June 24, 2002

Eliminating Passages...
D.C.

Hi, I'm Diana and this is my first time posting, although I've read a lot of the other articles.
It's great to see Tolkien has so many admirers!

I saw the movie LOTR twice, about a week ago, before reading the book. As a complete stranger to Tolkien's work and one who saw the movie without any expectations, I thought it was simply wonderful! As all movies that make me think long and hard about them, LOTR made me want to know more, if not everything, about it. I watched it a second time and borrowed the book. I've almost finished the first volume now, and I can say the book casts a new light upon the movie and its significance. I can finally understand the need to draw comparisons between the book and the movie, and even make reproaches to a movie that is outstanding when judged on its own.
(Peter Jackson's task was a hard one, and he's done a great job.)

Many of you have pointed out the discrepancies between the movie and the book, and there are indeed many - and I won't mention all of them.

I'm not sure if this has been said before, but Frodo does not leave on his quest the same day Bilbo leaves, but 17 years later! Frodo is 33 yrs old as the book opens with Bilbo's birthday party, and he's around 50 when he leaves the Shire. In the book he's described as a little "flabby" and looking forward to losing some weight! The entire discussion between Gandalf and Frodo about the Ring doesn't happen in one day, as Gandalf doesn't know much about the Ring in the beginning and it takes him many years to come back with news to Frodo.

I totally understand the need to cut off parts of the book in making the movie, but there are 2 ways in which PJ could have made things clearer and more consistent:
1. Why not employ a narrative voice once in a while, just like the one opening the movie, to make transitions - e.g. "And so they lived in harmony for 17 years, until news came of..." ?
2. Why not simply announce "17 years later" on the screen, as they did in the beginning, with the 60 year-interval between Bilbo's finding the ring and the continuation of the story.

Another opinion: some unnecessary changes have been made in the movie, and I don't see why. For instance, Frodo is not the one who answers the riddle "Speak ,and enter". It's Gandalf!
And it's Frodo who asks Boromir not to disturb the water in Moria, not Aragorn (Strider).
I feel PJ should have tried to stay true to the book when possible.

Finally, these are just opinions, and in no way do I pretend to be an expert in the art of movie-making. Oh, for those who still consider LOTR a trilogy, it is not! It's simply a big book divided into 3 volumes.

Sorry for this long message, but I'm becoming really enthusiastic and passionate about Tolkien. I'm not sure what PJ set out to accomplish with his movie (big profits aside), but as long as there are people who see it and think, "I must read the book!", the movie will endure. After all, maybe its foremost merit is that of making people (like me) discover the amazing world of Tolkien. Thanks and nice to meet you all!