@silverlily 

Yes, and I think the same is true for the books.  I would recommend reading The Hobbit for children. The Rankin/Bass film would be easier to understand, and perhaps later they could watch and better understand the Peter Jackson films when they are older and accompanied by a parent. The Lord of the Rings books would be better suited for at least age twelve or older if they are good students.  Families have been watching the Peter Jackson movies in their homes ever since home video was available so it is a matter of parental discretion.

I have ordered the 1980 animated film of The Return of the King. I think it was made by the same people who created 1977 movie of The Hobbit. It appeared that Rankin and Bass were involved in it, and I liked their version of The Hobbit better than Peter Jackson’s even though it was far from perfect.  As I remember both of the films were quite enjoyable, but it has been many years since I last viewed Return of the King. I kind of wish that Rankin/Bass had the rights to make the entire book of The Lord of the Rings into an animated film since it probably would have been more appealing to children than Ralph Bakshi’s. At least I liked the animation better, and it may have been more child friendly than Peter Jackson’s. It is good to have the film based on at least part of the book. Anyway, I am curious to see the movie again after so many years. I think I will like it again at least for nostalgia.  🙂

.

After viewing the animated The Return of the King I have to admit that I really enjoyed it although it shortened the story from the book too much. Surprisingly, two important characters were omitted, Gimli and Legolas.  If they had been included the film would have been much better, although the animation was quite good for the characters and parts of the book that were in the story. The compression of the book didn’t work so well. But I would still recommend viewing the program because there were some good scenes. 

One thing about Tolkien is that when one re-reads one of his books, all sorts of interesting features pop out and demand attention. For instance, by early in chapter 2 of The Hobbit, I have found his feet described as furry, woolly toes, and thick brown hair growing on his feet.
I've also noticed that ,"It will soon be June.", so I thought it must be May. already, but another sentence says it's 'nearly May.'

I love Tolkien's use of archaic words, including ones that were archaic when written and ones with a changed meaning since then.

I did look twice when I read that after the Wood-Elves captured Thorin they "put thongs on him". No doubt these were thin strips of leather used as ropes, and not the footwear known by this term in Australia,  but to most people as 'flipflops' (or to NZ wearers as 'jandals'). (Or the other meaning - no offence intended). 

I wonder if anyone else here owns the book Pictures by J. R. R. Tolkien. It is a collection of Tolkien’s own artwork with the selection and text by his son Christopher Tolkien. Believe it or not, I bought the book for only around $20. The book isn’t huge, but it is hardcover and of high quality.  I think it’s the only collection of Tolkien’s artwork that I own other than the illustrated edition of The Hobbit.  I really like it. 🙂

Here is the book on Amazon:

https://a.co/d/7VnMak5

 did look twice when I read that after the Wood-Elves captured Thorin they "put thongs on him".

That's an interesting visual, Thorin walking around in flipflops with a bunch of elves like he's on vacation  😀 

And in a more sedate tone, I am happy to announce that I have just begun my beautiful new hardback set of LOTR. I decided 22 March was a good date to start, as it's 'opposite ' Hobbit Day on 22 September, and I try to finish reading it by then.

@coracle 

Are the three parts of the The Lord of the Rings in three separate volumes?  My hardcover copy of the book has all three parts of the story in one volume, but of course it is a very large book at 1178 pages long!  🙂

@narnian78 I'm hobbit sized, and my hands aren't very strong, so I needed three volumes. It wasn't until I got back to London at New Year that I was finally able to find these good quality books.  I have had plastic covers put on them (a cheap service at our city library), and will be reading them for the rest of my life. 

I wonder how many people liked Tolkien the first time they read his books. I enjoyed The Hobbit in high school, although I thought my English teacher at that time so many years ago was rather boring. But that didn’t discourage me from reading The Lord of the Rings during the summer a few years later when I was in college. I regretted not taking a Tolkien course although I did take one about C. S. Lewis.  I just wondered what people’s first attitude was toward Tolkien’s books.  Did you like the books right away or did they grow on you?  I never could understand why some people thought the The Lord of the Rings was boring.  Reading it requires some patience, but I think if you do it at a leisurely pace you will like Tolkien better.  🙂

@narnian78 I definitely liked them right away — I first read The Hobbit, together with my mum, when I was 7 years old, pretty much directly after we'd finished the Chronicles of Narnia. (We used to read together every night before my bedtime, a few chapters each night, taking turns to read, usually lasting until Mum fell asleep while I was doing the reading! ) I absolutely loved it and wanted more, and my older sister was reading The Lord of the Rings at the time, so we went right on with that as soon as she'd finished it. Even though it was by far the longest and most complicated book I'd ever read at that time, there's nothing in the plot that's beyond the grasp of a lower primary school kid with a love of classic fantasy and a huge appetite for reading, and so we absolutely devoured it — over a period of several months, that is. Some parts of it were more exciting and/or easier to understand than others, and of course I've got more and more out of it over subsequent re-readings as an adult, but I was thoroughly addicted right from the start, and still am.  

Posted by: @narnian78

I just wondered what people’s first attitude was toward Tolkien’s books.  Did you like the books right away or did they grow on you

Good question! Back in the early-mid 1970s a good family friend told about this wonderful book he had just read (The Lord of the Rings). He told us it had elves, dwarves, wizards and ... hobbits (what a cool name!) in the long, epic tale. When he described all this to us, we were traveling right then through Smugglers' Notch near Stowe, Vermont, and I recall we all kind of giggled and teased David that he was reading such a book. (I have since apologized to him. )

Well, soon after, my brother, then in his early teens, was intrigued by what he had heard of The LotR, and began reading. He could not put the book down. After he finished, he told me almost forcefully that "I have to read this". I took the plunge, did so, and was hooked immediately. I have read it every second year since. The tale becomes more meaningful and fascinating with every read (as do the Chronicles of Narnia).

I read The Hobbit shortly after, and thought it grand fun!

The Silmarillion is another story. After my brother read it and loved it, he highly recommended it to me, whereupon I took it on after finishing The LotR (mid-late teens). I could not get into The Sil at all, so set it aside for about ten years. When I tried it again in my later 20s, I simply could not understand how I did not love it when I had first read it. I am definitely due for a re-read of this magnificent book soon.  

I have read most of Tolkien's other books, as well, and appreciate them, but none so much as TH, TLotR, and The Sil.

@jo 

I don’t know if it makes much difference in which location where you first read a book.  For me I first read The Hobbit in my parents’ home in the small town in Michigan where we lived. I still live in the same town although not in the same house. When I first read The Lord of the Rings I was staying in a motel on Beaver Island, Michigan.  It was also in a motel in northern Michigan where I first read The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Does the actual physical place where you read a book influence your view of the author’s writing?  It probably does, and northern Michigan is a lot like certain places in Narnia and Middle Earth. There are a lot woods and water in both the real and the fictional locations. 🙂

My parents gave me The Hobbit for Christmas when I was about 7. I surprised my parents by getting very into it very quickly, and soon wanted to read LotR. It took me about a year to convince my parents to allow me to read it. I think my mom must have regretted that decision after hearing about the violence in the last book. Unfortunately, I didn't have any friends who were into it until I was around 10-12, and most of those were a bit older than me.

I didn't read The Silmarillion for a while after that, probably because my mom was uncomfortable with the story about Turin Turumbar. I enjoyed it, more or less, but it was rather difficult to follow the parts with the Valar and the Eldar. The parts with the Edain are a little easier to follow. 

The story of Gorlim's betrayal of Barahir, and his ghost's later repentance, as well as Turin's unfair ostracism from Thingol's realm, delusion by the dragon, love and loss of Finduilas, and eventual vengeance on Glaurung are very meaningful stories.

Posted by: @narnian78

 Does the actual physical place where you read a book influence your view of the author’s writing?

One of my memories from the first time I read The Hobbit took place in late winter during sledding season, so yes, I believe it does. I still try to keep a tradition of reading those books around Christmastime. The midwest is a beautiful and Middle-Earthesque part of the country.

Soooo the musical is coming to Chicago this summer and I am so tempted to make the trip. International tour dates will be announced in June so hopefully if Chicago doesn't work out for me there is one closer!

In the meantime, local Tolkien book club I'm in is reading the revised and expanded Letters this year. We're up to #104 and there's been some interesting discussion. Although most of us wished for this expanded edition to include more context for some of the letters where they only included fragments.