And man do I feel old.
Countdown to BOFTA: Why I Don't Like Tolkien Purists · 4:50am Sep 13th, 2015
Yeah I wouldn't normally make something like this, but after dealing for five years with these people and how verbally abuse they've been to others, I think it's time for some proper revenge.
Now I want you to keep two things clear. First off that these come from real life experiences me and other Tolkien fans so I'll let what you're about to read speak for itself. And two: I did not make a single word of what you're about to read up. So...let's gaze into the depths of madness.
Well let's start with one guy who suggested "improvements" to the movies:
He said Tauriel should have been Legolas' betrothed who cheated on him with Kili as a form of escapism and that apparently Legolas disdain for dwarves we see in The Fellowship of the Ring should come from the fact that some dwarf took his girlfriend and that she should have died so that Legolas could blame dwarves for her death.
I showed that to a friend whose a big Tolkien nerd and she said it was the most convoluted, most un-Tolkien thing she'd ever heard.
Moving on...
He called Peter Jackson "a greedy asshole" and blamed him for all the movies faults, even though it's now public knowledge that nearly half of it was not Jackson.
Called the dwarves unmemorable and that we know nothing about them even though in the book they're pretty much non-existent save for a line here or there (a common criticism of the book) and the cast and crew pointed out that having the dwarves tell their backstory or having their backstories thrown at us would be repetitive and tedious.
Says Bifur should have been like Bill Murray in Lost in Translation even though the two have nothing in common.
He apparently thought it was a good idea for Kili to bring Tauriel to Erebor even though the film itself demonstrates why he couldn't and that Thorin would have her head cleaved off if she even set foot in there.
Called the trilogy "Peter Jackson's attempt to be George Lucas" even though it's been proven Jackson is a far better filmmaker then Lucas and the trilogy was overall better received then the prequels to Star Wars.
Said Jackson was lazy for not resolving plot-lines in the third film even though he filmed resolutions for those plot-lines only for Warner Bros. to cut them. In fact, he seems to be completely unaware of the behind the scenes troubles.
Called Kili "a horn-dog" because of that one line in The Desolation of Smaug (which admittingly is the worst line in any Peter Jackson film) even though in other previous interactions with Elves and further actions he doesn't do any sexual harresment-esc advances.
Then there's another one whose review topped that one in stupidity:
He only reviews An Unexpected Journey and it's literally seven parts long. Not to mention longer then the film's actual prologue.
He apparently hates any scene where the dwarves sit down and laugh or sing despite the songs they sing being written by Tolkien.
Complained about the way the dwarves round the fireplace in Bag-End is edited and how it cuts to Bilbo listening in from his room. No really.
He complains for almost two minutes about the fact that Elrond needs a crystal to read the map and that he didn't do it at dinner, even though the film itself both theatrical and extended explain why he can't and that he doesn't have the tools in his office to read them.
Thinks Radagast is pointless and useless even though he's actually mentioned in the actual book itself and it's through him Gandalf found Beorn and that he's mentioned in the Fellowship of the Ring book and in the appendices.
He complains about the way the tress fall when the wargs are uprooting them and that the trees look "too spindly".
He literally whines about the weather in some parts.
Now for a story someone related to me via a comments section.
"I got banned from Facebook because I told 3 people who always have something negative to say about the DVD releases to fuck off. All I said was "People like you piss me off. It is one thing to post and opinion, but you stalk every post just to says shit. Fuck off." My faceboook account got permanently banned for that? My god.." - twistedmetalplayer21
Okay granted I wouldn't have used "fuck off" but the fact someone got blocked for disputing a rating says a lot.
Before we get to the final stuff here are the real-life incidents that happened to me:
One Tolkien purist criticized me for making my post about Warner Bros. meddling, thinking that I made most of it up even though I didn't. She then proceeded to tell me that Fili and Kili acted like charlatans at Bilbo's house and the behavior was "un-prince like".
Another one called it a movie that had "politically correct decisions" and "beautiful people". Seriously.
One person actually insulted me because I liked the extended cuts and the movies overall.
And finally general things that anger me the most about them:
All their reviews are literally labeled rants whether in the title or in the description.
They're incredibly hypocritical. Criticizing and often verbally bullying fans of the Peter Jackson The Hobbit films while simultaneously praising his work on The Lord of the Rings.
Tying into the above one, they're incredibly sexist. They criticize Tauriel for being just there to be a love interest and that she wasn't in the book when Arwen, a character they love and adore, was literally created by Tolkien to be a love interest.
As a friend pointed out to me, they give no links or valid sources for their arguments. Most reviewers like Film Brain, Chris Stuckmann, Linkara and even myself often give links to articles, interviews, documentaries, IMDB, TV Tropes, so on and so forth. Tolkien purists do none of that. In fact, they miss a lot of points from the book itself and there's a stunning lack of research around them.
They will literally scream and fuss if the tiniest detail is changed even if it's color of someone's clothing.
They have a lack of knowledge about how film works.
What exactly they want The Hobbit to be is an enigma in of itself. They can basically be summed up as:
We want a hobbit movie to try something new!
But not too new.We want it to be faithful to the book!
But not just an audio-book with pictures.We want it to have stuff for adults!
But we want it to be a kiddie adventure and not too dark.
They seem to have a near sadistic pleasure in blaming Jackson for any problem the movies have, even though as stated nearly half the problems weren't his fault.
The mere existence of Radagast and the White Council seems to get them all angry even though it's canon in EVERYTHING Tolkien wrote, not just the book but in the appendices, The Lord of the Rings, The Silmarillion and in Unfinished Tales.
So that's about everything. It's getting really late but suffice it to say there you go. That's why I don't like them. They're an entire group of people who are some of the most close-minded, hypocritical, sexist, self-righteous and bitter people in any fandom I've ever seen. The fact that people like this exist baffles me.
They also are eerily similar to how Warner Bros. treated Jackson during the trilogies production: they didn't have faith in him despite proving he is a good filmmaker and proceeded to meddle, bully and harass him from 2009 all the way to now, which hurt the final product.
To wrap up I'm going to give five suggestions on how one should handle a hobbit movie being made or if you're reviewing it or Tolkien purists in general:
1. Ignore the Book Purists.
Often times even I'm scared too on whether or not my favorite book will be adapted properly. Some book purists have a right to be angry like the fans of the Fantastic Four comics or fans of Victor Hugo's Les Miserables. But in the case of The Hobbit, it's best to ignore the book purists. And if they start harassing you like with me and others, remember this:
2. Do your Research
Research is your friend. Read the book. Read up on all the behind the scenes info you can get on TV Tropes, IMDB or even my article about Warner Bros. meddling. Watch the Production Diaries. Watch cast and crew interviews. Read up on Unfinished Tales and the appendices sections involving The Hobbit. Trust me, it'll come in handy.
3. Watch the extended cuts
Peter Jackson and the cast themselves have said the extended cuts are their preferred versions and that the reason that the theatrical cuts are so abysmally edited is because a lot of key stuff was removed including some character moments and resolutions to plot lines. So watch those instead. I have. They explain certain plot threads, establish characters better, foreshadow events that happen later and probably the most important part...there's more of our titular hobbit. The third film's extended cut should be a cause of excitement because Jackson confirmed it's more character based.
4. Remember that The Hobbit is NOT a simple kids book
Linkara of Atop the Fourth Wall put it best: The Hobbit isn't a simple little story. It has lots of complex plot stuff with lots of events going on and having to deal with the consequences. And the great irony is that while Tolkien did craft a great story that's a lot of fun, it sadly doesn't give a lot of room for it's characters other then Bilbo to breathe. The only other dwarf then Thorin who get's any real dialogue or characterization is Balin. After him is Bombur of all dwarves but after that the other dwarves are pretty much mimes. 
5. If there is to be differing, it's gotta be necessary.
So yeah on the one hand The Hobbit doesn't have a lot to work with like The Lord of the Rings. But on the other hand, this means you can do more with it then The Lord of the Rings. You can expand on characters, create new plot-lines and better establish the world the characters go through. I think that's why a lot of people love The Hobbit so much. You can really have a lot of fun with it even as a stand-alone work and as a part of Middle-Earth and if necessary, you can expand it.
And if you do take liberties, make sure their well done or have a basis in the original work. Part of the reason I hated the 1977 version was because not just that it moved so fast but that they cut one of the most important plot elements out and that the dwarves had even less characterization then the book. And I found a lot of people enjoyed the White Council subplot actually. Why? Because it expanded it, explained the most annoying plot point in the book (where Gandalf went and what he did) and it's something Tolkien actually wrote.
That's about everything for now. Thought I'd end this on an upbeat note then a bitter one.
Nat is out!
Peace!
Wow, yeah, that sounds more Shakespearean than Tolkien.
I will say that even though I love Radagast, and he was in the book, his integration into the film wasn't the smoothest.
I certainly did. It can be a bit clunky, but I still really enjoyed it.
3390674 Yeah. I thought giving helpful tips would help people like you in reviews or re-watching them in the future.
3391888 No, yeah. Once I get to it, I'll keep this in mind. After I get my laptop fixed (again) and get the Batman Returns review done. In between school work. And possibly other projects.
3391929 Okay. I'm sorry I haven't read any of your pony reviews.
3393717 'sallright. We all have time constraints.
3393724 I'll have to read your Age of Ultron review. It sounds hilarious.
By the way apprently in an extended version of the BruceNat house scene...the scene was actually worse. And keep in mind the original scene is eight levels of stupid.
3394231 Well, I certainly remember your sister enjoying it.
And, wow. That's impressive.
3394243 Yeah Natasha actually says in complete seriousness "We're not playing the circle of life. It's just the two of us."
3394876 Boo! BOO!! BOO!!!
quickmeme.com/img/12/12575abb9c923e21918e484e1acaff88ba332512edced490b55af176644654c1.jpg