Re-reading the book after watching the film

***azalea*** · 11-26-2002, 03:45 PM

Amandil, I'm not sure I understood what you meant, but I would disagree if you meant that those artists before the Renaissance didn't put in their personal interpretations just because they didn't sign their names. Personal interpretation happens whether you want it to or not, regardless of whether or not your name is on it. Music is a good example of this -- I can often tell who the artist is just by hearing a small part of a song I've never heard before, because their artistic "signature" permeates the song.

Anyway, back on topic: LotR was read to me as a child, and I read it as a teenager. I did not read it again until after I had seen the movie, although I really wanted to when I heard that the film was being made, because my brother said he was going to wait until after all of the films came out before he read it again, so that he could enjoy the films for themselves without making the inevitable comparisons to the book, and I thought that was a good idea, but decided I couldn't wait that long and read them after FotR came out. (wow, that was a long sentence) So when I saw the movie, I was very familiar w/ the world of ME, but it had been about, oh, 12 years since I had read LotR (although I had re-read The Hobbit a few times in that period). Thus, there were a lot of details I had forgotten about, and I feel like I had the best of both perspectives. I was excited that they were finally doing a live action movie of it, and hopeful that it wouldn't be total garbage.

So now to the point (thankfully

). When I saw the movie, the things that stood out to me as someone who knew ME but hadn't been in a long time and had forgotten a lot were as follows:

No Tom B. and Goldberry. (I loved him, but honestly I don't think I remembered his name

, I just remember thinking -- hey that guy I really like wasn't in it).

Felt very rushed (even after all that time I remembered that it took much much longer for the events of Book One to unfold. Even factoring in the "you have to keep things going in a movie" argument I thought it felt too rushed).

Saruman had a bigger role in this part (I didn't remember him having so much "speaking time" in FotR, I remembered his role being bigger in TT and RotK. This didn't bother me that much, because I liked that the movie dramatized events that in the books were only mentioned).

Frodo seemed too young, but I LOVED Elijah's portrayal, so that didn't bother me too much. (I know, I have been corrected a few times about the whole age thing, but in my mind he looks older than 18, and I like it that way

).

Merry and Pippin were changed a little, but this really didn't bother me too much.

Boromir was portrayed a little differently than I remembered.

Arwen's role being greatly expanded, but I found that understandable. Hey, I like love scenes!

The Council of Elrond was different. Elrond himself seemed more emotional than I pictured him (when speaking to Gandalf).

Those are the things that really stood out to me. I loved the movie, despite the changes. Then I read the books again, and the movie really had no effect on my re-reading it, other than to say to myself "Oh, they did that really well," or " I wish they had put that in," and some of "Why did they change that?"

Then when I saw the movie again, I saw a lot more of the differences, but it didn't diminish my liking of the movie. I like the movie as a movie, and don't expect it to be just like the book, but I do think it could have been done less as an action movie to allow for more episodes from the book.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Introduction: Reading the Sil for the First Time	Bombadillo	The Silmarillion	41	04-03-2005 05:07 AM
Reading Lolita in Tehran	Menelvagor	General Literature	1	05-12-2004 09:41 PM
March 25th (Today) : Tolkien Reading Day	Finrod Felagund	General Messages	6	03-30-2004 11:41 AM
For those reading along with the movie	Elfhelm	Lord of the Rings Movies	0	11-06-2003 01:17 PM
Reading THE HOBBIT at the bookstore...	Gilthalion	The Hobbit (book)	95	11-06-2000 04:01 AM

11-26-2002, 03:45 PM	#21
*azalea* Long lost mooter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Florida Posts: 3,342	Amandil, I'm not sure I understood what you meant, but I would disagree if you meant that those artists before the Renaissance didn't put in their personal interpretations just because they didn't sign their names. Personal interpretation happens whether you want it to or not, regardless of whether or not your name is on it. Music is a good example of this -- I can often tell who the artist is just by hearing a small part of a song I've never heard before, because their artistic "signature" permeates the song. Anyway, back on topic: LotR was read to me as a child, and I read it as a teenager. I did not read it again until after I had seen the movie, although I really wanted to when I heard that the film was being made, because my brother said he was going to wait until after all of the films came out before he read it again, so that he could enjoy the films for themselves without making the inevitable comparisons to the book, and I thought that was a good idea, but decided I couldn't wait that long and read them after FotR came out. (wow, that was a long sentence) So when I saw the movie, I was very familiar w/ the world of ME, but it had been about, oh, 12 years since I had read LotR (although I had re-read The Hobbit a few times in that period). Thus, there were a lot of details I had forgotten about, and I feel like I had the best of both perspectives. I was excited that they were finally doing a live action movie of it, and hopeful that it wouldn't be total garbage. So now to the point (thankfully ). When I saw the movie, the things that stood out to me as someone who knew ME but hadn't been in a long time and had forgotten a lot were as follows: No Tom B. and Goldberry. (I loved him, but honestly I don't think I remembered his name , I just remember thinking -- hey that guy I really like wasn't in it). Felt very rushed (even after all that time I remembered that it took much much longer for the events of Book One to unfold. Even factoring in the "you have to keep things going in a movie" argument I thought it felt too rushed). Saruman had a bigger role in this part (I didn't remember him having so much "speaking time" in FotR, I remembered his role being bigger in TT and RotK. This didn't bother me that much, because I liked that the movie dramatized events that in the books were only mentioned). Frodo seemed too young, but I LOVED Elijah's portrayal, so that didn't bother me too much. (I know, I have been corrected a few times about the whole age thing, but in my mind he looks older than 18, and I like it that way ). Merry and Pippin were changed a little, but this really didn't bother me too much. Boromir was portrayed a little differently than I remembered. Arwen's role being greatly expanded, but I found that understandable. Hey, I like love scenes! The Council of Elrond was different. Elrond himself seemed more emotional than I pictured him (when speaking to Gandalf). Those are the things that really stood out to me. I loved the movie, despite the changes. Then I read the books again, and the movie really had no effect on my re-reading it, other than to say to myself "Oh, they did that really well," or " I wish they had put that in," and some of "Why did they change that?" Then when I saw the movie again, I saw a lot more of the differences, but it didn't diminish my liking of the movie. I like the movie as a movie, and don't expect it to be just like the book, but I do think it could have been done less as an action movie to allow for more episodes from the book.