|
12-19-2002, 02:23 PM | #1 |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 128
|
Insteresting speculation
Here’s an interesting question for all of us who have read The Lord of the Rings before seeing the movies.
Do you think you would enjoy the movies more if you had never read the book beforehand? Please note that I’m not asking “which is the better sequence to maximize enjoyment of the book?” Obviously you would want to read it first, get the real story, bask in Tolkien’s language, form your own mental images, and only then come here to gripe and nitpick after seeing the films. That’s not my question, though. I’m just asking whether or not you would have enjoyed the films more if you weren’t familiar with the book. When you consider the dissatisfaction you feel when the films “get something wrong,” it’s easy to answer “yes” immediately. But try to imagine all you’d be missing: the thrill you feel when they get things absolutely right … when someone delivers a line right out of the book, exactly as it should be delivered … familiarity with the geography of who’s where at any given time … all the references (Valinor, the White Tower of Ecthelion etc.) which would seem vague or inexplicable without prior knowledge of the book … much more. On the other hand, though, it’s telling to note that some of the films’ harshest critics (ahem, you know who you are) are we who love the book most. Everyone else — professional critics and general moviegoers alike — seem to be utterly blown away by the films. So, sheerly for the purpose of enjoying the movies, maybe it’s better not to have read the book first. (Again, I’d never recommend this because of the effect it would have on your first reading, but remember the question.) For myself, despite the occasional frustrations, I still believe that reading the the book beforehand has allowed me to enjoy the movies more. Of course, despite my attempt to stay objective, my answer might be tainted by knowing how priceless that first read is … What do you think? P.S. Try to keep this thread free of spoilers for the Two Towers film … there’s already a thread (jerseydevil’s What people think of Two Towers (*SPOILERS*)) for specific raves and gripes about it. Last edited by Churl : 12-19-2002 at 04:36 PM. |
12-19-2002, 02:33 PM | #2 |
Truest of Friends
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Pennsylvania, but I have a vacation home in the Westfarthing.
Posts: 520
|
Wow. That's a hard one. But I have to say that... for maximum enjoyment of the movies... see the movie first.
I read the book first (of course) and I was all psyched and hyped up, expecting something truly awesome... and it was... just a movie. The letdown was the worst part.
__________________
"...Beleg Strongbow, truest of friends, greatest in skill of all that harboured in the woods of Beleriand in the Elder Days..." Aure Entuleva! John Kerry for President! |
12-19-2002, 02:42 PM | #3 |
Dead
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: on the floor, under the table, just to your left, your other left
Posts: 1,486
|
You'd like it more if you saw the movies and then read the books because you wouldn't be so dissapointed.
__________________
How to Survive the Sillmarillion I thought that Alcohol was just for those with nothing else to do. I thought that drinking just to get drunk was a waste of precious booze. But now I know that there's a time and there's a place where I can choose To walk the fine line between self control and self abuse. "Lacerations make complications, but welts go away in a day." |
12-19-2002, 03:46 PM | #4 |
Slacker
Warrior Admin Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,759
|
Probably. If you haven't read the books, you don't know how the story is supposed to go. Therefore, you can't rant and rave about how Peter Jackson changed this or should have left that alone. Fellowship of the Ring blew me away, but I probably would have enjoyed TTT more if I hadn't read the book. I still loved TTT, but that's beside the point.
__________________
"If the giving of information is to be the cure of your inquisitiveness, I shall spend all the rest of my days in answering you." Gandalf to Pippin Psalm 107:31 |
12-19-2002, 03:50 PM | #5 |
Legolas's beloved sister and Queen of the Wood Elves of Mirkwood
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Under the hill at Bag-end, Hobbiton the Shire Or Rivendell,I can't remember!!!!!!!!!!
Posts: 1,086
|
I agree with you all!
|
12-19-2002, 04:44 PM | #6 |
protector of orphaned rabbits
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kalamazoo... yes, its a real place!
Posts: 1,236
|
haha hindsight is a wonderful thing, no?
i would say see the movie(s) first, because they are some darn good movies reguardless of what PJ left out or left in. soo seeing a great movie, or movies, first- then reading an even better and far superior book would be better than going thru all the heartache of seeing your favourite parts left out (or in some cases left in)
__________________
|
12-19-2002, 04:53 PM | #7 |
Death of Mooters and [Entmoot] Internal Affairs
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 2,870
|
Agreed. I'd enjoyed the movie much more if I hadn't read the book first, but I wouldn't have changed. The movie still rocks, but it doesn't come close to the book. Nothing will. Ever.
__________________
Fëanor - Innocence incarnated Still, Aikanáro 'till the Last battle. |
12-19-2002, 05:03 PM | #8 |
Greatest Elven woman of Aman
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Having way too much fun with Fëanor's 7
Posts: 4,285
|
Answer to Churl's question: Definately not. For me to watch the films (both FotR and TTT) without having read the books would be as watching rather ordinary fantasy action films with some great CGI's. Now when I have read the books, the films become so much more. Only because I have read the books (and not only LotR) I know the full meaning of what it is for an Elf to sail over sea. I know what Gandalf, Sarumann and the Balrog really are. When Arwen mentiones the Valar, I know who and what they are. I know the story connected to Sting and the mithril coat that Bilbo gave to Frodo. The references that are given, familiar names that triggers associations. To name a few examples. It greatly enhances my joy of the film. That's me.
__________________
--Life is hard, and then we die. Last edited by Artanis : 12-19-2002 at 05:05 PM. |
12-19-2002, 05:15 PM | #9 |
Lady of Letters
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Either Oxford or Kent, England
Posts: 2,476
|
I agree with Artanis: definitely not. I saw FOTR before I read the book, and TT after, and I would certainly have preferred to have read the books first. I didn't really understand FOTR - I didn't know what an Elf or a hobbit was, I didn't know the significance of anything that was happening, I didn't even understand what was happening some of the time (esp. at Rivendell). I couldn't tell the characters apart... you get the picture. The thing is, it made me want to know, so I went to the books. Maybe I'm just a bit slow, but you get the depth of the story far, far more if you know even a tiny bit of the history, and for me, that's more enjoyable.
__________________
And all the time the waves, the waves, the waves Chase, intersect and flatten on the sand As they have done for centuries, as they will For centuries to come, when not a soul Is left to picnic on the blazing rocks, When England is not England, when mankind Has blown himself to pieces. Still the sea, Consolingly disastrous, will return While the strange starfish, hugely magnified, Waits in the jewelled basin of a pool. |
12-19-2002, 05:32 PM | #10 | |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 128
|
Artanis wrote:
Quote:
I agree: the films' Middle-earth would not have seemed nearly as grand and complex if I hadn't read the book (and the appendices, and The Hobbit, and The Silmarillion, and Unfinished Tales, and countless articles and Entmoot posts) first. As readers, we have the luxury of knowing the full enormity of Arda's geography and history. No matter how amazing the movies are — and I am amazed by them, warts and all — they can only scratch the surface of what was essentially Tolkien's life work. In contrast, familiarity with the source can lead to frustration when the films deviate, but it can also "fill in the blanks" in our minds. In that sense, readers of the book bring to the theater a mental "special effect" more vast and convincing than any computer or modeler could ever create. Last edited by Churl : 12-19-2002 at 05:38 PM. |
|
12-19-2002, 05:43 PM | #11 |
Fowl Administrator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Calgary or Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 53,420
|
Look:
With both The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers, I liked the film better the second time, because I wasn't paying so much attention to all the differences from book and film, and I was fully absorbed by the visual and emotional power of the film itself. But I would never, ever claim that I would enjoy the films more if I hadn't read the book beforehand. I think the reservations upon the first viewing are just a hump to get over. If I had never read the book, I wouldn't have been so delighted to see Legolas and Gimli's "headcount" (which a lot of people seemed to think was a Hollywoodish addition!). If I had never read the book, I wouldn't have as refined a sense of geography of all the locations relative to each other. Let's face it, Lawrence of Arabia is easier to absorb if you know where Aqaba and Damascus and the Suez Canal are on the map. It's no different here, having a mental sense of where all the characters are going in the grand scheme of things. If I had never read the book, I wouldn't have been so overjoyed - practically to tears - at Frodo and Sam's dialogue in the last scene, as they speak of how people will be telling the tale of Frodo and the Ring. Knowledge of the source material can be a double-edged sword. Anyone who's taken even the most basic Roman history knows that Maximus Decimus Meridius didn't exist, and that Commodus reigned for a good twelve years after Marcus Aurelius before his assassination. Yet these are the same people who pick up on all the details of culture, design, costuming, and morality in Gladiator. (Which, although I loved it, The Lord of the Rings puts to utter shame.) Sure, I notice all the liberties and "inaccuracies" - but at the same time, I notice all the little tributary nuances that make the film not just great, but wonderful.
__________________
All of IronParrot's posts are guaranteed to be 100% intelligent and/or sarcastic, comprising no genetically modified content and tested on no cute furry little animals unless the SPCA is looking elsewhere. If you observe a failure to uphold this warranty, please contact a forum administrator immediately to receive a full refund on your Entmoot registration. Blog: Nick's Café Canadien |
12-19-2002, 06:33 PM | #12 | ||
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: At the computer...
Posts: 376
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do one thing every day that scares you ~Anonymous~ <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><<>< <>< <>< <>< I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America And to the Republic for which it stands One nation UNDER GOD with liberty and justice for all |
||
12-19-2002, 06:37 PM | #13 | |
Fowl Administrator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Calgary or Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 53,420
|
Quote:
__________________
All of IronParrot's posts are guaranteed to be 100% intelligent and/or sarcastic, comprising no genetically modified content and tested on no cute furry little animals unless the SPCA is looking elsewhere. If you observe a failure to uphold this warranty, please contact a forum administrator immediately to receive a full refund on your Entmoot registration. Blog: Nick's Café Canadien |
|
12-19-2002, 06:45 PM | #14 |
Elven Warrior
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 222
|
Hmm....
I read the books first. Well...kinda. I read them after I saw a trailer of FotR and remembered that book in the library. I saw the movie after I fininshed the book. Does that count? Anyways, yeah, I probably would have enjoyed the movie better if I had never heard about the books before going to the movies. I prefer the books even now, but I haven't even seen TT yet.
__________________
a violinist... |
12-19-2002, 06:55 PM | #15 |
Fowl Administrator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Calgary or Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 53,420
|
For my part, I fail to see how this is at all a matter of "preference". That one work is a pinnacle in the realm of literature doesn't mean that the other can't be a peak of the realm of cinema, and that's how I see them both - two towers, if you will.
__________________
All of IronParrot's posts are guaranteed to be 100% intelligent and/or sarcastic, comprising no genetically modified content and tested on no cute furry little animals unless the SPCA is looking elsewhere. If you observe a failure to uphold this warranty, please contact a forum administrator immediately to receive a full refund on your Entmoot registration. Blog: Nick's Café Canadien |
12-19-2002, 11:41 PM | #16 | |
Viggoholic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
__________________
Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try. |
|
12-20-2002, 03:20 AM | #17 |
Greatest Elven woman of Aman
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Having way too much fun with Fëanor's 7
Posts: 4,285
|
Luckily we don't have to choose. I totally agree with IronParrot concerning first and subsequent viewing of the movies. The more I see and think of PJ's work, the more I appreciate it. Now I think the books enhances the joy of the movie, and vice versa. But I'm glad I read the books first.
__________________
--Life is hard, and then we die. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Yule-tide in Eriador - Speculation | Valandil | Middle Earth | 26 | 01-11-2006 11:27 AM |
Speculation: What if Sauron got the One? | Aragorn_of_the_west | Middle Earth | 17 | 07-01-2003 01:32 AM |
A Romantic Speculation | allsirgarnet | Lord of the Rings Books | 13 | 03-02-2002 12:33 PM |