Subject for the Second film?

[Galendor]

[QUOTE=Sauron the White;540402]

Having an Tolkien expert in on the film process cannot be a bad thing.... can it?
Having accuracy and more complete detail of those bridge events hinted at in the Appendicies but dealt more fully elsewhere cannot be a bad thing ... can it?[

STW, I agree of course, having a Tolkien expert in the film process cannot be a bad thing! But since it is understandable that the Tolkien Estate would not want that position, I nominate you, William Cloud Hickli, davem, and alatar. Just think of the arguments (and jokes from alatar) that would occur on the set. Jackson would have to hold his head in his hands or just run and hide.

I'm no genius either, but I have a suspicion that Jackson started out with great intentions of faithfulness to Tolkien, and that may be why many of us have fewer problems with the FOTR movie. But as the years passed, his own vision of the tone and substance of the movies became stronger - and understandably so. After all, he was immersed in it for years. And each time his 'version' of LOTR was presented to the public, he was strongly rewarded at the box office and with film awards. Now I suspect he feels more or less fully affirmed in his right to make alterations to the tone and substance of Tolkien's stories. And the vast majority of movie-goers having no interest in the books might agree. Action movies with moments of seriousness punctuated with base humor and a soundtrack designed to tell the audience how it should feel at any given moment seem to be quite popular. Being more of a pessimist, I fear we "purists" may be in for some disappointments in the future Hobbit movies due to Jackson's affirmation as a visionary of Middle Earth. But most moviegoers won't be disappointed.