LotR movies better than the books?

[Mistwell]

GoT is the least of the books in the series. You have some great reading ahead of you.

PS

I'm still reading the series, but I find the lack of any really heroic and semi-morale character to be difficult. I want to root for someone, but they are all just so damn nasty! Perhaps Jon Snow will be a hero, but so far he isn't even in it all that much...

 

[Umbran]

I still maintain, though, that LotR would be a better book for a heavy edit, and better still for a substantial abridgement.

Maybe. And maybe the readership would be better with a dose of patience and a little more literary theory.

I'm sorry, that's a bit of a knee jerk reaction. Much of people's problem with Tolkien is that it was not written for a modern audience. It uses different conventions. You find the same sort of thing with HG Wells - there have been enough decent treatments in film, and on TV, that people eventually get around to reading the original text, and get confused. It doesn't seem so great. As far as I can see, the issue isn't that the book is bad, so much as it is that we've become trained to Hollywood/soundbite pacing, and been rather deluged with bad writing.

The Hollywood influence is plain - we need fast pacing. We are not satisfied with a thing that is beautiful, in and of itself. If nothing is happening we lose interest. So, movies like Dances with Wolves are panned as boring, when actually you can spend the time enjoying the sheer beauty of the scenes and not feel your time was wasted.

The influence of bad writing is also pretty easy to see. We've seen so much of it that we automatically assume that if we don't immediately see the point, there must not be one, and that the words are bad, and should be cut or edited out. However, I think that if you look carefully you'll find that slowness, that long-windedness, is intentional, and well chosen....

 

[Henry]

...as well as Tim Benzedrine...

You had me laughing for five minutes. Actually, Tom's house was one part I enjoyed. I was almost as sorry as the Hobbits they had to leave it.

 

[Agback]

If you watch the extra stuff on the FoTR extended DVD, Jaskson was told from new line that there HAD to be a prologue.

Then I will modify my remark.

If I had been in New Line's shoes I would have done without a prologue. The film would be better structured with more mystery at the beginning, a gradual revelation of conflict and background, and a steadier rise of conflict.

Tim Benzedrine? You mean Tom Bobilbil(SP?)

Tim Benzedrine is the character who replaces Tom Bombadil in The Harvard Lampoon's excellent spoof of LotR, Bored of the Rings.

Regards,


Agback

 

[KenM]

Accually I have read HG Wells, and liked Him. been awhile since i read BoTR. I think with the huge ammount of info the viewer of the movie has to digest, they did it right with a prologe you need to tell the audence whats going on. Anyone remembber when David Lynch's DUNE movie came out in 1984? I went to the theater, and they handed me a double sided sheet of terms to look over before the movie. that went over well with auedences.

 

[Agback]

Maybe. And maybe the readership would be better with a dose of patience and a little more literary theory.

In the best of all possible worlds we might have a patient and literarily-savvy readership reading a version of LotR that is less digressive and long-winded.

Don't mistake me for one of the people who bounced off Book I. I loved Lord of the Rings at age nine, and have read it, skipping at most a small fraction each time, over twenty times. I think it is grand. I think it is magnificient. I think it is subtle. I think it is profound. But quite without malice, I think it needs a heavy edit.

YMMV.


Agback

 

[WizarDru]

I'm still reading the series, but I find the lack of any really heroic and semi-morale character to be difficult. I want to root for someone, but they are all just so damn nasty! Perhaps Jon Snow will be a hero, but so far he isn't even in it all that much...

There are quite a few characters with strong moral convicitions in SOI&F...but some of them have significant character flaws, and others understand the value of RealPolitik. Moreover, GRRM is very skilled at leading you by the nose, with regards to playing off of your expectations. Suffice it to say that several characters that you THINK you know in GoT turn out to be very different animals when you find out more about their pasts and the truth of past events.

I would also put forth that almost all of the Stark clan are VERY moral characters, but each has different perspectives and beliefs. You also haven't met many of the characters who are closer to these qualities of 'straight hero'. Most of the characters in the series are in a moral grey area...much like life. However, if you're looking for heroes...you'll get your share. One might argue that Bran and his sisters, while not being brave warriors in the classic mode of a knight, are classic heroes, for showing strength and courage in the face of horrible events.

 

[King_Stannis]

There are quite a few characters with strong moral convicitions in SOI&F...but some of them have significant character flaws, and others understand the value of RealPolitik. Moreover, GRRM is very skilled at leading you by the nose, with regards to playing off of your expectations. Suffice it to say that several characters that you THINK you know in GoT turn out to be very different animals when you find out more about their pasts and the truth of past events.

I would also put forth that almost all of the Stark clan are VERY moral characters, but each has different perspectives and beliefs. You also haven't met many of the characters who are closer to these qualities of 'straight hero'. Most of the characters in the series are in a moral grey area...much like life. However, if you're looking for heroes...you'll get your share. One might argue that Bran and his sisters, while not being brave warriors in the classic mode of a knight, are classic heroes, for showing strength and courage in the face of horrible events.

I think Daenerys becomes more and more of a hero as the series goes on, as does Jon Snow. When I first read GoT, I couldn't wait to blow past Daenerys' chapters. By the end of book 3, I looked forward to her chapters the most. She has had a very hard life, but still is what I would term "good", at least for Martin. Jon Snow is destined for great things...he too is "good", in the Martin sense. It wouldn't surprise me if those two end up together to bring just rulership to Westeros.

 

[LostSoul]

Herbert's Dune?

Succinct?

<Inigo> I don't think that word means what you think it means </Inigo>

Well, there isn't a passage in Dune where the narrator talks about the presents that Duke Leto gave to his men. Or the history of rice-growing on Caladan. If Herbert wants to put in some characterization, that text also moves the story along. I think there's too much pointless text in Fellowship (Book 1) - it doesn't tell us anything new and/or important about the characters or the setting, nor does it move the story along.

 

[KnowTheToe]

I think Daenerys becomes more and more of a hero as the series goes on, as does Jon Snow. When I first read GoT, I couldn't wait to blow past Daenerys' chapters. By the end of book 3, I looked forward to her chapters the most. She has had a very hard life, but still is what I would term "good", at least for Martin. Jon Snow is destined for great things...he too is "good", in the Martin sense. It wouldn't surprise me if those two end up together to bring just rulership to Westeros.

Mark my words, the Imp will be King.