Will The Hobbit do damage to the books?

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

Weren't the Tolkien purists upset at the Lord of the Rings movies too?

Nothing against you, LadyB., but every time I see the word "purist" in conjunction with a person irritated or upset about the manner in which Jackson buggered the Bagginses, I wonder.

For instance, I wonder what is the opposite of Purist? The Illiterati? or simply Impurists? I've never given a name to these contrarians.

[Rhod the Red]

I wouldn't say so.

By including characters & elements that were left out of TLOTR
they're compensating with a 3-movie provision. I can appreciate
that.

[Pomegranate]

I think what purist means for me in these kind of situations are people who are not able to accept that the movies are interpretations, not illustrations. While I'm not saying that any of you guys would particularly be such - I think a lot of what has been said here is valid and reasonable - there are quite a lot of people who have not been able to accept that movie as a template is very different from books and has a different set of usable devices for storytelling (and thus lacks the option of, for example, having 13 characters that, apart from some exceptions, only differ in the colour of their caps), and that what we are seeing here is something that Peter Jackson sees inside his head when reading the books, rather than something that should be taken for canon.

That being said, I am mildly worried about these not ending up being good films. The Hobbit as a book has at least for me had the status of nice and easy-to-read fantasy: if I have friends who are new to the genre, I could suggest they read that, to lure them into the world. The movie clearly doesn't seem to have that simplicity - it looks like it might end up being a lot more confusing than other recent fantasy movies. Then again, it's hard to say anything just yet - what I'm mainly concerned about is the ability of the team to merge the two stories together in a meaningful manner and to explain the premises of the Dol Guldur plot for those who don't understand it beforehand, and there's nothing in the trailers to suggest them having succeeded or failed in that. But time will show: I'm sure a lot of people will go see the first movie, and the level of success in that one will determine the fate of the others.

Regarding Bombur (looking at you, Pilgrim): It might just be that I haven't read The Hobbit in a while, but I can't see it as degrading his character a lot, if PJ'd base it solely on weight - it isn't that far from it in the book. In the book most of the dwarves are "the dwarves" and that's the end of their person - this ignoring Thorin and Balin, and Fili, Kili and Bombur (Fili and Kili are younger and that's their role, Bombur's lazy and fat and doesn't want to accept being reminded/treated through his weight, but that's really the extent of it). Or can you tell me a deeper characterisation of Bombur? What should PJ have put in in order to make him become/stay a full character? I do understand perfectly the negative feelings people had about Legolas and Gimli being treated as the comical sidekicks, since there was actually something to be lost/changed there, but doesn't Tolkien himself use Bombur as the funny fat guy?

[LadyBrooke]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Nothing against you, LadyB., but every time I see the word "purist" in conjunction with a person irritated or upset about the manner in which Jackson buggered the Bagginses, I wonder.

For instance, I wonder what is the opposite of Purist? The Illiterati? or simply Impurists? I've never given a name to these contrarians.

I have no idea, given that I would hardly label myself a purist (not caring that much about Bagginses or Hobbits in general.) I won't give my thoughts on the opposite of Purist, since Purist has all sorts of negative connotations for me...I would say that I think that there's a difference between being a purist and being upset that PJ messed up a character. One, to me, is the kind folks that chase me down and yell at me about stories labeled crack/humor not following the books exactly...the other is a valid thing. It's the middle ground that gets tricky, especially when it's not clear if people are complaining because they truly dislike something, or just for the sake of complaining....