KillerMovies - Movies That Matter!

REGISTER HERE TO JOIN IN! - It's easy and it's free!
Home » Movie Franchises » Lord of the Rings » Tom Bombadil

Tom Bombadil
Started by: chillmeistergen

Forum Jump:
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (2): « 1 [2]   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread
exanda kane
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Norwich, England

quote: (post)
Originally posted by The Sacred Fire
True. But people must understand that Tolkien invented Tom for personal reasons and not to satisfy anyone else. He also didn't want everything to be known about him, he wanted him to be an enigma.

Also, Tolkien considers Tom unimportant to the story.

Tolkien said:

"Tom Bombadil is not an important person — to the narrative. I suppose he has some importance as a 'comment.' I mean, I do not really write like that: he is just an invention (who first appeared in The Oxford Magazine about 1933), and he represents something that I feel important, though I would not be prepared to analyse the feeling precisely. I would not, however, have left him in, if he did not have some kind of function."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Bombadil

That "feeling" he is talking about there we know part of and is mentioned in my last post:

Tolkien envisioned Tom as a nature-spirit that is expressive of the English countryside, which in Tolkien's time had begun to disappear. Also, any Tolkien scholar will tell you that Tolkien had a deep love for trees. This is shown by the characters the Ents and Tom (among others).

So there you have it, from the man himself: Tom must have had some purpose otherwise Tolkien wouldn't have added him.

I love Tom. He's colourful, different and a total mystery smile


It's all well and good citing sources et cetera, but it doesn't change the fact that Bombadil has never found the mass appeal other characters have enjoyed.

There's no doubt Tom Bombadil was an important character for Tolkien, but disregarding Tolkien's intentions, and taking into account the "love/hate" relationship readers have with him, either something got lost in ranslation or that's simply the way the character was concieved and executed.

Old Post Oct 30th, 2007 09:40 AM
exanda kane is currently offline Click here to Send exanda kane a Private Message Find more posts by exanda kane Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
The Secret Fire
Diverse, progress, change

Gender: Male
Location: New Zealand

quote: (post)
Originally posted by exanda kane
It's all well and good citing sources et cetera, but it doesn't change the fact that Bombadil has never found the mass appeal other characters have enjoyed.


Sure, totally agree. Tom isn't as popular as other characters, I'm not saying he is. I love that aswell, sometimes characters that are worshiped too much by fans can be offputting (e.g - Legolas, the movie version). Just my opinion!

quote: (post)
Originally posted by exanda kane
There's no doubt Tom Bombadil was an important character for Tolkien, but disregarding Tolkien's intentions, and taking into account the "love/hate" relationship readers have with him, either something got lost in ranslation or that's simply the way the character was concieved and executed.


As I said, Tolkien deliberately created Tom to be an enigma. Afterall, what kind of a fantasy story has absolutely no mystery: a boring one!

I see Tom as Tolkien's indulgence. He's his treat, for him. I think it's fair that he has something that represents his personal views and that is purely for him to enjoy (if not the readers aswell). Seeing as, lets be honest, when you write a book (although I never have! :P) you do want it to appeal to people, which it obviously did.

People who try to analyse Tom too much are taking the fun out. Tolkien actually told an older fan they were looking into it too much/being too serious when they questioned Tom and the mystery surrounding him.

As for that WK theory, as impossible as it is. I read somewhere that Eru/Illuvatar was Tom. Tolkien also dismissed this idea too though.

Last edited by The Secret Fire on Nov 1st, 2007 at 05:36 AM

Old Post Nov 1st, 2007 05:33 AM
The Secret Fire is currently offline Click here to Send The Secret Fire a Private Message Find more posts by The Secret Fire Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Cap'n Happy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States (of America... it's r

Tom was a wonderful detour in the book. I perfectly understand cutting him from the film, it was the right, if painful, thing to do. Still, how good would it be to see what those scene's would have looked like? I deeply missed the Scouring of the Shire as well- but there was absolutely no way to have it in the movies without adding at least 30 min. to an already LONG run time. The truth is, only a television miniseries could ever do justice to the books (maybe we'll see this happen, in twenty years or so?)

Old Post Feb 3rd, 2008 08:12 AM
Cap'n Happy is currently offline Click here to Send Cap'n Happy a Private Message Find more posts by Cap'n Happy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
rockycairns
Senior Member

Gender:
Location: United Kingdom

Tom doesn't play an important part of the story and Jackson didn't have time to focus on stuff not plot related.

Old Post Feb 4th, 2008 02:23 PM
rockycairns is currently offline Click here to Send rockycairns a Private Message Find more posts by rockycairns Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Khamul 666
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Laketown

yes i agree that bombadil didn have much effect on the storyline but WHY !!!!
it kinda does effect them in a ways , when they get taken by the barrow wight and Tom saved them they got the kickass swords , in the movie strider gives them normal swords , which shouldve made it impossible for pippin to kill the WK


__________________
This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers;
Gnaws iron, bites steel;
Grinds hard stones to meal;
Slays king ruins town,
And beats high mountain down.

Old Post Aug 29th, 2009 05:01 PM
Khamul 666 is currently offline Click here to Send Khamul 666 a Private Message Find more posts by Khamul 666 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Lord Lucien
FU

Gender: Male
Location:

Pippin?


__________________
I'm not going to lie: I despise children. There, I've said it.

Old Post Aug 29th, 2009 11:11 PM
Lord Lucien is currently offline Click here to Send Lord Lucien a Private Message Find more posts by Lord Lucien Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Khamul 666
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Laketown

merry , i get those confused ive read the book and seen the movie dozens of times and still get them mixed up


__________________
This thing all things devours:
Birds, beasts, trees, flowers;
Gnaws iron, bites steel;
Grinds hard stones to meal;
Slays king ruins town,
And beats high mountain down.

Old Post Aug 30th, 2009 12:43 AM
Khamul 666 is currently offline Click here to Send Khamul 666 a Private Message Find more posts by Khamul 666 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
jayce78
Restricted

Gender: Male
Location: Banned

Account Restricted

I would have loved to of seen Frodo's wild cousin in the film , but I believe the right decisison was made to cut Tom Bombadil from the movie. The film turned out to be a masterwork of moviemaking and the E.E. make's it even more so. So one can't really complain that much. Would have been nice but ultimatley you have to do what's right for the film.

Old Post Nov 15th, 2009 08:29 PM
jayce78 is currently offline Click here to Send jayce78 a Private Message Find more posts by jayce78 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
harishamul
Junior Member

Gender:
Location: India

EXCELLENT

EXCELLENT DISCUSSION

Old Post Nov 21st, 2010 05:55 AM
harishamul is currently offline Click here to Send harishamul a Private Message Find more posts by harishamul Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Exabyte
Senior Member

Gender: Female
Location: There and back again

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Khamul 666
it kinda does effect them in a ways , when they get taken by the barrow wight and Tom saved them they got the kickass swords , in the movie strider gives them normal swords , which shouldve made it impossible for pippin to kill the WK


Depends on the definition of "normal". The swords they got in the book were normal Dúnedain swords, no "elven magic". It is certainly not unlikely that Aragorn had access to such normal Dúnedain swords to give them to the hobbits (as in the movie).

Also, the Witchking was certainly not killed because of a special sword, but because of Merry's and Éowyn's courage - after all, we're in a book, not in a computer game. The sword that killed him was Éowyn's plain normal Rohan blade, but yielded by a desperate woman with a loyal friend.

Old Post Feb 14th, 2011 08:02 PM
Exabyte is currently offline Click here to Send Exabyte a Private Message Find more posts by Exabyte Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
All times are UTC. The time now is 02:42 AM.
Pages (2): « 1 [2]   Last Thread   Next Thread

Home » Movie Franchises » Lord of the Rings » Tom Bombadil

Email this Page
Subscribe to this Thread
   Post New Thread  Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
Search by user:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

Text-only version
 

< - KillerMovies.com - Forum Archive - Forum Rules >


© Copyright 2000-2006, KillerMovies.com. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by: vBulletin, copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.