Lord of the Rings: Did PJ lose the plot?

[Nightfall]

I guess what doesn't work for me is reap going around being supercilious, denigrating others, and oh yeah if you hate ST you're an idiot. (Again I hate the MOVIE not the book. I haven't read the book.)

 

[Salthanas]

a) I didn't ignore them - they simply didn't convince me, and they didn't counter my stated reasons.

b) That's a big question.
But there are many reasons, not the least of which is human nature/psychology:
The more people read (and/or learn) something, the more their approach becomes similar to the material. They become more agreeable towards the subject, to justify their long exposure to it.
This is the basis of brainwashing, and a recognized psychological observation, AFAIK.

LOL So in this case anyone who does not agree with you must be brainwashed?
Okkkkkkkkkkkkkkk Surely its more a case that people like to think that what they believe or like is somehow correct and will therefore go to extreme ends to justify their feelings towards something (which cuts both ways of course both for justification and criticism). You seem to be taking the view that somehow justification works on some sort of brainwashing syndrome but on the other hand refuse to belive that criticism, such as your own for example might also stem from an equally illogical or emotive standpoint. Critics can be equally as culpable as zealots when it comes to objectivity....

Further, most people that are fans of something prefer not to point out its flaws. I'm not talking about the internet - I'm talking about real people.
When people like something, they seldom talk about the parts they didn't like - they concentrate on the parts they did. This is human naure - to appear agreeable, and fun to be around. Conflict and disagreeableness are not virtues in human society (again, not talking about the internet).

It's usually people who DON'T like something that will talk about the flaws in a work.
Guess who reads these LotR threads?
People who LIKE the work, for the vast majority.

I even like LotR - quite a lot, actually.

This doesn't blind me to the things that don't work in it.
To me, something that can hold up to scrutiny INCREASES my respect for the work.
Which is why I started this thread here to debate what I perceive to be things that don't work in the book. I'd appreciate more input.
However, what you've mentioned here is not convincing at all, mainly because you haven't been addressing my points.

Right so let me get this straight, you direct people to reviews posted by individuals who apparently really dislike Tolkien and say that his view mirrors your own as you said here.

Here's a page that is pretty close to my (overall) opinion on LotR book (minus his 'state of fantasy writing' bit): http://www.theferrett.com/showarticle.php?Rant=69
"But his writing also meanders. He spends a lot of time focusing in on things that better writers would discard. His plots are filled with side-trails that wind nowhere, just like real history, and interchanges that really don't matter much at all. But like a man with no editor, Tolkien regurgitates it all so that you can see it.

And then you say how much you like LoTR. I hope you'll forgive me if I take your "I like Tolkien and am just being objectional" line with a slight pinch of salt or rather whole mouthful to be honest

 

[reapersaurus]

Salthanas - stop the straw man stuff.

I never said that anyone who likes Tolkein is brainwashed.
You asked, I went out of my way to make a fairly insightful (I thought) reply.
I rooted my answer in established psychological observations and techniques (i.e. the brainwashing comparison).

It's (at best) a digression and a dodge on your part to make it like I said that all Tolkein fans are brainwashed.

Similarly, I explained why I linked to theferret's rant: because he makes some salient points that I'd like to see countered, and because it's one of the only anti-lotr pages I could find. (In fact, the only one that used any references to the books or detailed anything).

Maybe you can't imagine how someone who can point out things that don't work in a book or movie, while still enjoying and respecting the overall work. But I can do that, and have my whole adult life, so please stay impersonal and stick within the debate, please.

BTW: your point about both fans and reviewers staying objective is well noted.
I strive at all times to try to stay objective - I wish others would return the consideration.

Speaking of which, Nightfall, your post has been Reported to the Moderators.

 

[Hypersmurf]

... so please stay impersonal and stick within the debate, please.

That's good advice... for everyone.

Keep the atmosphere at least 'civil'; 'pleasant' would be even better.

-Hyp.
(Moderator)

 

[reapersaurus]

re: Starship Troopers

I have based my comments on observations about what was in the film.

All I've heard bad about the film boils down to "it wasn't like the book" "it's bad" "teens" "t&A" "bad performances".
Not too many solidly objective responses there, guys.

If you want to critique ST in an objective way, it might help to reference specific parts of the movie (as I have done with my critique of LotR).

 

[Storminator]

[SNIP]
LotR has sold more than any book EVER, excepting only the Bible, and PJ has the nerve to try and improve on it? I'm not saying it's perfect, but that's a bit arrogant, imo.

*Donning flame retardant suit now*

If you consider the trilogy as one film, it has out sold every film in history, including the Star Wars trio. And all three movies hit Internet Movie Data Base's top 10.

In short, it's a contender for the best film work in history.

PS

 

[Salthanas]

Salthanas - stop the straw man stuff.

I never said that anyone who likes Tolkein is brainwashed.
You asked, I went out of my way to make a fairly insightful (I thought) reply.
I rooted my answer in established psychological observations and techniques (i.e. the brainwashing comparison).

It's (at best) a digression and a dodge on your part to make it like I said that all Tolkein fans are brainwashed.

Similarly, I explained why I linked to theferret's rant: because he makes some salient points that I'd like to see countered, and because it's one of the only anti-lotr pages I could find. (In fact, the only one that used any references to the books or detailed anything).

Maybe you can't imagine how someone who can point out things that don't work in a book or movie, while still enjoying and respecting the overall work. But I can do that, and have my whole adult life, so please stay impersonal and stick within the debate, please.

BTW: your point about both fans and reviewers staying objective is well noted.
I strive at all times to try to stay objective - I wish others would return the consideration.

Speaking of which, Nightfall, your post has been Reported to the Moderators.

Sure I can imagine works I like not being flawless, personally I havent yet read a book to date which I would think of as being perfect and I doubt I will do. I just generally try to dwell on the positives of the fiction I read than concentrating on the negatives.

What was exactly the purpose of spouting your particular views regarding psychological techniques, it was an answer after all in relation to why this obvious hole you see in the book was not universely agreed on. Rather than avoiding the obvious answer based on the general level of disagreement that maybe its not as clear cut as you imagine and that some people might not have the same problems with the said passage in the story as you do you went on to spout on about the general principles of brain washing techniques which as it amounted to your only explanation as to why, was as good as saying that anyone who thought otherwise was somehow deluded or not all their in the head

 

[reapersaurus]

What was exactly the purpose of spouting your particular views regarding psychological techniques

Because I was answering your question.
If you'd prefer me to dodge your questions, like most people are exhibiting today, than I think I'll do that next time and save myself the time and insult of being deliberately misrepresented.

To wit:
You asked "if it's so obvious, than what explains other people not agreeing that it's a problem?"

I gave you multiple possibilities.
The fact that humans tend not to like pointing out bad things (appearing disagreeable), the tendency for people to start adopting the approach of things they have great familiarity with (the brainwashing comparison), and the tendency of people to fawn over things they have spent a lot of time/effort on.
I also pointed out how it's more likely that people who are reading this thread are fans of Tolkein, and not "haters".

So that was 4 applicable answers to your question.

I guess I should just dodge the questions, generate straw man arguments, or attack the person I'm talking to personally like other people have been doing today.

 

[Orius]

Umm, yeah, that's pretty close to how it was destroyed in the book. Frodo and Gollum fight, Gollum bites off Frodo's finger and begins dancing around in glee. Gollum loses his footing and falls into the volcano.

Yeah, but in the film, Frodo pushes Gollum in and nearly falls in himself. That's not how it happened in the book. The book may have been less dramatic, but the reality was that Frodo failed, and the Ring was destroyed only because Gollum was careless.

 

[Greyhawk_DM]

I'll bring the Cheetos!

I'll bring the Mountain Dew