darth_ender said:

My italicized "obviously" in the above quote was intended to convey sarcasm. Not sure that it worked now :(

For my part, I took your sarcasm well, but I did first think you wrote Hobbit when you meant Star Wars. Then I realized you had already changed subjects to Tolkien somewhat stealthily midsentence. It amused me, so I reposted it. :)

darth_ender said:
I encourage you to read the books, xhonzi. You might enjoy the differences and the resulting approaches Jackson and Co. took to the different films.

I don't know when I gave off the impression that I had not read the books. I have read them. I have read the 4 'standard works' as it was, and read some of the Silmarillion and Christopher's works. I've read the Hobbit the most since I read it at 8 or 9 and 3 or 4 times since. I read the first 30 pages of Fellowship almost as many times, but as a kid it never hooked me the way that Hobbit did. I've read LotR as an adult, when the movies reminded me that I needed to go back and do just that.

As I said before, Hobbit holds a special place in my childhood that LotR doesn't, but as the adult that I am today, I would rather sit through a version of The Hobbit that is "the version that happened" rather than "the way ol' liar Bilbo told it".

I think Jackson & Co. made some great edits in LotR (some not so great, as well). I think Tolkien was a very fallible story teller and didn't always have the reader's best interest in mind. PJ & Co. went so far in their adaptation of The Hobbit, and for my money I wish they had gone further.