Talk:Treebeard

From Tolkien Gateway
Revision as of 19:48, 3 December 2006 by Quidon88 (talk | contribs)

The outcome of the Entmoot in the movie was one of the worst changes PJ made, IMHO. On a BBS I frequent, board owner Mike Wong said that after seeing the Ents refuse to act, he concluded that they deserved to die. Hard to disagree with that sentiment. --Ted C 17:30, 1 December 2006 (EST)

Amen, you took the words right out of my mouth. --Dwarf Lord 20:47, 1 December 2006 (EST)

While I agree that was terrible, I have to say that the entire Scouring of the Shire, or lack of, I should say, was the worst change. I understand intelectually, but I guess I'm just a purist.--Quidon88 12:20, 2 December 2006 (EST)

The Ents are the sort of thing that you can get terribly wrong quite easily when adapting. PJ did something sort of strange. . . his adaption of the ents themselves are excellent. They're old, wise, earthy, etc. Unfortunately, all this drops when we get to the Entmoot. He did something very well at first (something that most directors, perhaps, would do badly at), and then lost it all for the sake of giving Merry and Pip a little more screen time. But I do not object to the removal of the Scouring of the Shire. In my opinion, while good book material, it would have well-nigh ruined the last movie. The quest is fulfilled. . . now get on to the sad parting at the Grey Havens. Tom Bombadil isn't so obvious a choice to remove (and would less affect the smoothness of the plot), but I think it was neccessary. After the quest is over, it seems drawn-out and boring, just a little something to add to the end. Anyway, Frodo had an idea of it in the Mirror of Galadriel. --Narfil Palùrfalas 14:18, 2 December 2006 (EST)

Well, met Narfil Palúrfalas. I momentarily let my desire for a pure by-the-book(pun intended)adaptation and forgot for a second about movie clarity. Thank you for setting me right. --Quidon88 14:48, 3 December 2006 (EST)