In a dream scenario where they can get the right people to do it, I would vastly prefer a TV series. Even with the extended editions, there’s a ton of material in the books we didn’t get to see. Things like the whole sequence with the elves early in the books being turned into “hey look there’s some elves”, no Tom Bombadil, the journey from Rivendel to Moria. And that’s just the first book.
I think most would agree the world building is one of the best aspects of the books and there just isn’t time for that in a feature film.
As some kind of “filler” in a TV series is actually the only way I can see the Tom Bombadil content working on the screen. It’s just too specific to work in any other way IMO, even though I would like to see something. (Especially with Jack Black as Tom Bombadil, can you imagine him ring-a-ding dillowing xD)
It was the same for me, I didn’t spend time thinking about who could play Tom, but when I saw this painting, I knew Jack would be perfect. He would be so naturally comfortable in that role, I imagine.
Idk if you watched the last of us, but like that Bill episode, which is mostly disconnected from the greater narrative, didn’t feel out of place in the series to me. That’s what I’m getting at. I want to see all of it at a slower pace.
I don’t think there is a version of our world where Tom Bombadil is done well onscreen. While Jack Black has the energy for him, I would see Jack Black and not Bombadil Hey-Dol-Merry-Dol-ing.
Yeah maybe/probably. That’s always my biggest problem with famous actors, you know them as actors and thus the bridge to the character is further. I like when new/unknown actors are cast for large roles for that reason.
It’s one of the core parts. Makes sense PJ and most commenters agree in discarding it. One can say it’s the closest we get in the book to characters talking to Middle-Earth itself. (Something no sane person would discard from Narnia books, for example.)
There’s a difference, metaphorically, between the ballad and the accompanying ambient harp play, and in general background music.
The former is inconvenient - like a book or a tale. It conveys a story, a position, a morale, which inevitably leads to conflict and conflict is bad for business. It also can’t be generated from existing stories and positions to cover all audiences, they’ll average to the same bland product. It can only be borne out of human instincts and experiences. Even totalitarian propaganda has historically used real feelings and experiences.
While the latter can be generated and pipelined.
So the modern “consumerist” recommendation for art is to never look at the root, never search for the ballad itself, only for tables and food and harps and ambient play and windows and stones and the weather. And even if you look at what’s supposed to be the art at the root, it’s assumed that the modern way is to only rationalize it, find technical, formal similarities and intersections with something else, like a style or a touch, but never allow it to bloom naturally. Getting at the essence of things is seen as impolite and asocial.
(Reminds me of that quote about white color and wisdom.)
In a dream scenario where they can get the right people to do it, I would vastly prefer a TV series. Even with the extended editions, there’s a ton of material in the books we didn’t get to see. Things like the whole sequence with the elves early in the books being turned into “hey look there’s some elves”, no Tom Bombadil, the journey from Rivendel to Moria. And that’s just the first book.
I think most would agree the world building is one of the best aspects of the books and there just isn’t time for that in a feature film.
As some kind of “filler” in a TV series is actually the only way I can see the Tom Bombadil content working on the screen. It’s just too specific to work in any other way IMO, even though I would like to see something. (Especially with Jack Black as Tom Bombadil, can you imagine him ring-a-ding dillowing xD)
I had never actually fan casted anyone as Tom Bombadil, but now I will forever have Jack Black in my head.
Although, knowing Hollywood, it’d be Chris Pratt.
It was the same for me, I didn’t spend time thinking about who could play Tom, but when I saw this painting, I knew Jack would be perfect. He would be so naturally comfortable in that role, I imagine.
Idk if you watched the last of us, but like that Bill episode, which is mostly disconnected from the greater narrative, didn’t feel out of place in the series to me. That’s what I’m getting at. I want to see all of it at a slower pace.
Yes! That’s what I meant, not a filler in the sense of boring content, but as a neat excursion outside of the main plot line. :)
That LoU episode is one of my favourite episodes over any series btw 💚
I don’t think there is a version of our world where Tom Bombadil is done well onscreen. While Jack Black has the energy for him, I would see Jack Black and not Bombadil Hey-Dol-Merry-Dol-ing.
Yeah maybe/probably. That’s always my biggest problem with famous actors, you know them as actors and thus the bridge to the character is further. I like when new/unknown actors are cast for large roles for that reason.
He would pronounce it “hrrrring-a-ding dillow.”
But then we’d have Kyle Gass as Goldberry.
It’s one of the core parts. Makes sense PJ and most commenters agree in discarding it. One can say it’s the closest we get in the book to characters talking to Middle-Earth itself. (Something no sane person would discard from Narnia books, for example.)
Careful what you wish for. You’ll get a “Tolkien Cinematic Universe” pile of algorithm driven ersatz ‘content’.
That doesn’t happen in my made up scenario where the world is good lol
There’s a difference, metaphorically, between the ballad and the accompanying ambient harp play, and in general background music.
The former is inconvenient - like a book or a tale. It conveys a story, a position, a morale, which inevitably leads to conflict and conflict is bad for business. It also can’t be generated from existing stories and positions to cover all audiences, they’ll average to the same bland product. It can only be borne out of human instincts and experiences. Even totalitarian propaganda has historically used real feelings and experiences.
While the latter can be generated and pipelined.
So the modern “consumerist” recommendation for art is to never look at the root, never search for the ballad itself, only for tables and food and harps and ambient play and windows and stones and the weather. And even if you look at what’s supposed to be the art at the root, it’s assumed that the modern way is to only rationalize it, find technical, formal similarities and intersections with something else, like a style or a touch, but never allow it to bloom naturally. Getting at the essence of things is seen as impolite and asocial.
(Reminds me of that quote about white color and wisdom.)
It’s literally soulless.