|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Mar 18, 2017 14:47:22 GMT
It wasn't simply time constraints that doomed Tom Bombadil from the films, but rather something much more fundamental.
I kid you not, but when I first read the Lord of the Rings, it was always clear to me that Tom Bombadil was not an organic part of the story. Somehow he didn't fit. Part of it was how the narrative keeps telling you how important he was instead of ever really showing you. Gandalf even has a line saying they considered giving him the ring, and I think it might have been this line that clued me into the fact that Tolkien was trying his best to convince you that the character was significant. It felt exactly like something that would happen if you had to include a new character, after the entire book was written. Yes, they get some swords from him, but so what? When it comes down to it, the character doesn't do anything, and is completely superfluous to the story being told.
And then sure enough after I finished the books and was looking up additional information on how Tolkien put together the novel, developed languages, etc, I learned that Bombadil was a character he included from a bedtime story for his daughter.
I KNEW IT
I knew it all along, the character just fundamentally didn't belong, and although he was well written into the narrative and I enjoy his inclusion and have absolutely no problem with it, it was always as obvious as touch up paint that he was not a seamless part of the whole.
Tom Bombadil is a cameo. He is not an integral part of the original narrative structure, and this is why he didn't make the film. |
|
kjnics
New Member
@kjnics
Posts: 11
Likes: 6
 
|
Post by kjnics on Mar 18, 2017 16:54:25 GMT
Tom Bombadil is a cameo.
Well put; that's rather how I perceived him as well (though some have compared him to Eru, etc.) A little like Father Christmas in the second Narnia book (the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe); someone from outside passing by and saying hello.
|
|
bb15
Sophomore
@bb15
Posts: 220
Likes: 63
|
Post by bb15 on Mar 19, 2017 8:56:56 GMT
Tom Bombadil is a cameo.
Well put; that's rather how I perceived him as well (though some have compared him to Eru, etc.) A little like Father Christmas in the second Narnia book (the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe); someone from outside passing by and saying hello. Imo Tom Bombadil was part of the Tolkien mythical universe but Tom wasn't essential to the LOTR story (if that makes sense). Tom Bombadil was a spirit of nature (from the countryside which Tolkien wrote about in early poems). Nature spirits had a place in the Tolkien pantheon of angels/the Valar & Maiar in The Silmarillion (by Tolkien). But spirits were always side characters for Tolkien with his main mythology. So a nature spirit was not going to protect the Ring. His inclusion just showed the range of what the Tolkien myth could include. - Tolkien's big success as a popular writer before LOTR was The Hobbit. The LOTR was a Hobbit sequel. So, the center of LOTR was going to be on those kinds of characters; Hobbits, Gandalf, men (humans), elves and dwaves. Imo at least, BB ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Mar 21, 2017 20:04:40 GMT
Tom's one of those characters I never miss when watching the movies. He can seem a bit too much like a Mary Sue, which would fit in with his being a bedtime story for a child.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Mar 21, 2017 20:15:06 GMT
Tom Bombadil is a cameo.
Well put; that's rather how I perceived him as well (though some have compared him to Eru, etc.) A little like Father Christmas in the second Narnia book (the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe); someone from outside passing by and saying hello. Imo Tom Bombadil was part of the Tolkien mythical universe but Tom wasn't essential to the LOTR story (if that makes sense). Tom Bombadil was a spirit of nature (from the countryside which Tolkien wrote about in early poems). Nature spirits had a place in the Tolkien pantheon of angels/the Valar & Maiar in The Silmarillion (by Tolkien). But spirits were always side characters for Tolkien with his main mythology. So a nature spirit was not going to protect the Ring. His inclusion just showed the range of what the Tolkien myth could include. - Tolkien's big success as a popular writer before LOTR was The Hobbit. The LOTR was a Hobbit sequel. So, the center of LOTR was going to be on those kinds of characters; Hobbits, Gandalf, men (humans), elves and dwaves. Imo at least, BB ;-) I think he was necessary in terms of the reader.
I think he was one of the first things the Hobbits needed (Along with the danger) of the world being bigger and more mysterious than they could imagine and that the story is not as big as the universe it's in.
He doesn't necessarily fit in the movies though. He takes up a lot of time just to set a tone that would be wasted in film.
|
|
bb15
Sophomore
@bb15
Posts: 220
Likes: 63
|
Post by bb15 on Mar 22, 2017 7:23:07 GMT
Imo Tom Bombadil was part of the Tolkien mythical universe but Tom wasn't essential to the LOTR story (if that makes sense). Tom Bombadil was a spirit of nature (from the countryside which Tolkien wrote about in early poems). Nature spirits had a place in the Tolkien pantheon of angels/the Valar & Maiar in The Silmarillion (by Tolkien). But spirits were always side characters for Tolkien with his main mythology. So a nature spirit was not going to protect the Ring. His inclusion just showed the range of what the Tolkien myth could include. - Tolkien's big success as a popular writer before LOTR was The Hobbit. The LOTR was a Hobbit sequel. So, the center of LOTR was going to be on those kinds of characters; Hobbits, Gandalf, men (humans), elves and dwaves. Imo at least, BB ;-) I think he was necessary in terms of the reader.
I think he was one of the first things the Hobbits needed (Along with the danger) of the world being bigger and more mysterious than they could imagine and that the story is not as big as the universe it's in.
He doesn't necessarily fit in the movies though. He takes up a lot of time just to set a tone that would be wasted in film.
I like your points. With the The LOTR novel once Frodo and his group leave the Shire they come across several amazing things which opens up the world of the story. As you put it; "the Hobbits needed (Along with the danger) of the world being bigger and more mysterious". - Frodo and the other Hobbits are chased by the Nazgul in Buckland. - They go into the old forest and run into Old Man Willow. - Tom Bombadil saves them and takes the Hobbits to his home. There they also meet Goldberry, another nature spirit. - The Hobbits go to the Barrow Downs and get into trouble once more and are again rescued by Tom. All of those things happened before Bree. For the reader who wants to keep exploring the depth of the Tolkien myth, that side journey is a taste / introduction to the LOTR Appendeces and then the Silmarillion. But for a LOTR movie? Everything had to be stripped down to a single story thread about the Ring. Imo at least, BB ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Apr 21, 2017 5:54:53 GMT
I've read that Tolkien began writing LOTR on the fly without much planning, & thus FOTR does read more aimlessly & freeflowing than the more structured TTT & ROTK acts of the book.
|
|
bb15
Sophomore
@bb15
Posts: 220
Likes: 63
|
Post by bb15 on Apr 22, 2017 7:39:40 GMT
I've read that Tolkien began writing LOTR on the fly without much planning, & thus FOTR does read more aimlessly & freeflowing than the more structured TTT & ROTK acts of the book. That's how some people would describe FOTR (maybe sometimes Tolkien himself thought of it that way) - But actually FOTR is a huge accomplishment. What Tolkien did was to take a children's story, The Hobbit, and begin piece by piece to connect it to his greater mythology including The Simarillion. - This is why Tolkien brought in Tom Bombadil, the Barrow Downs, Sauron, the Nazgul, the high Elves like Galadriel, the great Dwarf Mine of Moria and the kingdom of Gondor with its history all the way back to Numenor. * The way Tolkien did this was fairly unique. While he had vast knowledge of many literary, language and religious subjects (including from his fictional world), Tolkien was an intuitive writer. He wrote with inspiration and would let a story take him following his imagination. When he reached a dead end, he would start writing the story from the beginning again following a now more experienced imagination. - He repeated that process until it felt right. - This is one reason why Tolkien's LOTR is far superior to other fantasy. His story is huge and complex yet it flows easily like a river. It has the depth of a Beethoven symphony and the intuitiveness of that kind of great music. Imo at least, BB ;-) |
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Apr 23, 2017 0:32:53 GMT
One of the reasons I prefer reading FOTR to the others, a book has never been so escapist.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jan 7, 2018 8:43:45 GMT
I thought it was just because he sucked, but that's interesting.
|
|
