Learning from Peter Jackson

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Valandil, according to Tolkien, it was the greatest mockery to Iluvatar by Morgoth, that when he bred the hidious race of Orcs, that they were to reproduce in the same fashion as the Children of Iluvatar.

Hence my feelings that Morgoth created orcs from elves and NOT men. What better way to slap the face of Ilúvatar than to take his most prized creation and twist it into a hideous beast?

I think Tolkien's brain wasn't all there when he wrote that obsure letter only 2 years before his death where he says that it makes more sense that they came from men. I especially feel this way - because it states in Lord of the Rings that they were from elves. I think he simply forgot what he had written - which he often did. His notes were a disaster - asi s well documented and he often forgot what he had written.

[Elf Girl]

I doubt he had forgotten- he was intentionally remaking Middle-Earth throughout his whole life.

[Earniel]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Hence my feelings that Morgoth created orcs from elves and NOT men. What better way to slap the face of Ilúvatar than to take his most prized creation and twist it into a hideous beast?

The question is: Were the Elves Ilúvatar's most prized creation?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elf Girl
I doubt he had forgotten- he was intentionally remaking Middle-Earth throughout his whole life.

Well this isn't the forum or the thread for it - and I have talked about it in the Book forum - I disagree. He was refining the the history - howevwer he was only making CORRECTIONS to Lord of the Rings that had been missed or the publisher had messed up on. He was not changing things like how the the orcs were born.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eärniel
The question is: Were the Elves Ilúvatar's most prized creation?

They were his most prized living creation.

[Elfhelm]

Originally posted by azalea
the topic for discussion in this thread is: Are differing viewpoints acceptable when interpreting scenes from LotR/ the storyline (for instance, filling in action where it isn't explicitly written in the book, stuff like that), or is it unacceptable to fill in or have an alternate interpretation of characters, scenes, actions, etc.?
Is the book as written the final word, or has the story become bigger than the book, a legend that is open to the reader's imagination to go beyond the printed page?

I don't see much discussion of this topic. Why not lock the thread and start another every-deviation-from-the-book-you-can-think-of thread, because that's all this is.

My point given above is that most people who have read the books like the movies.

I'm curious why there is such a high concentration of people here who answer azalea's statement of the topic with a definite "no" to the first statement and "yes" to the second. I'm just going to take a wild guess and say that this site was made of, by, and for the book fanatics.

If so, why not just close the movie forum and declare all discussion of the movies off-topic? Because every time anyone likes anything about the movies, a half dozen rabid fans attack him, and they aren't very civil about it either.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
I don't see much discussion of this topic. Why not lock the thread and start another every-deviation-from-the-book-you-can-think-of thread, because that's all this is.

My point given above is that most people who have read the books like the movies.

I'm curious why there is such a high concentration of people here who answer azalea's statement of the topic with a definite "no" to the first statement and "yes" to the second. I'm just going to take a wild guess and say that this site was made of, by, and for the book fanatics.

If so, why not just close the movie forum and declare all discussion of the movies off-topic? Because every time anyone likes anything about the movies, a half dozen rabid fans attack him, and they aren't very civil about it either.

Actually Elfhelm - if you read the threads you would see that the MAJORITY of so called "book fanatics" only pick apart certain aspects of the movie. BB is the one who thinks that nothing jackson did was wrong and he is the one who constantly is deragatory to the people who prefer the books.

I have said REPEATEDLY and I will say it again - the movies were AVERAGE. They were action movies.

[Elfhelm]

You can state your opinion all you want. All caps does not turn an opinion into a fact. I believe BB is right when he says some people here need to mature (or something like that). One essential step in the maturation process is to recognize that other people have different opinions and to allow them to think differently from you. That's what I think the real topic is.

[Sister Golden Hair]

I'm just going to take a wild guess and say that this site was made of, by, and for the book fanatics.

If so, why not just close the movie forum and declare all discussion of the movies off-topic? Because every time anyone likes anything about the movies, a half dozen rabid fans attack him, and they aren't very civil about it either.

Of course this site was made for book fans, seeing as how it existed long before the release of the movies. I think most people have tried to discuss their differences between book and movie at least fairly in this thread, with the exception of one movie fan that referred to the so called "purists" as "queers."

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
You can state your opinion all you want. All caps does not turn an opinion into a fact. I believe BB is right when he says some people here need to mature (or something like that). One essential step in the maturation process is to recognize that other people have different opinions and to allow them to think differently from you. That's what I think the real topic is.

Yeah - his maturity showed by what he said in the first post.

We accept other people's opinions - he just doesn't accept ours. As has been demonstrated repeatedly in his posts.

[Elfhelm]

Wrestling with Gollum
This illustration by Alan Lee is an interpretation. It is not the actual book. He had to guess at some things in order to draw it. He had to pick from many scenes to illustrate but he chose this one because it had action. If I wanted to, I could search this and other paintings of his for details to quibble over. What would be the point?

You could say, Alan Lee has only illustrated parts of the books. You could say that he only chose the highlights. You could argue that it gives a false representation of Tolkien.

But nobody ever says any of this. Nobody shoots down the Hildebrandts or the animated RotK or the earlier movie. But there are a certain half dozen people here who circle in and rip apart anyone who dares to enjoy the current movies. I don't see why they don't just stick to the books forums.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
But nobody ever says any of this. Nobody shoots down the Hildebrandts or the animated RotK or the earlier movie. But there are a certain half dozen people here who circle in and rip apart anyone who dares to enjoy the current movies. I don't see why they don't just stick to the books forums.

They never drew scenes of Lord of the Rings that were NOT described in the books. If the Hidebrants or ANY artist did a painting of Flight to the Ford the way Jackson did it - they would not be a "Tolkien artist" and people would be complaining about them. Your comparison is completely flawed.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Wrestling with Gollum
This illustration by Alan Lee is an interpretation. It is not the actual book. He had to guess at some things in order to draw it. He had to pick from many scenes to illustrate but he chose this one because it had action. If I wanted to, I could search this and other paintings of his for details to quibble over. What would be the point?

You could say, Alan Lee has only illustrated parts of the books. You could say that he only chose the highlights. You could argue that it gives a false representation of Tolkien.

But nobody ever says any of this. Nobody shoots down the Hildebrandts or the animated RotK or the earlier movie. But there are a certain half dozen people here who circle in and rip apart anyone who dares to enjoy the current movies. I don't see why they don't just stick to the books forums.

First of all, I don't hate the movies. I don't even dislike the movies, but I know when I see something that is different from Tolkien's word. As for artwork, I have always liked the elves of the Hildebrandt brothers, but, their orcs leave a lot to be desired IMO. Ted Nasmeth is another Tolkien artist whose work I favor, but his depiction of Finrod is to me, awful. And to address the last part of your post, I have seen many movie fans in the book forums, that know nothing about the books, but because they have seen the movie, think they do. And as I said earlier, they look foolish when they do this. Why should book fans not be able to discuss the movie when they have seen it, as opposed to movie fans that attempt to discuss the books, when they haven't read them?

[Elfhelm]

You choose not to see what is different because you like the painting.

[Sheeana]

Originally posted by Valandil
PS: Sheeana - LOVED your explanation. You're not a mom yet though, are you? I'm a dad of young boys (surprising I know with my apparent bewilderment) and I'm takin' notes!

Nope - but I gave my brother the sex talk (with parents permission would ya believe) when I was 11 or so!

Originally posted by Eärniel
The question is: Were the Elves Ilúvatar's most prized creation?

If they were - then why did he give Men the gift of Death?

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
You choose not to see what is different because you like the painting.

Explain please. Not everyone has the same taste in art, music, literature. Everyone knows what they like, and when they see a painting and don't like it, it doesn't make the artist a bad artist. It just means it is not thier kind of art. FYI, IMO, J.R.R. Tolkien was not a good artist.

[Elfhelm]

Just a quick glance at the painting and I see there is no hair on Sam's foot. If I were like the viscious attacker type people here I would make up stupid tortures for no other reason than that. Who ever heard of a hobbit with no hair on his foot. Maybe he shaved it. Maybe we should start a two year running joke about Sam shaving his foot. What's to explain? You like the painting so you don't see the hairless foot. And people who like the movies like Arwen. I never heard Arwen hatred until I came here.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Just a quick glance at the painting and I see there is no hair on Sam's foot. If I were like the viscious attacker type people here I would make up stupid tortures for no other reason than that. Who ever heard of a hobbit with no hair on his foot. Maybe he shaved it. Maybe we should start a two year running joke about Sam shaving his foot. What's to explain? You like the painting so you don't see the hairless foot. And people who like the movies like Arwen. I never heard Arwen hatred until I came here.

Well, I think you're over reacting. And each is entitled to their opinion, movie fans as well as book fans. I don't think that's the problem here. The problem here seems to be that the movie fans want to claim that the movie was a work of precision and they want to argue the events that book fans find are not in spirit (good word) with the books.

[Elfhelm]

The same subjectivity that blinds us to the hairless foot also colors our perception of these arguments. It is only natural to believe our eyes, even when they are fooled.

On other threads I have pointed out that one particular poster here has set himself up as the spokesman for the people who wrote the screenplay. I have pointed out that he finds various ways to belittle and dehumanize those who disagree and invites attacks. I have also pointed out that in responding to him people have exagerated their statements about the movies. This can be seen as entertainment by the participants. When it ceases to be all in good fun and turns into vitriol, it drives other people away from here. He has never accepted my points that he belittles those he disagrees with, but a careful reading of the first post of this thread will show me to be correct.

[Sister Golden Hair]

On other threads I have pointed out that one particular poster here has set himself up as the spokesman for the people who wrote the screenplay. I have pointed out that he finds various ways to belittle and dehumanize those who disagree and invites attacks. I have also pointed out that in responding to him people have exagerated their statements about the movies. This can be seen as entertainment by the participants. When it ceases to be all in good fun and turns into vitriol, it drives other people away from here. He has never accepted my points that he belittles those he disagrees with, but a careful reading of the first post of this thread will show me to be correct.

Elfhelm, here I agree.