[The Saucepan Man]

I have to admit that I find it strange how many people here are upset or annoyed by things in the films purely by reference to the books. I suppose that is inevitable with any adaptation of a book to film, particularly of one as well-written and well-loved as LotR. But it does seem to me sometimes that people here are going out of their way to find fault with the films.

As I have stated many times, I do not consider them to be perfect. But as films, they are some of the best that I have seen. And, as has been pointed out, they are there amongst the most popular and successful films ever made. So they must be doing something right.

I am sure that there are few (if any) here who would scrutinise any other film in quite the same depth to which they put the LotR films under the microscope. Of course, that's understandable, given that we are all here in consequence of a love of Tolkien's works. But woud you treat any other film in the same way? Personally, if I did not frequent this forum, then I would be blissfully unaware of about 90% of the criticisms that have been levelled against the films in this forum. Yes, I would be aware of the differences from the book, but most of those don't bother me. It is only those matters which are inconsistent or inexplicable within the context of the films themselves that concern me at all (and, to my mind, there are far less of those than the threads here might suggest). And, even then, they are not sufficient to impair my overall enjoyment of the films. Certainly, it would never occur to me to call into the question the likes of Theoden's line at his son's burial (which, grammatically correct or not, I thought was rather moving) or Galadriel's lines to Frodo in Lothlorien.

Tolkien was an exceptional story-teller with an in-depth knowledge of language and myth. Is it really any surprise that the screenplay does not fully do his lines justice? I should imagine that there are few writers around today who would have been able to write a script that would stand up fully in comparison with the lines that he wrote. Fewer still who would have been either able or willing to undertake the screenplay for these films. Perhaps they should have retained more of the original lines, but I was actually quite surprised at just how many they did retain (even though many were swapped between characters). Given that, on any view, major changes and omissions were inevitable in a translation of the book to screen, it was similarly inevitable that some of the lines would need to be re-written and additional lines added.

Perhaps I am just easily pleased. Perhaps I am strange in being able to separate the films from the books and enjoy them both without letting the one impair my enjoyment of the other. But I have never really understood why it is that people get so worked up about what I regard as fairly minor issues. As I see it, you either enjoy the films for what they are (and overlook their minor foibles) or you don't enjoy them (and don't watch them). Why should a "different take" on the characters or some dialogue which might seem at odds with the lines written by a man who was a master of language annoy you when you can sit and enjoy the films and then go and read the books and enjoy them even more? These are the kinds of questions that I always seem to find myself raising on threads like this, but I have never really got a satisfactory answer (or at least one that I can understand). I can come close to understanding those that say that the films are a huge disappointment compared to what they might have been. But would they really ever have been? And, in any event, I am one who tends to view the glass as half full rather than half empty. Or maybe, as I said, it's just because I am easily pleased.

Finally:

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

How could Tolkien's work be made more accessible? LotR was already one of the biggest selling works of all time, and most readers who were likely to have enjoyed it would have read it already anyway, unless they were too young to have done so by the time the films were released. It is not exactly a difficult or daunting read, so I wonder who are these people who would never have read LotR and had to have this accessible version? Surely this means all those people who never read books anyway? It can't mean those who read the books after the films and enjoyed them, as they would likely have come to the books in any case, despite the films. So the films were made for the class of people who hate reading? Or are they made for those who like reading but couldn't be bothered with the books? I know I thoroughly enjoyed the BBC adaptation of Middlemarch, as it saved me reading a book I found unutterably dull; is it for this reason that the films were made? To save people from having to bother reading the books?

I agree with you concerning the popularity of the book. But I would hazard a guess that the number of people (living today) who have read and enjoyed the book is still a small proportion of those who have seen and enjoyed the films. I do believe that there are many people who have read the book who would not have done so but for the films (particularly as my wife is one such person). But there are many more, I am sure, who have seen the films who will never read the book. Surprising as it may seem to us, there are many people in this world who would prefer to see a good film than read a good book. Books (or certain types of book) do not appeal to everybody. Neither does the kind of language that Tolkien uses appeal to everybody. There are many who simply saw the films as great action films - nothing more and nothing less (you know - they were the ones shifting uncomfortably in their seats during the final sequences ). And fair play to them, if that is what they enjoy. Who are we to regard them as somehow inferior or "dumb"?

And that I would wager, is why the film-makers tried to (and quite clearly succeeded in) making the films accessible to as wide a range of film-goers as possible. If that is "dumbing down", then yes the films were dumbed down. But I do rather dislike that term, as it sems to me to be somewhat patronising towards those who have different tastes to us and perhaps want something slightly different from their films and books.