I Hate Lotr!!!!!!!!!

Postby **Heart of Sword** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:30 pm

I like them, but not if I watch them every day. (Too violent to watch every day, anyhow...)

;_; I had a horrible time getting through Helm's Deep in TTT. I ended up drawing out the landscape on paper just so I could understand it better.

I was confused too. So, I was just yelling whenever Aragorn and Legolas (ooooooo) were on, rooting for them and hoping they weren't going to die. :sweat:

Postby **Hitokiri** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:24 pm

Well I love themovies but I'm a HUGE fan of the books...not only LOTR but Tolkien's other works (The Hobbit, The Silmarillion, History of Middle Earth).

Jackson did a good job portraying the book but the books are still way better. Can't wait till the extended version!! The Mouth of Sauron! Houses of Healing! The Confrontation of Saruman!!! I may go crazy with all the stuff taken from the books to film.

As for seeing the movies in the theator
I've seen FOTR bout 4 times, TT bout 5-6, and ROTK 10 times (which includes the first midnight showing of me dressed up as Frodo and me going by myself on several occassions).

I wish I had that group picture of our dress up.

Postby **Needle Noggin** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:20 pm

Why don't you guys (who have not read the book) just read the book. People who say they hate or love LOTR without reading it once or twice strike me as ignorant and/or lazy. And if it is your lazyness well you sure are missing alot. It's not like you are reading Gone with the Wind or something I read the LOTR trilogy for the fisrt time in 5th grade.

Postby **Mangafanatic** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:30 pm

Needle Noggin wrote:Why don't you guys (who have not read the book) just read the book. People who say they hate or love LOTR without reading it once or twice strike me as ignorant and/or lazy. And if it is your lazyness well you sure are missing alot. It's not like you are reading Gone with the Wind or something I read the LOTR trilogy for the fisrt time in 5th grade.

Honestly, it's rather unkind to make these generalizations. There are a great many people who haven't read LOTR and still have perfectly valid opinions about the movie. Having any gilded standard is simply unfair and harsh. Afterall, There are a great many things in life that are more important thanLOTR, and being kind is one of them. I, for one, don't have time to sit down and read these books right now. I am neither ignorant or lazy. I'm a highschool student and I have test, exam, community service, volunteer projects, ect. to do in right now. I'm sure many of our "LOTR ignorant" members are in a similar situation.

Postby **Needle Noggin** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:38 pm

Mangafanatic wrote:Honestly, it's rather unkind to make these generalizations. There are a great many people who haven't read LOTR and still have perfectly valid opinions about the movie. Having any gilded standard is simply unfair and harsh. Afterall, There are a great many things in life that are more important thanLOTR, and being kind is one of them. I, for one, don't have time to sit down and read these books right now. I am neither ignorant or lazy. I'm a highschool student and I have test, exam, community service, volunteer projects, ect. to do in right now. I'm sure many of our "LOTR ignorant" members are in a similar situation.

Are you not making an umm geralazation about me in that statement?
I never said all the people who said LOTR is good or bad are lazy. So don't try to make it look like I did.

Postby **Mangafanatic** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:44 pm

I apologize profusely for any such inferrence. Such a statement was uncalled for.

Typically, a generalization is a statment made about a whole group of people and it's one made without knowing the individuals. That was my basic meaning when I spoke of generalizations. I was making a statement based on the comment that you made, but I was apparently too harsh. Very sorry about that.

I thought you said that they were lazy because of this statement:

People who say they hate or love LOTR without reading it once or twice strike me as ignorant and/or lazy.

Perhaps you can explain what you really meant since the most forward meaning wasn't your intent.

Postby **Needle Noggin** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:54 pm

Postby **John316** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 3:57 pm

Lord of the Rings is perfect proof that you don't have to be the best, just the first.

Sure, it's a defining piece of work for the fantasy genre, but the concepts and ideas from it have been borrowed from/expanded upon so much since its conception that the original feels a little flat now.

Postby **Maledicte** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:04 pm

I shall throw all prior opinions down into the dust
The HOBBIT is the best book in the series!!!! and the cartoon!!!!!!!!
Bilbo rocks and i personally think that the Gollum vioice in the 75-minute 1970's animated movie is waaaaaaaay better than Serkis' voice.
Then again, i saw the cartoon first and read the book at least 10 times...
as for LoTR, i thought it rocked the first 2 times i saw it in the theater, but when i watched the extended version of FoTR with my dad he found it kind of...i don't know how to put this lightly, but...boring, and i have to say that after the initial excitement was over with i think so too.
The dvd's are nice to play when i need some background noise when i'm doing my homework, though...and the music is gorgeous
and the books were confusing. and had hardly any dialog. Not in the least like a novel. That's why the Hobbit was better.
HOWEVER, i DO like one of Tolkein's unfinished tales...the one with Turin and Beleg, in the second age...i think THAT one should have been a movie and not lord of the rings.
Or better yet, THE HOBBIT!!!!!!!
okay i'm done now

Postby **Needle Noggin** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:08 pm

SirThinks2Much wrote:I shall throw all prior opinions down into the dust
The HOBBIT is the best book in the series!!!! and the cartoon!!!!!!!!
Bilbo rocks and i personally think that the Gollum vioice in the 75-minute 1970's animated movie is waaaaaaaay better than Serkis' voice.
Then again, i saw the cartoon first and read the book at least 10 times...
as for LoTR, i thought it rocked the first 2 times i saw it in the theater, but when i watched the extended version of FoTR with my dad he found it kind of...i don't know how to put this lightly, but...boring, and i have to say that after the initial excitement was over with i think so too.
The dvd's are nice to play when i need some background noise when i'm doing my homework, though...and the music is gorgeous
and the books were confusing. and had hardly any dialog. Not in the least like a novel. That's why the Hobbit was better.
HOWEVER, i DO like one of Tolkein's unfinished tales...the one with Turin and Beleg, in the second age...i think THAT one should have been a movie and not lord of the rings.
Or better yet, THE HOBBIT!!!!!!!
okay i'm done now

I concur, The Hobbit is the best of them all.

Good work.

Postby **dareiq s'an** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:14 pm

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HOW CAN YOU HATE LORD OF THE RINGS!!!?!!! ITS THE BEST MOVIE EVER!!

>_<

Postby **Needle Noggin** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:17 pm

IT'S NOT A MOVIE IT'S A BOOK!!!

Postby **dareiq s'an** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:27 pm

Fine... ITS THE BEST BOOK & MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Postby **Mangafanatic** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 4:28 pm

Needle Noggin wrote:IT'S NOT A MOVIE IT'S A BOOK!!!

Come now, friends. It is both a movie and a book. To deny the inexistance of either is unnecessary.

Postby **K. Ayato** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:20 pm

Whichever. The Hobbit is plainly the best of all.

Postby **Arnobius** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:56 pm

I'm a fan of the books (Well, LOTR and Hobbit and "Leaf by Niggle" anyway. Silmarillon and "Tales" books tended to put me to sleep.)

I hated the movies. Fellowship extended version and Towers regular edition were barely tolerable. For me, Steve Jackson completely MISSED the point of the books. His adding of scenes not found in the books and the documentaries explaining why show me he didn't understand what Tolkien was trying to do in the books. Tragic characters became either twisted or bizarre because of the removal of key scenes from the book that developed the reasons (Denethor comes to mind here).

I'm hoping the extended version of Return is decent, as the movie version didn't even deserve 1 oscar, let alone a sweep (Best Picture should have been given to "Tokyo Godfathers"-- a pity it wasn't nominated.)

Postby **desperado** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:59 pm

the return of the king made me seriously mad, it didnt follow the book almost at all. i really really hated the whole twisted sam golem frodo thing. THAT WAS SO WRONG IT MADE ME MAAAADDD. its like the director riped a whole section out of the book and taped in his own story ><

Postby **dareiq s'an** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:00 pm

I have read most of the books (still working on ROTK) and I think Peter Jackson did a really good job at translating the book to movie, though some things could be added. Not to mention there is quite a bit of extra denethor footage in the extended ROTK, if I'm not mistaken...

Postby **Hitokiri** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:29 pm

I'm one of the biggest Tolkein purests I know however I wasn't mad at some of the stuff Jackson decided to do and not to do. The reason being I can read those parts with my own interpretation and enjoy them more. For instance, I was thrilled not to see Tom Bombadil, cause now it's more enjoyable reading it and having my own "movie" play in my head. Same with the end of Return of the King with Saruman taking over the Shire and such. Those parts mean more to me now since I can have my own view on them.

As for the movies, I look at them purely as a movie trilogy. i won't compare and contrast the book and the movie cause it takes away the significance of both. The books set up a standard of writing and a entire orginal story that has drawn in millions of readers. The movies has set a standard not of th ebooks but the movies. Wether you like it or not, the movies has greatly and forever changed the world of cimentography (right word there?) It has set the standard for CGI characters and computer graphics. The movies are a brilliant masterpiece on the level of film-making and should be seen as such. Bringing Gollum to live is a incrediable story that I have researched and done a paper on. It wasn't a victory for the books nor of book Gollum but for the movie and film industry (and no not Hollywood).

Both are equally great in thier own special ay and thanks to the LOTR movie, it has brought in even more fans into this great series and introduced them to the books which alot of my friends who likes the movies got introduced to the books and love those.

The books are a literally masterpiece and the movies are a cinemeographic (right word again?) masterpiece.

desperado wrote:the return of the king made me seriously mad, it didnt follow the book almost at all. i really really hated the whole twisted sam golem frodo thing. THAT WAS SO WRONG IT MADE ME MAAAADDD. its like the director riped a whole section out of the book and taped in his own story ><

Actually after re-reading the RTOK shortly after watching it, I found RTOK the closest to thebook than than the other two (with TT coming in last ::sigh:: ) With the Extended Editon, most of the stuff added will be from the books (Mouth of Sauron, Saruman versus Gandalf, Corsairs of Umbar, House of Healing, Aragorn challenging the Sauron, etc).

One thing that has me mad actually is rumors have it that Sauron will appear in physical form (in white) to fight against Aragorn at the Black Gate. Here's the site: http://www.hdr-see.de/ I'm not liking this at all. Sauron can and never will appear fair to Men after his downfall in Numenor and because he does not have the ring, he can't yet take physical form.

Postby **dareiq s'an** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 6:34 pm

exactly! succinctly(I hope I spelled that right) put

Postby **Arnobius** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 7:30 pm

I'll concede that the movie was technically well done (and in that respect deserved an oscar). But the movies were done in a rather "hurry-up fashion
(http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/two_hour.htm). In Fellowship, the events of Gandalf and Frodo discovering the significance of the ring took place over a period of 17 years, not a weekend. Bringing Frodo to Minas Tirith in Two Towers because the timeframe allowed it (according to Jackson in "the making of" showed no comprehension of the events that DID occur (In the book, Gandalf was in Tirith before Faramir was).

I agree that you can't get it perfect with a book of that scope, but the Rankin Bass production of "The Return of the King" was closer to the events of the book than Peter Jackson's version [And I SO wanted to start singing "Where there's a whip, there's a way" when Frodo and Sam were mistaken for orcs-- but they didn't have that part in the movie].

Postby **Hitokiri** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:35 pm

AnimeHeretic wrote: Bringing Frodo to Minas Tirith in Two Towers because the timeframe allowed it (according to Jackson in "the making of" showed no comprehension of the events that DID occur (In the book, Gandalf was in Tirith before Faramir was).

ummm...Faramir brought Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath not Minas Tirith in TT. Don't get me wrong, I'm upset at some stuff Jackson did such as screwing Faramir over with this evil attitude of his and portraying him as a bad guy, same with denethor. Denethor in his day exceeded the deeds of his son Boromir but because of the palantir he held in the White Tower, his mind and will was taken over (i really wanted that in there).

There were some things here and there but some of the stuff Jackson did gave new light to it. Instead of seeing Osgiliath in ROTK, we see it in TT so we dont need a explaination in RTOK when everything is already jumbeled up. I thought the elves in Helms deep was a ntresting addition....far, far from the truth but I was fine with it.

I just finished watch TT: EE (well i half watched it, I was busy drawing).

Postby **The Doctor** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:52 pm

HOW DARE YOU SPEAK THESE WORDS!
....or not. LOL. If you didn't like it, it's cool.

Postby **FadedOne** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:09 pm

whoa...harsh words guys(lol...just imho, i know these are all opinions). Tell me, do you honestly think they could take something as beautiful as the written Trilogy and make the movies as good? naaah.

They're flawed sure, and not even AMAZING movies shoudl be watched to death. Too many people over-do a good thing. But they're surely not lousy by any means. yeah...i'm a fan.

oh and htis is prolly worthless opinion but its 2am...i can afford to be a little rambly hehe...

Postby **uc pseudonym** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:41 am

Some of the people here are very, very worked up about what is admittedly only a fantasy series. I am, however, glad to see some conflict be resolved without any moderation being necessary.

Without a doubt, the movies were significantly speeded up. As a book purist, this is a terrible crime, but personally I approve. I consider the significant lag in Tolkien's original work a flaw. It did not have to be incredibly rushed and with evil overbearing, but much old literature is (considered by modern standards) not truly excellant in regard to spacing.

Postby **Arnobius** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:13 pm

uc pseudonym wrote:Some of the people here are very, very worked up about what is admittedly only a fantasy series. I am, however, glad to see some conflict be resolved without any moderation being necessary.

Without a doubt, the movies were significantly speeded up. As a book purist, this is a terrible crime, but personally I approve. I consider the significant lag in Tolkien's original work a flaw. It did not have to be incredibly rushed and with evil overbearing, but much old literature is (considered by modern standards) not truly excellant in regard to spacing.

I guess I am new here. I thought these posts were supposed to be good natured (Mine were anyway) :sweat:

Postby **Arnobius** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:20 pm

Hitokiri wrote:ummm...Faramir brought Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath not Minas Tirith in TT. Don't get me wrong, I'm upset at some stuff Jackson did such as screwing Faramir over with this evil attitude of his and portraying him as a bad guy, same with denethor. Denethor in his day exceeded the deeds of his son Boromir but because of the palantir he held in the White Tower, his mind and will was taken over (i really wanted that in there).

There were some things here and there but some of the stuff Jackson did gave new light to it. Instead of seeing Osgiliath in ROTK, we see it in TT so we dont need a explaination in RTOK when everything is already jumbeled up. I thought the elves in Helms deep was a ntresting addition....far, far from the truth but I was fine with it.

I just finished watch TT: EE (well i half watched it, I was busy drawing).

Osgiliath? Whoops. My face is red. All this time I thought it was Tirith. (Sighs and gets out the book to re-read).
I agree about Denethor. I think Tolkien was trying to show in him the sin of despair. Because he believed in what he saw in the palantir, he believed all was lost.

What I hope to see in the Extended version (just put down $886 on car repairs, so I don't see myself getting it anytime soon) is:
Saruman meeting Gandalf at the White Tower.
The Scouring of the Shire (The hobbits don't have allies anymore and have to fend for themselves)
An apology from Steve Jackson (I can dream can't I

)

BTW, I hope nothing I posted was taken seriously here. Maybe I stumbled in on a serious discussion, but I thought it was just a lot of lighthearted banter and responded accordingly.

Postby **Hitokiri** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:52 pm

[quote="AnimeHeretic"]What I hope to see in the Extended version (just put down $886 on car repairs, so I don't see myself getting it anytime soon) is:
Saruman meeting Gandalf at the White Tower.
The Scouring of the Shire (The hobbits don't have allies anymore and have to fend for themselves)
An apology from Steve Jackson (I can dream can't I ]

I hate to embarass you some more but Gandalf never meets Saurman in the White Tower. The White Tower is located in Minas Tirtih..unless you mean the Tower of Orthanc in Isengard, than yes, Gandalf DOES meet Saruman (and to my discovery from th epics on the site I posted), something happesn to Saruman and Wormtougne that I'm incredibly excited about.

and it's Peter Jackson...not Steve :lol:

I think he said he was sorry for making soem fans made before.

As for the Scouring of the Shire, it will not appear in the EE, as far as I know, because Jackson he thought it was unesscary to. I also think he didn't feel lke adding another hour and half which is estimated how long that scene will take already adding to the 90 minutes of additional footage. Like I've said before, I'm gald cause than I can enjoy the part n the book without his interpretation.

Postby **Souba** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 5:22 pm

Hi,
I one of those Lotr fans, and I'm trying read the books at least once every year so this will be my fourth year.

What makes these films so popular I think is because of the timing of the movie's release and the Christian themes that run throughout it. Well that is one reason I admire the films, and if you ever see the behind the scenes I think you can appreciate the time, work, and love that was put into these films to remain true to the books. Ok it's not perfect, but we are talking about two seperate mediums, but I really believe they have really captured the essence of the books.
So When I got to met a couple actors from the movie I could really sense that this wasn't an average acting job for them and that they really loved their characters and the story. and yes, I did get them to sign my book.

Anyway, if some one keeps saying "I love Lotr!", you could ask them why, and maybe even point out all the Christian themes in the story it may be a great oportunity for ministry.

Ok end of my ramblings.
God Bless,
Souba

Postby **glitch1501** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:33 pm

i havent read any of the books, i have read the hobbit though, and ive seen the movies, i liked the movies, and i really want to read the books, but this new game called LOTR: The Battle for Middle Earth jsut came out, and it is the best lord of the rings game ever IMHO
its like an awesome risk game!

I Hate Lotr!!!!!!!!!

Who is online

Loading