The hobbits and the shire already do that, and also serve much more narrative function.

Sounds like some top level fansplaining to me.

@@RWDtech A little reading and little understanding of Tolkien himself and the reasons for Bombadil's presence in the story becomes clear. He's not important to the plot, of course, but he is central to the major themes of Tolkien's books.

If his home was being destroyed and he and everyone else in it was threatened, would Tom have done everything he could to stop an attack? Therefore would Tom not be subjected to the same temptations as everyone else to keep his home safe and eventually fall under the rings temptation?

@@JoeyJoe-JoeJrShabadoo Tom is a very different kind of "thing" in terms of his place in the lore and his relationship with Middle Earth. Tolkien tells us that Tom was both the first being to set upon Arda and would ultimately also be the last to leave it. The implication here (and as suggested by the nature of both Tom's personality and capabilities) is that Tom exists as sort of the "Spirit of Arda", like a "Gaia" or "Mother Earth" type figure. The manifestation or embodiment of the world itself. Tom is not a warrior, or wizard, or really any kind of active agent in the world. He simply is an extension of Arda and it's his presence alone that brings comfort and courage to the good-hearted while sedating or rebuking the wicked or mean-spirited. If Sauron's forces decided to come to Bombadil's door, it's more likely that they would simply be repelled from entering his domain in the first place. Not by any overt "magic barrier" or spell but because Tom and his realm are the heart of pure life and goodness in Middle Earth. Sauron and his servants would likely feel an unconscious aversion to the place itself and never wish to tread there. In short, if Sauron had won and stretched out his hand to rule Middle Earth, there would be no "Battle for the Old Forest". Sauron would likely leave Bombadil alone and Tom would go on tending to his forest as he always had. But this unique nature also explains to the reader why Tom, for all his seeming "power", was never really an option for dealing with the One Ring itself. Because Tom is beyond the power of the Ring, it also meant that he likely didn't perceive its nature and thus didn't consider it of any significance. We are told that the One Ring was crafted as a distillation of Sauron's greed, malice and lust for power, and these were the qualities upon which it preyed. Tom is a pure embodiment of innocence, joy and a love of life, against which the Ring was entirely impotent. Gandalf speculates that, placed in his care, Tom was likely to simply forget about the Ring and misplace it or lose it. Tom was also seemingly unconcerned with (or perhaps even unable to influence) matters beyond his domain, so giving him a role in the Fellowship to destroy the Ring didn't seem feasible either.

Tom knew of Maggot and was impressed. This is similar to the very concept of "Shire" and Hobbits. There are some who, while they do have ordered society, do not seek to amplify power, to engage in wide ranging and thorough control of all beings, or certainly of Middle Earth. There is also a concept probably not taught very much in schools of today called "noblesse oblige", which surrounds the idea of leaders or elite (any of the Kings in M.E. would fit this). This is a concept that they don't just get free hand, but have substantial obligation to provide for the welfare of common folk. Usually this simply means help or charity. For some, though there is the concept that should the elite fail in this required aid, their nobility may well be lessened or even wiped out.

Maggot was afraid of Nazgul (not knowing who said death knight exactly was), though. Not to the point of panic, ofc, but still.

@@mateuszslawinski1990considering masses of men soldiers would flee from the Nazgûl out of fear, Maggot seemed to be quite exceptionally stalwart as a being.

@@Jackaroo. Maggot admited the visitor had given him chills. He also noticed his dogs were scared. Of course he deduced something was very wrong with this guy. Besides, hobbits in general can be quite bold if they want.

@@mateuszslawinski1990 Not in the Books hes not. He tells them to bugger off..and by the path!

They shoulda casted Legoslas as a black. In the books he was dark af. and packin' that heat downstairs brugh.

Him and Grabahan should have both been included

I agree but I also understand why both were cut. If they had Glorfyndel, even in a couple of scenes they would have to explain him and his power. Also why it was he didn’t go with the fellowship instead of Legolas. His story arc would be to long for someone with a couple of scenes. While I would totally be down for more run time on the movie I just don’t think they would get the value out of the production that would justify it.

@jennyanydots2389 Lmao no. His clothes were described as green and brown. There was no true physical description of him. But if we bring up the other entries in the series, he was most likely very white. (Elves are just fair skinned, it's how the culture and mythos are.)

@@IamSumfoo totally agree, I will say I’m a little bummed that it looks like Rings of Power is replacing Glorfyndel once again. But yeah, there’s way too much background info to truly understand Glorfyndel’s role

And, Gandalf mentions that Bombadil would forget about the ring because it didn't interest him, which is why it wasn't safe to leave it to him. This doesn't sound like the actions of the creator deity.

lol ‘anomaly’ guys a fucken retarded worm who thinks he’s fucking god me to and forth wants to rape kids

He also upsets the tone Jackson was going for, in my opinion. He's eccentric and odd, lighthearted and mystical, but so much of the fellowship was dark and dangerous and brooding. The movies had their moments of levity, but they weren't as outlandish as a deity singing about his yellow boots all the time.

@@marcopoloonpollo5937 They even altered the appearance and (I think) the tone of Gandalf in the movie. To make him more serious and maybe even cater to the actor's style.

It would be impossible to even make that claim if you understood what story is actually being told.

​@@rapid13well then don't be shy do tell us

I think it's fine if you consider that the Lord of the Rings isn't supposed to be a conventional series of novels, it's supposed to be a legend. In Epic poems like the Odyssey or Beowulf there's weird mysterious tangents all the time, because they weren't written as one narrative, and were instead collections of oral poetry that were combined into one work. The lord of the rings is ultimately just a load of stories invented to flesh out the world of middle earth and give history to the languages Tolkien invented.

Movie only casual fans don't care about book progression, let it go.

It makes sense that he wasn’t included in the movie, and it makes sense that he was included in the books. I think comparing him to Sam is silly. Sam cares in a way that Bombadil doesn’t and it’s probably due to their very natures (Tom’s being, likely, something close to immortal, and Sam’s being.. mortal)

Nay. They were just scared of puttin' a gay in the film like Thom's charachter.

​@jennyanydots2389 you've got a serious case of brain rot.

@@jennyanydots2389 Goldberry has a few questions for you.

I'd have taken to a daring concept and tried freakishly hard to not do the Faramir thing of dragging Hobbits and "Ring" to Osgiliath, only to then release them. I gather this had to do with ordering of plot points to the set of three movies. I'd have been glad to leave things as they were when Sam had no idea if he could get back to Frodo, or not, and Shelob had been wounded and was burbling in her hideout. There may have been some technical problem building convincing giant spider digital assets, but I'd hope to use that as in the books.

@@crtune I disagree. Farmerier was a total soy boy beta cuck. Ozgillyuth was a pit of despair and debachery. Fraudo was a bitch, Shelobe was Bunt Citch. You don't know what you're talmbout brugh.

I think in the books they talked about that and what was said if I remember correctly is that Tom has no interest in such trinkets and would very well just lose it, that is if they could have convinced him to take it anyway, Tom never once cared about the ring it is a trinket to him he just loves his woods and his lovely river daughter Goldberry.

"Most powerful." Pfft.

I think that Uruk-Hai helmet was the most powerful in Middle Earth.

@@teehasheestower He is a powerful being compared to most, especially when in his own realm. But to the big names like Gandalf the White, Saruman and Sauron he is more limited.

@@Historyfan476AD on the contrary, ole Tom may have power, but is apathetic as to it's use. To him something like the Ring is an interesting curiosity to come across one day, and be forgotten the next. Tom being an asset or liability to saving the world boils entirely down to his personality, which limits his capability. Unlike a given wizard or even hobbit, who is willing to risk everything under circumstances where Tom is not.

You're right. Theoden is the most powerful LOTR character.

First of all. Miss Marvel is not that powerful. Secondly Adam warlock was supposed to be the hero of end game Third of all The Hulk and century is the most powerful Namely superheroes who can take on Thanos. With no sweat However disney doesn't know shit about Stan Lee's Comic book stories well To tell you that miss marvel is not the strongest hero there is

@@bonnierabbit1413 Ok, i appreciate the info. But even so, i'm talking about the films themselves. More about the narrative factors than about how faithful they are to the source material.

"Old young and fatherless."

I interpreted "fairer without the ring" as basically just not caring about it, as if its just a trinket to him so why bother

it wouldn't have ended in doom for Tom, though. Only the rest of the world. Tom would have cared so little about the ring because he doesn't understand it or what it represents. It has 0 affect on him. It is a shiny trinket. He would lose it in a week, according to gandalf.

in my mind it's like hiding the ring inside of a hollow tree. It's a decent spot. A good spot, even. But eventually, since the tree does not care, somebody will come along and take it, or find it, forgotten about, perhaps even an age later.

@@ABurntMuffin as I said I was referring to Gandalf's own analysis that Tom would of still fell to Sauron even if he didn't lose the ring (he said he'd probably be the last living thing to go, but that he would not hold out forever)

@@ZenithWest169 fair enough, calling him the "last living thing to go" sort of makes me think that he survives Sauron though, for surely if this was the end times as predicted then Melkor has returned, and I doubt Sauron would be able to even tickle him once he's back on Arda. Depends on whether or not you believe Dagor Dagorath to be 100% prophecy or not.

@@ABurntMuffin yeah I'm going off what I remember and for the life of me can't find all the quotes.... I remember Gandulf talking about the "what if" he doesn't lose it scenario.

All due respect, Tolkien himself said to the Narrative he was not important. I think his importance is to reminder readers and the characters that the creations of Illuvitar are numerous and that His was are mysterious.

4:30

The old hobbit movie

@@foofighter467 Thanks, saw it once I reached that part of the video

I believe its from a Russian short film made in the 90s

A Russian movie and a Finnish series

Me as well, exactly, except I didn't read the books until about 12 years after I saw the movies!

Audio mixing is a bit more complicated than that. Putting music directly over the top would ruin the audio mix even more, and likely make it even more garbled.

@@Shiftarus No! Everything is as simple as I am! Fix it! Seriously though, I appreciate knowing that so it doesn't stick out to me like it always does. Fuckin' copyright nonsense. And I say that as somebody who owns the scores for all of these movies in multiple formats.

Tom and Sam can act differently while upholding the same values. Their circumstances are entirely different, and Tom has the benefit of being completely unaffected by the Ring and those who are involved with it. Sam on the other hand is forced to be involved, and does things that are uncomfortable or odd for him in order to uphold his values and protect Frodo. Tom talks of his values, but never once is challenged about them.

They can act differently while holding the same values, I agree. But I disagree they have the same values. Tom just does not understand what the big deal is about the Ring. It’s just not how he sees the world. Sam is willing to go on this dangerous quest to save his home. Tom just doesn’t care. He has his domain and he will not leave it no matter what.

So was he suppose to add every single character in the LOTR universe? Your critical thinking skills are extremely low, son.

@@jygb7092 No, he was supposed to feature every character with a prominent role in the book. It's not that complex lil fella.

Do you mean Beorn? He appears in The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. Tom Bombadil was a different character although one could arge that they were quite similar.

@@himmelektronik oh.. maybe indeed

@@taavetmalkov3295 👍

Agree. It was dumb. It was Tolkien trying to unify his earlier writings and this one clashed because it was childish.

Please make yourself familiar with the text in whichever way suits you - audiobooks for instance. You will not regret it.

@@richardfurness7556 I'd love to but in order to get audiobooks I'd have subscribe to yet another service for yet another monthly fee. Maybe I'll have more money someday and can justify that then.

Really its one of my favorite parts

I always felt that Bombadail was evidence that Tolkien didn't know what story he was telling at the start of The Lord of the Rings and for some reason his editors left it in. The character does nothing to advance the plot and doesn't fit the overall theme of the story.

So many uber-fans online don't want to admit what is obvious to anyone who widely reads fantasy- the Tom Bombadil chapters are tedious and his omission from the films greatly improves the story.

I think people are too harsh on Bombadil’s section, and I’m not excluding myself from that critique. When I first read it, I thought it was nothing more than needless fluff (being a fan of the movies), but as I got older I recognized it as the last vestiges of the whimsical Hobbit-esque style of storytelling seen in the first book, and maybe even a farewell to it. I understand why they didn’t include him in the movies, but going from Nazgûl pursuit in Buckland straight to Nazgûl pursuit in Bree and Weathertop without that moment of high fantasy mystery and levity would have made for a dour read, and a poor transition from the novel it’s supposed to be a sequel to into a much more grounded story.

3:20, he didnt put it on he just grabbed it