August 8, 2001

HP, Bombadil, and Arwen
Stephanie C.

Well, we've gotten some good discussion going here!

Re: Harry Potter. Are we threatened by the HP books? Why not just sit back and have a little fun with them? Time and people will judge their quality. They may not be as serious in substance or workmanship as LOTR, but I'm not sure I could stand that kind of serious all the time as long as I'm not being taken for a dead-head. And HP addresses a much different time of life and environment.

Re: Tom. Pictures can certainly do a lot. Certainly, Jackson could find a way to portray the Old Forest well. I just wonder whether the time it would take to introduce it all (and any of the History of it would have to come from the Hobbits) would be well spent, particularly since this sequence seems to have such a limited impact on the rest of the movie. Apart from the swords (and there are a number of very quick ways of explaining them), nothing else plays into the War. Tolkien, as far as I understand, had a certain affection for Bombadil (which probably came from background that's never discussed in the LOTR). I don't think Tolkien himself would say that Tom should be presented in a movie as he is presented in LOTR; there's either not enough or way too much to tell.

Question: If you were going to include Bombadil, how much screen time would you give the events in the Old Forest and at Bombadil's house? How would you present it?

Re: Arwen. I agree. Keep her role pretty much to what's in the books. Not as much fun for the screenwriters, granted, but I think they'd be surprised at how much their audience might appreciate a light touch in this area. As I might say of a lot of cinematic changes to the original story that we hear about.

Cheers! Hope you're all having a good day!