Viewing Thread:
"LOTR - Movie or Book?"

Dunno if this has been asked before but it's an interesting question.

I'm not going to be pretentious about it either - I tried reading the books and they were boring. The movie was much more enjoyable.

How about you?

I liked Tom Bombadil... Robin Williams would have been good I think.

I would say I prefer the movies as I dislike the writing style of Tolkien and am not keen on the genre even in the movies. It's a bit too warhammer for my likings with elves and goblins and other mythical creatures. It's a bit airy fairy for my liking. Anyway that's my reasoning although it isn't very profound.

Yeah, exactly what I was thinking. The Good Life Briers, with the red cheeks, twinkle in his eye and all that. First time I saw The Good Life, I saw him as Bombadil.

Stryke wrote:
> If they'd cast Richard Briers as Tom Bombadil it would've been genius.

Oh my god, i can totally see him in the part. He is getting on a bit now though, if he was in the same shape as when he was in The Good Life he would be ideal.

I find it very hard to read books, once I get interested in them and find the time I seem to enjoy the odd book but most of the time I give up. Not really into books.

That being said though if you find a good book it is usually better than the film - more chance to let your imagination wonder and create your own vision of whats going on instead of just watching what is there for you to see.

If they'd cast Richard Briers as Tom Bombadil it would've been genius. Tom is crucial to the story. He's more powerful that all the characters in the film. Especially Sauron. Put together.

The books are better, there was far too much detail to include it all in the films. Don't get me wrong, the films are great, but they lack so much, even from the early points when they don't go into the forest and meet Tom Bombadil, instead they just arrive in Bree.

MoJoJoJo wrote:
> I stopped reading the book before the little midgets even met Strider.
> I guess that makes me ignorant. But it sucked.
>
> However, since I did spend 15 quid on the trilogy, I'll start reading
> it again sooner or later.

I've just got past the arrival to the Prancing Pony - it seems to be getting better now.

I too didn't really enjoy the part about Tom Bombadillo.

What Cyclone and The Cookie said. The books are infinitely better. Which takes nothing away from the awesome event that was the films. But that any LotR film fan aside and tell "The Fellowship would've failed without Glorfindel" and they'll go "Who? No, it was Xena:Warrior Arwen." This is why the books are better. Simply - depth.

I stopped reading the book before the little midgets even met Strider. I guess that makes me ignorant. But it sucked.

However, since I did spend 15 quid on the trilogy, I'll start reading it again sooner or later.