Lord of the Rings Movies vs Books. A difference in two tales.

[Micheal]

I love how this has turned into a Lord of the Rings thread. I'm okay with this. 

 

[Cdog923]

I love how this has turned into a Lord of the Rings thread. I'm okay with this. 

Tom Bombadil truthers, unite!

 

[The Dude]

Lord of the Rings is easily the best movie ever made.  The book is not even close to the best book ever written.  The book is still way better than the movie.  It do be like that sometimes. 

In both cases, there was no need to chop it up into three parts.  That's my only complaint with either.

 

[Enhance]

I have no idea why this was posted in the Husker football forum, so I moved it to a new home.

 

[Stone Cold]

I have no idea why this was posted in the Husker football forum, so I moved it to a new home.

Probably a good idea

 

[Mierin]

Amazon should have named it something else because the "series" is so far off from the books that it might as well be a different story. These aren't just minor differences either, these are major departures from the books.

I disagree.

 

[admo]

I don't like Peter Jackson movies.  He bores me.  The changes to suit his film.  And the original post said it best:

These major differences are as follows—1. differences in form; this includes changes made to the story by deleting or adding parts or spreading ideas over a long period of time, and 2. differences in substance, which included changing actual ideas and people in the story to suit the film. Some such changes include the changing of almost all the characters and changing events to reach the same outcome as the book.

The book was amazing.  I love books by J.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis.  

It's been decades, but I am curious to pick it up and read it again, but I am more so thinking about the lion the witch and the wardrobe.  

 

[Mierin]

The only thing left out that bothered me was The Scouring of the Shire. 

 

[teachercd]

Are they doing more of these movies?