Bombadil and the film.
 

I was just watching the film again, reflecting that when I first saw it, I was disappointed that the Bombadil scene was left out. Actually, now I think it was probably a good idea to axe it, since it is probably impossible to do cinematographic justice to this part of the book without tumbling into the ridiculous or trite. What do you reckon?<BR> Still I would love to have seen the Withywindle and all those willow trees!

Yea the Tom-less pill was hard to swallow, but after consideration I realized the importance of a Bombadil-less film.<P>People like you and I (and fellow Barrow- downers) would appreciate a 5 hour movie with all the story's details - however most people can barely sit through the 3 hour movie we all had the chance to see. <P>Ain't it grand that we have all 4 books in the Lord of the Rings to get all the details of our beloved story?

This would surely depend on the director - by which I mean, the style of the movie - it certainly wouldn't have been possible in Jackson's film - Tom & the Old Forest couldn't have been made to fit. But Brian Sibley, who dramatised the BBC's LotR, did a radio adaptation of the Episode & it worked brilliantly. Its available through Amazon uk or the BBC website.<BR>For me it is an important episode - for the first time we see Frodo tempted, in the Barrow, to use the Ring for selfish ends - to escape from the Wight, leaving his friends to die. But he doesn't. This is Frodo's first test, & its an extreme one. Tom is a central figure of middle earth, whose importance, I sometimes feel, is missed.