Hey dol! Merry dol! Get lost Tom!!! - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Son of Númenor · 09-15-2004, 04:47 AM

I personally am glad that Peter Jackson didn't include him - not because I don't like him, but because my mental image of him is so strong that any actor trying to play his part would have been a disappointment, and because the aura that Peter Jackson created for the hobbits' flight from the Shire would have suffered for a 10-to-15-minute Tom interlude.

dancing spawn of ungoliant · 09-15-2004, 05:37 AM

I agree with Son of Númenor. I think Tom isn't so central a character that he would have done much (positive) difference to the film. Besides, all the non-readers would probably have been quite confused about a character like Tom.

Mithalwen · 09-15-2004, 10:59 AM

I am afraid that I actively dislike Tom and his endless ghastly poetry... it was about the only exclusion ~I approved of.

Boromir88 · 09-15-2004, 01:14 PM

Ungoliant:

Quote:

Besides, all the non-readers would probably have been quite confused about a character like Tom.

Even most BOOK readers have trouble figuring out who/what Tom Bombadil is. Since it is an unanswered question Tolkien left for us to endlessly bicker about, we will never know. So yes, I agree, putting in Tom would have caused an utter amount of confusion, especially with non-book readers, but also with book readers too. I mean many non-book readers can't understand the concept of the Grey Havens, Bombadil is much more difficult and complex then the Grey Havens.

Encaitare · 09-15-2004, 01:40 PM

I wish he was in there, but it would have been nearly impossible. Those who hadn't read the books would have been terribly confused, and those who had would probably have been displeased by the movie's interpretation of him or his appearance.

The Perky Ent · 09-15-2004, 02:12 PM

I agree with Son of Numenor...again

Tom is too advance for technology and Peter Jackson (although many great things in the movie weren't)! My mental image would go haywire, and I'd never remember. To give a better example: When I first read Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone (or Philosophers Stone if your British), I had a great mental picture for everything. It was so perfect. I knew exactly what Harry looked like. But when the movie came out, seeing someone play Harry destoryed my mental picture, and I couldn't remember what I actually thought. I missed that

It didn't happen for LOTR because that image was much stronger, and I thought about it more often. I don't want Peter to destory my image of good ole Bombadil!

Boromir88 · 09-15-2004, 02:19 PM

Perky:

Quote:

But when the movie came out, seeing someone play Harry destoryed my mental picture

I actually got that feeling with LOTR. I mean, he destroyed my mental picture of all the characters. For some reason instead of making Legolas a dark-haired elf, he was blonde, in fact a lot of his elves were blonde, and there were very few blonde elves. I thought no matter how great a role Sean Bean did, he wasn't big enough for Boromir, and he also should have had dark hair like most Gondorians. Boromir was the strongest, broadest member of the fellowship, he needed to be bigger, but I loved Sean Bean. I also pictured Elendil to be a lot taller, I mean he was "Elendil the Tall." But, these are just nit-picky things that didn't get me furiously mad and stomp off, just saying my mental imaginations were destroyed, now I can't read a Legolas line without picturing some expert mumak slaying blonde elf.

dancing spawn of ungoliant · 09-17-2004, 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Even most BOOK readers have trouble figuring out who/what Tom Bombadil is.

Exactly!

I had terrible difficulties in picturing the elves in my mind when I first read LotR. After I saw the Fellowship, I adapted my frail image of the elves to correspond the movie version. I have same kind of difficulties with Tom. It would be easy if someone just showed me a picture: "Look, here's Tom, he looks like that." But since Tom is such a mysterious character, maybe it's appropriate to have a little blurred mental picture of him. Seeing him on the film would probably have been a disappointment.
Like The Saucepan Man said

Quote:

The difficulty would be in finding an actor who could portray the right mix of levity and underlying power.

Renzolicious · 04-24-2011, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I am afraid that I actively dislike Tom and his endless ghastly poetry... it was about the only exclusion ~I approved of.

I could not agree more.

Gothbogg the Ripper · 04-24-2011, 06:05 AM

I don't know, I quite liked the story of the Mewlips.

09-15-2004, 05:37 AM	#2
dancing spawn of ungoliant Mischievous Candle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: So near to Russia, so far from Japan, quite a long way from Cairo, lots of miles from Vietnam. Posts: 1,234	I agree with Son of Númenor. I think Tom isn't so central a character that he would have done much (positive) difference to the film. Besides, all the non-readers would probably have been quite confused about a character like Tom. __________________ Fenris Wolf

09-15-2004, 10:59 AM	#3
Mithalwen Pilgrim Soul Join Date: May 2004 Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle... Posts: 9,461	I am afraid that I actively dislike Tom and his endless ghastly poetry... it was about the only exclusion ~I approved of. __________________ “But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.” Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace

09-15-2004, 02:12 PM	#6
The Perky Ent Maniacal Mage Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Setting sail for Umbar, with Firefoot at my side! Posts: 3,297	I agree with Son of Numenor...again Tom is too advance for technology and Peter Jackson (although many great things in the movie weren't)! My mental image would go haywire, and I'd never remember. To give a better example: When I first read Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone (or Philosophers Stone if your British), I had a great mental picture for everything. It was so perfect. I knew exactly what Harry looked like. But when the movie came out, seeing someone play Harry destoryed my mental picture, and I couldn't remember what I actually thought. I missed that It didn't happen for LOTR because that image was much stronger, and I thought about it more often. I don't want Peter to destory my image of good ole Bombadil! __________________ 'But Melkor also was there, and he came to the house of Fëanor, and there he slew Finwë King of the Noldor before his doors, and spilled the first blood in the Blessed Realm; for Finwë alone had not fled from the horror of the Dark.'

04-24-2011, 06:05 AM	#10
Gothbogg the Ripper Wight Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Southend,U.K Posts: 113	I don't know, I quite liked the story of the Mewlips. __________________ Thanks for abandoning me for three years guys. I really enjoyed being a total outcast.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-15-2004, 04:47 AM	#1
Son of Númenor A Shade of Westernesse Join Date: May 2004 Location: The last wave over Atalantë Posts: 515	I personally am glad that Peter Jackson didn't include him - not because I don't like him, but because my mental image of him is so strong that any actor trying to play his part would have been a disappointment, and because the aura that Peter Jackson created for the hobbits' flight from the Shire would have suffered for a 10-to-15-minute Tom interlude.

09-15-2004, 01:40 PM	#5
Encaitare Bittersweet Symphony Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: On the jolly starship Enterprise Posts: 1,814	I wish he was in there, but it would have been nearly impossible. Those who hadn't read the books would have been terribly confused, and those who had would probably have been displeased by the movie's interpretation of him or his appearance.