Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost" data-source="post: 323669" data-attributes="member: 4720">Thanks for the thoughts, guys.&nbsp; It's opened my eyes a little on the utility of those parts of the story, but I still feel like it was forced.&nbsp; I think that both the movie and The Hobbit proved all those points about Hobbits without boring people to tears.The dialogue between the hobbits and the entire character of Samwise screamed &quot;parochial.&quot;&nbsp; If Bombadil was only there to drive that point home once again, a decent editor might have said, &quot;Haven't we beat that point into the ground?&quot;And the hobbits did a number of things that were dangerous, scary, and significantly more than unusual (barrow-downs, nearly getting eaten by trees, etc.) but they were all COMPLETELY unrelated to the main plot and had no sense of urgency.&nbsp; Furthermore, the entire section of the book made the Black Riders somewhat laughable.&nbsp; They were real scary once they got close, but for such great trackers, it sure took them a long time to figure out where the hobbits were.&nbsp; Especially considering the lazy pace they were setting.barsoomcore- I get the picture, but again, the movie did the same job in a tenth the time and with ten times the intensity.&nbsp; In the book, getting to Bree was nothing more than a LONG and largely boring walk through the park.&nbsp; In the movie, it was tense and exciting.&nbsp; In the book, the journey from Bree to Rivendell was slightly scarier, thanks entirely to the scene on Weathertop, perhaps they had upgraded from a suburban park to Central Park, NY.&nbsp; In the movie, the hobbits actually had a tough time of it, especially Frodo.If I were Frodo, after the events in the book leading up to the Council of Elrond, I would have been ready to keep going.&nbsp; If what he'd seen to that point was indicative of what Sauron had to throw at him, he could probably walk right across Mordor, stopping for 5 or 6 meals a day with a big sign reading &quot;Ringbearer HERE) strapped to his back.&nbsp; Whereas after the same time period in the movie, I'd have been ready to shoot myself in the foot to avoid the draft.Also, are we suggesting that Tolkien didn't intend the reader to KNOW that Frodo was going to hold onto the ring past Rivendell?&nbsp; If so, I think my intelligence has been insulted.&nbsp; Tolkien may have been somewhat cynical, but I don't think he gave his audience THAT little credit.EDIT:&nbsp; I also think that if the point of those sequences was to develop the character of the hobbits, it gave a BAD impression:&nbsp; &quot;You're carrying around a powerful evil artifact, and you're stopping for HOW MANY meals a day?!&nbsp; &amp;#@$!!!&nbsp; I've got belly button lint smarter than that!&nbsp; Get your furry little feet moving!&quot;Of course, that's just my opinion...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost, post: 323669, member: 4720"] Thanks for the thoughts, guys. It's opened my eyes a little on the utility of those parts of the story, but I still feel like it was forced. I think that both the movie and The Hobbit proved all those points about Hobbits without boring people to tears. The dialogue between the hobbits and the entire character of Samwise screamed "parochial." If Bombadil was only there to drive that point home once again, a decent editor might have said, "Haven't we beat that point into the ground?" And the hobbits did a number of things that were dangerous, scary, and significantly more than unusual (barrow-downs, nearly getting eaten by trees, etc.) but they were all COMPLETELY unrelated to the main plot and had no sense of urgency. Furthermore, the entire section of the book made the Black Riders somewhat laughable. They were real scary once they got close, but for such great trackers, it sure took them a long time to figure out where the hobbits were. Especially considering the lazy pace they were setting. barsoomcore- I get the picture, but again, the movie did the same job in a tenth the time and with ten times the intensity. In the book, getting to Bree was nothing more than a LONG and largely boring walk through the park. In the movie, it was tense and exciting. In the book, the journey from Bree to Rivendell was slightly scarier, thanks entirely to the scene on Weathertop, perhaps they had upgraded from a suburban park to Central Park, NY. In the movie, the hobbits actually had a tough time of it, especially Frodo. If I were Frodo, after the events in the book leading up to the Council of Elrond, I would have been ready to keep going. If what he'd seen to that point was indicative of what Sauron had to throw at him, he could probably walk right across Mordor, stopping for 5 or 6 meals a day with a big sign reading "Ringbearer HERE) strapped to his back. Whereas after the same time period in the movie, I'd have been ready to shoot myself in the foot to avoid the draft. Also, are we suggesting that Tolkien didn't intend the reader to KNOW that Frodo was going to hold onto the ring past Rivendell? If so, I think my intelligence has been insulted. Tolkien may have been somewhat cynical, but I don't think he gave his audience THAT little credit. EDIT: I also think that if the point of those sequences was to develop the character of the hobbits, it gave a BAD impression: "You're carrying around a powerful evil artifact, and you're stopping for HOW MANY meals a day?! &#@$!!! I've got belly button lint smarter than that! Get your furry little feet moving!" Of course, that's just my opinion... [/QUOTE]

Verification