Anti-LotR

[ColonelHardisson]

Yes, but it's also worthwhile to note that for the elves, memory and dream is as vivid as actual reality, as mentioned in LotR, the book.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Lots of talk here with a lot more negative reaction than I saw when the movie itself came out.

So all it takes for you guys to turn on LOTR was a lone post from a troll that came running over from the Kalamar forum?

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Did you assume that everybody who never said anything loved the film? If you actually noticed, you never saw me say much of anything about the movie one way or the other. I didn't "turn on" it; I was never really completely on board.

 

[WizarDru]

Lots of talk here with a lot more negative reaction than I saw when the movie itself came out.

So all it takes for you guys to turn on LOTR was a lone post from a troll that came running over from the Kalamar forum?

Then I don't think you were paying much attention last December.

I don't see anyone 'turning on' the movie. The Colonel made his disagreement with some of the choices known plenty of times before this. Moreover, I don't see him claiming he didn't like the film anywhere: just that there are things he would have done differently or didn't like the way they were done. Hardly the same thing as an angry mob with pitchforks and torches.

I particularly recall people discussing how they thought that Merry and Pippin contributed little to the story in the movie, and how some folks thought the film too fast, and others too slow. What's wrong with that?

I also remember folks going to see it three times in one week.

To give the original poster the benefit of the doubt, he was summarizing more than one person's review...perhaps he was mixing their reasons together.

Just because I think it's one of the greatest films ever made doesn't mean others can't think differently. Hell, I once knew a guy who thought 'Phantom of the Paradise' was the greatest film ever.

 

[Crothian]

Lots of talk here with a lot more negative reaction than I saw when the movie itself came out.

So all it takes for you guys to turn on LOTR was a lone post from a troll that came running over from the Kalamar forum?

Who cares if it was a troll or if the person was a Kalamar fan. Actually, that post doesn't even matter anymore. It's a good discusion on what people thought of the movie. It's been most enjoyible.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Good points, WizarDru. I also remember seeing some negative reviews of it last year. And, you are correct; I never said I disliked the film. I've also posted a number of times over the past year about what I didn't like.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Who cares if it was a troll or if the person was a Kalamar fan. Actually, that post doesn't even matter anymore. It's a good discusion on what people thought of the movie. It's been most enjoyible.

I agree.

The original poster gave no details as to what he disliked, and was criticized; I decided to give details (and I have more that I could post) and preempt any such criticism. I also thought it would be worthwhile to discuss something that, while it was flawed, I certainly liked. I think it's a closed and rigid mind that insists that something is flawless if it is liked.

Just don't ask me to critique a film I really hate, like The Fifth Element.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

First let me say I realy liked the movie, saw it only three times in the theater though. Dispite this I will also say it wasn't perfect for me. Mostly I understand why Jackson did what he did, the few things I disagree with have partly been covered already. Several are taken care of in the SE but some can not be.

I agree with the criticism that the chase to the ford could have been less frantic. Overall minor.

Not mentioned yet is that Aragorn somehow has a bag of swords to give to the hobbits at Weathertop. Where did they come from? I know in the book they came from the barrows but this was cut altogether and I understand why. Surerly they could have given some explanation. Overall the only loose thread that disturbed me.

Mentioned already is Arwen and the ford. My problem is not the replaceing of Gorfingel with Arwen, but rather the implication that she is somehow responsible for the flood. She is not, Frodo is not, Gorfingal is not. This was all Elrond, with Gandolf doing theatrics with the waves. That it is Elrond is important since it shows the control he has over Rivendell and why everyone is safe there. The reason he was able to do it need not be mentioned in the film (He has one of the elven rings) but the fact that he can is important.

Lastly the thing that iritaded me was the discussion of whether to go through Moria or not. What was wrong with keeping everone arguing the points they made in the books rather than mixing everthing up. Minor but confusing to Tolkien fans.

well there is my .02 cents. Just because I find a few flaws doesn't make it a bad film. I would give it a 95%. Now if you want a bad adaptation to film watch The Scarlet Letter with Demi Moore, but I warn you that you will want those 2 hours of your life back.

 

[KnowTheToe]

Lots of talk here with a lot more negative reaction than I saw when the movie itself came out.

So all it takes for you guys to turn on LOTR was a lone post from a troll that came running over from the Kalamar forum?

That this thread was a troll is of no doubt, I commented subtley on this earlier. If it was not a troll, the original poster would have or should have come back to discuss the movie and reasons. The opening statement was to bait people.

The beauty of the troll is that it did not work, instead of hurtling opinions, people posted logical statements. It is actually one of the better current threads on the movie (which I loved).

 

[Sulimo]

Not mentioned yet is that Aragorn somehow has a bag of swords to give to the hobbits at Weathertop. Where did they come from? I know in the book they came from the barrows but this was cut altogether and I understand why. Surerly they could have given some explanation. Overall the only loose thread that disturbed me.

Mentioned already is Arwen and the ford. My problem is not the replaceing of Gorfingel with Arwen, but rather the implication that she is somehow responsible for the flood. She is not, Frodo is not, Gorfingal is not. This was all Elrond, with Gandolf doing theatrics with the waves. That it is Elrond is important since it shows the control he has over Rivendell and why everyone is safe there. The reason he was able to do it need not be mentioned in the film (He has one of the elven rings) but the fact that he can is important.

I really didnt like the Rivendell scenes at all. Especially the council scene, which is among my alltime fave scenes in the book. Even Bakshi did that scene better imo...same with the Weathertop scene.

And the wierd changes to Aragorns motivations. Ironically, my fave Rivendell stuff was probably the Arwen/Aragorn scenes.

Lastly the thing that iritaded me was the discussion of whether to go through Moria or not. What was wrong with keeping everone arguing the points they made in the books rather than mixing everthing up. Minor but confusing to Tolkien fans.

And the strangeness (I felt) of Gimli expecting a thriving Dwarven community in Moria.

Actually, I generally felt the characterisation of Gimli was bad. More like the Dwarf from the D&D film than Gimli from the novel.

That said I really did like it, althoug it isnt the best adaption..the BBC radio-play easily holds that honour. I'm hoping the extended version will solve some of the issues I have with the original cut (it sounds like it solves the pacing issues at least).

Given the focus on action though, I am wondering if my fave scene from TTT, the parley with Saruman, will survive intact. Still, I'll be there on day one.