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

[greyscale42]

I cant turn LOTR off once I get it started. I could watch them over and over again. I could , however, understand the attention span problem .

[Arnobius]

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 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.

D'OHHH! Sleep deprivation (started work at 4am). Meant Orthanc, don't know why I said White Tower (Suprised I didn't say "White Castle" at the rate I'm going). Steve Jackson the publisher for GURPS RPG. Mental block with Peter Jackson. I also do this with Wolfwood from Trigun and Wormwood from Screwtape letters.

Glad to hear the confrontation between Gandalf/Saruman is there anyway. Disappointed that they didn't do Scouring (Necessary IMO) and think he could have done it if he had cut the unneccessary stuff out re: Faramir and put Shelob in TTT where it belonged (Tolkien created a real cliffhanger there and would have done the movie a better turn ending as the book did IMO). I would hope they changed the ending around anyway. The theatrical release seemed to stop more than end

[uc pseudonym]

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

You were not who I had in mind with the general pronoun "some of the people here".

[Raptor]

My fav. lotr was the first. The other two were long, never ending, and I though they were totally a waste of money. I would have made a better film with this budget, with flying monkeys and some vagabond who wants to get oil for his old car.

[ShiroiHikari]

._. you guys can't seriously expect a direct film adaptation of the books...overall I thought the movies were awesome, and the books were excellent too but -dragged- in so many places, and I think that was a flaw. (like someone else mentioned.) Jackson and his screenplay team probably had a -real- fun time trying to decide what would fit and what wouldn't. what would you do if you had that job? o_o

[Mave]

<.< >.> Forgive me but I've finally just finished watching the trilogy (the 2nd and 3rd being the extended versions) and this was the most current LOTR-related thread in CAA.

I just want to express how much I enjoyed the movies and look forward to re-watching them since there are just too many details I missed during the first watch. Admittedly, I have yet to read the books but I still think the movies themselves are masterpieces from a cinematographical point of view. I do plan to read the books when I get the chance to but that's not going to stop me from enjoying the visual fest. XD Anyway, yeah great special effects, acting, soundtrack, props....hyped or not, I still like LOTR very much. I was impressed at how they successfully brought Golllum aka "Worst Possible Roommate Ever" to life.

No preference between the 3 movies, I thought all of them were great. So much hard work was put into these movies...I've got to give my kudos to the producers. I also liked the positive messages brought forth, "Keep pushing forward even if all seems doomed" and "There's hope, good will triumph over evil (yes!)" I took the opportunity to interpret possible Christian parallels in LOTR to my non-believer friend who watched this with me. Ex: How Gandalf removed the curse over that King....erm...forgot his name. and how Saruman chose to become evil.... kinda reminded me of exorcism and fallen angels <-- of course, these are just my personal interpretations but hey, anything that allows me to share about Jesus...why not? ^_~

Yup, I'm planning to get the LOTR trilogy DVD sets (extended too) when the time is right. Great stuff, had lotsa fun, I'm a LOTR fan now. XD XD

EDIT: Just wanted to add, it was surprising for me to end up liking most of the characters (even the seemingly evil or nasty ones Ex. Gollum) I couldn't help cheering on Gandalf, Grimlin (did I get that right?), Frodo and Sam throughout the whole show the most. "Come on Frodo, you can do it!!! Don't give up!!! XD XD" or "Woohoo you go, Gandalf! Don't mess with old wizards!" Of course, I can't deny Aragorn, Legolas and Frodo are the bishies (hehe) but really, their personalities played a way bigger role in their appeal to me.

[Hephzibah]

I couldn't help cheering on Gandalf, Grimlin (did I get that right?)

Errrm... if you mean the dwarf, its Gimli

Anyway, I never knew this thread existed until my bro pointed it out... I must say I am deeply grieved! LOTR is absolutely fantastic, and it has so much depth to it. I've read the LOTR trilogy, the Hobbit, the Silmarillion and am currently browsing through the Unfinished Tales, and it is amazing how Tolkien's beliefs are at the very core of this world.

Now, as for the movies. I read the books first, and so was a little disappointed with the films (esp TTT). My favourite was probably FOTR, or ROTK for the awesome battle scenes. My only complaint with ROTK was that the ending was soooooo slow! Even how everyone talks is SOOOOO SLOW! does anyone else notice how slowly they talk?

[Jman]

LOTR rocks...no more disscussion about it, lol!

[Hitokiri]

I just finished the extended edition of Return of the King and I loved it. I wanted to express however my feelings on 2 issues (which I wrote in my xanga) that I hated.


However I have 2 beefs against the Extended Edition that literally got me mad. I gave Jackson ALOT of lienency as he made the movies and rather from looking at the movies as a Tolkein purist, I looked at them as a movie goer. But this really ticked me off.

Beef #1: The Breaking of Gandalf's Staff.
I was excited to see the Witch King of Angmar finally confronting Gandalf when the first trailer for the Theatrical Release was shown however I was dissapointed to see they cut that from the theatrical release and was thrown into the extended edition. So I wait a year and what do I get. The freakin dead king breaks Gandalf's staff. Enitrely untrue by all accounts and physically impossible. The Witch King has no power over Gandalf, nor authority, no rin rank. Gandalf, Saruman, and Sauron ar eof the same kindred - the Maiar. The Witch King, though powerful, is not a Maiar and is less then one. Gandalf was able to break Saruman's staff because Gandalf was in 1) the same class and 2) has been given authroity of the 5 wizards as well as Saruman. So to show that Gandalf can be crippled (a wizard's staff is how they basically channel thie rpowers and also thier life) by the Witch King when Gandalf is powerful shows that the Witch King is basically on the same level of the Maiar. It just got me angry that Jackson gave the Witch King the authroity to do that.

Beef #2: Aragorn challenging the Palantir.
I was super exicited to see this scene and didnt matter to me if it was in Minias Tirith, Edoras, Helms Deep, or even Orthanc. And I loved how it began.....until Liv T....ohhh...I mean Arwen showed up and Aragorn got all.....wide eyed. That he was scared. never was Aragorn scarred of the Palantier and mastered it. That and the freakin Evenstar breaks. It shows Aragorn didnt have the willpower to challenege Sauron nor ready to go into kingship.

My Tolkien purist blood has been calm as I saw each movie botched a bit but I either liked it or bared with it but this got me mad. Jackson took all disrepsect towards Tolkien's vision and wiped his buttocks with it by breaking Gandalf's staff and showing Aragorn feared Sauron and couldnt master the Palantir. That and I wanted to see the Houses of Healing a bit longer but oh well...it was in there.

[Hephzibah]

a fw more things about those that you pointed out

1) The Staff....
isnt it funny how it suddenly reappears in the Grey Havens completely unharmed?

2) The necklace
Isnt it funny how their son (Aragorns and Arwens) is wearing it... again completely unbroken

lol, gotta love those inconsistencies

[Hitokiri]

and that thier are four ponies riding in front of the coach where Gandalf, Bilbo, and Frodo is in however thier are 4 people riding the ponies

[Hephzibah]

LOL!!! I hadn't noticed that
One blooper that I am sure EVERYONE noticed was in TTT, when Pippin was tied up trying to escape the orcs. A horse reared, he rolled over and screamed , throwing his untied hands up in the air next scene, he was in ropes again

[Jasdero]

2) The necklace
Isnt it funny how their son (Aragorns and Arwens) is wearing it... again completely unbroken

??? Had it even broken then, though? o.o?

Edit: Never mind, never mind... XD;; I get it... But.. Blah, never mind.. =_=

[Hephzibah]

Arwen saw into the future... her son was wearing the necklace. In the EE, Aragorn drops the necklace immediately after the palantir thingy, and it shatters completely. Therefore, the son couldn't have had the necklace

[Jasdero]

XD;;;; Just edited my post before you posted... But yeah.. I get it... Thanks~ :3

[Arnobius]

Arwen saw into the future... her son was wearing the necklace. In the EE, Aragorn drops the necklace immediately after the palantir thingy, and it shatters completely. Therefore, the son couldn't have had the necklace

Sounds like grounds for burning Peter Jackson at the stake

[Bobtheduck]

Meh... I think the changes in the story were fine... Some of them were really good... Like speeding the story up and upgrading some of the dialogue... I half felt like I was reading Shakespeare...

One line I wish he had gotten rid of "I am no man!" Ugh... Worst line ever... Bad Tolkien...

Book readers are much more forgiving about pace issues than movie goers... Especially when there is a budget that big that needs to be paid back... They have to make it viewable by general audiences, not merely tolkien extremists... That requires lots of changes...

[Arnobius]

Meh... I think the changes in the story were fine... Some of them were really good... Like speeding the story up and upgrading some of the dialogue... I half felt like I was reading Shakespeare...

One line I wish he had gotten rid of "I am no man!" Ugh... Worst line ever... Bad Tolkien...

Book readers are much more forgiving about pace issues than movie goers... Especially when there is a budget that big that needs to be paid back... They have to make it viewable by general audiences, not merely tolkien extremists... That requires lots of changes...

Well, I didn't mind them tossing most of the songs from the novels (I usually skip over them (yada yada)). As for the "I am no man" bit, that was probably an original plot twist back when that thing was written. If only Mordor had an "Equal Opportunity Commission"
I didn't mind the subtractions (except for the elimination of the "Scouring of the Shire) so much as the additions and alterations to the characters and their motivations.

[Camuel]

I guess we have to remember that adapting a book into a film is actually quite tough. It would be impossible to have an exact copy of the book on screen. It would be like days long! I think they captured the essence of Tolkien's world very well. Yes there were some questionable changes... ie depicting Sauron as an eye and the arrival of Haldir's elves in TT, but for me, each film has been one of the most wonderful experiences of movie watching that I have ever had. (Good christian themes too!)

[Hephzibah]

Yes there were some questionable changes... ie depicting Sauron as an eye and the arrival of Haldir's elves in TT, but for me, each film has been one of the most wonderful experiences of movie watching that I have ever had.

But Sauron IS an eye in the book. As for Haldir... I'm glad they did that. The other idea was to have Arwen ride up with Aragorn's sword and kill tonnes of orcsies. It was also going to be her, not Legolas, that pulled Gimli and aragorn to safety on the bridge. *shudder*

I didn't mind the subtractions (except for the elimination of the "Scouring of the Shire) so much as the additions and alterations to the characters and their motivations.

Such as Faramir!! They ruined his noble character when he took them to Osgiliath!

[Camuel]

Nope Sauron ain't an eye! I know they refer to him as the "eye of sauron" but thats more his "unsleeping vigilance" rather than his shape. How could an eye put the ring on? He has a physical shape but needs the ring to make him all-powerful again. Only the movie says he doesn't have a physical shape

'He has only four [fingers] on the Black Hand, but they are enough', says Gollum in The Two Towers, and this is confirmed explicitly by Tolkien among his letters.


Anyway good movies

[Hephzibah]

But in FOTR, the Breaking of the Fellowship it says:
"And suddenly he felt The Eye. There was an Eye in the Dark Tower that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze."

also in ROTK, Mount Doom:
"The Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him, and his Eye (notice the capitilised E) piercing all shadows looked across the plain to the door that he had made..."

I had read the books tonnes of times before watching the movie, and every single time I imagined Sauron as an Eye, not a physical form. Maybe there are otherreadings into it, but that is how I and my friends interpreted it.

[blkmage]

One of the oddest changes from the book is that Sauron doesn't have a body; Saruman tells Gandalf that he isn't yet able to 'take physical form'. It's hard to see how this could be true - what use would the Ring be to Sauron, if he didn't have a finger to wear it on? The book makes it very clear that he does have a physical form - 'He has only four [fingers] on the Black Hand, but they are enough', says Gollum in The Two Towers, and this is confirmed explicitly by Tolkien among his letters. Actually, this does seem to be a misinterpretation rather than a deliberate change, because Peter Jackson has himself described Sauron in at least one interview as being no more than a floating eyeball.

Read this at the Encyclopedia of Arda.

The "I am no man" line was said much better in the book:

'Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!'
'But no living man am I! You look upon a woman. Eowyn I am, Eomund's daughter. You stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone, if you be not deathless! For living or dark undead, I will smite you, if you touch him.'

I didn't like the changes that really didn't make any sense. Gandalf's staff being broken, the Elves showing up at the Hornburg, the Ents not going to war and end up going when Treebeard gets angry and decides to go, Frodo showing himself to the Nazgul with the Ring.

[Mizumi-Kun]

Well, that's the thing; Sauron had physical form, and still does have presense, but not 100% physical. The All-Seeing Eye is not a physical eye, but an omniscous part of Sauron's non-physical being. He's sort of like a soul with a body, but it's seperated, if that makes any sense.

[Zedian]

I love the series, I think it's one of the best movie renditions of a book I've seen. I guess I'm a sucker for mythology and fantasy, and this trilogy perfectly nails those aspects. I also, acknowledge how much effort went into the production of these films, I know it was no easy task.

[Arnobius]

But in FOTR, the Breaking of the Fellowship it says:
"And suddenly he felt The Eye. There was an Eye in the Dark Tower that did not sleep. He knew that it had become aware of his gaze."

also in ROTK, Mount Doom:
"The Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him, and his Eye (notice the capitilised E) piercing all shadows looked across the plain to the door that he had made..."

I had read the books tonnes of times before watching the movie, and every single time I imagined Sauron as an Eye, not a physical form. Maybe there are otherreadings into it, but that is how I and my friends interpreted it.

I believe those were meant to be symbolic descriptions. Especially with the capitalization, it seems that it was a literary way of saying Sauron was watching.

I didn't have a problem with Jackson using the eye in that sense, since Sauron was never depicted as more than a dark presence. I thought he was just making use of the symbol Tolkien provided.

I just wish that they could have at least used the verse in FOTK of the rings, instead of rewriting it "Men who desire power above all else"!?

[uc pseudonym]

Personally I think the eye worked fine. It captures the presence of Sauron which in the books is always quite vague. Movies have to be more definite about such things.

the Ents not going to war and end up going when Treebeard gets angry and decides to go

Generally I do not like to quibble about small things, but the above was one of the few that disappointed me. Instead of seeming majestic and carefully moving, the Ents mostly just seem stupid (especially with their heads bobbing up in down in agreement with the "not orcs" statement). Then they attack later, for different reason (rather hastily, I might add).

[The Last Bard]

Yeah, sadly enough I feel the same way now...Although they used to be my favorite movies of all time.
I don't know what happened, I just COMPLETELY lost intrest in Lord of the Rings.
And as far as the books go, they are pretty good, but I'm more into Clive Custler and Lemony Sniket right now.

Later,
Aaron

[Alice]

Uh, I kinda felt that way about the books. >.> Look! Over there! A monkey!!!!

*flees from angry LOTR fans*

[Arnobius]

Wow, talk about gravedug. This was one of the first threads I posted on.