Anti-LotR

[Umbran]

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

Well, it isn't like they left much Gimli in to work with. Has anyone actually counted how many lines he had?

 

[Sulimo]

Well, it isn't like they left much Gimli in to work with. Has anyone actually counted how many lines he had?

Hehe. Yeah I guess. Most of his lines were the silly one-liners Jackson inserted, like 'nobody tosses a Dwarf' *shudder*

 

[WizarDru]

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).

I like the BBC radio-play, but there are some serious groaners in there, too. Gollum's capture at the very beginning, for example. It is the most faithful to the books, but the limitations of radio play were full in my mind while listening. Moria, for example, didn't translate at all well, in my mind....while I would have paid the price of admission JUST for the Moria scene in the theatrical version. That and the fact that, to me, half the voice actors sounded like the same guy. I know it wasn't...but I was suprised how many actors WERE in it. Michael Horden, though, ranks third in Gandalfs, in my mind. First is Ian McKellen, who has become as Jeremy Brett is to Sherlock Holmes, in my mind. Second is John Hurt.

I also tend to think many people overlook the fact that they come to LotR with certain expectations that non-fans simply won't have. The Colonel touched on this, in that he recognizes that he is somewhat biased about certain parts of the story. It is clearly one of his favorite works. That doesn't make his standard unreasonable...but I found I enjoyed 'Fellowship' more the first time than the second. This was because I wasn't running the book through my mind as I watched it: I merely enjoyed the film as a casual viewer. I was no longer watching with baited breath, hoping against hope that it was as good as I wanted, nay dreamed it would be.

The extended version only enhances my view of the movie. Whether we acknowledge it or not, we are hardcore fans, and we had certain desires and expectations. It's only natural that some should be disappointed. This LotR was not necessarily THEIR LotR. I could defend the movie, but it doesn't need my help. I find it amazing the Jackson and his vast team could make such a hurdle, and get this film made at all, let alone with such quality. Perhaps one day we'll see another interpetation...but I doubt it. I think this version will be the quintessential one.

And for the record, the audience laughed at the dwarf-tossing line at every showing I went to. Taste obviously varies. [well, that, and someone always let out a 'woo-hoo' whenever Bilbo talked about Old Toby ]

 

[Sulimo]

And for the record, the audience laughed at the dwarf-tossing line at every showing I went to. Taste obviously varies. [well, that, and someone always let out a 'woo-hoo' whenever Bilbo talked about Old Toby ]

True. I was also one of the few who groaned when Yoda started leaping about like an anime character in Episode II.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I've fully embraced that I have decades worth of preconceptions that come from reading the books. I've tried to weed out any criticisms that stem from that, or at least acknowledge them openly, and stick with ones that deal with the film in and of itself, except where I saw no reason for the book to have been changed in its translation to the screen.

The point made about Arwen and the flooding of the Ford of Bruinen is one I forgot to mention. On one hand, I see that Jackson was trying to make Arwen a very powerful, active character. On the other hand, there is a point where one has to decide how true to Tolkien one wishes to stay. Brown Jenkin seems to have found an interesting point to address that relates to this. Jackson is willing to alter things quite a bit, including to the point of taking away important moments from some characters to give them to others. Tolkien has been criticized, and I believe rightly, for his lack of female characters, and putting onto pedestals - and, in the case of Arwen, he does this literally - the few he does have. Modern commercial films stress the need for the love interest as well as strong female leads. So, Jackson was presented with a dilemma. He had to make some bold choices, which I admire him for making, but with which I disagree.

So, what would I have done, if I had the ability to do a Lord of the Rings film project? Personally, I would have tried to do it like a TV show, with several one or two hour episodes, and covered the books faithfully. Realistically, a project like this would likely never get made, but it's what I would like to have done, if I had a Ring of Three Wishes.

 

[WizarDru]

So, what would I have done, if I had the ability to do a Lord of the Rings film project? Personally, I would have tried to do it like a TV show, with several one or two hour episodes, and covered the books faithfully. Realistically, a project like this would likely never get made, but it's what I would like to have done, if I had a Ring of Three Wishes.

In a perfect world, that would have been nice, I agree. I'm curious, Colonel, how do you rate the BBC radio production? There are some things I think it does much better, such as Gimli's song about Khazad-dum, which seemed hollow to me on the page, but haunting and introspective when sung in verse.

I personally would be afraid of staying too faithful to the written word. My first impression of the 1st Harry Potter movie was that it was just that...too faithful. And yet, it didn't seem quite right. Later watchings softenend my opinion, and I view the film in a better light than my initial screening...but I still think that Columbus should have taken more liberties to accomodate the differences between written word and visual presentation.

There are some images in the movie that convey meaning to me as well as paragraphs of text. The visual of the ring dropping to the floor with a heavy thud and landing without a bounce (as if possessed of much greater weight) is a powerful image. The music, sound and visual all combine to create a metaphor I liked. This is where I think the movie excelled. Covering much of the lore and myth was something I thought the BBC did better, as they had more time to bother explaining about Caradhras the Cruel, as Gimli calls it. Of course, I don't always think that Tolkien's pacing was that good in the books, but that's another story.

 

[Henry]

Let me state that as someone who never could finish the books at all, I loved the movie. It brought the story to life in a way the books never could for me. We are very fortunate that those same works of beautiful prose from Tolkien serve as infinite flavor for Peter Jackson's scripts, whether you liked his vision or not - you can't say he didn't have enough material to work from.

I still hold that these three will be known as the best fantasy movie of all time (for now). The RPG community was NEVER had a movie that everyone could point to and say, "this is what my D&D sessions are like for me." The kinds of emotions this movie invokes in me are the kinds of emotions invoked in a very good RPG session.

This is why I like it.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

1. It was rather obvious that Strider was there waiting for them. Logic says a group of Hobbits leaving the Shire are not going to be armed so he better bring weapons for them.

2. Arwen clearly tells Aragorn that she will be safe if she can cross the river. I believe the line from the movie was "The magic of my people will protect me." So anyone who listens carefully knows it is not Arwen defeating the Nazgul but instead Arwen callign forth a power already there in the land.

3. Does it matter what the arguements are? I have read the book multiple times and even I cannot remember everyones exact arguements beyond the fact that Gandalf did not want to go but would not clearly say why.

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.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Someone save us from the attacks of PC on classical literature.

I do believe Eowyn in the third book would argue with all women being on a pedestal. She didnt slaw the Lord of the Nazgul and nearly die herself whole sitting on one.

Tolkien has been criticized, and I believe rightly, for his lack of female characters, and putting onto pedestals

 

[Storm Raven]

1. It was rather obvious that Strider was there waiting for them. Logic says a group of Hobbits leaving the Shire are not going to be armed so he better bring weapons for them.

Yes but how was he to expect four hobbits. Merry and Pippen were linked up with Sam and Frodo by accident in the Shire. How did Aragorn divine that this would happen before he left for Bree and rememebr to take along four swords and not two?