Inspired by going to see the second Hobbit film, which was pretty meh as far as i was concerned....

I would say without fear of contradiction that no cinematic adaptation has been met with such heated criticism as Peter Jackson's trilogy. Tolkien has a legion of supporters and the respect and adoration they heap on him is totally deserved. So when Mr. Jackson made some...choices, it was bound to be met with all sorts of opinions. Many of them extre,e, one way or another.

Now I'm no Tolkien expert. I only finished the trilogy for the first time a few months ago. Fellowship kicked my ass so many times where I just couldn't make it to the Council of Elrond. And no, it had nothing to do with Tom Bombadil - he was great. It was the stuff at Bree and the Borrow Downs and all that stuff which bored the hell out of me. But if you make it to the Council of Elrond, it's all uphill from there and onward to the sequels.

But not so if you ask people about the films. Book fans will tend to have these two opinions:
1. ALL the movies suck (BALROGS DO NOT HAVE WINGS!! WHY DIDN'T IT JUST FLY AWAY?!?!?!?!_
2. The extended editions of Fellowship and Two Towers are good. Never speak of film Return of the King.

Now, I like to think that I am a nice middleground kind of guy. While I'm no Tolkien buff, I counter that with a less biased perspective. For example, Durin's Bane was absolutely perfect in the film. It was as awe-inspiring and powerful as befitting one of the greatest servants of Morgoth. Everything about it from the way the legions of goblins and orcs run away in absolute terror, to the way Gandalf shouts that this new foe is beyond any of them, to the swelling of the music when they are fleeting...it was all exquisitely done.

And let's not forget Gandalf's sacrifice. It is heartwrenching in the film with Frodo's screaming no and the way Boromir screams for Aragorn to let the hobbits mourn for pity's sake. Meanwhile, in the novel, all you get is that Frodo and the others cried. It was maybe one or two lines.

Now, with all that being said, there are changes that are unforgivable.

One of them is turning Saruman into Sauron's toady. Saruman is a peer of Sauron existentially speaking and he had his own great cunning and schemes in the work. Moreover, he was an interesting villain. Unlike The Silmarillion, LOTR paints a rather simplistic picture of good and evil. Sauron by this point is devoid of anything resembling goodness and is all about torture and mwahahaha evil just for the lulz. He reigns over an empire of faceless goons. But Saruman? He is a "human" face of wickedness; someone we can look to and say "yes...I can see why he is doing this." Even when he repeatedly rejects his chances for redemption, it's presented in the most pitiable and understandable of ways. Pride is something we all must struggle with and Saruman was mastered by his, to his great loss as he was forever banished from paradise. His end is tragic and the way he's taken out in the films does him no justice, just like everything else in regards to Movie Saruman.

The less said about Sauron the Evil Spotlight of Doom and Denethor the Cartoon Madman the better.

And so my opinion is divided. In some areas, the novels are better and in some areas the films are better. But overall...I'd rather read the books.