Originally Posted by Timbo's hopeless slice
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.