For example, “crawled along for a good way, till suddenly his hand met what felt like a tiny ring of cold metal lying on the floor of the tunnel” (Tolkien 68). In the paperback Bilbo receives the ring by crawling on the floor and randomly finding it. He found it innocently, and didn’t know the ring was Gollum’s. So it wasn’t his fault for finding the ring and asking Gollum what was in his pocket. Technically he didn’t steal it, he found it. Tolkien's whole point for this, was for Bilbo to be innocent and be surprised when Gollum gets mad at Bilbo for “stealing” the ring. On the contrary, in the motion picture Bilbo wakes up to see Gollum battle with a goblin, and the ring falls from his pocket (Jackson). So he knows it was Gollum’s. By knowing the ring was Gollum’s, Bilbo was guilty for having the ring. He technically stole from Gollum, giving Gollum a reason for chasing Bilbo and yelling at him for stealing it. This is not the way Tolkien had it in the book, which defeats the whole purpose of the scene. The way Bilbo receives the ring in the novel was contrasting from the motion …show more content…
It has some boring parts, but has many surprising parts too, where Bilbo proved himself worthy of being a leader. The motion picture, overall, was mediocre, but there was too many differences from the novel to the motion picture. Peter Jackson changed many important parts and great scenes. Like the troll scene, Peter Jackson changed a lot to make the scene more entertaining and interesting, but it still wasn’t better than the novel . Even though the motion picture might have been more interesting than the novel. The novel is still the original, and is always going to out rank the motion