Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whizbang Dustyboots" data-source="post: 8859963" data-attributes="member: 11760">I think most works could benefit from cuts, especially ones where their length isn't based on how much quality content they have to offer, but on artificial constraints (X number of episodes of Y length cut into Z segments separated by ad breaks).Remove those constraints -- which, yes, can sometimes be the impetus for great creativity, but sometimes cannot -- and include what's needed to tell the best version of the story, no more, no less.Most of the time, as Coco Chanel will tell you, you're better off cutting to make the rest shine.At the risk of more people slapping me on ignore, I think removing Tom Bombadil improves LotR.The values that he allegedly brings to the story -- representing that it's a wide, magical world full of ancient mysteries -- are shown in other, better ways in the story already and Shelob, for instance, doesn't make everyone stop and say "wait, what the hell is going on here?"I think the character's inclusion was just JRRT doing something fun for himself, rather than what best served the overall story. He's certainly allowed to do that, but I don't think it benefited the story.In contrast, I think LotR is a story primarily about the Shire and the hobbits maturing as a nation and stepping forth onto the world stage. Merry and Pippin are a big part of that, especially as they each come to separately earn respect and acclaim in the world of Men in a way that Frodo, who is so terribly damaged by the end, cannot.I also think that Peter Jackson excluding the Sharkey sequence from the end of Return of the King misses out on the "real" ending for the story. In a movie that has nine hours of "final scenes," it amazes me that none of them are the Sharkey story.</blockquote>

Verification