Agreed. Hugo weaving is a good actor, but played the part so stoically that in my head I automatically insert “, Mr. Anderson” after everything Elrond says as if he’s agent Smith

Funnily enough, one of my main problems at first was that they did the opposite to Gandalf in the opening scene: in the book, he’s strict gravitas personified, but in the movie he’s genially chuckling over a line he said seriously in the books.

Granted, he was pretty much spot on for pretty much the rest of the movie, in no small part because of how brilliant Ian McKellen was and is.

I thought Legolas was portrayed as too sympathetic compared to the books, though. His haughty attitude and general jerkness towards the also very proud Gimli was a big part of what fleshed out Gimli as a character.

Making Legolas one of the biggest Marty Stus outside of fan fiction in turn relegated Gimli to almost only a comic relief parody.

I’d say Tolkien is a bit inconsistent in how he portrays elves. In The Hobbit, they are more like frolicking, dancing and singing pixies and in LotR they are more ethereal and aloof like fey.

Jackson chose to stick to the fey aspect.

I thought the latest research was pointing more toward homogenisation of the species through interbreeding rather than strictly competition or other factors.

OK so I was way off. This has info I was thinking of.

But they can still produce offspring with humans (e.g. Elrond is half-elven), which is usually what defines a species.

I am quite sure he based them on stereotypical views that were prevalent during his times and not actual people. Still he showed that these perceived differences come from their internal worst traits manifesting in their views on others and can be overcome for the good of all.

You are not wrong but nuance in reading is important.

1. Those are some nice claims, got any sources for them?

2. If your claims are true, it would be a quite kind depiction of stereotypical jews for the times. Dwarves were a very hardy and highly skilled people, who were quite generous with their craft. Almost the only bad traits they had were because of the incredibly powerful magic rings Sauron gave them, which were designed corrupt them and make them his slaves. They almost fully resisted that corruption, just becoming greedy and isolationist instead.

3. The story transpires in a world where there are actually good gods that help people and an evil god (Morgoth, and later demigod-ish Sauron) that is trying to corrupt and rule the world. I don’t think the decline of Men is a metaphor for growing secularism (Tolkien was famously a BIG hater of metaphor and allegory as story telling devices) as much as it is a direct consequence of their in-universe growing secularism and the same happening earlier in the world.

4. “Eastern/Southern men given to evil on brown people” What do you mean? The Eastern/Southern men are the brown people. The reality of it is that the story is one of war, and we’re seeing it told from people on one side of the war. That means we’re gonna get mainly negative views on the other side. Even so, the first time we see a Man of Harad in the books, the first thought we’re given from one of the characters is Sam thinking this about him:

He was glad that he could not see the dead face. He wondered what the man’s name was and where he came from; and if he was really evil of heart, or what lies or threats had led him on the long march from his home; and if he would not really rather have stayed there in peace.”

This is to me a nod towards the Men of Harad (at least, likely all the easterlings) not actually being evil but only being decieved by Sauron (the Deciever).

In general, Tolkien was born in 1892. He likely wasn’t a paragon of equality, but i also don’t think he portrays any kind of racism or xenophobia if you look past the very surface level of his writings.