>People get upset that PJ left this big dumb faggot out of the movies
ITT: Things smartly left out of adaptions that improves the film over the source
>>71872302
The movies never explain why the hobbits' blades are able to harm the nazgul because he left him out.
>>71872302
Did J.R put him there as a 'fuck you' to the audience?
>>71873245
No.
>>71873245
No, he just liked having a silly character.
>>71872302
He is weary fellow,old Tom Bombadil-o
>>71873245
How was he a fuck you?
>>71872302
Also,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmEsCKAb7r0
>>71873147
>The movies never explain why the hobbits' blades are able to harm the nazgul because he left him out.
So if he left him in, just how would he explain Tom Bombadil? He's the deepest rabbit hole in LOTR
>>71873147
If the information was really that important he could have had Aragorn explain it. The information served no purpose in the movie because they didn't even land any blows on the Nazgul in the first place.
>>71873304
I always sang this in my head to the tune of Swanee River.
>>71873495
>The information served no purpose in the movie because they didn't even land any blows on the Nazgul in the first place.
You forgot the Witch Kings demise didn't you?
>>71873447
He's not meant to be explained. Like Tolkien said, some things in this world are just a mystery.
>>71873147
>The movies never explain why the hobbits' blades are able to harm the nazgul because he left him out.
In the movies Galadriel gives the Hobbits there blades. Although it's never stated, I imagine some "presumably First Age) elf daggers have some degree of magic in them and, although not specifically designed for it, could conceivably hurt Nazgul. Plus Galadriel is a ring-bearer herself so she more than anyone would no a way to use Sauron's magic against him.
>>71873540
Like why Tolkien added him to begin with.
>>71873576
The blades were specifically designed to kill wraiths which were common enemies fought by Arnor and her allies during the war with Angmar.
>>71873534
I did actually, good point. I'm still not sure I agree that it needs explaining because nobody ever really says that they can't be harmed by normal blades. Do they? Fuck now I don't even know anymore. Either way, I still think Aragorn could've said something if they wanted the information in there.
>>71873540
But he is explained, he just walks around singing.
>>71873926
>I'm still not sure I agree that it needs explaining because nobody ever really says that they can't be harmed by normal blades. Do they?
Not really. Through it could stand that they could be impeded in some capacity. But ultimately they can't be killed by conventional means as they are not specifically limited to a corporeal form. Though when in said corporeal form, they are subject to physical limitations.
But in all, it's not that important that the Hobbit's blades can hurt the Nazgul as it's not even addressed in the books until AFTER the Witch King's demise. And Glorfindel's prophecy about the Witch King un-killable by a mortal man is addressed only in the Appendix of RoTK.
>>71872302
Yet Peter Jackson made a big deal of adding the lost Spider Scene to King Kong.
Movie really drags, should have cut the spider scene.
>>71872302
LOTR MEMES
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzprViZB6uI
>>71873147
ya bruv
the barrow wights was where they got them blades
Giant squid...
>>71876460
Is this kino?
The rankin bass cartoon told the story better than pj. The emphasis on weapons like sting is something all those movies lacked.
>>71877522
https://youtu.be/BS3ybMWQ_s8
