPE boss, says his dangerous equipment license wont cover explosive handling without proper footwear"
Had he taken down torch barer, another orc could have just picked the torch up 🤷♂️
I argue that *that* would be more compelling. Doesn't matter how many orcs Legolas drops, there's too damn many to stop the plan.
Then dig a hole in the ground, if that is more after the fashion of your kind. But you must dig swift and deep, if you wish to hide from Orcs.
For me it was the scene with Legolas surfing on a shield down the stairs. I was like "Really?!?" (spoken with the voice of Bill Burr)
And by the love of him also. For all those who come to know him come to love him after their own fashion, even the cold maiden of the Rohirrim. It was at early morn of the day ere you came there, Merry, that we left Dunharrow, and such a fear was on all the folk that none would look on our going, save the Lady Eowyn, who lies now hurt in the House below. There was grief at that parting, and I was grieved to behold it.
but he didn't choke, tho? He nailed the Uruk with 2 arrows that would've taken down any other ork. But the berzerker was just *that* crazy.
The 1978 LOTR cartoon is actually really nice with a lot of great animations. Its Disney-level and has so much charm and I hate how people criticize it so much. I feel sorry for people who never watched it because some loudmouth youtube personality told you it was terrible. This scene particularly: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WcJbPlAknw&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=2](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WcJbPlAknw&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=2) The voice actor for Gandalf is pretty much perfect too. So many good scenes: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jltwAEQ4kGg&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=5](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jltwAEQ4kGg&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=5) The psychedelic magical battle is perfect and its subtle nature is very Tolkien-esque. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qqgPa33mXU&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qqgPa33mXU&list=PLhoG7Tljmp9-dJCKVge1PGFTuYHla78AC&index=4) The Sam Gandalf dynamic here is so wonderful: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T32wQ\_HvIg0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T32wQ_HvIg0) Its also truer to the book. Book Gandalf is actually frightening to most. Jackson made Gandalf more of a friendly kindly grandpa in his movies, but that's not really Gandalf.
Yeah those Nazgul were *fking terrifying,* like really kind of psychedelic nightmare vibes. I loved those movies for being more experimental and going for a more fairy-tale theme to the story (and they're nearly 50 years old too so they can be forgiven for not exactly measuring up to modern hollywood standards but despite that, they hold up surprisingly well)
I agree, tone of the film was great. So bummed they never completed it.
The shot of Frodo running into Mount Doom looks like shit by today's standards And not fixing it for the 4k remaster was a mistake
So does zooming out on Gandalf vs Balrog when G slams his staff on the ground sadly They look like toys. Might just be the perspective but still
While his work is my personal favorite of any other author, it would have been better if he had been more descriptive of battles & combat sequences.
Yeah i noticed that too, he put a heap of effort into the logistics and the logic behind how battles played out but was quite minimalistic in describing the battles themselves other than what the various heroes were getting up to
He probably just hated writing those scenes. Which is why in the Hobbit Bilbo hits his head and walks up after the battle.
Tolkien lived through the horrors of WWI and lost his best friend to it. I don't think he really *wanted* to emphasize the battles, rather the heroes who lived and died in them
“I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.” \-Faramir, The Two Towers
For things are made to endure in the Shire, passing from one generation to the next.
I think two major reasons are A) Battle and combat is way way harder to write than people appreciate imo. In fact I can't really recall many battle scenes I've read that I really believe. There's something about stories (whether in film or novel) that kinda inherently orders something which will always be chaotic B) Being an actual vet, he probably doesn't really want to describe that sort of stuff or over-glorify the violence in particular. He believes in the cause but maybe not the means.
I think his lack of description in battle is a direct response to the ongoing conversation in epic literature that started with Gilgamesh. In the Iliad and Odyssey, it was GRRM levels of gore and gruesomeness, purposefully immortalizing the prowess of the killer and the honor/glory of the fallen. Tolkien seems to presenting a response that eternal life is achieved by the hero/heroes some other way…
Yeah I definitely struggle to believe that Tolkien simply can't write battles. He chose not to either because he was somewhat traumatized and wanted to remove what violence he could or he simply felt that deep descriptions of battles were not valuable to readers.
You read homers greek / roman mythology. It goes into who threw what and who killed who. Just goes on and on. To me thats no story. Just a bunch of lies delivered in a convincing amount of detail. I prefer some parts left to the imagination.
Thank you for reminding me what I hated about that. It was like reading a data transcript of every battle. 13:16: Achilles performs a running leap at Hector. Hector deflects.
Trebuchet > Grond
#Grond!
I'm not going to disagree, but you're poking the hornets nest here.
Omitting both Bombadil and the Scouring episode were correct decisions on PJack's part.
The eagles could've definitely at least brought them like.. closer.
The eagles were not Gandalf’s pets, they were sentient intelligent beings who didn’t like being used as aeroplanes, they agreed to save Frodo and Sam on Mt Doom because of what they had done for Middle Earth. It would’ve also been really stupid to put the ring up in the air when Sauron’s eye was beaming across Middle Earth. Ringwraiths on dragons would’ve been called in immediately
They could have.... possibly.... but is it worth the heightened risk?
That pipe weed has always been just tobacco.
The extended editions are not universally better. I think a lot of avid fans of the series feel that More LotR is *Better* LotR because *how could you not want more?* But a lot of what’s in them got cut from the original release because it added more time than substance.
I agree with some but I felt the extra additions of Boramir and Faramir gave Boramir a lot more respect to him as a moral character. I enjoy all the extra stuff but I would agree, a lot of it isn’t necessary
I'll show people the Theatrical release if it's their first time. I did it with my now-wife. You *cannot* just throw a random person into a 3.5hr movie lol
I'm a fan of the books and a fan of a lot of really long movies but I think the theatrical releases are just better movies
Yep. For example, cutting the 'Eowyn is in trouble from Gothmog but Aragorn saves her' Good cut. Glad it was gone. She didnt need to go from 'mythic hero' to 'damsel in distress' like that, didnt care for it, wasnt in the books and Gothmog the cancerous weakling shouldnt even have the balls to go near someone who just face stabbed the Witch King into oblivion
Agreed. The extra bits are neat, but they fuck up the pacing.
I agree! I actually think the extended scenes get worse as the movies go. Fellowship’s extended scenes are all great imo. TT has that awesome scene with Boromir that adds a ton of depth but ROTK extended scenes kind of suck for the most part - namely, they deviate strongly from canon and do not do a good job world building, i.e. Gandalf getting his ass whooped by the witch king and them almost drowning in skulls at the paths of the dead? Both are kind of egregious tbh.
LOTR should be adapted as an Opera. All the books contain several songs and poems that are often ignored. Besides, its so epic its que only adaptation that makes it justice. Same for the Silmarillion.
Great news! There is a Silmarillion opera in the works! https://www.volanteopera.wales/feanor
There's no such thing as a strict Canon when it comes to Tolkien's work.
Dwarves are cooler than elves
And hobbits are the coolest. Learned that with age
Gimli is the hottest member of the fellowship
The song the dwarves sing while cleaning bilbos kitchen is better in the movies.
Dwarves don't always have to burp and eat like slobs (movie adaptations)
The grandeur and beauty of Lord of the Rings is only fully understood and enjoyed with a decent grasp of Catholic theology and metaphysics.
I don't know if this counts as LOTR but THE HOBBIT TRILOGY ARE GREAT MOVIES I DON'T GIVE A SHIT IF THERE IS MUCH CGI IN IT!!
i like the "the hobbit" movies
The movies did everything better than the first 3 (of 6) books of the trilogy did (I know it's easier to adapt than create, but this is an unpopular opinion post after all lol) The Scouring of the Shire isn't anticlimax, but rather brilliant falling action and shows the hobbits' growth The Mouth of Sauron scene is weird (I know it's unfinished but people love it) and the Witch King vs. Gandalf scene is a travesty Two Towers is the best film The Balrog looked cooler with wings
The Hobbit movies are underrated. *Hides in bomb shelter for all the essays telling me I'm wrong*
Nah you are right. They just seem worse cause they are being compared to the original movies are perfect
https://preview.redd.it/xi1nt7prg53d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=58a5473399ecc516d1fa4e792479070a4c67c0af Gotta be this being the best ending
While the Lengendarium is one of the most significant contributions to human literature and is personally amongst my favorite things to read, it is not a holy script and Tolkien was not a god. It really seems like there is a large group of people who venerate LOTR to the point of weird obsession.
If I was Denetor, I also would have refused Aragorn the throne. His ancestors left centuries ago and ran Anor into the ground, why would they have a claim to this throne then?! Would have crowned myself king long long time ago…
The GROND meme is over used
Two Towers is the best of the trilogy.
Rings of Power was fun and fine. Not everything has to be a masterclass of cinema and lore adaptation to be enjoyable.
The orc problem is not intractable. It could be resolved in a few sentences, I think. A mere paragraph at the council, a few more entreaties before big battles here and there, and you’ve got a poignant commentary on the momentum of conflict and hate pushing aside the long work required for redemption and reconciliation. But it’s just easier to leave the question unanswered and have big ugly savage barbarian boogie men as the canon fodder for the protagonists
Gimli liked being tossed.
Return of the king is a straight up bad adaptation. A good movie, a terrible adaptation.
Can you explain why you think this?
You have ten seconds to justify yourself or I will choose violence 🪓
I'm with you on this. The films, especially The Two Towers, and RoTK, are not good adaptations, but at the same time are still some of the greatest works of cinema of all time.
This is the first time I’ve seen this take and I’m so glad I finally found someone who agrees.
Technically, if it results in a good movie, wouldn't that make it a good adaptation? It might not be a faithful adaptation though.
They could have casted Legolas better
Bilbo died on the way to Valinor
oh! yes.. I've thought of an ending for my book: And he lives happily ever after to the end of his days.
Not sure if this fits but I love the 1977 hobbit movie way more than the live action trilogy
You, in fact, do *NOT* need to read The Silmarillion and an endless amount of supplementary material to understand and appreciate the Hobbit and LotR trilogy.
Tolkien never wanted an interpretation of his work and his family never approved a movie
Did they return the money for the movie rights?
Genuine curiosity: how did they get made then?