The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - Should Tom Bombadil have been in the movies?

Arien · 04-18-2003, 02:44 AM

No....because although he was a main character I don't think there would be enough time to fit him in. There was no point in just sticking him in for one scene and then ending it otherwise we would be complainig that he did not get enough screen time. And his character is worth more than just one simple scene. The problem is while I am happy to go and see a six hour film of The Fellowship of the Ring most people arn't and Im sure if PJ could have done that he would of put him in, along with the other characters missed out. However........<P>I believe he would be very hard to portray rightly and then we would be complaining about that.(Are we ever happy???). I think he is better left in the books where our imagination can make him as we want.<p>[ April 18, 2003: Message edited by: Arien ]

04-18-2003, 02:44 AM	#2
Arien Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: London/Leeds UK Posts: 417	No....because although he was a main character I don't think there would be enough time to fit him in. There was no point in just sticking him in for one scene and then ending it otherwise we would be complainig that he did not get enough screen time. And his character is worth more than just one simple scene. The problem is while I am happy to go and see a six hour film of The Fellowship of the Ring most people arn't and Im sure if PJ could have done that he would of put him in, along with the other characters missed out. However........<P>I believe he would be very hard to portray rightly and then we would be complaining about that.(Are we ever happy???). I think he is better left in the books where our imagination can make him as we want.<p>[ April 18, 2003: Message edited by: Arien ] __________________ "...still, we lay under the emptiness and drifted slowly outward, and somewhere in the wilderness we found salvation scratched into the earth like a message."