I wonder what his version would have been like as well. I heard that he had pulled out because of the time investment required for those movies.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Spoilers Middle Earth/The Hobbit/ Lord of the Rings
- Thread starter Huntn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually, I don't need a director who is a woman to make me detest Frodo; the books did that all by themselves, and I especially loathed the servility of the relationship with Samwise.
Quite apart from the subject of directors (and I have no doubt that a woman can direct this tale every bit as well as a male director, even if the perspective might differ a little), I am of the opinion that utter fidelity to the narrative - a rigid, almost religious fidelity to a narrative that could have done with some judicious editing - is not necessarily a good thing; whatever about the other characters, much of Frodo's tale was exceedingly tedious.
And, even if we allow that it took LOTR three movies to tell its story properly, I can see no way in which anything other than greed compels the Hobbit (a fine book, and interesting story, even if almost entirely lamentably lacking female characters - but somewhat redeemed by the fact that Bilbo was a most attractive character) to be told over three movies.
Not liking Tolkiens work is a completely different different discussion from the discussion of adaption and changing from the original. There is no female director for the Lord of the Rings movies that had Frodo so not relevant at all.
I personally like the story of Frodo. He has taken on a quest bigger then him and is seemingly the wrong person to do the job, most would think a strong hero type who can fight the orcs and conquer everything in his path is the right approach. In the story Frodo cannot even complete the task, it takes Gollum biting off his finger and then falling into the volcano. It is not for everyone for sure, but millions love the Tolkiens work dearly.
Samwise is the hero, IMO. He's lightning to Frodo's thunder. As Mark Twain once said, "Thunder is good, thunder is impressive, but it is lightning that does the work."
I appreciate and accept his stoic heroism; it is his servile relationship with Frodo that I cannot abide.
Obviously very different world views. Serving others is not something I look at as a bad thing, it is actually something I hold pretty high, putting someone else before myself. It is obviously rooted in Tolkiens Christian faith. A servant attitude is a massive part of the Christian attitude.
“The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
— Matthew 23:11–12
“Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
— Matthew 20:26–28
While his work was not allegorical like C.S. Lewis it was definitely influenced heavily by his faith.
Tolkien's writing shows that he is a product of his time. Samwise Gamgee was of a lower social status than Baggins. Sam had the role of being Frodo's batman--as in an orderly, not the Dark Knight. Because the "hero" was too busy heroically tripping over his own hairy feet and bumbling into trouble time and again, someone had to be around to make sure the job gets done. Even after Sam got the "hero" to the mouth of the volcano, he couldn't finish the job. You had one job, Frodo.😫
I like to imagine that Sam would push Mr. Frodo into Mount Doom if Gollum hadn't acted.🤭
Samwise worked for Frodo, he was no slave. In the end when they returned if you have read the books, Samwise ends up Mayor, has a wife and many children and moved into Bag End when Frodo went West. I am no lore expert of Lord of the Rings, just one who read it when I was younger and have loved the world and stories Tolkien told. There was a certain utopia element to The Shire. There was no one lording things over the other, they all lived in relative peace and harmony. Content lives gardening, farming, etc. No King and seeming little government. Sam was no forced slave, and was content in his role and position, that is something I admire. How many people are actually content? We are constantly being told we need this and that, the latest product and we will truly be happy, at least till the next year when the new model is released. People stuck in social media, doom scrolling, and everything else. No time to actually sit and smell the flowers because if they actually sat in a field they would be more focused on trying to capture the moment on their phone then actually be in the moment. I love this line from The Hobbit by a dwarf named Thorin who is on his death bed after a battle "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world". Basic sentiment is valuing simple pleasures and community over material wealth. There is much to admire in my opinion of the life of the Hobbits.
Last edited:
For me, Tolkien succeeded in creating a mythology where many others failed. His work has resonance and gravitas, a real heroic flavour, but more there is a sense of deeper truths showing through the veils.
If you consider Game of Thrones or Wheel of Time, in comparison they are small fry when held up against the depth of story that Tolkien provides.
If you consider Game of Thrones or Wheel of Time, in comparison they are small fry when held up against the depth of story that Tolkien provides.
Did you read the GoT books? Martin was on a role for GoT, it was complex, intriguing, creative, engrossing, until he burned out and sold out. For what it represents, it’s one of the best narratives of modern time, and despite the flaws, short changed nature of the TV series it’s still obe of the best ever made imo.
I gave up on Game of Thrones midway through volume four, A Feast of Crows. I found Martin’s writing insufficient in many ways. Every time he wrote ’Truth be told’ (and it would appear with tedious regularity) I would flinch. His editor must have been asleep on the job.
The GoT books I’d describe as belonging to an honourable line of pulp science and fantasy fiction. Page turners, certainly, and a diversion if one is inclined. In a different league altogether are Tolkien’s Rings books and, say, Ursula K Le Guin’s Earthsea treasures. Lord of the Rings in its book form is literature, art and poetry. The films: entertainment (and I enjoyed them very much).
I do reckon HBO made a decent effort at getting the GoT books onto the screen. I found the series impressive yet less than compelling.
The GoT books I’d describe as belonging to an honourable line of pulp science and fantasy fiction. Page turners, certainly, and a diversion if one is inclined. In a different league altogether are Tolkien’s Rings books and, say, Ursula K Le Guin’s Earthsea treasures. Lord of the Rings in its book form is literature, art and poetry. The films: entertainment (and I enjoyed them very much).
I do reckon HBO made a decent effort at getting the GoT books onto the screen. I found the series impressive yet less than compelling.
Indeed. The sear scale of Middle Earth's mythos dwarfs GoT mythos a many, many folds. Tolkien's Middle Earth spands millions of years and mulitiple realms. GoT deals mainly with a single continent and a few decades at best. It's like comparing an Cat 797 ore hauler to Silverado pickup.
I love how Earthsea magic is different from other fantasy works--like the Forgotten Realm series or Harry Potter. There is a balance, a price to pay when magic is used. Using magic to call up rain in one region can cause a drought in another part of the world. I like that. Earthsea magic cannot create or destroy which makes the idea easy to wrap my head around. With other magic, the total mass in the universe keeps changing everytime a mage conjures up something or disintegrates a monster. Y'all violating the Laws of Thermodynamics.
The books are way better. I'm still salty the Grey Lady aka Lady Stoneheart was excluded from the show. I was also disappointed the Mountain wasn't 8 feet tall in the show. I didn't mind Bronn's extended screen time on the show despite being a minor character in the book. The actor did such a great job, I view the HBO Bronn more Bronn than the book Bronn.🤗
I think that’s fair. But I think The Lord of the Rings is a book for the ages, in a hundred years it will still be popular.
I used to read a lot of science fiction and fantasy, and even the best of them have pretty much vanished from the landscape. Who now remembers David Eddings ‘The Belgariad’? Or Julian May’s ‘The Many Coloured Land’?
Game of Thrones had it’s moment due to the TV series, but I think that will turn out to be a thing of it’s time and may not age so well. The Lord of the Rings films will last, I think.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
― John Rogers
The Earthsea books I recall as amongst the best but not literature, it was still within touching distance of a lot of the other genre books. I think Gene Wolfe’s The Book of the New Sun is more literary although not as accessible.
How about the Eye would have been on them and they would have been swarmed immediately, this is beside the fact they could have flown directly into the unguarded entrance of Mt Doom, and there would not be much of a story. 😝
Yep. There are many reasons.
- The Nazguls ride fell beast that would have taken out a great eagle.
- No one can order the great eagles around. They help Gandalf out of respect and friendship.
- There is a possibility that the One Ring could corrupt the great eagle the hobbits rode on.