[Sir Kohran]

I think one of them is on Channel Four this evening?

LOL, a while ago my younger brother was hammering on my door screaming, 'Lord of the Rings is on!' I didn't watch most of it but saw the last half hour. I was amazed at how primitive the theatrical version felt compared to the extended.

Therefor, we end up with a very entertaining movie, yet a bad representation of Tolkien's story.

This seems very unfair. It wasn't perfect, but it certainly wasn't 'bad' - the sadness, heroism and sheer spirit of the books are definitely there, if in a lesser form.

I believe one of those so called experts PJ hired was a self proclaimed 'dwarvish expert.' I find that funny considering Tolkien never created a language for the dwarves (besides the names of a few places, people, and the saying 'Baruk Khazad! Khazad-Aimenu'). So this self-proclaimed expert in the dwarvish language, was just making up his own bilge.

Oh really? What about all the various Elvish lines in the movies which used Tolkien's languages, or the Elvish lines used by Enya in 'May It Be'? Viggo even asked for more Elvish lines because he enjoyed using different languages.

I'm sorry but when the author of the book says that something doesn't belong in his story, or that something is 'essential' to his story. And the director responds with remarks of 'that's just silly,' and to prove his point that it's silly he goes directly against what the author said. That's plain out arrogance and disrespect.

This just sounds ridiculous. Of all the things to criticise, you find a type of food being used a problem?

but when dealing with whether these movies are a good representation of the books...it is surely not trivial.

But it *is*. Anyone who judges an adaptation by whether or not it includes something so small as a tomato just comes across as nit-picking to an insane level.

Sorry if anyone's taken any offense, but I'm not going to crown Jackson the greatest director this world has ever seen, with the toilet humor and bilge he pulls.

Oh really? Does Gandalf's fight against the Balrog, Boromir's last stand and Aragorn's promise to him, Sam willing to drown to follow his master, Gandalf and Eomer's arrival at Helm's Deep, Faramir turning away from temptation and releasing the hobbits, Sam's tearful speech to Frodo, Faramir's mournful ride, Rohan's epic charge in the golden morning, Sam carrying Frodo up the mountain, Aragorn's speech to the soldiers at the Black Gate, the final victory and celebration in Gondor, Frodo's last farewell to his comrades and Sam's return to his home and family count as toilet humour and bilge?

Compare all those beautiful moments to other 'fantasy films' (**** like Eragon and Dungeons And Dragons) and maybe you will see just how great these films were. Not perfect, but great.

I also did not like the changes of the Elves in the movie. I much prefer the book Elves, they have a much more 'humanistic' quality about them in the books. They're flawed in the books and that makes them more lovable.

Actually I think the Elves were one of the things they got right - the physical beauty with a tint of sadness. Also, the book 'version' of the Elves seems nigh on perfect. The film Elves struck me as more flawed (Elrond and even Galadriel change their minds in ROTK and TTT respectively on how to treat Men).

And I never once found the Elves 'lovable'. That sounds vaguely like a cuddly animal, probably not what Tolkien imagined.