originally posted by: Bybyots
Jackson has gone way too far.
It's a childrens' book.
I'm one of "those people" who have read the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings trilogy, several times. Including the Silmarillion and the LOTR
appendices. And I disagree with you.
One of the things "fans" of the original novels are often in denial about is that Tolkien, genius he was, isn't a very good story teller. Very
compelling writer, terrible story teller. Just think of the awkward fragmentation of the LOTR books, and you get what I mean.
The Hobbit is a story written for young adults
. Children's books are not over 130,000 words, including elvish and complex poetry.
it's, most importantly, a story that clearly takes place in a very dangerous world, with incredible evil lurking as an undertone (especially via the
appendices and Silmarillion).
What I think Jackson, and his team, have done is transformed a very awkward story in LOTR, into sequential tale that takes liberties, but is faithful
to the entirety of what knowledge there is of Tolkien's Middle Earth.
The Hobbit movies are the same. Jackson has taken the tale designed for more tender ages, mixed into it the backstories and more clear motivations of
the characters… yes, took some liberties… but still has a tale that is faithful to Middle Earth, the story of Bilbo Baggins, and establishes a
preamble for the LOTR movies.
I see what Jackson has done as being very similar to the nearly countless ways theater creative directors, directors, and actors have interpreted
Shakespeare's MacBeth (never say it out loud, say "Mackers" instead) over the decades. Think about it.