View Single Post
Old 12-16-2012, 07:40 PM   #54
flyinghippos101
Legend
 
flyinghippos101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbo's hopeless slice View Post
hmm, I actually thought the LOTR movies did a brilliant job of realising the book(s), much better than I had expected.

It may have been because Jackson chose the elements of the story that most resonated with me and cut some of the things that had always annoyed me a bit
(Tom Bombadil and those damn songs, for example!)

Personally, I am looking forward to The Hobbit, but I do wonder how such a short(ish) book could possibly require two rather large movies to tell its tale..

(in a hole in the ground there lived an accountant?)
For the most part, I thought the adaptations were fairly well done too. Granted, there was a lot of cutting and shifting. Tom bombabil was definitely a reasonable cut. Bombabil is just so bizzarely out of synch with the ongoing plot, it didn't seem necessary to include him IMO. I remembering them mentioning that they had casting for Bombabil though.

I was a bit apprehensive when a I heard the adaptation was being split in three films too. But from what I've heard so far, I guess they're all about character development in this first film along with expanding on Gandalf's storyline. i'm not too miffed about the run time tbh, I can handle the slow burn and time taken to flesh out the characters, it only makes subsequent films that much more emotionally engaging.
__________________
2x Head Youtek Radical Pro
flyinghippos101 is offline   Reply With Quote