|
Post by MolarAmšµ on Jun 24, 2024 9:07:44 GMT
My biggest problem with the LotR books, was that I don't think the Council of Elrond chapter was nearly long enough. Tolkien could have stopped forward momentum in the plot for at least another hundred pages or so, and it would have made the book so much better.
Also: not enough singing. He really dropped the ball there.
|
|
|
Post by MolarAmšµ on Jun 24, 2024 9:08:06 GMT
What a beautiful new page this is.
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 878
|
Post by otto on Jun 24, 2024 9:15:07 GMT
Lore dump chapters are the best chapters
|
|
|
Post by rawshark on Jun 24, 2024 9:16:45 GMT
I remember seeing Return of the King as saying to my LoTR expert friend how the Minis Tirith battle turning thanks to the ghost soldiers was bollocks and he told me in detail how that was a change made for the film for the sake of convenience, as the events of the book would have taken too long to work in film.
So I was like āOh ok. So that crap bit where the woman kills the Witch King was just for the film as well?ā And he was like āNo, really, thatās what happens.ā
|
|
|
Post by Bill in the rain on Jun 24, 2024 9:19:14 GMT
Jackson inserted himself as a filter, taking Tolkien's words (which were not always great) and superimposing his own imagination, heavily editing Tolkien's vision That's kinda the movie director's job. Let's not forget that the books were considered unfilmable at the time, and he not only filmed them, he turned them into massive hits, and also made 3 movies that are considered masterpieces. The odds of that happening were pretty low. Of course, then he screwed it up by making the awful Hobbit movies. Though that was partly down to studio interference. He really should have said NO though. I love the books, but so-far attempts at getting the kids to read The Hobbit have all failed. I'm fairly sure they'd like it, but it's hard to get past the first few chapters where not much happens other than dozens of dwarves doffing caps and singing. I'm hoping that the films can serve as an entryway into loving the wider universe, in the way that the Marvel, Star Wars and Harry Potter films did. We may need to dig out Lego LotR soon. It's a shame those old xbox LotR games aren't really a thing anymore, as I think they'd be great for the kids to run around in the world and whack things with swords.
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,191
|
Post by cubby on Jun 24, 2024 9:21:56 GMT
Guys guys, it's not worth fighting over whether the films or the books are better, they're both shit.
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 878
|
Post by otto on Jun 24, 2024 9:24:25 GMT
Hey! Come merry dol! derry dol! and merry-o! Starchild, MolarAm, fonty geeky forum-o! Cash-grabbing Hollywood, you tuck your films away! Fat Peter Jackson-o! Dwarf-tossing bollocks-hey! Ottoās on the web again, whining and a-griping, Hey! Come derry dol! Can you hear me typing?
|
|
|
Post by rhaegyr on Jun 24, 2024 10:24:39 GMT
Both the films and the books are awesome ĀÆ\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
|
|
|
Post by Whizzo on Jun 24, 2024 10:24:53 GMT
But on the plus side, Tom Bombadil was also thrown off the mountain. Having to put up with his bullshit in LOTRO was bad enough.
|
|
|
Post by harrypalmer on Jun 24, 2024 10:46:16 GMT
Re-Animator - Integral Cut (Blu-ray) - 4/5
I've not see this since I was a teen and so not 100% what all the Integral Cut changes were, but there is a mind control ability now, which makes sense. Apparently this version has less gore though, so will watch the original un-rated cut again soon.
I need to watch Evil Dead 2 again because I think I might prefer Re-Animator, both have very similar manic energy, but RA has more plot and characters that I care about.
It's completely mad and all sorts of wrong. Like ED2 it has a deranged rape scene which manages to be funny, but can't help feeling exploitative.
Do not eat sloppy rice pudding whilst watching.
|
|
|
Post by britesparc on Jun 24, 2024 10:53:13 GMT
I do not come on here for this kind of Lord of the Rings slander.
The books are masterpieces, as are the three films Peter Jackson made that are set in Middle earth, before everyone stopped and decided not to make any more films set in Middle earth.
|
|
|
Post by grey_matters on Jun 24, 2024 10:54:15 GMT
But on the plus side, Tom Bombadil was also thrown off the mountain. Christ, if I had known this I might have made it further than I managed.
|
|
|
Post by š on Jun 24, 2024 12:31:17 GMT
I still want to know ottoās opinion on Rings of Power. Heās being curiously silent about it. Maybe he was one of the three people who liked it.
|
|
|
Post by Jambowayoh on Jun 24, 2024 12:39:45 GMT
Who was the former forumite who lost their mind at the criticism of it?
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 878
|
Post by otto on Jun 24, 2024 12:40:01 GMT
Oh Christ no it was bollocks, of course
But nobody had any illusions - it was harmless - taking a couple of paragraphs from the Silmarillion and turning them into a generic fantasy TV series, I can't get too bothered about that, it's like taking Homer and turning into Xena Warrior Princess. No no, I can live with that. My problem with Jackson's LOTR is that it had pretensions of being canonical, authoritative, credible. People call it a masterpiece. I don't get it. It's so badly acted, so badly directed, even if you set aside the liberties it took with the source material.
|
|
|
Post by grey_matters on Jun 24, 2024 12:46:00 GMT
I still want to know ottoās opinion on Rings of Power. Heās being curiously silent about it. Maybe he was one of the three people who liked it. I was one of those three! Although it was the first thing I had watched at home for a couple of years and it was on a new 4K projector so I was totally under the influence of a number of things.
|
|
|
Post by dfunked on Jun 24, 2024 12:47:49 GMT
Who was the former forumite who lost their mind at the criticism of it? Witchking? Seemed a decent sort aside from that.
|
|
|
Post by Bill in the rain on Jun 24, 2024 13:26:46 GMT
. It's so badly acted, so badly directed This is a very odd take.
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 878
|
Post by otto on Jun 24, 2024 13:31:07 GMT
Is it though? I mean, I made myself sit through ROTK at the cinema, so I saw it. The person I was with walked out in boredom/disgust but I made myself see it through to the end. I wish I could have those five hours of my life back but that eternity of soft focus gurning hobbitses will stay with me like a half digested kebab.
|
|
|
Post by Reviewer on Jun 24, 2024 13:39:53 GMT
Iām not a Lord of the Rings person at all, or a big fan of that sort of fantasy so as an āoutsiderā Iām not sure if itās badly directed but certainly the cinematography and framing does nothing for me. Some of the acting is outstanding (Serkis), others is ok.
It feels very of itās time in many ways, itās excellent in some parts and awful in others.
Think thatās on the fence enough. Itās alright.
|
|
sportā
Junior Member
notice me senpai
I want to claim my tits
Posts: 2,284
|
Post by sportā
on Jun 24, 2024 13:39:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rhaegyr on Jun 24, 2024 13:47:02 GMT
Oh Christ no it was bollocks, of course But nobody had any illusions - it was harmless - taking a couple of paragraphs from the Silmarillion and turning them into a generic fantasy TV series, I can't get too bothered about that, it's like taking Homer and turning into Xena Warrior Princess. No no, I can live with that. My problem with Jackson's LOTR is that it had pretensions of being canonical, authoritative, credible. People call it a masterpiece. I don't get it. It's so badly acted, so badly directed, even if you set aside the liberties it took with the source material. Honestly this continued criticism of the films comes across as a little barking, even from a self-confessed book wanker like me who reads them once a year. I don't think Jackson has ever said (or even inferred) that his adaptation is canonical or authoritative - it's simply an adaptation and a fairly comprehensive one at that. It's not Jackson's fault the public treat it as the definitive LOTR story. Badly directed? Are we watching the same trilogy? Cinematography, costume design, practical (and special) effects, editing, soundtrack and everything else are all at the very least competent. Most of those areas I'd argue are pretty great, even now. Cameron, Spielberg and Lucas have all gone on record praising Jackson's work on the trilogy. Don't really see much of an issue with the acting either - there's the odd clanger or duff facial expression but most of the time it's more than serviceable and there's some great tender moments that are well acted sprinkled throughout all the action. There's a ton of stuff I wish the films did differently (Aragorn's arc/reluctance to be king) and some characters were botched for no reason (Faramir/Denethor being the most egregious examples) but I'd argue it got far more right than it did wrong. Plus it introduced LOTR to the general public on a massive scale and now I'm able to talk about it with tons of people instead of pestering them to "READ THIS"! A lot of them have gone on to read the books too. So yeah, I like both.
|
|
|
Post by rhaegyr on Jun 24, 2024 13:47:50 GMT
Is it though? I mean, I made myself sit through ROTK at the cinema, so I saw it. The person I was with walked out in boredom/disgust but I made myself see it through to the end. I wish I could have those five hours of my life back but that eternity of soft focus gurning hobbitses will stay with me like a half digested kebab. Did you watch it with Christopher Tolkien? All this ranting would finally make sense.
|
|
|
Post by clemfandango on Jun 24, 2024 13:48:38 GMT
I thought TFOTR and TTT were both brilliant.
I remember really looking forward to TROTK as it was my favourite book, I hated the ghost soldiers and soft focus epilogue of hobbits slow motion jumping on beds as much as any sane person, but I thought it was alright at the time.
It only gets worse with age though and is the most like the hobbit movies out of the three.
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 878
|
Post by otto on Jun 24, 2024 13:51:19 GMT
OK, look, I know I go on about this too much and you probably all hate me for it so maybe I should just give my reasons for disliking the Jackson trilogy and then it's done and I'll never mention it again:
- I think the thing I love most about the novel is actually The Shire - clearly JRRT saw it as an idealised rural English landscape. You see this also in his paintings as well as his beautiful written descriptions. I thought Jackson got this hopelessly wrong, I hated what he did with The Shire, it looked like Teletubby land and it immediately set me against the films right from the outset. Bag End was OK - I'll give him that - but The Shire - my God I hated it.
- Elves. Rivendell. See above. Jackson just got them so badly wrong. This is subjective, I know. There was nothing of the mystical or magical about them in the film, they just seemed so hackneyed and ordinary. Didn't work for me at all.
- Treebeard. See above.
- Helm's Deep. Dwarf tossing. Archers marching in from Mirkwood. Just silly and wrecked any suspension of disbelief for me.
- And then there was the handling of the ending. The period from Mount Doom to the closing credits just seemed to take FOREVER, and nothing happened, just widdly-widdly music and Frodo looking at everyone with big eyes. And they ditched the Scouring of the Shire for this?? It felt hammy, the pacing was all off, I hated it.
- The casting. Actually the casting was mostly pretty good EXCEPT FOR THE HOBBITS. Sam worked for me. The other three just didn't on any level.
Look, in between there was lots to like. Moria was very well done. Minas Tirith was well done. Rohan was pretty good. But the downsides listed above set my teeth on edge and I'm afraid radicalised me into the bore I have become on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by Bill in the rain on Jun 24, 2024 13:52:36 GMT
Well, the record breaking academy awards, incredibly high review scores, etc... would indicate... er.. yes?
|
|
otto
New Member
Posts: 878
|
Post by otto on Jun 24, 2024 13:54:22 GMT
Honestly this continued criticism of the films comes across as a little barking, even from a self-confessed book wanker like me who reads them once a year. This is totally fair
|
|
|
Post by peacemaker on Jun 24, 2024 13:57:10 GMT
Well I think the whole Lotr trilogy is amazing and I loved the books. Tfotr is one of my favourite movies of all time.
The hobbit films were fine, just pants in direct comparison to tlotr movies.
|
|
|
Post by rhaegyr on Jun 24, 2024 14:01:51 GMT
Honestly this continued criticism of the films comes across as a little barking, even from a self-confessed book wanker like me who reads them once a year. This is totally fair Hah, to be fair you've articulated why you don't like the films and they're all reasonable points. "Widdly-Widdly" music and The Shire looking like Teletubbie land gave me quite a chuckle too
|
|
|
Post by Bill in the rain on Jun 24, 2024 14:09:28 GMT
My son after Fellowship of the Ring, looking at the cover.
"I loved it, but why were there no girls in the fellowship? Most action films have at least one girl!"
Sigh. He's gone all woke.
|
|