As someone who thorougly loves the books and can mostly 'get' what Tom Bombadil is meant to represent, I would have loved to have seen him and the entire Old Forest/Barrow Downs sequence in the movie, if only for completion's sake. However, due to the complexity of the character and the sheer amount of confusion it would create in the average moviegoer's mind, this is one of the changes (or omissions, if you will,) that I do not fault PJ at all for making. There absolutely would have been no time or place for it in the theatrical version, and even in the EE it would cause some pacing problems. I firmly believe that Tom belongs solely in the books because he simply would not translate at all to the screen. Most book fans argue to this day what Tom's purpose in the story is, and some even say Tolkien should have left him out. I can only imagine what havoc having Tom in these movies would have created. :rolleyes:

Edit: As for his importance, many argue that he stands more outside of the story than in it. This is mostly argued by those who really don't understand what Tolkien was trying to say. Good and Evil are not all that exists in the world and some few things are not affected by either. To introduce this highly philosophical and non-essential tangent into the movie would not have gone over well.

I think those are all good after-the-fact rationalizations of Tom's significance. Whether Tolkien consciously intended that or not, I don't know. I often just assumed that Tom's purpose was simply to provide color, which he does in abundance, and a brief reprieve from the horror of pursuit by the Nazgul and the harrowing adventure in the Old Forest.


I think Tom was a relic from the earliest stages of writing LOTR, when JRR still conceived of it as essentially a children's book. In successive waves of writing, Tolkien adultified other aspects of it, changing hobbit Trotter to human Strider, changing Bingo to Frodo, and so forth, but Bombadil hung on, no doubt due to the affection Tolkien must have felt for the character.

The Bombadil sequence works ok in the book, where it provides a little more on the history of Middle-earth, but it would have been a disaster in the movie. Only as a miniseries (of many, many installments) could LOTR have been adapted in a form that could include Bombadil. Since a miniseries would focus more on the pacing and structure of each individual episode instead of the whole, TB wouldn't necessarily destroy the pacing of getting the Ring to Rivendell.

I must confess I intensely disliked the Tom Bombadil sequence the first time I read it. It felt out of place and really pulled me out of the suspenseful narrative built up to that point. It wasn't until further reflection and subsquent readings that I began to appreciate more the subtle nuances of Tom's inclusion in the tale. To me, the point of Tom is precisely to take one out of the story for a brief time. Though the rest of Middle-earth seems to be moving toward the critical event of the One Ring's final fate, the presence of Tom and his uncaring attitude shows the reader that even fate cannot touch some things. The levity and sillyness of Tom himself is more a byproduct of how Tolkien chose to depict him rather than the main intention of the authour, in my opinion.

As for what Tolkien truly meant by Tom, I think Gandalf's response to Frodo concerning giving the Ring to Tom provides a few insights into Tolkien's mind on the subject. Gandalf knew it would be pointless because Tom would promptly forget about the Ring and likely lose it. To me, that points clearly to the fact Tom is both the simplest yet most complex character in the entire story by virtue of his absolute neutrality, and I think that is no accident. In a world that always seems so clearly polarized between good and evil, Tolkien gave us a brief glimpse of a middle ground. That Tom survived all of the revisions that Tolkien made stands as testament that he meant more than some seem willing to concede.

Valkrist wrote:Though the rest of Middle-earth seems to be moving toward the critical event of the One Ring's final fate, the presence of Tom and his uncaring attitude shows the reader that even fate cannot touch some things.

I think fate and indifference would have caught up to Bombadil in the end. At the Council of Elrond, someone opined that when Sauron had conquered all else, Bombadil would fall too, and then "Night will come."

Oh I most definitely agree with that. I didn't mean to imply that Tom would remain untouched by the events of the world forever should Sauron be victorious. What I meant is that at the time the hobbits come upon him and for his entire existence leading up to that point, Tom wasn't really too worried about what was going on around him.

I often thought that if Sauron had won, what a sad time it would be for old Tom when being forced to abandon his beloved forest at last, for even he could not have remained hidden for long. Granted Tom wouldn't really be a threat to Sauron's realm, but the Dark Lord would never have tolerated his presence within his borders.

It is interesting to speculate on what did happen to Tom as things rolled into the Fourth Age. Did the Old Forest survive long into that age, untouched by woodsmen's axes? Did it vanish altogether, taking Tom and Goldberry into distant memory with it? What do you think would have become of him?

Valkrist wrote:Granted Tom wouldn't really be a threat to Sauron's realm, but the Dark Lord would never have tolerated his presence within his borders.

It is interesting to speculate on what did happen to Tom as things rolled into the Fourth Age. Did the Old Forest survive long into that age, untouched by woodsmen's axes? Did it vanish altogether, taking Tom and Goldberry into distant memory with it? What do you think would have become of him?

I think Sauron would have tried to ensnare and enslave Tom, as he did Saruman. Failing that, he would either try to destroy him, or drive him out.

Regarding Tom and Goldberry in the Fourth Age, I think they and the Old Forest would have remained untouched as long as Gondor remained strong and vigilant. Tolkien e xp licitly tells us that Elessar put the Shire off-limits to all Big People. He doesn't say anything about the Old Forest, but considering Aragorn's personality, I think it reasonable to assume he would have done likewise for the Old Forest. Eventually, of course, the Old Forest would be destroyed by whatever geologic cataclysm changed the shape and form of Middle-earth. If the Shire became England, then the Old Forest would have been swallowed under the North Sea.

Have you guys ever read "Bored of the Rings," the LOTR parody? I read it a long time ago and laughed hysterically at parts of it. The Tom and Goldberry part was particularly funny (in fact, it's the only part I remember in these latter days).

Heh... Bored of the Rings was funny, but my recollection is fuzzy... doesn't the story just kind of end abruptly? I know it is only a parody, but it looks like the authour got tired halfway through and just rushed everything to the end. He left out a huge amount of stuff.

Valkrist wrote:Heh... Bored of the Rings was funny, but my recollection is fuzzy... doesn't the story just kind of end abruptly? I know it is only a parody, but it looks like the authour got tired halfway through and just rushed everything to the end. He left out a huge amount of stuff.

I was in high school when I read it my one and only time, so I don't remember. All I remember is

O slender as a speeding freak! Spaced-out groovy tripper!
O mush-brained maid whose mind decays with every pill I slip her!

etc. That's Tim Benzedrine's ode to his lady love, Hashberry, for those of you who haven't read it.

To give due credit, the authors are Henry Beard and Douglas Kenney, and it was written in 1969. In case anybody wants to pick up a copy....

Trust me, I have never seen it, but I saw it on the channel listing on one of the late nite cable channels, "lord of the g-string" i believe it was a parady of lord of the rings

BladeCollector wrote:Trust me, I have never seen it, but I saw it on the channel listing on one of the late nite cable channels, "lord of the g-string" i believe it was a parady of lord of the rings

I'm sure the very thought of that would make our beloved Professor spin in his grave. I wonder if he was aware of Bored of the Rings? It was published 4 years before he died, so he certainly had opportunity to read it. If he did, he probably got some preliminary spinning practice prior to getting into his grave.

I think there's something on this in Unfinished Tales. I know it talks about the Pukel-men, who are depicted by the grotesque statues lining the road to Dunharrow--they are the ancestor's of Ghan-buri-ghan's people. I think it talks generally about the other people of the area, too.

Tolkien once divided the race of man into three basic sub-categories. These were the Men of Light (three Houses of the Edain,) the Men of Twilight (Rohirrim, Beornings, Druedain, men of Eriador,etc,) and the Men of Darkness (Easterlings, Souhtrons, and anyone else from those nether regions.)

I think the Dead Men of Dunharrow belonged to the group classified as the Men of Twilight. Essentially, like the Rohirrim (who were called the Eotheod before,) these peoples followed in the footsteps of the Edain into the northwest of Middle-earth but never crossed the Blue Mountains into Beleriand. They were generally considered more civilized and friendly than their eastern and southern cousins in that they had closer dealings with the Numenoreans, and later the Dunedain, even becoming steadfast allies. In the case of the men of Dunharrow, these were probably people native to the area of Anfalas and the southern White Mountains, before the coming of Isildur.

what happened to this thread... it like died... lets revitalize it!!!

and star trek! not a new movie, but the thread is doing pretty good.

Am I seeing things or was this thread moved? And if so, why? This is LOTR related and should stay where it was. Could the mod that moved this please provide a valid reason?

You're not seeing things--it's been moved. Though not by me.

This is just a thought, but with the mass moving of threads by JustinTD into the archives, this one could have been moved there. Then someone may have PMd JustinTD to restore it, and he may of mistakinly put it in the general disscussions instead of the LOTR disscussions.

Isnt there a thing when your a mod that you can see past actions done to this thread?

Anyways, how should we get this thread restarted?
-wormtongue

The mod moving the thread actually has to type in a reason for other mods to see why the thread was moved. In this case, no reason was provided that I can see.

Olorin, I'm going to move the thread back. If there are any objections, or if the mod that moved this wishes to say something, then just drop me a PM. I think this may have been an error... a bunch of threads in the original Forum where this one came from got moved, and they are all labelled as such, but not this one.

I had PMed Justin about the absolute TON of threads that got archived, and he e xp lained that the archive snared too many threads--it wasn't supposed to take anything with posts newer than a month, but I think it took anything that hadn't had a post that day. He OKed me to move back anything I felt appropriate. I restored a number of the General LOTR threads, but not the Pure ME Discussion. It was already where it was when I first encountered all the changes. Justin had told me he hadn't moved anything back because he wasn't sure where they all came from. So that's probably why it ended up in General Off-topic.

So now that we've had some new posts in this thread, let's see if we can actually put some real life into it again, beyond discussing its recent changes of address. I miss it! Unfortunately, my mind has been too stress-fried by work lately to think of any pebbles to cast into this deep pond.

First, thank you for posting a good question that will maybe jump-start this thread.

There are two answers to your question. The first is that in the movie, we're looking at PJ's interpretations of these characters' physical abilities. The second answer actually tends to validate PJ's interpretation. Remember that these characters are not human, or not entirely human anyway. Legolas is an Elf. I always pictured them as stronger than humans. I don't recall whether Tolkien was e xp licit about that, but I think it was certainly implied. In the movies, they kind of come off like Star Trek's Vulcans (except for the emotions issue). Anyway, I think it works for them to be considered stronger than humans. And Aragorn has considerable Elvish ancestry. He's Elrond's nephew, many times removed. I think Tolkien implies the Elvish strain tends to breed true from one generation to the next, at least to the extent of not being totally washed out over the millennia from the founding of Numenor to the War of the Ring.

PJ shows the Witch King as having an enormous mace, and the commentaries refer to the fact that he had the crew keep upping the size. Tolkien states only that the WK carried a mace and a sword, and doesn't go too much into their sizes. However, the WK is no longer a natural human, but is augmented by the power of his Ring. The Rings of Men were designed with power and domination in mind, and that undoubtedly enhances his abilities to wield implements of war. Finally, at the time of the War of the Ring, Sauron is pouring his own power into the Nazgul through his bond with them, giving them extra power to wage war against the Free Peoples.

That does bring up a bit of a conflict. In some of his writings, Tolkien talks about the power of the Nazgul being primarily in their ability to generate terror and despair, not in actual acts of combat. However, he does depict the WK as a formidable opponent to Eowyn, one who probably would have killed her, had not Merry stabbed him with the Barrow blade, which broke the Ringspell and effectively made the WK mortal again.

AWF1209 wrote: Another example is the swords. I've yet to actually hold a UC replica, but I've held some similar items in weight and lenght, and they're pretty heavy too. And Aragorn looks like he can wield it lightning quick without much struggle whatsoever

I can kinda extend on this answer from Olorin1s. UCs replicas are not for fighting, and they are much heavier. Peter Lyon, the man who made the sword for the movies used a lot of techniques to take weight out of blades so its easier to handle and use like swords from hundreds of years ago. For example, William Wallaces sword was 5 ft long, and I belive it weighd around 3 pounds, while UCs narsil is about 4ft and weighs 5 pounds I belive. So in truth, the swords in the movie and Tolkiens world should be around 3 pounds. They ar4e also balanced so a lot of the weight is in the hilt, so it the blade feels lighter
-wormtongue

People nowadays are lazy ol' bums We dont have to track Uruks for 3 days straight and weild weapons. but wall hangers are definatley heavier than fighting blades.

I never took too much thought into it, I just figured Elves were very strong, agile and everything else.

Yes, I meant to mention the stamina issue--chasing Uruks for 3 days. Regarding the walking on snow, I always felt that was more magical than physical.

Interesting points.....

Technological advancement. There are a couple of aspects to this. Remember first of all that Tolkien was the Lord of the Luddites and hated technology. It probably wouldn't have occurred to him to build technological "progress" into his story, and if he did, it would be portrayed in a negative light (e.g., Saruman). You get the impression that even though ME societies are essentially static technologically, they still have what they want and need, and are content. Second, much of the Third Age would have to be considered a Dark Age. After the War of the Last Alliance, many of mankind's and Elfkind's finest lay dead upon the Dagorlad or within Mordor. Thereafter, many of the remaining Elves left Middle-earth. A series of catastrophic events befell the Dunedain kingdoms: a plague, a terrible winter, the Kin-strife, the breakup and dissolution of Arnor, and various wars. Plus, the Third Age followed the Second Age, which included the War of the Elves and Sauron and the catastrophic destruction of Numenor, the most "advanced" society. All in all, people in Middle-earth were lucky to survive at a static level.

Fitness--what a good point! It makes think I need to sign off and get on my Nordic Track.

Yea, people of middle-earth are way way way away from being modern. they do have some "technology" like gunpowder and the trebuchets (is that spelled right?) ... if you compare that to our dark ages... we are far away from having electricity and things like that.

If i had to go with beauty... Rivendell would be my choice... those lush forests and waterfalls... if i ever had the money, i would have a backyard that looked like that.

hmmm, character... why not be a King that lives a really really long time... Aragorn for me.

Its not lame Gandalf the white, It keeps this thread going

Id go with rohan, Ive always liked the wind, and it does seem windy over there Plus its a beautiful place, but there are also many other places in Middle earth that seem nice to live

Though Grimas my favorite character, Id much rather be a ranger like person, so I guess it would be strider
-wormtongue

Hmmm, I think I'd probably live in Lothlorien. The forest always looks beautiful, whether in Spring or Autumn, and it's a tranquil location, which in part is due to the security it holds. I think this would be the perfect refuge.

A character? Haldir. Since he doesn't actually die in the book :clapping:
He gets to live and defend the Golden Wood, so it's a perfect life too.

RE: the staff, somebody made him a new one.

Where would I live? Either Rivendell or the Shire. Rivendell always held an attraction for me, partly because of Tolkien's description, and partly because of the song Rush did about it. The Shire would be appealing too, because it's a place where eating and drinking are held in high esteem, comfort is important, and Bag End looks like such a cozy, homey place.

Who would I be? Tough question. All the main characters have such a tough row to hoe. I guess I'd have to stick with my screen name and be Gandalf. He does have to fight a Balrog, but he manages to win, and comes back stronger than ever. I suspect Gandalf got a nice reward when he returned to Valinor, or at least a big feast pitched in his honor.