this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2024
242 points (96.5% liked)

movies

1789 readers
184 users here now

Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.

πŸ”Ž Find discussion threads

A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome

Related communities:

Show communities:

Discussion communities:

RULES

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.

2024 discussion threads

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 71 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Looks like they mostly did a good job matching up

[–] AFKBRBChocolate 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I saw the image and thought it was going to be bad, but it's not like you'd expect any of them to be exactly on the line. They all generally track - I don't see any giant outliers.

[–] IMALlama 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Tom Bombadil is probably the biggest omission - both the character and all tge activities that take place around their house. I remembered that sticking out to me when I watched the films for the first time, but at that point I last read the trilogy at least five years prior.

[–] AFKBRBChocolate 7 points 2 months ago

Understood, but if you did this same graph for most books made into movies, they'd look vastly different. I mean, think of The Shining.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The Legolas-Gimli discrepancy is astonishing.

[–] MoonManKipper 45 points 2 months ago

Gimli was turned into the comic relief dwarf, which was a bit sad

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Honestly surprised Legolas is over represented considering how much of a boner Tolkien had for him. But I guess everyone did, right.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago

Can’t say no to that face.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Good riddance, Tom Bombadil. I don't care how merry a fellow he was, those were my least favorite chapters of Fellowship.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

That's disrespectful! He also had a bright blue jacket, and his boots were yellow.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Tom Bombadil was my favourite part of the book, and I was so disappointed when I realised that that part had been taken out of the film.

[–] TheBat 11 points 2 months ago

This got me confused

Why didn't just Tom wear the Ring as he makes passionate love with his wife, so he can force Sauron to watch.

Sauron, who is a virgin, who never had a gf and was dismembered and reduced to a giant eye by a fucking human would realize he is nothing compared to Tom, whose girth is beyond even Eru IlΓΊvatar's comprehension.

Wishing to die but unable to kill himself as he doesn't even have a fucking hand to pull the trigger, he would order his orc armies to piss on him, so that the flames of his eye can be extinguished and his mind can be set free of Tom's all encompassing girth. His spirit would be released to the boundless void that ripples and contorts with Tom's mighty thrusts and he would find no solace.

Edit: When Tom thrusts his final thrust and shoots a billion Bombadillos deep into Goldberry's loins, the impact would shatter Sauron's soul into a billion Saurodillos and he would be free. When this happens, not even the wisest can tell.

[–] Cyclist 9 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Was there a point to Tom Bombadil? All I really remember was that he helped the hobbits escape the. And I'm not even 100% sure about that. Also that Gandolf said he might go visit him at the end of the book. Was there some important part about it I missed?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

He could wear the one ring and remain unaffected by it, laughed at it even. Then he could make the ring vanish and bring it back at will.

He seemed unconcerned by the war, almost as if he knew of and had seen wars greater and far more terrible. Yet he had chosen a side and was willing to provide what aid he could.

He was Doolittle to all lifeforms, his songs tranquilized ancient evils, and he could be called upon at long range to swiftly respond.

His very existence suggested fundamental mysteries about the world; old and powerful.

Bombadil, moreso than Strider, was the embodiment of strong, old roots not withering, remaining out of reach of the frost. Old roots that could reason with willows and wights.

[–] Cyclist 2 points 2 months ago

Thanks for the response. I remembered that he was older than time it seemed.

[–] IMALlama 8 points 2 months ago

Not that I remember, which is probably the reason why it was cut from the film. There is a lot of activity around him and the area around his house in the books, but it's more side quest than main quest.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

It was just a relaxing, peaceful section of the narrative, which the film could have done with more of.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] adj16 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] shalafi 4 points 2 months ago

"I think I was trying to suggest something about the duality of fan, sir. The Jungian thing, sir."

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (2 children)

... Glorfindel was in the movies?

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago

In The Fellowship of the Ring, Glorfindel's role in guiding Frodo Baggins to Rivendell is filled by Arwen, though he does appear during the prologue when Sauron is defeated. In The Return of the King, Glorfindel is seen walking next to Arwen as she is having her vision of her son Eldarion during the journey to the Grey Havens. In his last appearance, he is seen at the crowning of King Elessar, behind Legolas and in front of Arwen. In all appearances in the movies he has no speaking lines

[–] zorro 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

~~I hink that's the 0 line. There with good old Tom bombadil~~

EDIT: nvm I'm blind

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The scale is neither linear nor logarithmic. What?

[–] bramkaandorp 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

How else can you make it look like a linear grouping?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

make it look like

Data processing isn't about making it look like something unless you are purposefully manipulating it.

[–] bramkaandorp 1 points 2 months ago

But that's what happened here. The x-axis has been unevenly distributed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because the point isn't to compare 2 characters, but to see how one character performs in the books and in the movies.

And for that, it doesn't matter. But they could have used a bar graph instead.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Well, I'd like to know if Arwen's screentime/mention ratio is 2x or 3x that of the Frodo baseline. This arbitrary scale makes it impossible. It would not hurt to add more values to the axes, and perhaps a faint grid.

[–] BowtiesAreCool 11 points 2 months ago

I wonder if this is off the theatrical or extended and what the other might show.

[–] chetradley 8 points 2 months ago
[–] Repelle 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Biggest surprise to me is that Faramir has more mentions in the books than Boromir.

[–] trolololol 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Are you saying Boromir should have died earlier? Dude!

[–] Repelle 1 points 2 months ago

Not at all, I really like Boromir’s story, but that’s why I’m surprised. I feel like his development got a lot of attention, and even though Faramir was around for longer in the story, he never seemed quite as prominent to me. I guess that duration made up for the attention boromir got early on, though.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Gothmog gets screen time?

Edit: nvm that's the uruk general. I was thinking of Morgoth

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

I'm actually fairly ok with this, more or less what I would expect from a mainstream movie(s, and the fact that they are good is just a nice bonus).

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago
[–] bramkaandorp 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

A mention is not the same as an appearance, so the discrepancy for some characters could be even greater if you take that into account.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

The balance of this doesn't surprise me. The shift between book and film is quite heavily based on gender.

The books were certainly much more male character based and the films evened it up a bit more. Although obviously still not even.

[–] DarkSpectrum 2 points 2 months ago

Not surprising considering the hours of "Oh Frodo!" "Oh Sam!" "Oh Frodo!" "Oh Sam!" Hobbitses are little girlses

[–] trolololol 1 points 2 months ago

How can Sauron be under represented? Who do you think the Lord in "Lord of the rings" is??

It's like saying the book on Tom Bombadill doesn't have enough mentions of Tom.