It probably would have required an additional 30 minutes of footage to make Bombadil’s presence in the movie work, and even then fans might have argued it would not have worked correctly. Foreshadowing works differently in cinematic productions than it does from the written word. However, Bombadil’s chief function within the structure of the story is to foreshadow many things that come. Bombadil fans (including me) argued strenuously for his inclusion because he plays a pivotal role that is felt throughout The Lord of the Rings. The most controversial omission from the films was probably the dropping of Tom Bombadil. Their intent was not to “tell the story better than Tolkien” but rather to merely acknowledge the complexity of Tolkien’s literature without unnecessarily complicating the movies. Peter and his co-writers attempted to allude to these things in several places by altering the storyline so as to combine characters, events, and in some cases peoples.
Many fans were disappointed by various omissions of favorite characters, places, and events in the movies. But the knights contribute only slightly to the overall advancement of the story and thus were not included in Peter Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings” movies.
Their function is strategic and beneficial, serving to demonstrate that Gondor still has a significant military force composed of (apparently) true Numenorean families. Q: Why Did Peter Jackson Leave Out the Knights of Dol Amroth?ĪNSWER: Although many fans of The Lord of the Rings feel that the Knights of Dol Amroth are important to the story, the truth is that they play a relatively small part.
0 kommentar(er)
