Capturing Tolkien's Vision vs. A Literal Interpretation

[Black Breathalizer]

We seem to have a few Mooters here who are unable (or unwilling) to see the difference between a screenplay that strictly adheres to Tolkien's story on a scene-by-scene basis and one that captures the essence of Tolkien's great work. Capturing Tolkien's vision is not about whether Bombadil was included or whether Arwen took Frodo to the Ford but about nailing the themes that were important to Tolkien.

If you want to argue that Peter Jackson didn't follow Tolkien's story in filming the flight to the ford or the breaking of the fellowship, I will agree with you. (Although I would argue that PJ's changes were actually better for a movie adaptation.) But if you want to argue that PJ hasn't captured Tolkien's vision, I think you're all wet.

To illustrate my point, I would encourage any Mooter who would argue that Jackson hasn't captured Tolkien's vision to please provide specific examples of plot deviations that CHANGED THE UNDERLYING THEMES of Tolkien's story.

Let's see what real differences we come up with.