My God, It Was Horrible!

[Beorn]

All you doomsayers were right. It was absolutely horrible. I was crying in the theater. I wanted to walk out, but I didn't b/c my friends were there!

All the party is screwed up, out of order, shortened.

The trip to Bree was in 45 minutes or so...not 1.30 like it should've been.

IT WAS HORRIBLE!!!

When Gandalf fell into the chasm, he had his arms out straight, his legs too, as if he was crucified.

THE BALROG HAS LARGE ARMS...NO WINGS

I was saying to myself throughout the entire movie "It is just an interpretation"

I doubt I will actually see the second and third movies. There is so much changed. PJ trys to make parts humorous. THE COUNCIL OF ELROND IS TOO F'IN SHORT!

They show the destruction of the Shire to Frodo in the Mirror, but it shouldn't take place w/o the Scouring...

MAY YOU BE CAST INTO THE CRACKS OF DOOM, YOU OBSINATE FOOL, PETER JACKASS. MAY YOU SUFFER ENDLESSLY, BEING TORTURED UNTIL YOU ARE NEXT TO DEATH. MAY YOU FEEL THE PAIN THAT WE HAVE FELT, HAVING OUR FAVORITE BOOK OF ALL TIME DESTROYED, MADE INTO A BASTARDIZATION OF THE GREATEST WORKS WRITTEN THIS CENTURY. MAY YOU BE TORTURED BY DEATH THREATS, NAME CALLING, AND FEAR OF BEING ATTACKED UNTIL YOU FIND A WAY TO REPAY YOUR DEBT TO TOLKIEN, HIS FAMILY, AND US, HIS LOYAL FANS. FOREVER CURSE YOU TO THE TORTURES OF BEING THE DESTROYER, THE RAPER OF TOLKIEN'S WORKS.

AND, A QUOTE FROM THE MOVIE, WHICH WAS ONE OF THE FEW THINGS YOU DID RIGHT...

Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. YOU CAN BET YOUR FAT A$$ THAT I WOULD BE SWIFT TO MAKE THIS JUDGEMENT. I WOULD NOT HAVE YOU PUT TO DEATH, BUT I WOULD HAVE YOU STRIPPED OF ALL DIGNITY, ASSUMING YOU HAVE THE SLIGHTEST TRACE OF IT, I WOULD BE SURE THAT YOU NEVER AGAIN ARE ALLOWED TO WORK WITH ANY SHRED OF THE LORD OF THE RINGS, BY J. R. R. TOLKIEN

[rast_lotrlover]

YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK? if you were a TRUE fan of the books, you'd appreciate any small shred of lotr you could get. even if he did screw everything up(like sam not looking in tha mirror, gorfindel not existing, galadriel crazyier than shes supposed to be, elrond being a jackass, hobbits not looking chubby enough, mispronoucing things like Gandalf(which is pronouced Gandalve) and celeborn(which is pronouced keleborn), and many other things), its still lotr, and if u ask me, its not that bad of an interpritation. have you seen the cartoon of lotr? all the books squashed into 1hour1/2? now THAT was bad, but since it was still lotr, its wasnt that bad because they did theyre best. and just bcuz the movie sux, a REAL lotr fan would never feel hate, or even dislike, towards a fellow lotr fan. if he liked the books, then he kix ass, even if he didnt read teh appendices b4 making a movie, or screwed up the whole thing. ITS STILL LOTR AND IT SHOULD BE APPRECIATED!!!!!!!!

[Aerin]

Look, I just got home from seeing the movie. For what it was, it was very good. For what it WASN'T, it wasn't LOTR. I am a devoted Tolkien fan, but I am not starving for any jerk's interpretation of LOTR. I am not desperate for PJ's cheap imitation of the best piece of literature in existence!!! Don't tell me what I want, Rasta_lotrlover!!! I am the only one who knows what I want, and nobody is going to change my mind!!!
Sure, PJ may be BASED the movie on LOTR, but he didn't stay very true to the books! So don't go shoving your opinion down my throat! If PJ had included all the characters and symbolism from LOTR, then he deserves some huge award, but what he did was marginally acceptable.
I will say that PJ stuck somewhat to the storyline, but he wandered off the road quite a bit!

[rast_lotrlover]

i agree with you fully, and theres no need to start a war here, but i still think you should accept his interpretation because, well, maybe hes mentally challenged and he didnt realize what he was doing. its not his fault. its hollywood's.

[Talierin]

Amen Brother Mike! I'll be writing up a long review tonight on every thing that was wrong that I can remember.:mad:

[Greymantle]

What? And what do you say makes up Hollywood? Movies and movie directors, no?

[el Damahj]

Hello.
This is my first post.

This film's still five days away in Sydney.
What Tolkien created is beyond the cage of words. . . .

To anyone who has the film already, please tell me, reassure me.

Are there enough redemming features in this 'interpretation' to make it worth seeing? If it was painful to watch what kept you from walking out? And having seen it would you see it again?

*shaking in trepidation *

[rast_lotrlover]

Ive seen it twice in the first day it came out!!!!!!!!!
and im going to see it a dozen times more! its worth seing-trustme


yes, hollywood is made by directors and so forth, BUT, deep down, its made by Satan. So blame it on the devil, not PJ.

[Telchar]

A friend of mine, who hasn't read LoTR, thought the movie was great.. As for my opinion, I'm probably not going to see it again..

[SirNothingman]

You are all making my day because I am going tonight and NOW I know what to expect...it is much easier to accept the bad news/bad movie...I wish I wasn't so emotionally connected!

DAM IT DAM IT....Take all things with a grain of salt.

[Valinorean]

Yes, by all means, take it with a grain of salt. Heck, take the salt-shaker with you.

Mike B, I was afraid to show it on the board for fear of causing trouble, but I agree with you so much. Thank you for your strong comments. Long live Gondor!

People keep asking me how it was, and I just shake my head. I wanted to leave, but I dragged my sister to see a movie at midnight, and she wasn't going to budge.

The worst part was seeing the smiles on the faces of all the other movie-goers. I wanted to stand up and scream!!!!

I should just leave this forum and insulate myself from the comments of all these movie fans who will join the forum just to scold us and never even look at the threads that are NOT about the movie. . .

[masterofmiderth]

Peter Jackson pre-movie rhetoric was that he read the book over and over so that they could get it right. What a farce!

The hobbits are just baggage in the picture. Frodo shows no signs of having bravery or charictor.

Merry and Piipen are just bumbeling fools.

Aragorn doesn't belive in himself.

There is way too much violence. It is not what the book is about. They spent too long killing the cave troll and torturing Gandalf.

Why is Arwen the hero?

Why is Gandolf hugging hobbits?

Frankly, the animated and the radio adaption was much better.

Unfortunatly, all the rookies out there who haven't read and re-read the book, will have no idea about the absolute brillance of the man J.R.R. Tolkein. Long live his works!

[Kementari]

ive decided the i am NOT going to see this movie. I start crying when i see the trailers i cant imagine what the movie would be like.
Its ONLY a money making movie, its not worth all this trouble

[Black Rider 7]

Why did you guys even go see the movie? How are you supposed to fit a 300 page book into a movie and still make it true to the work? Its not going to happen. Have you ever seen Ulysses? Have you ever read the Godfather? I have yet to read one problem that wasn't mentioned in the forum months ago. If you knew that there would be all of these problems, why did you go to see it, on opening day no less? They got your money, so that gives them the thumbs up. So congrats, they butchered your precious and still win. At least you have something to whine about, and it only cost you $8.

[SirNothingman]

Well....I am going to see it and I will not whine. But you are right to say they stole our money. Merry and Piipen are just bumbeling fools

I must say that I have always considered Merry and Pippen as devoted bumbling fools in the first book. Always sticking their noses where it didn't belong. You are true to say:
Why is Gandolf hugging hobbits?
Gandalf would never hug anyone...never.

The fact is if we ever expected it to be perfect we would have been kidding ourselves it is sad that Peter jacka$$ gave the impression that he read the books and kept up the storyline. He only did that so WE would wait in line to get into the first showing. He knows he didn't keep with the books; he played us off for fools.

Oh well, I hear the MOVIE is good...nothing like the book but a good MOVIE.

The Lord of the Other Ring

[Oyarsa]

Mike B,
I thought I saw wings on the Balrog. Granted black wings with reddish edging doesn't exactly stand out against a black and red backdrop.

And no one has mentioned the heaps of Dwarrow corpses at the western gate of Moria.

Or the apparent crossbreeding of orcs and squirrels to create a pillar climbing race.

Or the Crebain flying over what did not look like Hollin.

Or the cramped quarters of the Prancing Pony's common room. Oh yeah that's the Shire-to-Rivendell flaw.

Or if/when Aragorn gets Anduril. Was it even reforged in Rivendell?

Or Legolas wearing boots.

Or Gimli advocating Moria against Gandalf's advice.

Sorry, its easy to get carried away.

[Valinorean]

Welcome to the forum Oyarsa!

I was looking for the wings on the Balrog too, but you are right - it was hard to see.

And the sword - it is so important to the story and establishing Aragorn as the true heir - I was disappointed not to see it at the Council.

[GimliOfGloin]

Ok, I saw the movie last night at midnight.
As a whole, I'm "satisfied" with the movie.

What I could not get over was some of the changes that PJ made that have not been addressed.

Upon entering Lothlorien, Gimli is just allowed to come on in. No mention of "no dwarves allowed in" or anything like that. Also what about the wonderful presents bestowed upon the fellowship by Galadriel. And Gimli's love for Galadriel?

There were no dwarves at Bilbo's birthday party!!!!

I hated the ending, Frodo leaving and telling everybody he was leaving.

Samwise was a little over the top for me. I think they stayed true to character with him, but he just comes across as a little too much of a wuss.

And what about Aragorn's sword? Was it reforged in Rivendell? They show the shards of the sword in Rivendell, but make no mention of him carrying it.

And when did Sauron's entire HAND get chopped off? I thought Isildur cut off Sauron's hand. I was actually reading The Two Towers last night after the movie, and it came to a point where Sam and Frodo were discussing Sauron with Smeagol, and Smeagol referred to Sauron as "the one with 9 fingers"

Oh well, maybe I'm just too critical.

Again, I did enjoy the movie for what it was, and I'm not going to even mention the whole Arwen thing............

[mbarlo]

This thread started with a totally unrealistic rant! :p

The movie is great, I saw it on the 19th and will see it many times again. Sure, I would have prefered they hadn't replaced Glorfindel with Arwen and a lot was left out. It's nearly 3 hours long, so objecting to missing parts is like saying it should be even longer which isn't going to happen.

It's not perfect, but considering the different media it's as good as could be expected. :)

[Ness]

MISSING PARTS?!?!?!?! There wern't just missing parts, i would understand missing parts. but do you understand that the parts that they did have in there they completely massacered?!?!? im not even going to go into the whole thing about Arwen, but they made it seem like it only took like a half an hour for the poision to work Frodo to a wraith, when in acuality it took 17 days. a bout the balrog thing, there were wings on it, but they were hard to see. i might see the movie again, but only so that i have more proof to back up my stand. that is also the reason that i will go and see the second and third movies as well. well, about the movies being way to long, i dont propose that they make like a 12 hour movie, i think that if pj really read the books, he would realize that he could make 6 movies, and have much more details. Of course with pj, even a movie on the 1st out of the 6 books would be totally screwed up. well see ya later.

[Morwen]

Everybody must understand that the producers have poetic licences. They can to whatever they please in making a movie. It should have been excepted from the start that not everything in the books was going to be in the movie. We've seen it happen to Dune. accept that it wasn't like the book and get on with it. Movies are hardly EVER like the books. Look at the movie without comparing it to the book. Enjoy it! Peter Jackson couldn't put every single detail into the movie. Yes, he changed alot. I am somewhat dissapointed at this fact, but you have to admit that it probably is a very good movie. I haven't seen the movie yet, but I almost know what to expect. I'll enjoy it anyway. Maybe in the future somebody else will take on the challenge of creating a pure LOTR movie. We can't come to expect to much from hollywood. Be at peace. Reading is much better than watching a movie anyway:D

[Mithrandir]

OK. I have seen the Movie and read some very ligit views from many of you. This is what I feel about the whole thing:

As a Movie it was phenomonal. As a Movie. If you want to look @ it as a portrayal as J.R.R.Tolkien's Lord of the Ring's than you are going to be greatly disapointed. It is not Tolkien's it is Peter Jackson's. As a director he has the right to make these changes, but I would rather he would just come out and say it. It is like I have said to many of my friends, if I had never read the books and saw the movie than would think it was one of the best movies of all time, which in reality it was.
I thought that the begining sequences of the history of the ring were portrayed beautifully and suprisingly accurate. The biggest thing that disapointed me was HOW MUCH was taken out and added in. I remember thinking, how in the world are they going to make this 3 hours long, they are already half way through.
The lack of content from the book was a huge disapointement for me, and it really ruined my first expierence of the movie.
I would like to just look at this movie as a great action movie and nothing else, because that is what it is.

Now all this is not to say that there were good things about the movie, because there were, linguistics was accurate, a lot of the same lines from the book were in there, and the special effects were phenominal. I hope that we can at least see some of the good things as well and try to enjoy the film.

~Mithers

[Beorn]

Ah, I don't have the patience now to attack each subject at once, so I'll address each person...I'm still peeved about last night's TRAGEDY!

Ok, I'll start off addressing each and every person. Those of you who know me know that I'm not usually angry...

Rasta_lotrLover:
YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK? if you were a TRUE fan of the books, you'd appreciate any small shred of lotr you could get. even if he did screw everything up(like sam not looking in tha mirror, gorfindel not existing, galadriel crazyier than shes supposed to be, elrond being a jackass, hobbits not looking chubby enough, mispronoucing things like Gandalf(which is pronouced Gandalve) and celeborn(which is pronouced keleborn), and many other things), its still lotr, and if u ask me, its not that bad of an interpritation. have you seen the cartoon of lotr? all the books squashed into 1hour1/2? now THAT was bad, but since it was still lotr, its wasnt that bad because they did theyre best. and just bcuz the movie sux, a REAL lotr fan would never feel hate, or even dislike, towards a fellow lotr fan. if he liked the books, then he kix ass, even if he didnt read teh appendices b4 making a movie, or screwed up the whole thing. ITS STILL LOTR AND IT SHOULD BE APPRECIATED!!!!!!!!
a) try learning to type right....
b) I am a true fan. You might have a different idea of a fan than I do, or anyone else...I believe that Peter Jacka$$ did not try to stay close to the book. Even stupid things, such as the boots...and taking 6 days from Weathertop -> Rivendel instead of a fortnight (actually in the book it was estimated by Strider to be a fortnight, but turned out to....I think 17 days).

Val(inorean)--Thanx for your support (and Tal & Aerin). I was disappointed, saddened, when the movie-goers were laughing with Gandalf's height disorder in a hobbit hole, and Merry & Pippins dragon*See Below!*.

Oyarsa-I got into a little discussion (a verbal debate) on whether or not the Balrog had wings. They seemed like large arms more than anything else. I think what PJ was trying to do was make it be able to be interpreted both ways, as the book can be (Counting [b]1[/i] consistency (sp?)

Anyone-IIRC, Strider was sitting at the bar watching, not in a corner... I think there should be a new acronym: S-RF, which means the Shire to Rivendel Flaw. S-RF would include Tom, The PP, Merry & Pippin just happening to run literally into Sam & Frodo, Time disorder (Frodo being 33 not 50), Arwen at the Ford, Sam knowing the weed Kingsfoil...

mbarlo:
This thread started with a totally unrealistic rant!

The movie is great, I saw it on the 19th and will see it many times again. Sure, I would have prefered they hadn't replaced Glorfindel with Arwen and a lot was left out. It's nearly 3 hours long, so objecting to missing parts is like saying it should be even longer which isn't going to happen.

It's not perfect, but considering the different media it's as good as could be expected.

Totally Unrealistic rant...hmm...So, being angry that the director spoke out of both rear ends (the one on his head, and the one by his womanhood? It may be three hours long with things taken out, but there were stupid things added in that shouldn't have...Say you have 10 RED Apples (Tolkien's work) and you're only allowed 5. The logical thing to do would be to get rid of 5. But Peter Jacka$$ got rid of 8, and added 3 of his own BLACK Apples.

Anyone--Kingsfoil you are supposed to boil & let the fumes of it heal you, and/or soak a rag with the boiled substance and put it on the wound. NOW, you cannot boil anything by shoving it in your mouth and chewing it like it was shown by Strider.

Now, here comes my botching (hehe Aerin), all of which will be addressed Here (http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=764):


Merry & Pippin didn't run into Frodo & Sam
Distorted Time Line
Gandalf fell looking like he was cruscified (sp?)
Merry & Pippin weren't at the friggen party
Most people don't carry around 4 extra swords that are too small for you.
The Ponies
Gimli's beard
Synchronized Stalking-the new Olympic Game
I only saw 5 riders go into the river, not all nine
The stupid incantation
Legolas' weapons
That Balrog Thingy

[Alathorn]

Personally, i thought the movie was amazing. It was very well done, the effects were brilliant, and the movie never slowed down.

Most of the complaints people have with the movie are not really that important, and a few are incorrect.

1) The Balrog DID have wings, they were hard to see because of the darkness and the fire, but if you were watching, they were there.

The movie did not follow the book correctly, but they did not change any of the major points in the book. The complaints from people about scenes being too short, what do you expect? The movie was 3 hours long! For every scene to be as long as it was in the book, it would of been 6 hours instead of 3, and i think just about everyone would of got tired of sitting in that theatre for 6 hours.

I think that most of the stuff that was missing was not cut because they wanted to change the story, but simply a matter of time. If they had added all those scenes and discussions, you are talking more time in the movie, and the movie was already long as it was. It would of been very hard to get a studio to release a movie that long, and nearly impossible to get one even longer.

And for those who think 6 movies would of been better, they had enough trouble getting the money for 3, i doubt any company in the world would of funded 6 movies, with no idea on the return of money until long after they were done.

I agree with some people's comments, to a point. The Arwyn debate, they expanded on a lot, but they didn't do that much, just made her more confident, and call upon the river to sweep away the wraiths.

The only think i wish they had covered was the reforging of Anduril, to help show Aragorn's right to rule.

I am wondering though, they said they cut out about 2 hours of scenes from the movie. I bet when the DVD comes out with the deleted scenes, most of the missing stuff will be there.

All in all, I thought this was a great movie, and doubt i will ever see a better retelling of these books. I thought it was done very tastefully and carefully, and there was little adaptation, other than a few scenes, which i think was done to save time more than anything, and didn't really change the story as a whole.

[rast_lotrlover]

first of all mike, youre telling me not to do typos, well, ***Deleted by ReadWryt*** , because i have a life and i dont want 2 spend my entire day on this like you probably do.
and i'd like 2 thank everperson who has liked the movie, to me those people are true fans. and to those who thought it was horrible, well, if find your sense of reasoning dull. Its only a matter of ***Delete by ReadWryt*** opinion. so shut the ***Deleted by ReadWryt*** up you haters and let the true fans enjoy the freacking movie. ***Deleted by ReadWryt***. appreciate the ***Deleted by ReadWryt*** u can get ***Deleted by ReadWryt***, if u dont like it make a movie yourselves.

[AngelElf]

You all really need to calm down. We all knew that the movie was not going to be exactly like the book. Its not possible. It may be true that PJ should never even have tried to interpret the book into a movie but he did and there is nothing we can do about it. For what it was the movie was good. Can we please not attack each other? everyone is allowed an opinion.

On a lighter note. Someone earlier said that they wanted to stand up and scream at the movie. Well, in the theater that I went to as the ending credits came up a man jumped up and screamed NOOOOOOO!!! It was pretty funny b/c I thougt of all those here that would be doing just that when they saw the movie.

[Shanoncia]

All of thee hath revealed a great deal thy true self in thy scathing reviews. Needless to say surely thou would be corrupted if thou were tempted only once by the one ring. Ignorant people cast blame, yet the wise will seek solutions. My celtic agression sees through thy layers of anger and into an empty soul, a void, which harbours not even a lack. Who are you to say great works are garbage ? Was it thee who who dedicated 2 years of labour and an immortality of passion into this project. NAY, 'twas not. Cowardly fool, thou will meet thy own ends soon enough I suppose. How couldst thou expect a mythical, fantastical land created in the abstract mind of a genious to be perfectly portrayed in 3 hours time? Thou art lacking love. Thou art lacking music in thy soul. Cursed be thy forked tongue which so cunningly spouts fire in the dark, yet coats itself in honey during day. 'Tis to late for thou. You cannot pass.

[Beorn]

Originally posted by Rasta_lotrlover
first of all mike, youre telling me not to do typos, well, suck my c***, because i have a life and i dont want 2 spend my entire day on this like you probably do.
and i'd like 2 thank everperson who has liked the movie, to me those people are true fans. and to those who thought it was horrible, well, if find your sense of reasoning dull. Its only a matter of f***ing opinion. so shut the f*** up you haters and let the true fans enjoy the freacking movie. a****les. appreciate the sh*t u can get mo****fu**ers, if u dont like it make a movie yourselves.

Whoa....you're grossly over-reacting to my comment that you typed horribly.

And, I've a life too...I go out, I do stuff with my friends, I goto parties...I, for the most part, keep a civil tongue, my post is one of maybe 3 or 4 times when I've cursed on this board...in 1000 posts...You did that 8 times in 10 posts...

Also, why can you not accept the fact that people think differently. You yourself said that it's a matter of opinion. You think, assuming you think, a true fan is someone who loved Peter Jackson's the Fellowship of the Ring... To me, MY OPINION, a true fan is someone who dislikes the movie because so much of it is changed. I mean, you are completely and totally ignoring your own words...

EDIT: P.S. If you do that again, I will get really nasty...

[hraerek]

Hello forum,
I have been reading for a while and I now feel moved to interject. I have been an active tolkien fan for over 25 years. I am not saying this to brag but to point out that I am not some newbie bandwagon jumper (Incidentally, I am perfectly happy with newbie's jumping on the bandwagon...I love converting people to Tolkienism) First and formost...If you went to see the Lord of the Rings at the movie theatre and expected it to follow the book then you are already daft. Unfortunately, in the real world if it doesn't make money it won't be done. I was happy the director filmed all three movies first. This way, regardless if the movie flops, I will get to see it all. As a tolkien fan I would still collect it when it comes out (I own the kiddie animated one,s and even Ralph's one...I still wish he would finish his series because I hate to see things left undone) I dragged my wife to the theatre to see it with me last night. She never read the books (yes, and I still married her) and she doesn't intend to ever read them. She loved the movie but complained it was two long (I did feel it was too short... I was hoping for the 30 hour movie). I thought the movie was AWESOME. Like Braveheart in middle earth (sort of...kinda..in a wierd kind of way). Every storyteller retells a story in a slightly different way, and that's OK. Would you go to a concert and hope to hear your favorite band play your favorite song EXACTLY like it is on the record? If you do then you miss the point. Yes, it could suck, but it could also be something more...don't be afraid of change, be happy and thankful someone made the movies at all (I was getting tired of waiting) and completed the circle. Geez, I didn't realize I was going on so long...Bye...Hraerek

[Thorin]

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Rasta_lotrlover
first of all mike, youre telling me not to do typos, well, suck my c***, because i have a life and i dont want 2 spend my entire day on this like you probably do.
and i'd like 2 thank everperson who has liked the movie, to me those people are true fans. and to those who thought it was horrible, well, if find your sense of reasoning dull. Its only a matter of f***ing opinion. so shut the f*** up you haters and let the true fans enjoy the freacking movie. a****les. appreciate the sh*t u can get mo****fu**ers, if u dont like it make a movie yourselves.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey, there potty mouth! Smile! You've been reported! Nevermind the cesspool of filth spouting from your diseased mouth, but your lack of Tolkien allegiance alone warrants you to be kicked off of the true Tolkien fan website to a PJ butt-kissing website where you belong!

A true fan of LotR will put Tolkien's genius in the forefront of any attempt, whether Bakshi or Jackson. What audacity to come on here and claim that those who like the movie are "true fans". Where were you before this movie came out? The real true fans don't need Jackson's rendition to spur us to come on Tolkien websites and let our mouths move faster than our minds.

"True fans"...Please, give me a break buddy. You know Tolkien as well as Jackson....Go away, potty mouth. Your foolish and offensive opinions are not wanted here.

[Beorn]

Hey Hraerek...welcome...

Originally posted by Shanoncia
All of thee hath revealed a great deal thy true self in thy scathing reviews. Needless to say surely thou would be corrupted if thou were tempted only once by the one ring. Ignorant people cast blame, yet the wise will seek solutions. My celtic agression sees through thy layers of anger and into an empty soul, a void, which harbours not even a lack. Who are you to say great works are garbage ? Was it thee who who dedicated 2 years of labour and an immortality of passion into this project. NAY, 'twas not. Cowardly fool, thou will meet thy own ends soon enough I suppose. How couldst thou expect a mythical, fantastical land created in the abstract mind of a genious to be perfectly portrayed in 3 hours time? Thou art lacking love. Thou art lacking music in thy soul. Cursed be thy forked tongue which so cunningly spouts fire in the dark, yet coats itself in honey during day. 'Tis to late for thou. You cannot pass.

Strange words are they that come from thy hands, or thy mouth. Of your tongue, I shall attempt to speak, for a challenge. I agree that corruption wouldst come from such terror as the One Ring. Ignorant I am not, nor wise am I.
Is it surely that you claim my soul a void, which harbors not even a lack? I say not that great works are of rubbish, but that Jackson has not created a great work as he said he should. He claimed that thy movie wouldst be of the work of Tolkien, 'twas not. He created a work claiming to be that of Tolkien, but in a different medium, but he didst not follow through on thy task, rather copied thy literature, and changed thy contents, and claimed to be the same.
Cowardly fool am I, to come hence? I say to thee the same, as it appears thou came hence to insinuate that I am not as high as you are.
I didst not expect a mystical, fantastical land that thou speak of, that Tolkien wrote, nor a land which was similar, but a tale of our beloved fellowship. 'Twas a tale of a fellowship, but 'twas not thy tale I didst expect to view.
Love I do not lack. I love thy works of Tolkien that I've read, but not thine one I've seen of Jackson.
My tongue be cursed? Dost thou have thine power to do this unto myself? Prior to thy insults, thou should have considered my side, for I love Tolkien's work, and I wouldst have loved to see it brought to thy screen, but I did not

You're good at Olde Englsih...I struggled through that...

[Evenstar]

Hey Mike- i just wanted to say that I agree with you 100%. I had a rather long rant myself and wont repeat it. Just wanted to say I AGREE!!!

[rast_lotrlover]

thorin, thorin,thorin, you said the b-word. and no, im not a PJ b-kisser, im just defending the movie because its good. i mean, sure many things r wrong with it, but youre getting me kicked off this because you say i dont like tolkien enough? ive been reading tolkine since i was 5! but you, you hate the movie, because its not exactly like the book, but, its still tolkien(partly, well, its a kind of copy, its based on it) and since its based on it, that means it kickes A-word! so go F-word yourself, please, and stand in the light, because the darkness youre swimming in will get you f-worded.

[rast_lotrlover]

hraerekm i'd like to tell you that you kick-a-word.
and b4 thorin gets me kicked off, i'd like 2 say bye 2 every1, good job at being fans, except for thorin, youre the weirdest kind of fan ive ever know(because youll get another fan banned because of stuff he said), but since youre still a fan i respect you. but anyways, bye bye :p se yall l8er;)


***Moderator's Note: If anyone gets kicked off of the Forum for what they have said it will be because of what they said, not because anyone happened to point it out to a Moderator. ReadWryt***

[Aerin]

I agree totally with Mike!
How dare you say to us that we are not fans of J.R.R. Tolkien's masterpiece! There are people on this forum who know so much about his works, it's astounding. I do not know nearly as much as some of the "senior members" on the forum, but I know enough to know how off PJ's interpretation was. Reading the books, there is so much symbolism and lineage and history behind everything. InN the movie, it didn't even begin to touch on that.
Oh, BTW, Rasta_lover....I type at over 50 WPM. I don't spend all day typing a post on here. I do type well enough that those who read my posts can understand and comprehend what I'm saying, instead of puzzling out some vague meaning out of a string of profanities.

[rast_lotrlover]

well, aerin, if you dislike the movie simply cuz it aint deep enough, well i suggest you get some help, if you expected the movie to be 100% pure, then youre dreaming. and just because you have a better education than i do, and you have an english degree in university and u type faster than i, doesntmean anything. i still think you shouldnt diss someone becuase they cant type well, cuz u dont know the story, maybe i have 6 fingers, maybe i onylhave 1 arm, so dont say anything about dissing my typing.

[Ness]

Now dont get me wrong, as a movie, and nothing more, it was THE BEST movie i have ever seen, but if we are looking at accuracy, then im with mike, Jackson did take out three of tolkiens apples, and replaced it with three of his own, but thats ok, (i've kinda gotten over my dissapointment) just watch the movie 4 what its worth, you cant change anything by ranting and raving were Jackson isn't going to here you MIKE. if you really want to let him know how you feel, then write him a letter, send him an email, do something...and im sure you already have. well, have a nice night.

[Aerin]

Rasta, you read my post incorrectly. I do not have a degree from a university (I'm still in high school), and I was not critizing your typing. I do not care for profanities, and I was simply expressing my feelings. I did not expect the movie to be 100% true to LOTR, but I was rather saddened to how big Arwen's part was. I will say this, though, I loved the movie for the action/adventure it was. I just can't say that it was wholly LOTR.

[Beorn]

No, I've not sent him anything; it would never get through...he's probably getting plenty of mail as it is, some of which more serious than my rant...

And, I wasn't making fun of your typing ability. I was saying, again I repeat, that you cannot type well.

[Shanoncia]

Perhaps we should all come to the agreement, putting all LOTR accuracy aside the movie was great and being fans of mythology, fantasy and other such things we should enjoy the experiance.... elves.... dwarves.... swords.... very nice decaputation in the end .... bows and singing arrows.... trolls.... MAGIC ! :D It may not have been accurate, but oh well, that's what the books are for !!!

[Thorin]

Rasta, I do not hate the movie. As a matter of fact, I have not seen the movie and I do intend to do so despite my disgust at the gross liberties that PJ has taken with it. Only a fool expects the movie to be exactly like the book. I have never done so. However, if PJ claims to be a Tolkien fan and states that he is making it as true to the book as possible, he is a liar because he has not and he is deceiving the public who are unaware of JRR Tolkien's LoTR. This is wrong and the many of the changes he made are gross misrepresentations of what Tolkien intended. Plus he added in his own ideas and claims (like you and others) that you can't possibly fit all of LoTR into the movie...well, no kidding. How does that justify his own ridiculous creations? That is so wrong and if you were a true Tolkien fan, you would acknowledge and admonish PJ for doing so.

Great! Pat PJ on the back for making a valiant effort and an exciting movie! But call a spade a spade! It is not a great representation of Tolkien's LoTR. He did not have to change so much, nor add in so much other junk. He is speaking out of both sides of his mouth and people should recognize that as much as praise him for the things he did right. I haven't heard you do that.

And BTW, I reported you because of the use of your atrocious language, not your narrow opinions. There is a rule against using profanity on this board, especially if it is directed against others. If you can't state your opinions with out calling someone a "motherf----" and telling them to "suck your ----" then you can't have anything reasonable to contribute.

If the moderators choose to boot you, that is there choice and your undoing. Maybe you should mail them and ask for their forgiveness about using the language if you were unaware. :rolleyes:

[rast_lotrlover]

heheh, ok, well, im not exactly patting PJ on the back, but oh well. lets just pretend i never said anything and ill leave all the insults we've thrown around behind. just take me for the extreme lotr fan i am, not the PJ-lover. just ignore the part that i like the movie,.

[Shanoncia]

Is it not the director's job to create the movie the way he sees it using his own brilliant mind ? Aren't the actors and plot just a tool for them to communicate the things they see inside?

You decide. I do not have the answers to these questions.

[Asha'man]

Well, I saw the movie today, and I thought it was fantastic. The effects, costumes, casting, acting......all great. As most of you from the old board know, I'm not a huge fan, but after seeing the movie I may (and I hate to say this) just have to read the books again. :eek: :)

As I'm not a hardcore fan like you all, I didn't have much of a mental picture of what things should look like, so I thought PJ did a good job interpreting those elements of it. I didn't like Arwen and her "warrior chick-ness", but since I don't even remember anything about her from the books, that's not a huge point for me. Is it just me, or did both Arwen and Galadriel have JRULS (Julia Roberts upper lip syndrome)? Bugs the heck outta me.

I liked the fighting. Boy, did I ever like the fighting. Not nearly bloody enough, though. *SPOILER COMING* (although, considering the nature of this thread, that doesn't really matter) When this Lurtz dude lost his head to Aragorn, it didn't bleed. Not a bit. Realistically, his carotid would be spurting blood (black?) eight feet in the air, and it would be leaking out of the head stump, too. Did Boromir really take three broadheads in the chest in the book? And kept fighting? I tend to think not. I really liked Legolas and his speed-shooting - Grab-nock-draw-shoot-grab-nock-draw-shoot........very cool. Never ran out of arrows, though. Hmm...... Does make me want to take up archery. :)

Was is just me, or did Gimli have a double-headed axe when he hit the Ring? Seemed like the blow chipped one head off, and he used the remaining one for the rest of the film.

The Balrog: very cool. I didn't see if it had wings or not, because I don't give a damn. I liked the cave troll, too. Did anyone else notice the resemblance between the cave troll and the troll in Potter? :)

Anyway. I'll be online a lot in the next couple of weeks, as I'll be recuperating from foot surgery, so I'll probably have lots more to say and ask about the film.

Off to get some sleep before they cut me up,
I remain most enchantingly and (currently) pain-free yours,

Asha'man

[rast_lotrlover]

haha, Rand's One-Power channeling servant, youre a funny guy! u act alot like a guy i know. anyways, he does take arrows and keep fighting. i havent seen hairy potter so i wouldnt know what that troll looked like, but hell, a troll is a troll, shouldnt they look alike? now, i saw the movie 3 times and i assure you that the balrog had wings of shadow or something of the like.
and heres an interesting fact, in #2 or 3(im not sure which) ,to make it look like Legolas is drawing arrows and shooting them realy fast, they cut the movie when hes right between taking the arrow out and notching it, so it looks like hes going really fast, cool huh?
i dont know about the axe part, ill tell you when i go see it again (i plan on seeing it a few more times this weekend)

[Bucky]

I don't get the fuss.

I also don't know the level of expertise on Middle Earth I'm dealing with here as this is my first time on a Tolkien discussion board.

I haven't spent the last 3 years trying to glean every bit of information about this movie.
I don't debate where Maglor may have gone after the end of the First Age.
Or where the Red Mountains may be.
Or how & why Elrond's 2 sons became mortal for not going to Valinor with the last ship, or how Frodo & Bilbo could become immortal when it is clearly stated that the 'beings', not the land itself, made them live forever......

But I have read TLOR about 25 times in the past 25 years. The last time was about a year ago when I read it out loud to my 10 year old daughter, with a different voice for each character. She cried when she thought Frodo died at the end of The Two Towers.
So, I knew every mistake, every change & omission.


My response? SO WHAT.
Being tortured for making this abomination? Get a grip, pal.
It's not like this was a movie about Jesus & the producer twisted every story & detail in the Gospels.....
First, the only way everything in the trilogy was going to get put on screen would be in a 25-30 hour mini-series on TV.
Second, if you want a perfect copy of TLOR, read the books.

I was reminded of what Christopher Tolkien wrote in the foreward to 'The Silmarillion', and I paraphrase:
"It fell upon me to finish (edit & organize, not write) my father's work. That it should remain unpublished was unthinkable. A complete consistency within it, or to my father's other published works, is not be looked for."

So, what we got was a shorter than intended version. What Tolkien intended for The Silmarillion can be seen in 'Unfinished Tales', where 2 stories, 'Of Tour and his Coming To Gondolin' & 'Narn I Hin Hurin' are partially embellished on a grander scale comparable to TLOR.
I don't know about you all, but I personally glad that Tolkien's son finished up & published The Silmarillion in it's imperfect form, and the same goes with the movie....

A complete consistency with TLOR is not to be looked for. It sure was better than nothing.

Personally, I loved the movie, great scenery, great special effects, mostly great characters.
The theatre I was at Tuesday at midnight, there were 300+ people there & ONE couple got up during the movie's 3 hours.
You should've seen the line to the men's room at 3AM......

If you're worried about filmed scenes cut out, I bet many will be in the DVD release anyhow.

[dapence]

Let me get this right Mike B ... You didn't like the movie -- right? :)

Oh, by the way, Mike, read this article (http://www.bloomsburymagazine.com/ezine/Articles/Articles.asp?ezine%5Farticle%5Fid=286) ... Make sure you read all of it.

[Gloer]

Wellcome Bucky!

Your view is right on target!
Especially what you say about Silmarillion.
It is very good to compare Silmarillion and this film.
The movie is not the best movie ever nor a very good adaption of the book either. The flaws are not so much in the character portrayals (only Saruman is screwed up). It is in the editing and bad pacing. There is hardly any narration after the great prologue, nor enough rest&light sequences to give feel of time and space and depth of characters. Why to reduse the great dialogue between Saruman and Gandalf into a fight?

I enjoyed Silmarillion maybe more because it was a framework story and not as detailed as LOTR. If Tolkien had written Silmarillion as he did TLORT, the book would have been 10000 pages long! Or divided into a series of books. It would have been great.
But then - Christopher Tolkiens Silmarillion gives a better overall view on the first age.

[Valinorean]

Hey there Mike B! You are famous!

And you are right about the pony. I wonder if he will show up at the end of the last movie.

And which finger WAS the ring on?

[Bucky]

One character I thought was portrayed wrongly was Strider when Elrond says that "He chose his path" as if Aragorn had chosen not to be King.....
There wasn't too much embelishing of that afterwards & we'll see how it develops in the next 2 films....

Another was that I thought Merry & Pippin were too goofy & Sam didn't say all the stupid sayings from his gaffer....

But, these are minor complaints.

Did anybody ever see The Hobbit cartoon?
It came out around '76 & was my first exposure to Middle Earth. There's many omissions & simplifications of the story there. They even say that 6 or 7 of the 13 Dwarves died.....
I'm sure many Tolkien purists were aghast back then.
But, it got me to read the books.
And I'm sure this film will do the same.

Besides, has there ever been a movie better than the book?

On the Silmarillion, when I read it, I cut to 'Unfinished Tales' & read those 2 stories where they fit in with the published text of the book.
It probably would've been thousands of pages had the whole thing been written on that scale, but I prefer the long, detailed storytelling approach to the brief history book final version.
Tolkien would've had to live until now to complete it on the larger scale however.

[Manwe]

Some of you seem quite irate for no good reason.

It makes depressing reading.

It's a film. Remember that, and hold onto that fact. It's not a book. The book (of the same name) is, equally not a film. If some fool decided to film the whole thing without any changes, you'd get a three week long unwatchable mess. Rather than taking the flawed route of the Bakshi cartoon, and chucking as much of the book as possible into a stupidly short amount of time, the new movie is a re-written version of the story. And only a baboon in mans clothing would ever expect it to be otherwise.

So let's look at the film on its own merits. Those who claim it to be unwatchable are, frankly, lying. As a film there's *nothing* wrong with it - except the technically **** special effects when Galadriel considers accepting the ring.

I was surprised (and, I admit, initially unhappy) at some of the changes. I got over it. Look at the film - it's amazing. Did you similarly slate the stage production of "The Hobbit"? I expect not. On stage you're allowed to make concessions because that's the way of it. Why should a film be any different?

Stop being so childish. No one really cares about your petty sulking, but it annoys me because it makes the world a very slightly less happy place for absolutely no reason.

If you love the book so much, read it and enjoy it. And be prepared to accept the fact that someone has to make an interpretation of it for the story to be told through any other medium. If you're close-minded enough to insist that no one should ever adjust any part of the work, then shut yourself away with the religious zealots, racists and other perjudiced things that slink across this planet, and allow others the chance to enjoy celebrating the book in a variety of ways.

And if you don't accept any of the above statements, remember:

IT IS JUST A FILM.

So stop whining about it - if you don't like it, don't watch it but stop making everyone else miserable.

Feel free to bombard me with lots of nasty replies if it makes you feel better. But please don't assume that I'm stupid, that I've little knowledge of The Lord of the Rings, or that I do not love the book.

Apologies to those of you to whom this does not concern.

[hraerek]

Very good Manwe,

Exactly what I was trying to say earlier. You said it so much better. (If you need me in the shield wall I'll be there). Hraerek

[mbarlo]

Spot on, Manwe. Also well said Bucky

There are things that could have been better, but it was still a great film and the best we are likely to get for a long time.

It's pretty brave to make a film where maybe 300 million people know the story and love it and will be comparing it to a book so vast that even 3 x 3 hour films will only scratch the surface of all the detail.

Martin

[Unicef]

Originally posted by Manwe

I was surprised (and, I admit, initially unhappy) at some of the changes. I got over it. Look at the film - it's amazing. Did you similarly slate the stage production of "The Hobbit"? I expect not. On stage you're allowed to make concessions because that's the way of it. Why should a film be any different?

Stop being so childish. No one really cares about your petty sulking, but it annoys me because it makes the world a very slightly less happy place for absolutely no reason.

If you love the book so much, read it and enjoy it. And be prepared to accept the fact that someone has to make an interpretation of it for the story to be told through any other medium. If you're close-minded enough to insist that no one should ever adjust any part of the work, then shut yourself away with the religious zealots, racists and other perjudiced things that slink across this planet, and allow others the chance to enjoy celebrating the book in a variety of ways.

And if you don't accept any of the above statements, remember:

IT IS JUST A FILM.



Thanks Manwe and Bucky. I think you are both on the right track. I also think those of you who are personally wounded to the film, read Roger Ebert's review at http://www.suntimes.com It's some enlightening reading. Look up Roger Ebert under columnists - Sorry - I would post the exact link but I have to leave work.

Unicef

[Beorn]

Never did I say that the film was going to be the book. I've never seen the Hobbit visually, so I cannot comment.

Who said being childish was bad...Who says I cannot express my feelings. Yelling is a good way, childish, yet one of the best ways to relieve stress

I'm famous...Well, not really...

[markrob]

BRAVO, BRAVO MANWE, ISN'T IT AMAZING, BAFFLES MY MIND OF THE CRITICISM. I TRIED TO REASON WITH THEM EARLIER BUT TO NO AVAIL. I AM GLAD TO KNOW THERE ARE OTHERS OUT THERE LIKE ME WHO LOVES LOTR'S BUT AM NOT GOING TO MAKE MYSELF MISERABLE OVER A BOOK/FILM ADAPTATION! LIFE IS TOO SHORT.

[Elendil]

Roger Ebert's review made me feel better, because I felt the same way. I saw many changes to the story, some of which I was pretty unhappy about. However, my main problem was the fact that the hobbits, the main characters of the story, were diminished in their roles, bravery, and spirit.

This is particularly true of Frodo. [Spoilers!]

In the film, Frodo did not attack the king of the Black Riders, instead he shrinks backwards and is stabbed.

He does not stand alone at the Ford and command the Riders to go back to Mordor, he sits sickly like a lump on Arwen's horse while she works her magic spell.

Worst of all, as I have mentioned, Frodo sees Merry and Pippin leading orcs off, and he leaves them to their probably fatal doom while he sneaks off to the boats. This is totally out of character for Frodo. In the book he left without knowing of the orc attack. He left because Boromir tried to take the Ring and because he didn't want to endanger his friends. He certainly would not have left if they were being attacked!

More than anything, Lord of the Rings is about human love and friendship. I did not feel this in the film at all (except possibly from Gandalf, and perhaps to a small extent, from Frodo).

[Beorn]

Whether or not you like it, I didn't like what PJ did to the fans of the book.

Period

End of story.

You cannot reason with my opinion, as it is my own...

[Elendil]

Originally posted by Mike B
Whether or not you like it, I didn't like what PJ did to the fans of the book.

Period

End of story.

You cannot reason with my opinion, as it is my own...

Are you addressing Markrob? Please be clear who you're talking to when you write an emotional response.:confused:

[Foe-Hammer]

This entire thread is a joke! You NPWG members need to get a life. Open the door, step outside. There are no dragons or wizards (except Bball), hobbits or elves, Orcs or dwarves. It is a book! Pure fantasy!
I'd bet a million dollars that tolkien would be more ashamed of you than the interpretation of his book.

He knew the difference between reality and fantasy.

[Beorn]

Right...I'll ignore that for now...reply later....Elendil...it was to markrob...you posted your response before I was done writing mine...

[Tuor]

Some things: Legolas does not wear boots in the movie. he wears shoes and leather greaves.

The Balrog did indeed have wings. it also had the wrong kind of whip.

there where too many people at the council.

Barliman Butterbur isn't funny anymore.

there are no songs.

the whole atmosphere of Bree is too oppressive.

but for all this, and many other things, I was still able to enjoy the movie, because i viewed it as exactly that. a MOVIE. i mean, I went to the theater EXPECTING a mangled version. it's not true to the books, and i was infuriated about Arwen, but i was still able to enjoy it. chill out.

[Tuor]

that cave-troll looked like Shrek.

[rast_lotrlover]

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA, LMGAO!!!!

[ReadWryt]

I've said it elsewhere on the Forum, but I'll say it here as well. If one wanted to make a fantasy film about Wizard Duels, Brave horse riding Elven Witches who are as fearless as they are beautifull, little mischievous irish people who commit petty theft on their neighbors, conversations with Moths, Orcs named Lurtz and a geography that is conciderably smaller then Middle-earth then one SHOULD have written such a tale from scratch instead of shredding the characters, title and good name of an author who worked so hard, wrote so much and has been so well documented as Tolkien.

[Greymantle]

Sounds as though it would make a half-way decent junk D&D novel, if they got a better writer.

[Beorn]

Originally posted by Foe-Hammer
This entire thread is a joke! You NPWG members need to get a life. Open the door, step outside. There are no dragons or wizards (except Bball), hobbits or elves, Orcs or dwarves. It is a book! Pure fantasy!
I'd bet a million dollars that tolkien would be more ashamed of you than the interpretation of his book.

He knew the difference between reality and fantasy.

No, it is not a joke. It started as my way of showing how I felt about the travesty, and I can assure you that it was not a joke. Again, I say, for I do not know whether you've accepted this in the past day (I'm not done reading posts from 12-21-01), that the Nit-Picking Weenie Guild is a JOKE. Open the door, and step outside, do you say? Why don't you open the door and realize how much was changed in the movie? Why don't you open the door and realize that the movie was not anywhere close to as horrible as PJ said it would be.

[Courtney]

It was not a good movie even for those who had never read the books. One of my friends who went with me fell asleep in the middle of the movie.
I personally kept checking my watch to see how long until the agony would end. Unfortunately, my sleeping friend had driven, so I couldn't leave til the movie was over.

[Shanoncia]

Sounds to me Courtney like you are one of those ' impossible to please' people. If yu could not even catch one moment of excitement from the movie than perhaps your brain is numb. ;)

[Greymantle]

Why, pray tell, do you need to be so rude? Does it make you feel good? Or do you just want attention?

[Courtney]

I am not impossible to please, but the movie could have been a little bit exciting considering it is about saving the world. "Oh no the world is going to end....yawn...i think i'll go back to sleep..."

[Shanoncia]

Isn't what you really mean, why are you rude when we are the only ones allowed to be? If she can diss PJ why oh why can't I diss her? Both are humans, none is no better than the other. Now let me ask you another question, why can't you calm down? I'm only teasing. Do you actually think that if I was serious I'd put one of those stupid smily face icons in? Is it you who wants attention by tryying to sound like a hero when no one needs to be saved? ha ! That is what I thought ! I suppose the grey in gerymantel tells not the colour of your beard for certainly you have much growing to do.

[Courtney]

I did not mean to make anyone angry. Lets all sit back from the computers for a moment, have a nice cup of tea and enjoy the wonderful Tolkien Forum. Let's all be friends.... Oh, and Merry Christmas!!!

[Shanoncia]

Don't worry Courtney. I am not mad at all. As some of you have seen already, I like to argue. It's... I don't know... a challenge? Hmm... Maybe I should be a lawyer or something. :rolleyes: I find that friendly arguements strengthen your mental capabilities in all aspects of possible applications. Forems are great places to debate about your own opinions. You shouldn't be affraid to stand up and fight like a lion for what you believe in. Life isn't about giving in, it's about knowing when your wrong and you need to change your course. Never give in ! The road goes ever on and on.....

[Ciryaher]

And here's my 2 cents worth *clinking noise*

I thought the movie was fabulous...as a movie. Great action, humour, and a good fright now and again. The Balrog was great IMHO. Out of a possible 5 for the movie itself, I give it 5.

Now for the changes. A lot of the changes I found to be acceptable for time and simplicity's sake, but a rare few hit angry nerves. The "Arwen Fiasco" (as I like to call it) was the one that stood out the most. For storyline accuracy, I give the movie a respectable 3.5.

[Valinorean]

Originally posted by Shanoncia
Forems are great places to debate about your own opinions. You shouldn't be affraid to stand up and fight like a lion for what you believe in. Life isn't about giving in, it's about knowing when your wrong and you need to change your course. Never give in ! The road goes ever on and on.....

Whether one is a fan of the movie or not, I have a hard time believing it is worth "fighting like a lion for." (Pardon the dangling participle)

We all know that the books are classic works -- the original fantasy literature. I don't think the movie is EVER going to be considered a classic.

I can't even imagine it becoming a CULT classic.

But by all means, fight like a lion. Never give in. Get on that road and go on and on . . .

[chrome_rocknave]

I loved the movie but I have to keep in mind that this is PJ's version. I am dissappointed in all of the changes that were not needed. But, if I repeat to myself that this is what PJ sees when he reads the books... and thats not my Frodo but HIS Frodo and thats not my Legolas but HIS Legolas...then all is well :D

Also, I see nothing wrong with "dissing" the movie although I think it is more of critiquing and examining certain aspects that were not true to the book.

[shadowfax54]

I've read the books about a dozen times in the last 30 years, usually with a Jethro Tull background soundtrack.

I could not believe how well the movie captured the beauty of the Shire, the fear inspired by the ring-wraiths, the breadth of Gandalf's personality, and the scope of the battles. I had complaints, but they were so small in comparison with the love I had for the movie. I think that his preview described the history and was an exciting start to the movie. I actually liked the strand that explained Orthanc. The scene with Bilbo being tempted by the ring in Rivendale was worth the price of admission. (I got the twilight costs.) I would have preferred that he remain truer to the book when Frodo left, but overall this is one of the best movies I've ever viewed. Also the horse race scene was a little too much like star wars.

Please continue to tell everyone that it's terrible and maybe they will have to show the second one next summer instead of December to recoup losses.

I give the movie a 10 out of 10 as a movie. As an adaption of my favorite series of books, I give it 8.5 out of 10.

[shadowfax54]

This movie got rave reviews from every professional reviewer that I have read. I refrained from reading any of them before watching the movie. Every person I know that watched the movie, both those that read the books, and those that didn't, loved the movie.

I am a real person, saying my real opinion. I have been on the internet for about 3 years, and I have seen message-board provacateures (sp?). Some of the people that are vilifying LOTR, are doing it to get our goat, are you one of those?

[Arwen]

It's your own opinion of you dont like the film...but i must say that you are part of a very small group of people who hate it becuase every single person i have heard/spoken/seen about the movie absolutly loved it, every session of the film is full of cheering and clapping at the cinema i went too.

[mbarlo]

I enjoyed reading through this thread again and was pleased most contributors seem to have enjoyed the movie.

For me it's without doubt the movie of the year. I can't imagine anything coming close until this time next year. The only competition for "must see" in 2002 has to be Episode 2 - Attack of the Clones.

Considering JJR said he doubted it could be made into a film (Bakshi nearly proved him right) its a great effort. Maybe in another 10 years someone else will try. But for all it's variations from the book its still a great film.

[loser093]

Originally posted by Mithrandir
OK. I have seen the Movie and read some very ligit views from many of you. This is what I feel about the whole thing:

As a Movie it was phenomonal. As a Movie. If you want to look @ it as a portrayal as J.R.R.Tolkien's Lord of the Ring's than you are going to be greatly disapointed. It is not Tolkien's it is Peter Jackson's. As a director he has the right to make these changes, but I would rather he would just come out and say it. It is like I have said to many of my friends, if I had never read the books and saw the movie than would think it was one of the best movies of all time, which in reality it was.
I thought that the begining sequences of the history of the ring were portrayed beautifully and suprisingly accurate. The biggest thing that disapointed me was HOW MUCH was taken out and added in. I remember thinking, how in the world are they going to make this 3 hours long, they are already half way through.
The lack of content from the book was a huge disapointement for me, and it really ruined my first expierence of the movie.
I would like to just look at this movie as a great action movie and nothing else, because that is what it is.

Now all this is not to say that there were good things about the movie, because there were, linguistics was accurate, a lot of the same lines from the book were in there, and the special effects were phenominal. I hope that we can at least see some of the good things as well and try to enjoy the film.

~Mithers

THANK YOU for your fair take on the movie!
everyone else in here is so "it was horrible"/ "it was wonderful"
and can't look at it any other way
open your minds a little...
or don't...doesn't matter...

[CRAIG]

THEY MISSED OUT SO MUCH OF THE STORY..WHAT HAPPENED TO TOM BOMBADIL???..THE CONSPIRACY..???...THE JOURNEY TO WEATHERTOP..?? AND SINCE WHEN DID LADY ARWEN SAVE FRODO...WHAT HAPPENED TO LEGOLAS??..DID THIS GUY EVEN READ THE BOOK???.WONDER WHAT THEY WILL LEAVE OUT IN TWIN TOWERS...I SHUDDER TO THINK

[Mithrandir]

I am afraid I must disagree w/ you there Harad. I have seen the movie 3 times now and am therefore very adapt to how the story line was put out, and to be quite honest they stayed true to one scene in the whole book(Bridge of Kazad-Dum), and even that had minor changes, and they did the history of the ring correctly. Despite this they took out way more than half of the book, just to replace it w/ scenes of their own. To say that this movie was accurate to the book is just plain not right. Not to mention the Tolkien estate could not sue Jackson because Christopher Tolkien had his father's name taken out of the title, thus tying his hands in the matter.

Just because they kept the names and basic plot does not make it accurate to the book at all.
~Mithers

[ReadWryt]

It's just those nasty characterizations that seem to have been so badly done by Tolkien that they needed a re-work...Too bad Tolkien was such a bonehead when it came to characterization that his characters needed a complete change over for those pitifully braindead film audiences that couldn't begin to wrap their brains around the characters from the book that has such a small readership due to it's complexity..:mad:

[Undómiel]

Gimli only has one axe. He grabs the axe from the dwarf sat next to him when he attempts to smash the ring.

[Foe-Hammer]

RW,It's just those nasty characterizations that seem to have been so badly done by Tolkien that they needed a re-work...Too bad Tolkien was such a bonehead when it came to characterization that his characters needed a complete change over for those pitifully braindead film audiences that couldn't begin to wrap their brains around the characters from the book that has such a small readership due to it's complexity..

If Tolkien had been a screenwriter, he'd starved to death. Tolkien's characters, done as you want, on screen would be choppy, stupid and shallow.

Why is it so difficult for those facts to sink in? I think I'm going to have to demand that you remove your signature from your posts or amend it so that it refers directly to you and not be a vague reference to anyone else here.

[Mithrandir]

ReadWryt I am going to assume that you are being sarcastic, beacause if your not than pigs officialy fly, hell just froze over, and the world has come to an end.
~Mithers

[LadyGaladriel]

Enjoy the movie , if you dont like it then dont watch it, But do not try to influence our decision to love it !

[Talimon]

Chill on the hate, people. Tolkien wouldn't approve of it.

Anyone naive enough to cry because of a few changes in an adaptation has more problems then there are cures for. They will get only pitty from me, if that.

Some of you die-hard fans have absolutely no perspective. You take everything so literraly it just makes me sick. I can't even associate your mechanical mongering with Tolkien. Some of you should be ashamed to call yourselves Tolkien fans with the kinds of complaints I've read in this thread.

Wake up! Lighten up! Enjoy life a little and don't be so critical. Instead of looking at the empty half of the cup look at the full. Don't be so petty.

And just for the record, both Tolkiens grandson and one of his close friends loved the movie. And the Tolkien estate has been very excited about the movies (though that may just be due to the increasing book sales :)). The fact that Tolkien's name isn't associated with the movies has nothing to do with the estate. Tolkien himself gave the rights to the movies to Saul Zaentz, who in turn gave them to Bakshi and later to Peter Jackson. Saul himself (he lives here in Berkeley) has talked at numerous gatherings, and I've heard him talk with great passion about the movies. Just by the way he talks you can tell there is something truly great happening, and by what we saw in the theatre I think that just affirms it. I don't know where you get your stories from, but I think everyone other then a few confused "die-hard" fans thought the movie was great. The vast majority of people who have read Tolkien don't remember it for the deatails. They remember it for it's themes and charachters. And that is what the movie can be remembered for.

[Talimon]

Originally posted by Valinorean


We all know that the books are classic works -- the original fantasy literature. I don't think the movie is EVER going to be considered a classic.

I can't even imagine it becoming a CULT classic.


I just have to quote this, because I so fiercely disagree. As a movie it's quite frankly destined to a classic. That's just so obvious that I don't see how you could even make an alternate argument. It's literrally written in it's flesh. It won't be a cult classic for sure, because it's not that type of movie (PJ already has enough of those made :)), but as a movie it'll be as classic as Star Wars at least.

[ReadWryt]

I think I'm going to have to demand that you remove your signature from your posts or amend it so that it refers directly to you and not be a vague reference to anyone else here. Is this meant to prove some point, or make some argument? If it is, it is lost on me...But in any case, you may "demand" away and see where it gets you.

The point is that the presumption prevailing here is that audiences must have dumbed down and significantly altered versions of characters in order to be entertained, and that means that one needs to change things like characters who are barely in the books at all having more screen time then characters who are pivotal...characters being reduced to Comic Relief...characters being cut altogether to accomodate screen time for Insects...characters being portrayed as less noble and reserved then they are...characters being so stupid as to think that it's a good idea to pull out what they have been told is the most dangerous single object in all of Middle-earth from time to time to play with it or display it openly...characters having their power undermined and being shown casually watching the only other character in the scene say "No" and wander off without distroying the object that thousands of Men and Elves had just died attempting to destroy and doing nothing...little insignificant changes like that.

God forbid if the audience doesn't understand every aspect of the characters they see, their histories and foibles and all, and that a film maker not realize that Audiences are smart enough to figure out that everyone in a story have pasts and aspects of their personalities that are not fleshed out through invented **** never conceived of by the Author who's hard work and imagination they happen to be cashing in on. It would be a horrible shame if people had been shown the minimal story with the original characters doing the amazing things they did in the original story and be left wanting to know more about these characters and, perish the thought, be tempted to crack the pages of the books to learn more.

There is a world of difference between Accuracy and Completeness and it seems that many who do not share my opinion wish to confuse the argument by mixing these two concepts, saying that to show Tolkien's characters as they were in the books would take up too much time on screen and would make the movie too long and complex. This is a bunch of hooie! One needn't show Gandalf's entire conversation with his fellow Istari, just show him thanking Radagast by name and saying "...I trust you to get this message to the Eagles with haste friend...", and on with the story...But no. We wasted so much time inventing a "Wizard Duel" that we couldn't include something else from the book. Showing characters doing what the characters would do is good story telling. Changing characters to meet the standards you desire in a movie simply because you have some preconceived notion of what an audience is capable of understanding is something altogether different...

[Talimon]

Originally posted by ReadWryt

God forbid if the audience doesn't understand every aspect of the characters they see, their histories and foibles and all, and that a film maker not realize that Audiences are smart enough to figure out that everyone in a story have pasts and aspects of their personalities that are not fleshed out through invented **** never conceived of by the Author who's hard work and imagination they happen to be cashing in on. It would be a horrible shame if people had been shown the minimal story with the original characters doing the amazing things they did in the original story and be left wanting to know more about these characters and, perish the thought, be tempted to crack the pages of the books to learn more.

There is a world of difference between Accuracy and Completeness and it seems that many who do not share my opinion wish to confuse the argument by mixing these two concepts, saying that to show Tolkien's characters as they were in the books would take up too much time on screen and would make the movie too long and complex. This is a bunch of hooie! One needn't show Gandalf's entire conversation with his fellow Istari, just show him thanking Radagast by name and saying "...I trust you to get this message to the Eagles with haste friend...", and on with the story...But no. We wasted so much time inventing a "Wizard Duel" that we couldn't include something else from the book. Showing characters doing what the characters would do is good story telling. Changing characters to meet the standards you desire in a movie simply because you have some preconceived notion of what an audience is capable of understanding is something altogether different...

Do you realize that you are making a petty argument? One thing you have to realize is that this movie has to stand on it's own. The vast majority of people who watch movies don't read books. The vast majority of people these days don't read books. Let's narrow that down to people who read fantasy books. It's just not going to happen. I don't care how many copies LotR has sold the majority of people who watch movies are never going to read LotR. Some things just don't work out.

And for the love of all things holy give a film maker some creative license. Jackson isn't being hired by anyone to make these movies. He isn't under any contract to stay true to the books. He has some creative license in making an adaptation, and he has hardly misused it. One need look no further then Bakshi's adaptation to see what too much (and at times too little) creativity can do. Jackson is being amazingly true when you consider that this is his movie. It's not Tolkiens, it's his. He could have changed the whole movie and nothing would have happened. He's under no obligation to anyone. The changes that are there are done to help tell Tolkiens themes to a modern movie going audience. The language may be different, but what is being said is the same.

And I must say that as a fan of one the most creative pieces of art produced in the last 50 years you seem to be amazingly conservative. You seem to use the words 'invent' and 'create' as if they were something to shun and dispise.