[alatar]

Originally Posted by The Saucepan Man

It's all about "bums on seats", luvvie. I do think that much more exposition in this scene would have had many audience members fidgiting in their seats. But that's understandable since, given that the film was essentially billed as an action/adventure (to get them there in the first place), they would be expecting it to keep the pace up.

Can't say it any better than that, SpM. What I don't know, or remember, is the pacing of the theatrical version of this sequence compared to what I just watched. Were even more details left out?

But Frodo's alias does play a part in Bree, doesn't it? Gandalf's warning here helps us to understand why Frodo is so concerned when he sees Pippin identifying him as Baggins rather than Underhill in the Prancing Pony, provoking him to adopt the ill-fated attempt at distraction.

I guess we'll come to that in a couple of weeks, but right now I still think that it's a detail that could have been left out.

Have you not heard of the renowned glue and dog-food factories of Mithlond.

Scary that I had the same thought, yet wanted to be sensitive to the Downs members who may not even considered such a thought/practice.

I agree with this, and the example of the first Alien film is a good one. It's a masterpiece of suspense horror with few graphic "splurge" scenes (although there is of course the obvious one ...). Perhaps it's because SFX have improved or perhaps its because tastes have changed over time, but it seems to be the "modern way" to show as much as possible these days. Like you, I personally prefer the understated, suspense-building approach, but I can understand why Jackson may have thought it necessary to match the expectations of today's audiences.

More agreement - what's happening to me? Maybe some of the younger members who have seen not only FotR but also the first 'Alien' movie can give us their take on the understated/overstated issue. Back in the day I found the movie Salem's Lot (1979) creepy, and you don't even see the vampire until late in the flick. It was made-for-TV, no gore, most things take place off screen, yet it was still scary.

It would also have given rise to problems with Merry and Pippin. Either they would have had to have been older (which would rather work against their film characterisations) or they would have had to have been omitted from Bilbo's party (which would then require additional time introducing them later on).

We first see Merry and Pippin as fools, then I guess we would jump 17 years into the future to see them less as fools. Which are they? And though we are only in seq03, we've already met 5 of the Nine Walkers along with Bilbo, Elrond, Galadriel and Gollum. And I'm guessing that with the exception of Merry and Pippin (who at this point are indistinguishable fools), most movie goers might already understand a little about each of the named characters.