January 10, 2002

The Lost Fellowship
Brett C.

Reading essays like the one by Dan H., who I think made some very interesting points, made me think back to my first experience with LOTR, which was to see Bakshi's animated version when it was released in the 70's. Naturally it motivated me to read the books. But if you compare Bakshi's script with PJ's, it quickly becomes apparent that the animated movie is a good deal truer to Tolkien's dialogue as written, and includes, or rather does not modify, certain elements of the story. For example, Frodo's defiance of the Riders at Weathertop and the Ford. The 70's movie does fall down in many key areas, alas; Arwen is left out completely, and the significance of Anduril is never really explained. But then continue to compare the two and there are some very strong similarities - the omission of Bombadil, the inclusion of the Isengard scene where Gandalf is captured, the escape of Gandalf explained to Frodo at Rivendell, the removal of much of the Lothlorien events. Now anybody whose been reading my other submissions should know I ADORE the new movie, but how about a lighthearted discussion of how it compares to the old one story-wise [not effects or detail wise - there simply is no comparison].

I hope it will not offend anyone submitting to or reading this forum, but in the interests of keeping things light, maybe we could also discuss-
1. Did PJ's Balrog have wings? [not do Balrogs in the book have wings, which is just far too controversial in my experience]
2. Who suffered more; Bombadil ommited completely, or Radagast replaced with a moth?
3. Should perhaps PJ's Nazgul not wear robes made of flannelette and died in a mixture of black tar and kerosene?

Okay, 2 and 3 are for laughs, but seriously - the Balrog...anybody?