I've always wondered why so many people complain about Tom Bombadil not being in the LOTR movies. I've never seen why he would have to be in them... when you're making a movie, even a 3 hour long one, you don't have the luxury of scenes or characters that are completely non-essential to the plot, and let's face it, Tom Bombadil, as interesting as he may be, is absoultely extraneous to the plot of the story. It's always been obvious to me, but apparently not to a lot of LOTR fans, that Tolkien had a really interesting idea for a character when he created Tom Bombadil, but couldn't think of anything interesting and/ or useful for him to do... in the books Tom is just a comma, pausing the plot to show off how interesting and eccentric he is, after which the plot carries on as if Tom had not existed. Peter Jackson simply could not afford to waste film on such a character, not even for bonus material, and I agree with decision completely.
1 comment:
I've always wondered why so many people complain about Tom Bombadil not being in the LOTR movies. I've never seen why he would have to be in them... when you're making a movie, even a 3 hour long one, you don't have the luxury of scenes or characters that are completely non-essential to the plot, and let's face it, Tom Bombadil, as interesting as he may be, is absoultely extraneous to the plot of the story. It's always been obvious to me, but apparently not to a lot of LOTR fans, that Tolkien had a really interesting idea for a character when he created Tom Bombadil, but couldn't think of anything interesting and/ or useful for him to do... in the books Tom is just a comma, pausing the plot to show off how interesting and eccentric he is, after which the plot carries on as if Tom had not existed. Peter Jackson simply could not afford to waste film on such a character, not even for bonus material, and I agree with decision completely.
Post a Comment