Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some researchers consider Tom to be the 'reader'
Really? Thats actually a super interesting theory that I had never considered before. Any more info, I'd love to look into this.
Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
211–220 of 349 posts
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t forget the how the entire character of Gimli the dwarf was replaced with some sort of clown.
They lost me at dwarf tossing.
The axe to the ring was bad enough, but when the character later explicitly suggested that they go through Moria, ranting about food and beer, that’s when I knew we had gotten a clown on our hands. By the time the tossing was discussed, I was thoroughly disillusioned about the character, and expected no better.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
What podcast is that? I'm just reading the books for the first time.
Tangentially related, the BBC published a pretty solid radio adaptation of LOTR in the 80's: https://archive.org/details/the-lord-of-the-rings-bbc-radio-... (no sign of Tom Bombadil here either though, IIRC)
Old Forest section was dramatised later (though they couldnt get the same cast)
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tales-Perilous-Realm-Full-Cast-Dram...
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#214> Possibly the least liked character in The Lord of the Rings. A childish figure so disliked by fans of the book that few object to his absence from all adaptations of the story. I've been a fan of Tolkien for decades, and this doesn't match up with my experience at all...Tolkien fans seem to generally love Tom, and many were deeply disappointed that he wasn't in the movies (even though his exclusion makes perfect se…
Since my school days, I have not met anyone who dislikes Tom.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#215Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
It provides some pretty key context to where Merry got his blade from and why it is able to break the spell and make the Witch King killable. Bit of a better explanation than Eowyn's "I am no man."
I think “I am no man” is a perfectly good explanation in the movie. It implies that the witch king is relying on a prophesy he doesn’t fully understand (rather than a spell). “If Croesus goes to war, he will destroy a great empire.”
There's also a strong tie between this kind of prophecy and Tolkien's (and Anglo-Saxon literature generally's) love of the riddle form; "riddles in the dark" draws clear inspiration from Vafþrúðnismál, which doubles as both prophecy and riddles. Along these lines, I also recommend Adam Roberts's The Riddles of The Hobbit.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He was certainly one of mine & my sibling's favourite characters. Why? He doesn't actually do anything except drone on and on about the color of his boots. He doesn't advance the story in any way (which is why it is so easy to omit him in adaptations).
He's extremely mysterious and in a good way. He is one of the only characters able to just casually put on the one ring with seemingly no effect and then give it back immediately afterwards. I think he gives off eldritch horror vibes, but in a mostly benevolent way. If everyone else were ants, he would be an etymologist intrigued by our behavior or something.
> He is one of the only characters able to just casually put...
He is the only character in the middle earth that can do that actually. The ring, and its immense power, has control over everyone else incl. Gandalf, Galadriel, and Sauron.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t forget the how the entire character of Gimli the dwarf was replaced with some sort of clown.
They lost me at dwarf tossing.
With that one line of dialog I was snatched out of this carefully crafted fantasy world and pulled back to our (rather sad) present.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can argue that much of the books can be eliminated because they're just not Hollywood, reading is for boomers after all. The origin of the blade is relevant because they nearly died in getting it, and because it came from the tomb of a prince who himself died battling the Witch King, so in a sense he obtained vengeance from beyond the grave. "Wow, this sword just turned out to be magic, what a coincidence" isn't…
Film--even a whole trilogy of films--is a different medium from books. Books are in general much more tolerant of diversions that don't move the story forward. Bombadil was pretty much a diversion. The films also had to deal with the fact that the LoTR books had a lot of material after the ring was destroyed--and that's not even counting all the material in the appendix of RoTK. Say whatever positive things you like…
I don't think it was "a mess" (just reread it this spring). Books support a lot more alternatives to structuring a story than most movies, with their tight time limits, want to explore.
That doesn't mean movies are better: in fact, movies are clearly more limited and worse, from the point of view of telling long, complicated stories. But people enjoy movies (me too), so... compromises.
Re: Oldest and Fatherless: The Terrible Secret of Tom Bombadil (2011)
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will venture further out on the speculative limb, and predict that in 1000 years when virtual reality subsumes reality, that Middle Earth (and the larger Tolkien world) will become the dominant reality - as it doesn't and may never have any competition for that role.
Tolkien either defined or at least cemented what Elves, Orcs, Dwarfs and Halflings are like (including their culture, environments and architecture). Almost all of fantasy is keeping more or less close to those definitions. If this influence continues to hold, then the popular fantasy VR reality doesn't need to be Tolkien World. It can stand completely on its own and still generally look and feel like Middle Earth wo…
True, but my premise is that it will be anchored in Arda and the stories and characters of the world he created.