I dont mind the films, but as LotR's is my all time fav book, since the age of 10, it upsets me that people think the films "are it"...in my opinion, the books offer so much more..the descriptions, the emotions take the story to another level...and the other problem with the films is artist licence...to make a blockbuster, you change bits, and add bits. I appreciate this, but I do think that this makes people beleive the film, and not think about the book..
Sorry, didn't mean to ignore you, I just wanted to chase down what Balgin was saying.
It's the classic "book vs. movie" argument. I'm glad that a good movie might make an obscure or hard-to-grapple with book easier for people to access. I mean, no one should really have to read
the Council of Elrond chapter. I heard of one person whose father abbreviated it to "They decide to take the ring to Mordor," and who didn't learn that it was actually a huge, dense chapter until years later. If someone made an honest effort to read the books and chokeed on that chapter, I for one couldn't blame them, since it took me a couple of tries myself. Same for people who thought they might like the book based on the setting or the theme, or the fact that they liked The Hobbit, but then heard that it had dull parts and let it lie. If they can get into the movie versions, more power to them. The main aspects of the story are there, so it's okay if some of the details must be left behind or changed.