View Single Post
Old 12-16-2012, 06:40 PM   #54
flyinghippos101's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,275

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