Book vs film versions

117 points · 13 comments · view on lemmy.world

13 Comments

ceenote@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 36d (1 reply)

I feel... thin. Sort of... stretched - like... one book adapted into three films.

OldChicoAle@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 36d

Confusticate and bebother these film makers!

Asetru@feddit.org · 26 pts · 36d (2 replies)

What? LOTR is missing so much stuff from the books, it's not even funny.

It's a good movie and a good adaption... but saying the content is almost identical is really stretching it.

Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 36d (1 reply)

I think the point is that Hobbit has like 2 movies of crap crammed into it that is never mentioned in the book

Asetru@feddit.org · 4 pts · 35d

And the lord of the rings is e.g. missing the return to the shire. If anything, that horse should be squished or cut short.

ekZepp@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 36d (3 replies)
Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 36d (2 replies)

I really like the M4 book edit.

gedfromgont@piefed.ca · 1 pts · 36d (1 reply)

Which from its length is more like 2 movies, and that is fine! I think 2 Hobbit movies could have worked, but there is just this bizarre obsession making everything a trilogy these days.

Wizard_Pope@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 35d

It's avout the same as one extended edition LOTR movie

magnetosphere@fedia.io · 9 pts · 36d

The film version of the Hobbit should be depicted as a steaming pile of manure under the horse’s rear end.

kubica@fedia.io · 6 pts · 36d

From time to time I forget that the hobbit were three films. I only saw it because I found a shortened version I don't know where.

hakase@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 36d

Bottom horse head looks way too pretty.

TreesInSpace@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 36d

Ngl i stopped going to movies after hobbit 2. And one of the mates from dorm was watching it on laptop on a yarrsite. I went to cars 3 with my sister later and done. I feel betrayed. My years ruined. I am traumatised. 2019 was 7 years ago!!!