Things We Love To Hate About The LotR Trilogy - Page 2

Arathorn · 10-17-2004, 10:11 AM

I hate it that they had to dumb down a really complex character like Denethor to give in to all the clean up and action footage they added.

He's supposed to be a brilliant anti-hero and all they have him do after his first meeting with Gandalf is to become target practice for his staff every time they meet. It also made the film-Gandalf's character confusing. Wasn't he supposed to be wise? Is that something that wise people do?

BeardofPants · 10-17-2004, 01:55 PM

Well, I don't know about Gandalf, but I know I've been tempted to whap people violently.

*BoP, the wise*

Hiya Arathorn, still floatin' 'round I see.

Finrod Felagund · 10-17-2004, 03:57 PM

I personally didn't like the entire portrayal of Gandalf the White

Though I loved Gandalf the Grey

Lenya · 10-18-2004, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arathorn

I hate it that they had to dumb down a really complex character like Denethor to give in to all the clean up and action footage they added.

He's supposed to be a brilliant anti-hero and all they have him do after his first meeting with Gandalf is to become target practice for his staff every time they meet. It also made the film-Gandalf's character confusing. Wasn't he supposed to be wise? Is that something that wise people do?

I totally agree with you. In the book Denethor was a really complex person. The first time he was introduced, I did not get the idee that he was nuts, but in the movie they fed it to you with a spoon. Where's the fun in that?

Wayfarer · 10-19-2004, 01:39 PM

Something I really, really hate:

The films have an incomplete plot. It jumps around, skips stuff, and basically has a lot of holes. But, if you point that out, most often people will tell you that you can't just take the films by themselves, you've got to read the books to understand them.

Then, when you do read the books and compare them to the films, any negative impressions you may express will get brushed off by saying that 'you can't just compare them to the books, they stand by themselves and you've got to consider them as films'.

Which is it, people? Are we supposed to take them with the books, in which case the complete failure as an adaptation of another story becomes apparant? Or are we supposed to take them on their own, purely on their merit as films, in which case there are obvious and repeated mistakes?

You can't have it both ways!

inked · 10-19-2004, 03:23 PM

O Insufferable One, we agree!

They are separate works in different idioms and require to be judged within their genre.

Comparisons between genres are definitely permitted but suffer from the desire to have cake and eat it!

Telcontar_Dunedain · 10-19-2004, 03:27 PM

I think it can be both. The films are based on the books and carry the same basic plot line and characters as the book but is an adaption, someones interpretation. They stand alone but together if you understand me.

Wayfarer · 10-19-2004, 03:29 PM

Yes. Quite.

The problem I have is with people who jump back and forth at random intervals in a lame attempt to distract from the very real flaws in the LOTR films.

The conversation almost always goes like this (Names Changed to Protect Identities):

Fan A You know... I saw those LOTR films. I thought they were badly made.
Fan BB What? No they weren't! You're just saying that because they were different from the books. If you consider them on their own, they're actually better!
Fan A Uh... No. I mean they're actually badly made films. Whether or not they were different from the books, the pacing was bad, the dialogue was stilted, the characters were stupid, and I couldn't follow the plot half the time.
Fan BB Oh, oh. In order to really understand the plot and the characters you have to have read the books. They had to leave some things out because books and movies are different.
Fan A ...
Fan A What?
Fan BB Yes. A movie can't fit in as much stuff as a book, so they were forced to leave stuff out.
Fan A So they had to cut some parts.
Fan BB Yes.
Fan A And they picked the parts that would have made sense of the story?
Fan BB Yes.
Fan A And now you're telling me in order to make sense of this lame film trilogy I've got to go read the books it was based on?
Fan BB Yes.
Fan A Didn't you say you wanted people to consider the films on their own, and not compare them to the books?
Fan BB Yes.
Fan A Oh, fine. I'll go read the stupid books.

(Time passes)

Fan BB So, how's it going?
Fan A Man, this Tolkien guy is the best writer I've read in a long time! This story is incredible!
Fan BB See! And you know what's going on in the movies now, don't you...
Fan A What? Oh, yeah... I guess.
Fan BB I told you! And now that you've read the books you realize how great those films were, right?
Fan A Well... No.
Fan A To be honest, I can't understand why the filmmakers didn't stick to the books more. This stuff is really great, and the changes that were made in the films make them worse than they could have been!
Fan BB No, no! Books and Films are different! They had to cut some things because of time!
Fan A Even though they added hours and hours of superfluous fluff that had nothing to do with the events of the book and contributed nothing to the plot of the films, thus degrading the entire story?
Fan BB Yes.
Fan BB Dude, you've got to stop thinking of them in relation to the books, and just look at them as films.
Fan A Okay. The pacing was bad, the dialogue was lame sometimes, the characters were stupid, and the plot didn't make sense.
Fan BB No! All of that stuff makes sense if you've read the books!
Fan A But I /have/ read the books, and you wanted me to look at the films without considering them. I'm just pointing out...
Fan BB You've got to read the books to understand what's going on!
Fan A But when I do compare the books to the movies it only highlights the stupid mistakes that the filmmakers made, like having fa...
Fan BB STOP COMPARING THE BOOKS AND THE MOVIES!
Fan A But if I /don't/ compare them, than the films don't make any sense!
Fan BB THAT'S BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE BOOKS TO UNDERSTAND THEM!
Fan A But when I look at the movies as compared to the books it only makes...
Fan BB YOU'RE COMPARING THEM AGAIN! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!
Fan A But how am I supposed to make sense... you know what, forget it. *leaves*

(A short time later)

Fan A Man, those movies are are lame. I like them less every time I watch them. These books are great, though. I wonder where I can find more on this Tolkien guy? Hmm... what's this? The Tolkien Tral... Hmm... Entmoot...

Valaru · 10-19-2004, 04:19 PM

The thing that annoyed me most is the:

Release the DVD, wait 6 months release another DVD with more stuff (wash rinse repeat 3 times)

THEN

Release a BOX SET?

wait there is more

I am betting in a year or 2 ANOTHE more extended boc set will be released.

as to the quality of the films in general I enjoyed them, but then again I saw them BEFORE I read the books *gasp*

But I liked the books better!!!

brownjenkins · 10-19-2004, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Something I really, really hate:

The films have an incomplete plot. It jumps around, skips stuff, and basically has a lot of holes. But, if you point that out, most often people will tell you that you can't just take the films by themselves, you've got to read the books to understand them.

actually my wife and my kids aged five and ten, all three of which have never read a word of tolkien, caught a lot of the plot and motivations better than i would have expected... i explained some things after they had seen the films a few times and asked me questions (mostly silmarillion related)... but all in all, they got the story pretty well from just watching the films

Quote:

Then, when you do read the books and compare them to the films, any negative impressions you may express will get brushed off by saying that 'you can't just compare them to the books, they stand by themselves and you've got to consider them as films'.

you can compare them however you like... i think the books are excellent... i think the movies are very good... this is because i enjoy the books as books and the movies as movies, and it has nothing to do with how much they follow one another

Quote:

Which is it, people? Are we supposed to take them with the books, in which case the complete failure as an adaptation of another story becomes apparant? Or are we supposed to take them on their own, purely on their merit as films, in which case there are obvious and repeated mistakes?

You can't have it both ways!

sure you can

Telcontar_Dunedain · 10-19-2004, 04:41 PM

Lol. Wayfarer that was great.

PippinTook · 10-19-2004, 08:29 PM

Sam bothered me. His charactar was -way- watered down. Twas upsetting, really. Personally, I still love the movies whether or not they butchered some things about the books. The thing that bothers me is the people who refuse to read the books because 'they've seen the movie'. Ack. That's just so...wrong. LAZY PEOPLE.

Oh, and the whole Aragorn-over-the-cliff thing. What? I mean, its just so...ack. But what would have been SO MUCH WORSE, was that Arwen was going to show up and fight at Helms deep, but they cut it. WHAT?! That would have been the end of any Tolkien fan that enjoyed the movies. PJ would have been found dead the next morning.

But over all, it wasn't that bad and most of the charactars were casted well (Aragorn mainly, but I like the Faramir dude too, even if his charactar was terribly distorted)

Lenya · 10-20-2004, 05:00 PM

Another character that was truly distorted was Theoden. In the book he was this cool kingly king, you know, everything you would not find in a hollywood king. In the movie however, he is this useless, scared, week guy that cannot lead his people

Attalus · 10-20-2004, 06:54 PM

Four words: Elves at Helm's Deep. The Aragorn-falling-into-the-River bit irked me, too. And his horse's name is Roheryn!

Telcontar_Dunedain · 10-21-2004, 03:28 AM

Well they can't of had that because Halbarad and the Dunedain bought Roheryn and they didn't show up.

PippinTook · 10-21-2004, 06:05 PM

Oh, and another little thing was in fort when Aragorn is by Narsil and boromir is there. He looks fat. Aragorn that is. He looks like he needs to lose a few pounds or like he's been drinking too much beer. Heh. Always bothered me.

obscenename · 10-21-2004, 10:56 PM

How can Return of the King win 11 Oscars when it is incomplete? In order to cut it to ~3 hours, Jackson left parts out. The complete film hasn't been released yet. It seems that Hollywood has lowered it's standards (irony intended).

There's no excuse for waiting this long to release ROTK-EE.

Wayfarer · 10-21-2004, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obscenename

How can Return of the King win 11 Oscars when it is incomplete? In order to cut it to ~3 hours, Jackson left parts out. The complete film hasn't been released yet. It seems that Hollywood has lowered it's standards (irony intended).

There's no excuse for waiting this long to release ROTK-EE.

I have to dissagree on that one. Hollywood /hasn't/ lowered its standards. Well... perhaps its standards have been lowered, but not within the past few years. The reason that LOTR won 11 oscars is that it offered the same mediocre hollywood blandness in a slightly better package.

You could try what I'm doing, which is the don't-bother-waiting-for-the-Extended-Edition trick.

Telcontar_Dunedain · 10-22-2004, 03:20 AM

I did that for the last two DVD's but I'll be getting this one.

Lenya · 10-23-2004, 12:57 PM

And another thing, what's with Arwen saving Frodo's butt at the river? She was not even supposed to be there!

10-17-2004, 10:11 AM	#21
Arathorn Bard of Mangled Songs Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: West of Middle Earth...oh alright...Manila Posts: 2,679	I hate it that they had to dumb down a really complex character like Denethor to give in to all the clean up and action footage they added. He's supposed to be a brilliant anti-hero and all they have him do after his first meeting with Gandalf is to become target practice for his staff every time they meet. It also made the film-Gandalf's character confusing. Wasn't he supposed to be wise? Is that something that wise people do? __________________ Power attracts the corruptible. Absolute power attracts the absolutely corruptible. -Missionaria Protectiva, Frank Herbert *Accio, Ash Nazg!* Elennuru s?la lúmenn' omentielvo* (The Death Star shines on the hour of our meeting) - Darth Arathorn Put aside the ranger... Start looking for Mumakil action figures...

10-17-2004, 01:55 PM	#22
BeardofPants the Shrike Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA <3 Posts: 10,647	Well, I don't know about Gandalf, but I know I've been tempted to whap people violently. BoP, the wise Hiya Arathorn, still floatin' 'round I see. __________________ "Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords

10-17-2004, 03:57 PM	#23
Finrod Felagund King of Nargothrond Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Canada! eh? Posts: 2,002	I personally didn't like the entire portrayal of Gandalf the White Though I loved Gandalf the Grey __________________ "THE EAGLES ARE COMING, THE EAGLES ARE COMING......AND A MOTH!!!!!"

10-19-2004, 01:39 PM	#25
Wayfarer The Insufferable Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 3,333	Something I really, really hate: The films have an incomplete plot. It jumps around, skips stuff, and basically has a lot of holes. But, if you point that out, most often people will tell you that you can't just take the films by themselves, you've got to read the books to understand them. Then, when you do read the books and compare them to the films, any negative impressions you may express will get brushed off by saying that 'you can't just compare them to the books, they stand by themselves and you've got to consider them as films'. Which is it, people? Are we supposed to take them with the books, in which case the complete failure as an adaptation of another story becomes apparant? Or are we supposed to take them on their own, purely on their merit as films, in which case there are obvious and repeated mistakes? You can't have it both ways! __________________ Disgraced he may be, yet is not dethroned, and keeps the rags of lordship once he owned

10-19-2004, 03:23 PM	#26
inked Elf Lord Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: sikeston, MO, usa, earth, sol Posts: 3,114	O Insufferable One, we agree! They are separate works in different idioms and require to be judged within their genre. Comparisons between genres are definitely permitted but suffer from the desire to have cake and eat it! __________________ Inked "Aslan is not a tame lion." CSL/LWW "The new school [acts] as if it required...courage to say a blasphemy. There is only one thing that requires real courage to say, and that is a truism." GK Chesterton "And there is always the danger of allowing people to suppose that our modern times are so wholly unlike any other times that the fundamental facts about man's nature have wholly changed with changing circumstances." Dorothy L. Sayers, 1 Sept. 1941

10-19-2004, 03:27 PM	#27
Telcontar_Dunedain Warrior of the House of Hador Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 4,651	I think it can be both. The films are based on the books and carry the same basic plot line and characters as the book but is an adaption, someones interpretation. They stand alone but together if you understand me. __________________ Then Huor spoke and said: "Yet if it stands but a little while, then out of your house shall come the hope of Elves and Men. This I say to you, lord, with the eyes of death: though we part here for ever, and I shall not look on your white walls again, from you and me a new star shall arise. Farewell!" The Silmarillion, Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Page 230

10-19-2004, 03:29 PM	#28
Wayfarer The Insufferable Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 3,333	Yes. Quite. The problem I have is with people who jump back and forth at random intervals in a lame attempt to distract from the very real flaws in the LOTR films. The conversation almost always goes like this (Names Changed to Protect Identities): Fan A You know... I saw those LOTR films. I thought they were badly made. Fan BB What? No they weren't! You're just saying that because they were different from the books. If you consider them on their own, they're actually better! Fan A Uh... No. I mean they're actually badly made films. Whether or not they were different from the books, the pacing was bad, the dialogue was stilted, the characters were stupid, and I couldn't follow the plot half the time. Fan BB Oh, oh. In order to really understand the plot and the characters you have to have read the books. They had to leave some things out because books and movies are different. Fan A ... Fan A What? Fan BB Yes. A movie can't fit in as much stuff as a book, so they were forced to leave stuff out. Fan A So they had to cut some parts. Fan BB Yes. Fan A And they picked the parts that would have made sense of the story? Fan BB Yes. Fan A And now you're telling me in order to make sense of this lame film trilogy I've got to go read the books it was based on? Fan BB Yes. Fan A Didn't you say you wanted people to consider the films on their own, and not compare them to the books? Fan BB Yes. Fan A Oh, fine. I'll go read the stupid books. (Time passes) Fan BB So, how's it going? Fan A Man, this Tolkien guy is the best writer I've read in a long time! This story is incredible! Fan BB See! And you know what's going on in the movies now, don't you... Fan A What? Oh, yeah... I guess. Fan BB I told you! And now that you've read the books you realize how great those films were, right? Fan A Well... No. Fan A To be honest, I can't understand why the filmmakers didn't stick to the books more. This stuff is really great, and the changes that were made in the films make them worse than they could have been! Fan BB No, no! Books and Films are different! They had to cut some things because of time! Fan A Even though they added hours and hours of superfluous fluff that had nothing to do with the events of the book and contributed nothing to the plot of the films, thus degrading the entire story? Fan BB Yes. Fan BB Dude, you've got to stop thinking of them in relation to the books, and just look at them as films. Fan A Okay. The pacing was bad, the dialogue was lame sometimes, the characters were stupid, and the plot didn't make sense. Fan BB No! All of that stuff makes sense if you've read the books! Fan A But I /have/ read the books, and you wanted me to look at the films without considering them. I'm just pointing out... Fan BB You've got to read the books to understand what's going on! Fan A But when I do compare the books to the movies it only highlights the stupid mistakes that the filmmakers made, like having fa... Fan BB STOP COMPARING THE BOOKS AND THE MOVIES! Fan A But if I /don't/ compare them, than the films don't make any sense! Fan BB THAT'S BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE BOOKS TO UNDERSTAND THEM! Fan A But when I look at the movies as compared to the books it only makes... Fan BB YOU'RE COMPARING THEM AGAIN! YOU CAN'T DO THAT! Fan A But how am I supposed to make sense... you know what, forget it. leaves (A short time later) Fan A Man, those movies are are lame. I like them less every time I watch them. These books are great, though. I wonder where I can find more on this Tolkien guy? Hmm... what's this? The Tolkien Tral... Hmm... Entmoot... __________________ Disgraced he may be, yet is not dethroned, and keeps the rags of lordship once he owned Last edited by Wayfarer : 10-19-2004 at 04:06 PM.

10-19-2004, 04:19 PM	#29
Valaru Hobbit Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 25	The thing that annoyed me most is the: Release the DVD, wait 6 months release another DVD with more stuff (wash rinse repeat 3 times) THEN Release a BOX SET? wait there is more I am betting in a year or 2 ANOTHE more extended boc set will be released. as to the quality of the films in general I enjoyed them, but then again I saw them BEFORE I read the books gasp But I liked the books better!!! __________________ home away from home My Hero: Josiah S. Carberry, studier of psychoceramics

10-19-2004, 04:41 PM	#31
Telcontar_Dunedain Warrior of the House of Hador Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 4,651	Lol. Wayfarer that was great. __________________ Then Huor spoke and said: "Yet if it stands but a little while, then out of your house shall come the hope of Elves and Men. This I say to you, lord, with the eyes of death: though we part here for ever, and I shall not look on your white walls again, from you and me a new star shall arise. Farewell!" The Silmarillion, Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Page 230

10-19-2004, 08:29 PM	#32
PippinTook The Infamous Tea Hobbit Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Riding my Attack Llama, CORY! Posts: 1,162	Sam bothered me. His charactar was -way- watered down. Twas upsetting, really. Personally, I still love the movies whether or not they butchered some things about the books. The thing that bothers me is the people who refuse to read the books because 'they've seen the movie'. Ack. That's just so...wrong. LAZY PEOPLE. Oh, and the whole Aragorn-over-the-cliff thing. What? I mean, its just so...ack. But what would have been SO MUCH WORSE, was that Arwen was going to show up and fight at Helms deep, but they cut it. WHAT?! That would have been the end of any Tolkien fan that enjoyed the movies. PJ would have been found dead the next morning. But over all, it wasn't that bad and most of the charactars were casted well (Aragorn mainly, but I like the Faramir dude too, even if his charactar was terribly distorted) __________________ http://jupiter.walagata.com/w/shanakdakhete/svbf.gif If I can stop one heart from aching, I shall not live in vain. -Emily Dickinson But the Master comes, and the foolish crowd Never can quite understand The worth of a soul and the change that is wrought By the touch of the Master's hand. Though she be but little, she is fierce! -MSND

10-20-2004, 05:00 PM	#33
Lenya Elentári Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: South Africa Posts: 727	Another character that was truly distorted was Theoden. In the book he was this cool kingly king, you know, everything you would not find in a hollywood king. In the movie however, he is this useless, scared, week guy that cannot lead his people

10-20-2004, 06:54 PM	#34
Attalus Swan-Knight of Dol Amroth Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: On the Bay of Belfalas Posts: 1,125	Four words: Elves at Helm's Deep. The Aragorn-falling-into-the-River bit irked me, too. And his horse's name is Roheryn! __________________ "What song the Sirens sang, or what name Achilles assumed when he hid himself among women, though puzzling questions are not beyond conjecture." - Sir Thomas Browne, Urn Burial.

10-21-2004, 03:28 AM	#35
Telcontar_Dunedain Warrior of the House of Hador Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 4,651	Well they can't of had that because Halbarad and the Dunedain bought Roheryn and they didn't show up. __________________ Then Huor spoke and said: "Yet if it stands but a little while, then out of your house shall come the hope of Elves and Men. This I say to you, lord, with the eyes of death: though we part here for ever, and I shall not look on your white walls again, from you and me a new star shall arise. Farewell!" The Silmarillion, Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Page 230

10-21-2004, 06:05 PM	#36
PippinTook The Infamous Tea Hobbit Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Riding my Attack Llama, CORY! Posts: 1,162	Oh, and another little thing was in fort when Aragorn is by Narsil and boromir is there. He looks fat. Aragorn that is. He looks like he needs to lose a few pounds or like he's been drinking too much beer. Heh. Always bothered me. __________________ http://jupiter.walagata.com/w/shanakdakhete/svbf.gif If I can stop one heart from aching, I shall not live in vain. -Emily Dickinson But the Master comes, and the foolish crowd Never can quite understand The worth of a soul and the change that is wrought By the touch of the Master's hand. Though she be but little, she is fierce! -MSND

10-21-2004, 10:56 PM	#37
obscenename Hobbit Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 19	The thing that bothers me the most How can Return of the King win 11 Oscars when it is incomplete? In order to cut it to ~3 hours, Jackson left parts out. The complete film hasn't been released yet. It seems that Hollywood has lowered it's standards (irony intended). There's no excuse for waiting this long to release ROTK-EE.

10-22-2004, 03:20 AM	#39
Telcontar_Dunedain Warrior of the House of Hador Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 4,651	I did that for the last two DVD's but I'll be getting this one. __________________ Then Huor spoke and said: "Yet if it stands but a little while, then out of your house shall come the hope of Elves and Men. This I say to you, lord, with the eyes of death: though we part here for ever, and I shall not look on your white walls again, from you and me a new star shall arise. Farewell!" The Silmarillion, Nirnaeth Arnoediad, Page 230

10-23-2004, 12:57 PM	#40
Lenya Elentári Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: South Africa Posts: 727	And another thing, what's with Arwen saving Frodo's butt at the river? She was not even supposed to be there!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HP Vs. LoTR	Pytt	Harry Potter	53	01-17-2011 01:33 AM
lotr trilogy trivia II	Farimir Captain of Gondor	Lord of the Rings Movies	443	06-26-2010 06:00 PM
Of Wraiths and Kings, and Friends and Rings (Calling All Nazgul)	The Witch-King of Angmar	Entmoot Archive	876	03-02-2006 06:36 PM
Theological Opinions	Nurvingiel	General Messages	992	02-10-2006 04:15 PM
LoTR discussion project: Book III, Chapters 8 and 9:	Forkbeard	LOTR Discussion Project	31	01-13-2006 01:05 AM