Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #7 - ljxjlos (07/07/2013) [-]
I hated the fact that The cleansing of the Shire (and Tom Bombadil) where missing in the movies. Those were two of my favorite chapters from the book. I really hoped they´d show these chapters in the extended version but yet again, I was dissapointed.

And I´m afraid I can´ hope for a "The Children of Hurín"-Movie.
User avatar #50 to #7 - ultimoz (07/07/2013) [-]
I ******* hated Tom Bombadil
User avatar #59 to #50 - foelkera ONLINE (07/07/2013) [-]
You just shut your goddamn bitch mouth, then. You ain't got **** on Tom ************* Bombadil.
User avatar #61 to #59 - ultimoz (07/07/2013) [-]
He was cool and all and a pimp with a sexy ass elven wife, but I didn't like the constant ******* singing.
User avatar #62 to #61 - foelkera ONLINE (07/07/2013) [-]
Bitch, you don't complain about Tom Bombadil singing. That singing is what keeps everything around him alive - the trees might see someone coming towards them and think, "Hey, let's put that guy on our list of **** to **** up today." Ten they hear singing, and they stand the **** still and let him pass. Even the goddamn trees know not to cross Tom Bombadil if they value their lives.
User avatar #63 to #62 - ultimoz (07/07/2013) [-]
Maybe I should read that part again, i probably skipped half the book purely from songs..
#36 to #7 - welodog (07/07/2013) [-]
My gawd I wish there'd be a Children of Hurin movie made. Its just a small wincest,nothing that we can't handle lol,but it'll be a while before anyone gets around to it. The Hobbit still has to be finished first!
User avatar #47 to #36 - ljxjlos (07/07/2013) [-]
Yeh, it´s my favorite, even amongst Tolkiens Books, but it won´t happen. To heavy stuff, to long, to controversial:/
User avatar #10 to #7 - azraelthemage (07/07/2013) [-]
*Scouring of the Shire.
They probably left Tom Bombadil out because of his lack of relevance to the overall plot. Nothing really major happens during his chapters. Plus, they had enough material to cover as is.

I've yet to read Children of Hurin. Is it any good?
User avatar #46 to #10 - ljxjlos (07/07/2013) [-]
Ah, okay, sorry, I´ve only read them in english some years ago, since them always in german, I thought cleansing would be okay.
Yeah, I understand why it was left out, but that doesn´t change the fact that it dissapointed me.

The Children of Hurín is the best amongst Tolkiens Books, IMO the best book ever. You should definitely read it.
User avatar #13 to #10 - austinboyer (07/07/2013) [-]
1. Tom is actually super relevant. If you can't see how from the trilogy of books themselves, then read the other tales of Middle-Earth, of which there are one Hell of a lot more by Tolkien and his son, Christopher.
2. Children of Hurin is absolutely amazing. I'd claim it's better than LOTR.(not in the way it's told or the scope, as it is much shorter, but rather as a story. plain and simple.)
User avatar #14 to #13 - azraelthemage (07/07/2013) [-]
I'm referring to LotR exclusively. Other Tolkiens works, yes, but he seemed irrelevant in the war of the Ring. Then again, I haven't read my copy of unfinished tales yet, so I don't know.

How so? I don't expect some grand scale of an adventure. Does it focus more on the characters? LotR was more about the world of Middle-Earth and what was happening rather than it's characters.
User avatar #16 to #14 - austinboyer (07/07/2013) [-]
~ I 'm going to agree to disagree with your opinion that Tom isn't relevant to the war and also your opinion that LOTR is more about the war than the characters(although, I understand that to make it heavily "historical" was Tolkien's intent, and I also fully see how you could reach that conclusion[basically, it factually is more about the war than the characters, but I hold that the characters make the story{even more basically, you're right to the real world, and I'm right only to me}]) .
I digress.
~If you enjoyed the fact that the main story was less character-centric, then you won't enjoy this story as much as I did. It still holds to Tolkien's style of of presenting the story as a relevant history, as well as his typical Christian-mixed-with-Norse themes, but it is done considerably less so. What I mean by saying it's better is that it feels like much less of a chore reading it, as it reads more like a fictional story than a history textbook. I value this story-telling trait.
Essentially, which one you feel is better will rely on you valuing one trait (the traits being: 1. Being treated as though it's a History of a fictional land, and 2. Being just a story) over the other.
I sincerely hope you don't find my analysis too long-winded. Tolkien is an important subject to me, and he is my 2nd favorite author.
User avatar #15 to #14 - galgawine ONLINE (07/07/2013) [-]
Children of Hurin is a tragedy, to compare it to something modern, its like Game of Thrones in the way that a lot of bad things happen. It's pretty brutal with peoples lives and it really makes you feel for the characters, in a sad way. I did not feel anything so sad when I read Lord of the Rings, except maybe when Boromir died, LotR was more about happiness and friendship.
User avatar #17 to #15 - austinboyer (07/07/2013) [-]
Also what the man I'm replying to said. It has more emotion to it as well, contributing to It's value as a story.
 Friends (0)