Keri’s Comments (group member since Jun 22, 2011)

Keri’s comments from the J.R.R. Tolkien group.

Tara wrote: "The Jackson films were my introduction to Tolkien, so they will always hold a special place in my heart, although I do agree there is plenty you can find to criticize. The main difference to me is ..."

100% agree! My thoughts exactly.

I don't think that the LotR films ruin Tolkien for new readers. If it hadn't have been for the films I wouldn't have discovered Tolkien nor been the fan I am today. After FotR came out on dvd, I enjoyed the story so much that I quickly bought a box set of the books and read them twice in 6 months, then everything I could get my hands on and the rest is history. Now that I know the book so well (having read them 14 times) there are things in the films that bug me to no end but I still adore them and think that PJ did a great job with them overall. I think the films opened up the world of Middle earth to a whole new generation. The Hobbit films are a different story. ;) If asked the same question about TH films, I would have to answer yes that they have ruined it for new readers.

I've read the LotR 12 times, the Hobbit 2-3, the Sil 5, Children of Hurin 3, Unfinished Tales 2 and the HoMe set of 12 all the way through once. I also used to read the LotR every year but have been every other for the last couple reads.

Sauron put so much of his power into the ring that once the ring was lost he was reduced to nothing more than a weak spirit. He would have had no choice but to linger in Middle-earth as he wouldn't have had the strength nor would he have been allowed back in Valinor which was hidden after the downfall of Numenor. I imagine much the same type of fate for Saruman as his deeds would have prevented him returning as well though who knows where his spirit ended up. So no, they wouldn't die in the way man or even elves did but wouldn't have the power to take form again and would be reduced to wandering spirits. Perhaps this quote will help where Sauron is concerned: "If [the Ring] it is destroyed, then he will fall, and his fall will be so low that none can foresee his arising ever again. For he will lose the best part of the strength that was native to him in his beginning, and all that was made or begun with that power will crumble, and he will be maimed for ever, becoming a mere spirit of malice that gnaws itself in the shadows, but cannot again grow or take shape. And so a great evil of this world will be removed." —The Return of the King, "The Last Debate"

While browsing reviews and such the common age range seemed to be 8-10 and grade level of 3-5 for reading on their own though many suggested reading it aloud to younger aged children. So if you want to give it to her to read on her own, I would suggest waiting a couple of years.

Thanks for the clarification on what you were referring to on the connections to LotR though I suspect that much of what you are missing will be added to the extended edition release in November and probably the main reason the stuff was left out of the theatrical.

I agree with you that the LotR and TH films needed to be done in the same style, have the same look and feel. I also agree that they need to tie together. However, I didn't think it was necessary to have so very many nods and similarities to the LotR films. For instance...the moth, glowing, deep voiced Galadriel, Bilbo falling and the ring landing on his finger just like Frodo, re-use of LotR music and similarities such as Eowyn and Tauriel, Bard and Aragorn, Alfrid and Wormtongue, the love triangle etc. etc. There were just far too many of them IMO and it became quite annoying every time it happened. To me, TH films felt like they were being forced into a mold of the LotR films and it just didn't work. That was what I meant by being its own thing. The LotR films were rather magical and TH films I think, could have been if they have been done right.

David wrote: " He also did not make a strong connection to LOTR. ..."

Seriously? All he did was make connections to LotR which was one of the major problems with the TH films. He wouldn't let them be their own but made connection after connection to the LotR films to the point of absurdity. For goodness sakes, they even re-used much of the music. But I will certainly agree with you on the action which in my opinion was way over the top and rather silly in most parts (especially the entirety of Galadriel and Gandalf fighting the nine etc.). In my opinion they would have done better to stick truer to the story in the book and the information provided in the appendices of LotR (which was needed to fill in gaps such as Gandalf) rather than trying to copy the LotR films.

Christine wrote: "I have a question but i am not quit sure where to post it.... In the movie The Battle of The Five Armies, Legolas mentions that his mother died at Gundabad, and his father King Thranduil never spe..."

Tolkien didn't write a single thing about Legolas's mother, all this was completely made up by the writers.

I don't think it has anything to do with how powerful Morgoth was or what he was able to do. It was personal with Hurin plain and simple.

The Children of Hurin is my favorite tale of Tolkien, so I love having the expanded story in a stand alone version. I think it would have been cool of The Wanderings of Hurin would have been added though.

The Hobbit (a few times)
Lord of the Rings (many times)
The Silmarillion (many times, my favorite)
Unfinished Tales
All 12 of the HOME books which are:
Book of Lost Tales 1&2
The Lays of Beleriand
Shaping of Middle-earth
The Lost Road
Return of the Shadow
Treason of Isengard
War of the Ring
Sauron Defeated
Morgoth's Ring
The War of the Jewels
The Peoples of Middle-earth

Letters of JRR Tolkien
The Children of Hurin
A Tolkien Miscellany (Sir Gawain, Smith of Wootton Major, Farmer Giles, Tree and Leaf, Adventures of Tom Bombadil)
A Tolkien Biography by Humphrey Carpenter
I have Legend of Sigurd and Gudrun but haven't read it yet.