🧙 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 ;)

Part of the movie that I felt was better than the book....

apan14

Registered User
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Please keep in mind that I about 3/4 way through the first book.

I saw the movie first so some of you might say that my thoughts about the story are skewed by the movie. But I thought some parts of the movie was presented "better" than the original.

Case in point

The point where Frodo meets Bilbo in the and Bilbo asks to see the ring again. In the movie we see Bilbo's face mutate and scaring Frodo. In the book, it was shown to be a less frightening momemt [in my mind] with sound being muted and the room being dark. It is suggested that we see visage of Gollum. But I'm not too sure about that.

I thought that Bilbo's apology to Frodo was that part that was presented better. In the book he wasn't crying or sobbing and lamenting [at least I couldn't feel lit] about having to place the burden on Frodo. He said it. But I couldn't feel the shame or sorrow that I could in the movie.

Any thoughts? There are some other parts that I thought were better in the movie but I'm going to reread it to make sure that I give the book another chance.
 

DGoeij

Pan Narran
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Messages
938
Reaction score
2
Location
The Netherlands
You do have a point there. The visual effect of the sudden change in Biblo was a lot better, that's for sure. It truly emphasizes the power of the Ring.
And in the movie the sadness of Bilbo having burdened Frodo with the Ring is somewhat better portrayed too.
But I think it is somewhat necessary. In the book it is made clear dozens of times how dangerous this Ring is and the burden to Frodo is made much clearer too, IMHO.

My thoughts, as you asked.
 

Mad Adski

Registered User
Joined
Dec 31, 2001
Messages
49
Reaction score
1
I think that bit was merely intended to scare the living daylights out of the kids whose parents assumed LotR = Harry Potter. And it worked too, both times I've seen the film.

Mad Adski.
 

Gloer

Registered User
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Messages
177
Reaction score
2
The scene is changed from the original!

Important:

This particular moment is misunderstood in the movie. Or interpreted a little onesided.

In the movie we see a freaky transformation of Bilbo and regret that he couldn't resist the desire to see the ring.

In the book the ring influences not Bilbo but Frodo!
Bilbo desires to see the ring. He never attacks to get it. He doesn't want to take it. It is Frodo that is manipulated that any desire for the ring. He is manipulated by the ring to see Bilbo as greedy miserable thief. The ring makes Frodo want to hit Bilbo. The ring changes Frodo to do evil to Bilbo who is his closest relation.

In the movie we see a starled Frodo with hardly any desire to protect his ring.

And Bilbo - who is only just curious about the ring sees all this evil influence the ring causes upon it's bearer. And finally he sees the way it inluenced him before Frodo. And he is sorry that Frodo is now under this curse. He apologizes THAT not his behaviour like in the movie. His behaviour is all the time in place.

I think the movie is incoherrent here. The actions and visualisation do not match the dialogue.

------------

Read the chapter:

`Have you got it here?' he asked in a whisper. `I can't help feeling curious, you know, after all I've heard. I should very much like just to peep at it again.'
`Yes, I've got it,' answered Frodo, feeling a strange reluctance. `It looks just the same as ever it did.'
`Well, I should just like to see it for a moment,' said Bilbo.
When he had dressed, Frodo found that while he slept the Ring had been hung about his neck on a new chain, light but strong. Slowly he drew it out. Bilbo put out his hand. But Frodo quickly drew back the Ring. To his distress and amazement he found that he was no longer looking at Bilbo; a
shadow seemed to have fallen between them, and through it he found himself eyeing a little wrinkled creature with a hungry face and bony groping hands. He felt a desire to strike him.
The music and singing round them seemed to falter and a silence fell. Bilbo looked quickly at Frodo's face and passed his hand across his eyes. `I understand now,' he said. `Put it away! I am sorry: sorry you have come in for this burden: sorry about everything. Don't adventures ever have an end? I suppose not. Someone else always has to carry on the story. Well, it can't
be helped. I wonder if it's any good trying to finish my book? But don't let's worry about it now-let's have some real News! Tell me all about the Shire!'
 

aragil

Just another loremaster
Joined
Aug 27, 2001
Messages
1,852
Reaction score
4
Location
Secondarily Beautiful State of Washington
Film-making is an art...

...as is writing a book. Art is often-times misinterpreted. The scene in the movie switches from us looking at Frodo and Bilbo to us looking at just Bilbo. We are looking from Frodo's eyes. As we look at Bilbo, the ring is transforming our perception, as it does to Frodo. Neat trick- we're experiencing what Frodo experiences in the book!
 

apan14

Registered User
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I thought up of another point...

The aftermath of Gandalf's fall....

In the book, it was written that Aragorn and Boromir attempted to aid Gandalf in the fight against Balrog. However in the movie, it was Frodo that was shown wanting to help. The movie did a great thing by embellishing the time immediately after Gandalf falls. We see the horror and scream of Frodo and being held back, the absolutely stunned Aragorn while arrows wizzing past him, Boromir calling out to him to finally snap him out of the shock.

in the book it was,

"The fire went out, and blank darkenss fell. The company stood rooted with horror staring into the pit. Even as Aragorn and Boromir came flying back, the rest of teh bridge cracked and fell. With a cry Aragorn aroused them"

Peter Jackson did really well to slow down the time so we the audience can absorb the shock and terror. It was too brief in the book.

The Grieving scene was pretty good also. We were given a time to witness and participate in the grieving. Aragorn was portrayed with a silent but commanding determination (instead of "come! I will lead you now!") The book, while being the "original" doesn't do as good of a job sharing the grief with the readers. It doesn't endear us to Gandalf as well as the movie.

don't you think?
 
Last edited:
H

Herllich

Guest
Poor Bill

On a contrasting note....

In the book I found myself grieving more for poor Bill the pony than for Gandalf - maybe at the back of my mind I knew the old beggar wasn't dead!

At the entrance to the mines of Moria it was quite sad to see Sam have to let Bill go especially knowing there was a big octapus/squid thing and a pack of wolves lurking..... although he knew it was for the good of the fellowship.

We never had any time to grieve for Gandalf in the book as they were soon to be pursued by the orcs of Moria and were in a rush to get to Lothlorien forest.

In the film Bill played a bit part since since he just appeared when they left Bree and we only found out his name when Sam told him to go back at Moria........

would have been a nice tear jerker for the ladies :)
 

apan14

Registered User
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Re: Poor Bill

Originally posted by Herllich
On a contrasting note....

In the book I found myself grieving more for poor Bill the pony than for Gandalf - maybe at the back of my mind I knew the old beggar wasn't dead!

At the entrance to the mines of Moria it was quite sad to see Sam have to let Bill go especially knowing there was a big octapus/squid thing and a pack of wolves lurking..... although he knew it was for the good of the fellowship.

We never had any time to grieve for Gandalf in the book as they were soon to be pursued by the orcs of Moria and were in a rush to get to Lothlorien forest.

In the film Bill played a bit part since since he just appeared when they left Bree and we only found out his name when Sam told him to go back at Moria........

would have been a nice tear jerker for the ladies :)

i agree the movie overlooked bill, but I think it would have taken away from the focusing on the character. Besides, there would be plenty of time to grieve for Gandalf later. [which the book didn't do]

I acknowledge that they were being chased by the orcs. But once they maded it outside of Moria, it was safe [relatively] to stop for like maybe 10 seconds. It may have just happened for 10 seconds in real time. But the movie allows the time to slow down a bit. You can't have a tragic scene in a movie and not allow some time for grieving. It turns off the audience.
 

Bill the Pony

Registered User
Joined
Dec 12, 2001
Messages
188
Reaction score
1
Re: Poor Bill

Originally posted by Herllich
On a contrasting note....

In the book I found myself grieving more for poor Bill the pony than for Gandalf - maybe at the back of my mind I knew the old beggar wasn't dead!

Oh now thank you! Finally someone who gives me the appreciation I deserve.
 
H

Herllich

Guest
yeah I agree the film has to interact with its viewers differently than the book.

I like them both but in their own different ways....

I have to say though that the book is a lot more powerful emotionally (to me) since the characterisation is so strong.......

I'm grieving for a pony - that must say something!
 

DGoeij

Pan Narran
Joined
Dec 3, 2001
Messages
938
Reaction score
2
Location
The Netherlands
Bill the Pony a dutchie??

Een pony het beste paard van stal? Is dat een woordgrapje? Wel humor daar niet van.
Wel gaaf van Tolkien dat Bill alles netjes heeft overleefd, precies wat het dier verdiende.

sorry about that.
 
R

Risen-Paladin

Guest
For sure, the movie was quite different from the book. Difference about the story is undenial. I expected to see Tom Bobandil, and the Barrow-Wight.
The atmosphere along the book vary from joice to danger and agony. All the movie, except Hobbiton and Elrond's House, has dark atmosphere, especially at Bri. The heroes don't enjoy the nature as they travel.
Also a week point of the movie was Gandalf's magic powers. Conclusivelly, he was very good in pyrotechnics,smoking, and talk to animals. We didn't see and admire his great powers, especially on fire.
Aragorn's character is much different. He is a living hero, a wise guardian and powerful man, hard to die in the wilds. His words "let's hunt some orc's", shows that PJ made him a Hollywood hero, not a Tolkien hero.
Besides, the battle at the beggining was AWESOME!
As more other things...
Excuse me for my English (not native)
 

Kiwi

Registered User
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
NZ
Character differences in movie...

Aragorn was presented more 'heart throb' Hollywood hero in the movie...to add that spice to an otherwise sexless tale?

Perhaps this has been discussed already...so forgive me, but did anyone else feel that Legolas and Gimli were unlike what they expected?
When reading LoTR in my mind Legolas and Gimli were on the same 'level' - characters each from vastly different races..but pretty evenly matched for fighting skill etc in the group.
However in the movie, Legolas is an absolute legend...walking on top of snow when the others were buried, foretelling what was on the wind, shooting arrows fast and with deadly accuracy...

Did I miss his superiority in the book, or has it been accentuated in the movie..to increase that 'hero' factor?
 
H

Harad

Guest
Dwarf-lovers (not -tossers) might argue but Elves were individually more powerful..e.g. they were immortal whereas Dwarfs were just long-lived. Elves with their long-range bombing are bound to do more damage overall, but in a close-in fight a Dwarf would be tough to beat. In the fight with the Cave Troll, Gimli got in some good hits, but Legolas finished him off. Maybe Gimli gets more closeups in TTT?

However, even in LOTR (if not the Hobbit) Dwarfs are a distant third after Elves and Men, in terms of importance in the War.
 

Kiwi

Registered User
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Location
NZ
...here's for more close ups of Gimli's heroism in TTT!

If they don't completely take the **** out of his character throughout the other movies (ie: being dragged around by his beard by big people)...the story needs a gritty character like this swarthy dwarf..otherwise it's all glamorous Elves, Men and cute Hobbits..vs Blackened deathlike monstors of Sauron.

I know it's all fantasy. But it's REAL fantasy.

(Risen-Paladin)-the opening battle was fantastic, and totally described the enormity of the events, the vastness and the darkness in a way that I couldn't feel from just reading the book.
I felt this way about most of the battle scenes..such is the effect that SOUND (movie noisier than book) has on the emotions of a viewer and dynamic cinematography drawing you in to the action.
 

starlight

Registered User
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Actually answering the thread title

The parts I liked in the movie better than the book were...

I liked the fall of Gandalf. It conveyed a great sense of loss that is easy to miss in the book.

I also liked Frodo's farewell to the fellowship and the testing of Agragon. It makes the power of the ring more apparant, and thus Frodos courage and strength to bear it more remarkable. It also puts Aragon and the rest of the company in less doubt as they follow the Orcs. Additionally I liked the idea that Frodo would have the oppurtunity to say farewell to Merry and Pippen. I always was sad that he had to leave them without a word.
 
H

Harad

Guest
Re: Actually answering the thread title

Originally posted by starlight
The parts I liked in the movie better than the book were...

I liked the fall of Gandalf. It conveyed a great sense of loss that is easy to miss in the book.

I also liked Frodo's farewell to the fellowship and the testing of Agragon. It makes the power of the ring more apparant, and thus Frodos courage and strength to bear it more remarkable. It also puts Aragon and the rest of the company in less doubt as they follow the Orcs. Additionally I liked the idea that Frodo would have the oppurtunity to say farewell to Merry and Pippen. I always was sad that he had to leave them without a word.
\

Great points, starlight. I especially agree with your description of the breaking of the Fellowship.

My only problem with Gandalf falling was that the Balrog whip didnt drag him down (probably for cinematic purpose) as it did in the book. It left some people thinking that he purposely jumped in (Geronimo!) after the Balrog. I dont believe THAT!.
 

jks13

Registered User
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
I liked that they walked way less in the movie cause in the book it feels like they just walked and walked and walked forever
 

Legsofglass

Registered User
Joined
Mar 5, 2002
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Regarding the Greiving over Gandalf scene in the movie:

In the movie (as stated here before) we definitely get the grievous feeling looming around the company. I don't think this is what Tolkien wanted to convey in this scene.

I think he wanted to show us the real lack of time the fellowship had, since the Orcs were closing in. But furthermore, I think by using the line "Come! I will lead you now!" Tolkien portrays the repression of Aragorns feelings hence showing the real nature of a human being. In my opinion, this was one of the best (if not THE best) scenes in the book, since it really showed amazing depth. This I understood only a while ago, after the death of my Grandfather. I was completely indifferent about the situation. I repressed all my feeling and acctually didn't feel a thing about it. I think this is called post-traumatic shock in certain fields.
That is what I think Tolkien was trying to show.
 

Thread suggestions

Top