I’m not sure whether I agree there would have been more suspense and wonder had the prologue been left out. For the ones among us who knew Lord of the Rings before, it is no surprise the ring is evil. But somehow, I don’t think the power and importance of the Ring could have come across in a believable way if we were solely informed of its origins by Gandalf. As classical authors very well knew, sometimes a story works better if you know what the issue is from the start. Should the Ring have come out of nowhere, I don’t think the audience would have been as intrigued. I really think those not familiar with Tolkien’s world need this little piece of background info and it contrasts nicely with the Shire-scene that follows. Even more, since not all people are big on the fantasy thing, the true identity of the Ring
(“What Ring? What’s the big deal, anyway?”) might have come off as slightly ridiculous, while the prologue does an extremely good job of drawing people into the mystery atmosphere of the trilogy.
I enjoyed the prologue very much and Cate Blanchett does an excellent job. Sure, not everything is correct, I presume, but I really felt it captured the mood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holbytlass
I think the biggest disservice of the prologue is that Bilbo really did come off looking like a thief. He finds a ring and someone is yelling 'lost, lost, my precious is lost'. So what does Bilbo do? Hurries and puts it in his pocket with a look of 'I hope I don't get caught'.
|
This is the only thing that bothered me too.