🧙 The Tolkien Forum 🧝

Welcome to our forum! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox! Plus you won't see ads ;)

Acid Test

Thrakerzog

Registered User
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
It seems to me the acid test regarding the people that find the FotR movie so disappointing and even insulting will be them staying home from TT.

If they truly dislike the first movie, we can pretty much assume they will like TT as much or less then LotR. So why would they go see it?

They are masicists - the see it to torture themselves.

They are trolls - they see it to come here to torture everyone about ever stupid detail they hated.

Bordom - they are bored out of their mind and have nothing better to do with 3, 6 or 9 hours watching it multiple times.

Any other reasons they would see it, despite the fact they were so "disappointed" with FotR?
 

Thorin

LOTR Purist to the end
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
15
Originally posted by Thrakerzog
It seems to me the acid test regarding the people that find the FotR movie so disappointing and even insulting will be them staying home from TT.

If they truly dislike the first movie, we can pretty much assume they will like TT as much or less then LotR. So why would they go see it?

They are masicists - the see it to torture themselves.

They are trolls - they see it to come here to torture everyone about ever stupid detail they hated.

Bordom - they are bored out of their mind and have nothing better to do with 3, 6 or 9 hours watching it multiple times.

Any other reasons they would see it, despite the fact they were so "disappointed" with FotR?
No we are not masochists, we expect to be thrilled by JRR Tolkien's amazing work to be shown on screen. We hope to find a true rendition (not an exact one) to bring Tolkien to life....The same reasons why we went to see the first one.

What's even more annoying then the "trolls" are those who have no objectivity and praise and promote Jackson's rendition over Tolkien's no matter what the cost or sacrifice of principle.

Though I was disappointed with FoTR, I understand that there was a lot of information to make a movie out of....That would mean that there seems to be less that could be screwed up in TTT....However, PJ is now going to the other extreme saying that there is not enough material to make a movie out of TTT and will be adding his own stuff for a "fresh take" on it....I am going wanting to be thrilled but expecting to be disappointed again....But I still will go.
 

Elanor2

Registered User
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
177
Reaction score
0
Location
Germany
Dear Thrakerzog,

There are other acid tests, as you call them.

Some people like something and do not accept any critics on it, whatever justified.

Others critic enlessly without other purpose that to hear the sound of their own voices.

A middle point mindless worship and mindless whining is desired. That means that, when there is point, you múst see, learn, understand, evaluate (thesis, antithesis, synthesis), criticise. Each were it belongs. These are the steps of a healthy thinking process. Nothing to do with masochism.

I hope this helps. Regards.
Elanor2.
 

Ged

Retired
Joined
Jan 19, 2002
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
Location
North West of England
Elanor,
I agree that healthy criticism is always justified. Where I fall foul of Thorin (always it seems) is his/her inabilty to give any credit whatsoever to the film of Fellowship of the Rings.

Thorin:
There are many thousands of people (maybe millions) who read and loved Tolkien's works before you, so please don't be so sanctimonious.
You are NOT a keeper of any sacred flame. You have no idea what Tolkien himself might have felt about the film.

He may have hated it. He might have liked it. You DO NOT KNOW. A little more humility would be in order IMHO.
 

Thorin

LOTR Purist to the end
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
15
What for? I haven't said anything against Jackson....All I've said is that many of the people who've never picked up Tolkien until after seeing the movie will most undoubtedly have those movie images in their mind's eye and that is unfortunate.

I don't care if it was the best movie in the whole wide world and captured Tolkien's world perfectly....When one doesn't have the chance to imagine Tolkien's world as they themselves would visualize it, they have been robbed.

That's my point....Don't automatically assume I'm bashing the movie in every thread....And some of you are just a little too quick to come running to PJ's defense instead of letting him take some lumps that he deserves...
 
R

ReadWryt

Guest
Thrakerzog,

You forgot that they went believing that when Jackson said in interview after interview he was not making major changes in the characters that he wouldn't be turning Arwen into a sword wielding Elven witch capable of calling forth the waters into a flood. Maybe they never expected that in claiming no major changes to the characters they didn't forsee being treated to a knock down drag out fight between Saruman and Gandalf, or they never thought that they would be seeing Frodo denied the oportunity to muster the incredible courage to defy the Nazgul at the ford. Perhaps their dissapointment isn't so much that they are bored or Trolls or even Masochists, but just maybe they are insulted by someone claiming that he would make the movies "in the spirit of Tolkien" has, in fact, represented HIS version, cuts and inventions and all, as being true to the story to people who have not read the books and that his falsehoods are an insult to Tolkien, his characters and the story he created.
 

Elanor2

Registered User
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
177
Reaction score
0
Location
Germany
Hi all,

I think that one of the points of criticism to the movie, from my point of view is that the director was not fully loyal to Tolkien's spirit. And I am not thinking of the logical adaptations that one has to make when trying to compress a large and complicated piece of literature into a 2h movie.

The movie simplifies caracters, makes up new things to follow the director's ideas (not Tolkien's), twists deep situations to make them easy to understand for the 'simple minded'. Most of the people are not as simple as PJ seems to think, but he did not bother to try that out. A faillure, from my point of view.

So. The movie won few Oscars. Not surprising. The director risked little with it. Only the special effects and technical stuff was staggering. And that's what he won at the end.

Just to balance, there were fantastic things in the movie. The initial battle scenes where wonderful. The Shire, just delightful. The environment, just plain Great. Pace was keeping, actors did a good job (limited by the script, no doubt).

Still, the movie could be better if the director had risked more and kept to the original spirit better. It was his decision.
 

PRH

Registered User
Joined
Dec 20, 2001
Messages
689
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by Thorin
All I've said is that many of the people who've never picked up Tolkien until after seeing the movie will most undoubtedly have those movie images in their mind's eye and that is unfortunate.

When one doesn't have the chance to imagine Tolkien's world as they themselves would visualize it, they have been robbed.
Chance? Exactly how long do you think people should've been given to read the books before being 'robbed?' Another 50 years? No, these people just never took the opportunity.
 

Elanor2

Registered User
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Messages
177
Reaction score
0
Location
Germany
Originally posted by aragil
horin- A lot of people who saw the movie first have never read the books at all without the movie. Can the movie give gifts and rob at the same time?
Sorry if I answer a posting for Thorin.

Yes, the movie can give and rob at the same time.

Gives, because with fantastic scenaries, beautiful special effects and good pace, has make Tolkien's books alive once more and make people enjoy the beautiful world he made up.

Robbes because it simplifyes Tolkien's deepness, makes it 'politically correct' when there is no need, makes the caracters appealing when they need to be themselves.

'Looks foul and feels fair'. It looks too fair for me, sometimes. It gives no room for the 'feeling fair'. It sledgehammers it right ahead. It lacks subtility, perhaps. This is just a personal feeling.
 

Strider97

Registered User
Joined
Dec 27, 2001
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
Location
Dublin
As I have mentioned in other post PJ as director was presenting his version of LOTR and I believe overall he did a credible job. I have seen many movies where I went back later and read the book version and conversely seen many movies made out of books I have read. Inevitably with rare exceptions seeing the movie after the book has been disappointing. I maintain that if this movie brings a new generation of readers to Tolkien it will be worth the small transgressions. Many movies condense characters for plot development and to avoid confusing viewers with to many characters. If the viewers come to the books with a preconcieved notion of Tolkien then they still have the richness of Tolkien to enhance their perception.
With sales of the books spiking, thanks to the movies, we will be able to welcome many new readers rather then bemoan their initial perceptions.

Thorin- The real robbery is if they had never been introduced to Tolkien in the first place.

All others if you don't appreciate PJ version of the movies instead of labelling him a bag of crap or fat and unbarbered, simply refrain from seeing the movies. Self-censorship is much better then an imposition of censorship by bad-mouthing the messenger.

If you did not like the first one- Don't go see the second one
If you don't like a post or a thread or a poster- Don't read the next post or thread that they enter or hit the ignore button.
 

Thorin

LOTR Purist to the end
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
15
Originally posted by PRH

Chance? Exactly how long do you think people should've been given to read the books before being 'robbed?' Another 50 years? No, these people just never took the opportunity.
So what? That is not the point...The point is, is that even though the movie inspired them to pick up the books (and PRH, believe it or not, some people haven't even heard of Tolkien, or given it a second glance: How many people really know about, or have given a second glance to works such as Roots or The North and the South, or War and Peace?).

The FACT (no matter whose to blame for it and I am not passing any blame, just stating the facts) is that many people who've been inspired to read Tolkien (and heard about him for the first time) will forever use the movie as a judging factor and not have had the opportunity to visualize it for themselves....

Why are you arguing with me about this??
Originally posted by aragil
Thorin- A lot of people who saw the movie first have never read the books at all without the movie. Can the movie give gifts and rob at the same time?
Yes, they can....PJ can be commended for inspiring people to go to where the real story lies....Consider him a lesser light leading people to the greater light....But as far as I'm concerned, Tolkien is still the central focus and it is unfortunate that it took a much inferior work (the movie) to introduce a fantastic epic piece of literature that is now forever altered in the newbie's mind due to the visual medium. What a shame, and part of the reason why I have not gone back numerous times to see it again...Though as said before, PJ should be congratulated on that. Book sales are probably higher now then when it first came out.
 
Last edited:

Greenwood

The Guild of Ost-in-Edhil
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Messages
1,596
Reaction score
3
Location
New York
Quote by Thorin
The FACT (no matter whose to blame for it and I am not passing any blame, just stating the facts) is that many people who've been inspired to read Tolkien (and heard about him for the first time) will forever use the movie as a judging factor and not have had the opportunity to visualize it for themselves....
The reason your argument is so absurd is the only way to avoid what you decry is to never make any movie of LOTR. The person who could have stopped it from happening was old JRRT himself if he had not sold the movie rights and instructed his heirs to never sell the movie rights. His son Christopher, at least, probably would have abided by JRRT's wishes. Since JRRT himself sold the movie rights you should take up your complaints with him!
 

Thorin

LOTR Purist to the end
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
1,402
Reaction score
15
Originally posted by Greenwood


The reason your argument is so absurd is the only way to avoid what you decry is to never make any movie of LOTR. The person who could have stopped it from happening was old JRRT himself if he had not sold the movie rights and instructed his heirs to never sell the movie rights. His son Christopher, at least, probably would have abided by JRRT's wishes. Since JRRT himself sold the movie rights you should take up your complaints with him!

It is only absurd if that was the ONLY way ANYONE could be exposed to Tolkien. As was pointed out before, millions have read Tolkien long before the movie came out....I have never watched Bakshi, never heard BBC or seen Rankin/Bass....I picked it up from curiousity and word of mouth at around 12 years old.....I didn't need any outside visual medium influence to spur me to read it and I am much better off because of it....All I'm saying, is that those who might have read it before and were not aware of it until the movie came out missed the opportunity to experience it for themselves....That's just the unfortunate truth.....

Man, will you guys argue about everything??
 
R

ReadWryt

Guest
As I have mentioned in other post PJ as director was presenting his version of LOTR and I believe overall he did a credible job.
The he should have stated that this was what he was up to and left it at that, instead of telling a bunch of lies to appease the fans of the books by making statement after statement that he was not doing what he proved to have been doing all along...
 

Greenwood

The Guild of Ost-in-Edhil
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Messages
1,596
Reaction score
3
Location
New York
Perhaps all bookstores and libraries should now have a new policy: "No Tolkien books will be sold or lent to anyone without a signed affidavit swearing that they have never seen or heard any production of LOTR or The Hobbit." To be fair we should extend this prohibition to all literary works. Also, no movie or television productions will be allowed unless they are totally original and not based on any previously written material. This all sounds rather difficult to accomplish. Perhaps the simplest thing would be if we just pulled all of Tolkien's books off bookstore and library shelves and burned them so that only those with a "pure" vision of Middle-earth, unsullied by any commercial productions, will have the copies they acquired before the movie came out. They must also swear to never lend their copies to the "impure" who have seen the film. Of course we will have to organize the Tolkien Thought Police to enforce these rules and to inflict punishment on any who transgress or have "impure" Tolkien visualizations. The job of commander of this police force seems to already be taken, so anyone thinking of joining should be prepared for only a rank and file position. After of course proving you are sufficiently "pure" in your Tolkien thoughts to qualify. :(
 

DGoeij

Pan Narran
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Messages
938
Reaction score
2
Location
The Netherlands
Now you're being sarcastic.;)
Anyway, RW is right. If PJ had said: Hey, LOTR is very difficult to turn it into a movie and some of it will be adapted in the way I find the most true to the book.
Or something close. It would have been fair, he would have been honest and completely right. I truly love this story, and I think PJ did a more than fine job on the visualizing part, but he messed around with the story. He added things that I found needless or a bad choice. One can debate over it, and my opinion is he made some wrong adaptations. He also added some footage which I liked.
I will go and see TTT, because I like to watch his version. I will have critique over some changes, and others I'll maybe like. I'll have conversations with friends over those changes and probebly we'll never agree.
It seems that some people think you either are to take the whole thing as fantastic or aren't allowed to go and see it at all. There's a Dutch saying on this: The truth lies somewhere in the middle.
 

Greenwood

The Guild of Ost-in-Edhil
Joined
Dec 26, 2001
Messages
1,596
Reaction score
3
Location
New York
It seems that some people think you either are to take the whole thing as fantastic or aren't allowed to go and see it at all. There's a Dutch saying on this: The truth lies somewhere in the middle.
DGoeij

I agree with you that the truth is somewhere in the middle. I have never said the movie was perfect. I have never said I agreed with all of Jackson's decisions. I have criticized some aspects of the film and I have said that I would have made different choices. My problem is with some people who seem to feel that they are the "Guardians of Middle-earth" and Tolkien's vision and who question whether you can be a fan of Tolkien and still like the movie. I tend to agree with those who say that if someone hates the movie as much as some of these people seem to, I fail to understand how they could consider going to see the next one.
 

aragil

Just another loremaster
Joined
Aug 27, 2001
Messages
1,852
Reaction score
4
Location
Secondarily Beautiful State of Washington
Originally posted by ReadWryt
The he should have stated that this was what he was up to and left it at that, instead of telling a bunch of lies to appease the fans of the books by making statement after statement that he was not doing what he proved to have been doing all along...
ReadWryt- without going back to read any quotes by PJ, I believe what he said was that he was making a faithful representation of the book, and that he hoped it would please both fans of the book and Tolkien virgins. Believe it or not, he did that. Greenwood, Ged, Strider97 and I (to name but a few on these boards) are Tolkien fans who felt that the movie was a faithful (or at least a 'faithful enough') representation of the book. That you didn't feel PJ lived up to his word is your opinion. I don't mind that you have an opinion on the matter (indeed if everyone here had the same opinion as me it wouldn't be worth my time to log on). I just wish you'd stop trying to crucify the guy because of your opinion.
 

baraka

Elven Craftsmen
Joined
Dec 27, 2001
Messages
360
Reaction score
1
Location
Outworld
The he should have stated that this was what he was up to and left it at that, instead of telling a bunch of lies to appease the fans of the books by making statement after statement that he was not doing what he proved to have been doing all along...
RW, you are absoulety right.
 

Thread suggestions

Top