Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Essex
i'm in an argumentative mood here!
'justfy' tom? OK, understand this point from a point of view of cutting down time in the movie, but if we're talking about cutting characters out - let's start with Galadriel.
...but so does Tom by his reaction to the ring - he is not controlled or tempted by it
|
Before we begin cutting Galadriel, assume that we have time to include Tom or another Pippin joke, and have to decide between the two. I'm PJ (I'll even wear shorts for the exercise) and you're one of the writers. Convince me that within the flow of the story that we have, and using the
PJisms noted in the SbS (i.e. elevating Aragorn, making Pippin silly, etc) that we could include the character of Tom Bombadil. You can even suppose that he would only appear in the extended edition.
My argument is that any appearance of Tom would only slow the pace and confuse the average viewer, and PJ endeavored to avoid doing both. Since first seeing the Ring, we've only observed *bad* connected to it. Sauron, its first bearer and maker, gets a finger-ectomy. Isildur goes for a face-down float, Déagol gets strangled (though we see that later), Sméagol gets an extreme makeover and Bilbo starts to get really odd and is not content in Paradise. Gandalf won't take the thing. Frodo is pressed by the wraiths to place it on, and when he finally does, he not only sees the Eye full screen but also has to endure its moronic rambling ("I'm a He-Eye, and I SEE YOU! "). And the next time Frodo places the Ring on his finger, he gets stabbed.
So if we had Tom, who is immune to the Ring, appear and caper about, I think that the audience would wonder (1) who Tom really was, (2) why he was immune (3) why the Ring was so important and (4) why Tom did not keep the Ring.
Anyway, maybe others have more pros and cons.