Poll of the Day > I really wish Peter Jackson didn't just cut out entire chapters from FotR

(+) Yeah! (+)

It was a great movie but it could have been even greater if they kept the full story
---

Yeah the problem with the movies is that they weren't long enough
---

would have been an 8 hour movie

Certain parts I feel weren't necessary for the story as a whole. I woulda like to see a Tom Bombadil scene but I feel this part was too minor to make a difference in the long run.
---

InfestedAdam posted...

Certain parts I feel weren't necessary for the story as a whole. I woulda like to see a Tom Bombadil scene but I feel this part was too minor to make a difference in the long run.

The old ps2 game had that part in

My most hated part in any game
---

Oops_All_Berrys posted...

Yeah the problem with the movies is that they weren't long enough

The only problem was that they changed stuff from the book

GasMonkey posted...

would have been an 8 hour movie

8 hours of perfection, im fine with that
---

On another note, I would love to see a TV series based on The Silmarillion. If it can be done on par with the A Game of Throne series, I think it can work out well. But I want it to be done with an actual budget. The Dune TV series was kinda off-putting even if parts were more accurate to the books than what the movie showed.
---

I really wish Peter Jackson never made The Hobbit
---

It's ok. Good movies.
---

Blighboy posted...

I really wish Peter Jackson never made The Hobbit

I wish he just made 1 and just went off the book, and used effects like LotR instead of cheap cgi garbage
---

Is Fotr a misspell, or do they have some new combo for LoTR and Hobbit etc?
---

wolfy42 posted...

Is Fotr a misspell, or do they have some new combo for LoTR and Hobbit etc?

Fellowship
---

wolfy42 posted...

Is Fotr a misspell, or do they have some new combo for LoTR and Hobbit etc?

...Fellowship of the Ring you normie
---

the movie really couldv'e used an extra hour or so of Bilbo explaining why he hates each and every one of his Bday party attendees
---

Oh lol:)

I never liked Tolkien, he's too shakespearian for me.
---

wolfy42 posted...

Oh lol:)

I never liked Tolkien, he's too shakespearian for me.

Tolkien was a linguist by trade, not an author, and it shows.

His world-building is amazing but the books have a TON of filler that has no bearing on the main story
---

HylianFox posted...

the movie really couldv'e used an extra hour or so of Bilbo explaining why he hates each and every one of his Bday party attendees

That woulda been enjoyable. The Party Tree is one of my more favorite part of the story. I think the movie coulda elaborate more as well when Elrond gave a history lesson to those representatives.

On another note, was there a reason Elves had their own representatives at that meeting when Elrond was also an Elf or was he trying to just be a mediator?
---

InfestedAdam posted...

On another note, was there a reason Elves had their own representatives at that meeting when Elrond was also an Elf or was he trying to just be a mediator?

weren't they Lorien elves? or from somewhere that wasn't Rivendell
---

HylianFox posted...

weren't they Lorien elves? or from somewhere that wasn't Rivendell

Either Lorien Elves and/or Mirkwood Elves I assume since Legolas was there. I assume Gimli and the Dwarves were representatives for Erebor while Boromir and the Humans were representatives for Gondor. Aragorn, assuming he is a representatives, probably represented the Dnedain.
---

anyway, Bill Amend had the same complaint

---

Muscles posted...

Oops_All_Berrys posted...

Yeah the problem with the movies is that they weren't long enough

The only problem was that they changed stuff from the book

GasMonkey posted...

would have been an 8 hour movie

8 hours of perfection, im fine with that

You might have been fine with an 8 hour movie, but you are probably one of very few people that would be
---

Johnny Eagle posted...

You might have been fine with an 8 hour movie, but you are probably one of very few people that would be

btw have I mentioned that FoxTrot is the best comic ever
---

Would you've taken your son to see it?
---

Muscles posted...

Blighboy posted...

I really wish Peter Jackson never made The Hobbit

I wish he just made 1 and just went off the book, and used effects like LotR instead of cheap cgi garbage

Booo. That would have been so boring. Have you read the book? I love it, but a lot of the changes for the movies were pretty beneficial. Plus, we got to see appendices material, so that was cool.

Also, the Hobbit movies had a lot of practical effects (and LotR had lots of CGI) but no one seems to care about that. But then again, people seem like theyd rather complain about and dislike something, so...
---

Johnny Eagle posted...

Muscles posted...

Oops_All_Berrys posted...

Yeah the problem with the movies is that they weren't long enough

The only problem was that they changed stuff from the book

GasMonkey posted...

would have been an 8 hour movie

8 hours of perfection, im fine with that

You might have been fine with an 8 hour movie, but you are probably one of very few people that would be

They should have at least put it in the extended editions
---

I have never seen the extended versions of the Hobbit movies. Are they any good?
Because I loved the extended versions of the LotR trilogy.
---

LeetCheet posted...

I have never seen the extended versions of the Hobbit movies. Are they any good?

I think so. The Battle of the Five Armies I felt had some good additional scenes. The one near the end shoulda been in the theatrical version in my opinion.
---

Muscles posted...

They should have at least put it in the extended editions

The extended editions were already very, very long. There'd be a handful of people who'd want movies with literally everything in there no matter how many days they had to set aside to watch them, but not enough to justify the added costs of the additional filming.
---

adjl posted...

Muscles posted...

They should have at least put it in the extended editions

The extended editions were already very, very long. There'd be a handful of people who'd want movies with literally everything in there no matter how many days they had to set aside to watch them, but not enough to justify the added costs of the additional filming.

They still would have made a huge profit, though not everything is about money, some things should just be about the art (in this instance, movies, but that stands for every kind of art)
---

Oops_All_Berrys posted...

Yeah the problem with the movies is that they weren't long enough

lmfao
---

I liked the Rankin & Bass version better than the Peter Jackson version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y" data-time="

Muscles posted...

They still would have made a huge profit,

Oh really? Do elaborate on how you figured that out, because from where I stand, doubling production costs to create a movie that would sell to fewer people doesn't sound like the best business move. Perhaps you have more in-depth numbers than me, though.

Muscles posted...

though not everything is about money, some things should just be about the art

You ever notice how it's almost always entitled consumers who say things like "you should just do this for art's sake and not worry about money!", and not actual artists that are trying to make a living? People love romanticising the "starving artist" trope, but in the decidedly-less-romantic real world, starving kinda sucks. Professional artists create art in the hopes of finding some degree of financial success, not because they feel the world deserves their art at no cost. You've done nothing to deserve that sacrifice. Don't act like you have.
---

The production cost on FotR was 93 million, domestic gross was 313 million, im pretty sure they could have spent a little more and be fine

It's not like they even just cut some stuff out, they had to move stuff out of order for it to make sense

They should have filmed it like it was in the books, then make that the extended edition and wittle it down for the theatrical release, and they still should have been just fine financially
---

I think people that haven't read it since they were a kid should reread it

I thought it was bloated when I was young too, but rereading it at 24 I don't feel like it drags at all, and nothing is useless, if you think it was too long when you were younger do yourself a favor and read it again
---

Oops_All_Berrys posted...

Yeah the problem with the movies is that they weren't long enough

Lmao
---

i wish they didn't add lots of bullshit to the hobbit
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

i wish they didn't add lots of bullshit to the hobbit

I do feel the introduction of Tauriel and love interest with Kili wasn't necessary. Almost seemed as if Jackson wanted to have Aragorn x Arwen 2.0.
---

they also cut the thrush, and changed how smaug was shot.

his kid as a bow??
---

InfestedAdam posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

i wish they didn't add lots of bullshit to the hobbit

I do feel the introduction of Tauriel and love interest with Kili wasn't necessary. Almost seemed as if Jackson wanted to have Aragorn x Arwen 2.0.

i think they did that so the audience could feel a little more attachment to kili and it would have more impact when he died. without it he doesn't really stand out from the rest of the dwarves. his brother dying right before him and nobody ever mentioning him is a good indicator of this.
---

He wasnt even suppose to direct The Hobbit, but they kept losing directors, so he was like fine i will do it.
---

The dwarves in general were sidelined after the first film which was a huge problem. Introducing Tauriel exacerbated this problem, rather than fixing it. In addition to her just feeling incredibly out of place and tacked on in the world.
---

not saying i disagree, just saying that was probably their thought process. i actually didn't mind too much. it was weird but i got used to it. my biggest gripe was probably legolas.
---

I have no problem had it just been a legolas cameo but he didn't an actual role, and taurial might have been the worst part, besides the terrible orc/goblin king cgi
---

InfestedAdam posted...

On another note, I would love to see a TV series based on The Silmarillion. If it can be done on par with the A Game of Throne series, I think it can work out well. But I want it to be done with an actual budget. The Dune TV series was kinda off-putting even if parts were more accurate to the books than what the movie showed.

Game of Thrones has no budget now?

Muscles posted...

I wish he just made 1 and just went off the book, and used effects like LotR instead of cheap cgi garbage

There's no way he could have fit everything in 1 movie. What he should have done is made only two though.

HylianFox posted...

but the books have a TON of filler

No such thing in an original source.

adjl posted...

You ever notice how it's almost always entitled consumers who say things like "you should just do this for art's sake and not worry about money!", and not actual artists that are trying to make a living? People love romanticising the "starving artist" trope, but in the decidedly-less-romantic real world, starving kinda sucks. Professional artists create art in the hopes of finding some degree of financial success, not because they feel the world deserves their art at no cost. You've done nothing to deserve that sacrifice. Don't act like you have.

Yeah those film artists are always starving.
---

^
books can have filler. filler doesn't mean non-canon
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

^
books can have filler. filler doesn't mean non-canon

Filler in the Sense of books is non important to the main plot
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

^
books can have filler. filler doesn't mean non-canon

I said original source.
---

Ogurisama posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

^
books can have filler. filler doesn't mean non-canon

Filler in the Sense of books is non important to the main plot

The book is about Frodo's journey, so anything that happens on the journey is important to the main plot

I feel like I would like it better if it at least continues the same chain of events, instead of all the big changes like running into merry and pippen stealing Farmer maggots crops right before their first encounter with the black rider
---

Revelation34 posted...

Yeah those film artists are always starving.

The ones that aren't willing to make artistic sacrifices to appeal to a broader audience? Yeah, they kind of are. Most filmmakers will never be able to make even a livable wage off of their work, and those that do don't find that kind of success by refusing to consider what will sell.

_AdjI_ posted...

Revelation34 posted...

Yeah those film artists are always starving.

The ones that aren't willing to make artistic sacrifices to appeal to a broader audience? Yeah, they kind of are. Most filmmakers will never be able to make even a livable wage off of their work, and those that do don't find that kind of success by refusing to consider what will sell.

But Peter Jackson was given 93 million dollars (more for TT and RotK iirc) to work on one of the most well known book trilogy ever, so this case is a bit different from the norm
---