I kindda know what you mean,But infact it does enhance a book, esspechaly if you know it. You recgonize small insigficant things (for example, the stone orks in LOTR, even though that was from The Hobit), and think to yourself 'cool'.
But it can kill a good book if done badly (Hands up who has seen any Steven King film that has been made in the past 3/4 years, AND read the book?)
At the end of the day, it's up to you, but it is 'ok' (My opinon is that it is a good film to have in the background with mates around, but fell asleep through the 1st and 2ed, and not bothered with the 3ed).
(But it can kill a good book if done badly (Hands up who has seen any Steven King film that has been made in the past 3/4 years, AND read the book?)
At the end of the day, it's up to you, but it is 'ok' (My opinon is that it is a good film to have in the background with mates around, but fell asleep through the 1st and 2ed, and not bothered with the 3ed).
G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩€,
Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:52,
archived)
The Orcsactually were in Lord of the Rings, but only in passing - when the party is walking through the forests outside Hobbiton they come across them.
One thing I think they probably should have done / should do is make a separate film of the Hobbit - it gives a much-needed description of how the One Ring came to be and how it was discovered. Also introduces Gollum and the ancestors of the ring bearers.
(,
Thu 22 Jan 2004, 10:55,
archived)
One thing I think they probably should have done / should do is make a separate film of the Hobbit - it gives a much-needed description of how the One Ring came to be and how it was discovered. Also introduces Gollum and the ancestors of the ring bearers.
They deal withthat in the films.
(
bovine I'm so old, even my old is old,
Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:03,
archived)
You know...I think you might be right. Been a while since I read the Hobbit.
(,
Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:07,
archived)
I've only read LOTR up to the pointJust after the centinal in the forrest, Lord Dumberdill (or something like that), and from what I gathered, the whole book is 3ed-person, but if bilbo isn't there, then it doesn't explain it.
They got around that in the films by showing parts without him.
I think the director is trying to get rights to another film, but the rummor is that it won't be The Hobit. This'll be done after he does King Kong.
(They got around that in the films by showing parts without him.
I think the director is trying to get rights to another film, but the rummor is that it won't be The Hobit. This'll be done after he does King Kong.
G/PP 💩💩💩💩💩€,
Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:08,
archived)
The Hobbitdoesn't do that - the history of the ring gets told in Fellowship of the Ring.
There's no mention of Bilbo's ring being the One Ring in The Hobbit. Because, at that point, Tolkien wasn't planning on writing more about Middle Earth.
(There's no mention of Bilbo's ring being the One Ring in The Hobbit. Because, at that point, Tolkien wasn't planning on writing more about Middle Earth.
Ijon Tichy,
Thu 22 Jan 2004, 11:09,
archived)