: "We obviously have Sauron's various emissaries to represent him, but just how Sauron himself appears is still a puzzle we are trying to solve. I agree that you can't reduce him to being a big guy striding around in black armour - but he cannot be limited to a flaming eye either. It's tough. We'll keep working on it."

: Why can't Sauron remain just the Eye? That's something I cannot
: understand.

: "It is true that most of the cuts will come out of the first book. We have to reach Rivendell a little quicker than the book does, as that is the point that the story picks up. I don't agree that there's not much interesting stuff in THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, but it does lack a urgency. That is one of the biggest problems with adapting the books - Tolkien gave his characters a fairly leisurely journey - I don't mean the length of the journey, but rather the lack of dramatic tension, especially pre-Rivendell. For the movies, we will have to make motivations a little tighter and more urgent. We have to focus on The Ring, Sauron and the threat to Middle-earth. There is not much room for
: other stuff that is not directly connected to this narrative spine."

: See ya Tom Bombadil. Well, I expected that, so it's not too disappointing. What scares me is that the pruning could be too extensive. The Gildor and Farmer Maggot scenes will probably be cut too. But I hope Bree is kept 100% intact. I hope Glorfindel remains in the story. And I hope that some of the "leisurely" ramble through the Shire is kept. I don't see the need for constant dramatic tension. The best movies pause and are reflexive at times before moving on to the meat of the story.

: "We have written the scripts in a reasonable "Tolkien" style ... on occasions using his dialogue verbatim. The older characters, i.e. Gandalf, Theoden, Denethor are pure Tolkien in their dialogue style. The younger hobbit characters slightly less so, but still not hip or modern. Sam will be pure Sam, and Gollum will be pure Gollum in style."

: Very scary to me. Tolkien style? Pure Tolkien? Verbatim in only some places? Why, why, why? Tolkien's dialogue is good enough for me.

: "For example, the Aragorn/Arwen romance is a lovely part of the story ...but if it was filmed exactly as Tolkien wrote it, they would have maybe 10 minutes screentime together over 6 hours of film. So we have to find a way to include Arwen in more of the story, to have a chance at creating a meaningful screen romance. However, we won't do anything radical like adding her to the Fellowship, as that would be departing too much from what we all know and love. It's a fine line that we walk."

: Yikes. I don't know about this. I suppose it will provide more insight into Aragorn's dilemnas...that could be interesting. But on-screen romance? Yuck.

: In general, though, I think Jackson has the right ideas. I am especially glad that he puts to rest the Connery rumor. I only hope that he sticks to British/Irish accents for the speaking characters.

Well it appears that several concerns of all have been addressed. As for myself I am satisfied. I guess my only fear is having to buy tons of McDonald "Happy Meals" to get the LOTR beenie babies for my children! UGH!!!