COmparing PJ's with Bakshi

[lilhobo]

Pj's work is all glitz and glamour, but when you bite into the centre there aint so much substance at all

Bakshi's on the other hand, is a great "first ever attempt" at a masterpiece they said cant be translated. From that perspective you cant fault Bakshi, he had neither the resource nor any guidance for the translation into a media more difficult to "act" then real life


PS. how can you be a moderator while being a one-eye ****??

[joxy]

Originally posted by lilhobo
Bakshi's on the other hand, is a great "first ever attempt" at a masterpiece they said can't be translated.
And PJ "borrowed" some of B's ideas, so he can't be that bad.

[Talimon]

What is this? The 5'th thread on this subject?

I don't care how many limitations Bakshi had. I'm really not the one making the consensus here. Bakshi's movie was very poorly-recieved when it came out, and with time it's reputation has only gone down. Don't believe me? Make one of these threads a poll, and let's see which movie gets more votes. I can't relate as to how anyone could honestly claim Bakshi did a better job then PJ. I mean, perhaps if you are deaf and blind, and could only "read" the script in brail, you could argue Bakshi kept more lines from Tolkiens book. But even then, one has to question what lines, and how they are used.

If you want to argue how well Bakshi could have done given the time and money, fine. That's none of my business, and I'm sure he was well aware what he was getting into. If he didn't think he could make a LotR movie he shouldn't have tried.

Did PJ copy a few of Bakshi's ideas? Perhaps. But even those that he arguably did borrow (a couple Nazgul scenes) were done much better by PJ. And, to PJ's credit, he limited Bakshi's influence to a couple visual images. We can go down the list, and I honestly can't see one place where Bakshi matches PJ, let alone exceeds:

Acting- No arguement. There are exactly 2 well acted (voice-acting) charachters in Bakshi's movie: Frodo and Aragorn. End of story. And even these get monotonous after a while.

Visuals- I know we have no arguement here.

Music- Howard Shore blows away that crusty Bakshi score any day of the week. What's up with the theme in the opening credits of Bakshi? :confused: Sometimes the music is just random, as well.

Directing- I'm not even sure how you judge direction on an animated film. I guess the interpretation of the script, but that only drops Bakshi's attempt even lower.

Editing- Randomness. I'm giving the script the advantage here and assuming Bakshi simply had to cut out a ton of scenes. But c'mon, can this even be considered a coherent film? Go watch Bakshi's movie, and assume you don't have ANY previous knowledge about Tolkiens tale. If that is not a butchering of the highest degree, I don't know what is. And what's up with that 17-years-in-1-second transition of seasons?

Script- This is the one place that Bakshi comes close. But not nearly close enough. Here is the thing: Bakshi keeps more dialogue from Tolkiens book. But look at which lines. The best lines are not just cut, but down-right contradicted. In the Shire there is a scene between Gandalf and Frodo that is just embarrasing. Something along the lines of "It's a pity that Bilbo didn't kill him (Gollum) when he had the chance", and Gandalf says "I know." Or "I wish the ring had never come to me", and Gandalf says "So do I." Not only does that replace two of the best lines from FotR, it right on contradicts them. While we're on that scene, what's with Sam being IN A BUSH? The movie, on it's own, just doesn't make sense.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Talimon
Did PJ copy a few of Bakshi's ideas? Perhaps. But even those that he arguably did borrow (a couple Nazgul scenes) were done much better by PJ.
Music- Howard Shore blows away that crusty Bakshi score any day of the week.
While we're on that scene, what's with Sam being IN A BUSH?

It doesn't make much sense to compare films made in such different genres, at such different cost. I think the H Potter comparison is more relevant.
Maybe copy, or maybe coincidence- the same as PJ and Hitchcock over PJ's cameo appearances. The cartoon replaces Glorfindel, so does PJ; it offers us an invented sword practice, which PJ also does when- so we are informed- the audience could not sit another minute without being given a little light relief from the high tension that Tolkien cruelly imposes on them.
The music, well that HAS to be a matter of taste, but I do get bored and distracted by all the shout/singing from Shore's heavenly, or infernal, choirs, which might be more at home in the other Ring, Wagner's.
And Sam cutting grass in the dark is so much better?! But no, that bush IS ridiculous!

[Talimon]

He wasn't cutting the lawn, thus sarcasm in Gandalfs voice when he says, "A little late to be trimming the verge?". He was evesdropping. Quite different from Sam being in a bush, one that is completely out and away from any hobbit holes ;). Do we really want to know what he was doing in the bush?

I thought Howard Shores score fit perfectly. Don't care much for the Wagner comparison, but it was meant to sound ancient, and I thought it did that very well. And there are some moments at the end of the movie where it almost seems as if the movie was cut to the soundtrack. That obviously wasn't the case, but it shows how much work was put into it.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Talimon
He wasn't cutting the lawn.... He was eavesdropping....
Quite different from Sam being in a bush....
Do we really want to know what he was doing in the bush?
I thought Howard Shores score fit perfectly. Don't care much for the Wagner comparison, but it was meant to sound ancient, and I thought it did that very well.
Yes, I see; so now the question is, why was he there in the first place? Hadn't he gone his own way home from the inn?
I said Sam's bush is ridiculous! And I assume hobbit-holes do have some sort of facilities that make bushes unnecessary....
Someone said Wagner has some fine moments and some awful quarters-of-an-hour; that fits Mr Shore's sounds pretty well imho. Some of it is so noisy, like a lot of Wagner, and if there are words in the voices they are of course incomprehensible; what's the point of that? At least some non-Germans can follow Wagner, but who knows elvish and dwarvish?
How does music sound "ancient"? Might as well talk about it sounding green or lean.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Nóm
Most anyone who watches Bakshi will probably notice things that show an all around sloppy job was done, and a lot of slacking off, that can not be attributed to low budget or lack of technology, but rather to laziness/carelessness.
Examples please!
I don't know about laziness and carelessness; there's a bit of silliness that comes to mind- Sam popping up out of a bush....

[Talimon]

Joxy, I can keep posting this link until the sun don't shine.... it just about sums up my feelings perfectly. Note that this was written before PJ's movie came out. Also note that very, very few of the complaints have to do with the budget:

http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/bakshi/bakshi.htm

[Mike]

Don't ask how I dug up this thread.


And Sam cutting grass in the dark is so much better?! But no, that bush IS ridiculous!

Sam was following Gandalf and Frodo in the Bakshi movie. You can actually see the bushes rustling as they move along, indicating Sam is there.
How come I'm the only one who noticed that?!

Acting- No arguement. There are exactly 2 well acted (voice-acting) charachters in Bakshi's movie: Frodo and Aragorn. End of story. And even these get monotonous after a while.

Visuals- I know we have no arguement here.

Music- Howard Shore blows away that crusty Bakshi score any day of the week. What's up with the theme in the opening credits of Bakshi? :confused: Sometimes the music is just random, as well.

Directing- I'm not even sure how you judge direction on an animated film. I guess the interpretation of the script, but that only drops Bakshi's attempt even lower.

Editing- Randomness. I'm giving the script the advantage here and assuming Bakshi simply had to cut out a ton of scenes. But c'mon, can this even be considered a coherent film? Go watch Bakshi's movie, and assume you don't have ANY previous knowledge about Tolkiens tale. If that is not a butchering of the highest degree, I don't know what is. And what's up with that 17-years-in-1-second transition of seasons?

Script- This is the one place that Bakshi comes close. But not nearly close enough. Here is the thing: Bakshi keeps more dialogue from Tolkiens book. But look at which lines. The best lines are not just cut, but down-right contradicted. In the Shire there is a scene between Gandalf and Frodo that is just embarrasing. Something along the lines of "It's a pity that Bilbo didn't kill him (Gollum) when he had the chance", and Gandalf says "I know." Or "I wish the ring had never come to me", and Gandalf says "So do I." Not only does that replace two of the best lines from FotR, it right on contradicts them. While we're on that scene, what's with Sam being IN A BUSH? The movie, on it's own, just doesn't make sense.

Ahem...I thought Peter Woodthorpe did excellent voice acting for Gollum, and the guy who did Boromir.

And you're last line is incorect. Gandalf did not say "SO DO I" when Frodo told him "What a pity Bilbo did not stab the vile creature when he had the chance". He said "Yes, it was pity. Pity and Mercy."

Actually watch the movie for once to verify your comments.

Mike begins rambling:
I'd also like to clear this oft-stated thing...In the Council of Elrond, Elrond says the ring must be taken to Mt. Doom, and doesn't state why.
This is what everyone says and tells us its proof that Bakshi's script isn't choerent at all.
Ignoring that fact that shortly afterward Gandalf explains to Boromir that they are going to Mt. Doom to destroy the ring. Bakshi expected people were smart enough to put these two things together...obviously he supposed wrong.

Did PJ copy a few of Bakshi's ideas? Perhaps. But even those that he arguably did borrow (a couple Nazgul scenes) were done much better by PJ.

No they weren't. They were THE SAME. They might as well have been the live-action footage Bakshi rotoscoped these scenes from.

In other words, actually watch the Bakshi film before critisizing it.

[Corvis]

I agree with everyone hear saying how PJ copied much from Bakshi. The transition between scenes and the things he cut out are much like the stuff Bakshi cut out. Though one thing I have to say is that PJ made his movies way more understanable. When I saw Bakshi's for the first time I thought to myself, "geeze if I hadn't read the books first, none of this would make sense". After all he made the first two books into a movie that is not even two hours long!