Peter Jackson has improved Tolkien - Page 12

Starr Polish · 10-16-2002, 08:08 PM

You're the victim? Right.

I've taken debate, and though I'm by no means good at it, I do recognize some tactics you've been using. Mainly, twisting words to your advantage and misdirection (ie, leading the thread off topic with your little parody...but wait, haven't you berated others for what you think is 'going off topic'? Hmm...). Sadly, you aren't very good at it, because it hasn't poked any holes in the opposing sides points. In most cases, it actually damages your own case!

Also, you have constantly stated that this is not a 'film vs. book' thread, but what else could it be? There is no way you could compare the two men without it involving the book and the film. PJ made a movie, he did not write a book. Tolkien wrote a book, he did not make a film.

Oh, I see! You're trying to tell us that PJ improved Tolkien the man? Hmm, I'd like to see where you get this idea. I haven't heard about the Professor raising from the dead and asking PJ to teach him. </sarcasm>

bropous · 10-16-2002, 08:57 PM

Well, the one who started the whole thread has shown again and again he is utterly incapable of reasoned argument without resort to ad hominem, then has the unmitigated audacity to cry foul when fire is returned.

How droll.

However, there IS a bright spot on this thread, and that would be the postings of my fellow VETERAN Mooters which "shine out like a shaft of gold, when all else is dark." Can you guys ever put a snot-nosed move-hypnotized brat in his place again and again. Bravo, brava, encore!

We have given this inconsequential pultroon opportunity galore to prove he could back up his original premise, "Jackson Improved Tolkien," and yet he has refused outright to engage on the field of intellectual battle. Not only has he failed to prove his premise, he has also refused to stand by it. If one will make a brash statement like "Jackson Improved Tolkien" on a board "Dedicated To the Works of Tolkien" one had better at least have the strength of character and conviction to weather the storm of criticism and stand by that assertion to the end.

In contrast, our illustrious, maladroit worshipper at the Altar of the Silver Screen whines that he is being victimized, that now this is not some book v. movie topic, that he simply throws tangential observations (extended release DVD) or facile, simpering, mind-numbingly predictable and unimaginative slashes at satire such as his little diatribes on BoP, meself and Luthien Tinuviel (two ladies with whom I may not always agree but I do respect the fact they can back up their arguments) in lieu of honing his debating skills and exercising his grey matter.

No. It is a wonderful film, but it in no way improves Tolkien. I will again revive the analogy to the Bible and "The Ten Commandments" or "The Greatest Story Ever Told," which remain as some folks' sole exposure to that most important work, and yet which fail to adaquately reflect the original source material.

However, considering the modus operandum of the thread starter, I am reminded of ANOTHER film. "The Jerk."

Black Breathalizer · 10-16-2002, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by beardofpants
It is only so long that you can piss in the wind before it comes back at you.

I gotta admit it, I hang out here for those wonderful gems of wisdom we get from posters like bropous and beardofpants.

You guys rocks!!!!

Cirdan · 10-16-2002, 10:22 PM

Typical screenplay adaptation. He cut out Bropous' part completely.

Black Breathalizer · 10-17-2002, 08:32 AM

Yep. Call me PJ Jr. I cut out that unnecessary bro-Tom Bombadil-pous and expanded the post space for xenaboardofpants!

Blackheart · 10-17-2002, 12:12 PM

Can I eat his brain now? Anyone else object?

No?

*munch munch gobble*

eeeww. It's all sour and bitter. And filled with images of Peter Jackson in drag.

I think I'm going to be ill.

Cirdan · 10-17-2002, 12:51 PM

Well, at least it's not very filling.

Black Breathalizer · 10-17-2002, 02:25 PM

The Scene: We see your typical grade school classroom except for a large poster of Peter Jackson's face taped to the chalk board at the front of the room. A group of students are sitting impatiently at their desks when the professor suddenly walks in. He is wearing a black ringwraith robe and hood. Most of the kids snap to attention as their professor enters.

Professor BB: Okay class, it’s time for another lesson on why Peter Jackson improved upon Master Tolkien’s wonderful trilogy. Now pay attention class!

{Professor BB raps his lecture stick on little Cirdan’s desk startling the poor chap out of his daydreams.)

Professor BB: (glaring at the embarrassed Cirdan) Now what was I saying?

Cirdan: (blushing) uh…I dunno, Sir.

Blackheart: I know, I know…You were talking about Peter Jackson being in drag!

(Snickers and giggles are heard from the purist section of the classroom.)

Professor BB: (ignoring Blackheart's juvenile remark) Today we will talk about how Peter Jackson improved Tolkien by NOT including Tom Bombadil in his movie.

(A stunned silence fills the classroom)

BB: While there are fringe elements out there who were actually upset that Bombadil wasn’t in the movie, his disappearance was actually a GOOD thing. As most Tolkien scholars know, JRR included Bombadil in the story early on when he still viewed LOTR as a sequel to his children’s tale, The Hobbit. Once the story took on a more adult and darker tone, he should have eliminated him. But he kept Tom in the story for personal reasons (Tom was, in fact, his son, Michael’s, favorite doll). Paraphrasing what Boromir said to Aragorn, Peter Jackson was able to do what JRR Tolkien could not --- resist the temptation to KEEP the misplaced Bombadil in the story.

BeardofPants · 10-17-2002, 02:42 PM

Pfffft.

Tom was the enigma. Tom was the one who gave Merry his 'magic' blade which enabled him to break the spells of the nazgul king. Tom was the one who saved them from the barrow-wights - servants of the nazgul. And not only that, but he allowed the hobbits a chance to rest before going on to face the crap that they had to. A pretty important role if you ask me. But you're not are you? You're just here to stir up the wasps nest.

I ask again: WHERE ARE YOUR ARGUMENTS? I want to actually see some debate, regarding your premise that PJ improved Tolkien.

You have been consistently shot down by many of the people here because of your rather blinkered statements, but this is still no excuse for falling back on childish parodies.

Tell me, how does it feel to be covered in piss?

BeardofPants · 10-17-2002, 02:45 PM

Oh and here's my rebuttal.

osszie · 10-17-2002, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Oh and here's my rebuttal.

hahahahahaha..........wondered when you'd find a use for that

Looks like I've been missing a bloody good argument here

Sween · 10-17-2002, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Tell me, how does it feel to be covered in piss?

young lady i am shocked

and you seemed like such a nice girl your poor mother if she knew you said things like that

Cirdan · 10-17-2002, 02:57 PM

BoP, you may as well debate a steaming pile of... oh, and why is Strider walking around with a bundle of swords; pretty silly for a guy who walks everywhere. But then, as BB posted, PJ and his writer admitted to having difficulty in adapting a complex and multi-dimensional story into the standard hollywood action flick format, but somehow they managed.

BB in professor robes hehe... I imagined Depends...

LuthienTinuviel · 10-17-2002, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Will our beloved BB survive this evil onslaught???

let's hope not.

oh and if you think that you know so much about what Tolkien should have done to make HIS story better, then why don't you write your own?

and if being a purist makes me sit at the opposite end of the spectrum as you, then woohoo, im a purist. what are you going to do about it? (edited: your right BoP!)

oh, and NEVER EVER call me an Orc or any Creature like them, im not joking when i say i truly dislike you now. i spit on the clingy shreds of decency that i thought you still had.

when i signed up here i decided against using the ignore feature, but people like you make me second guess that decision

BeardofPants · 10-17-2002, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by osszie
hahahahahaha..........wondered when you'd find a use for that

Didn't quite have the heart to pull it out on another certain individual.

Quote:

Osszie:

Looks like I've been missing a bloody good argument here

Well, that depends......... Did you wanna be covered with guano?

Quote:

Cirdan
BB in professor robes hehe... I imagined Depends...

Mummy wow! I'm a big kid now!

Quote:

Sween:
.........and you seemed like such a nice girl your poor mother if she knew you said things like that

I'm still a good girl.

Quote:

LT:
what are you going to do about it? parody me to death?

Don't encourage him. He's probably some school kid who gets his jollies out of pissing of Tolkien fans.

Quote:

LT:
i decided against using the ignore feature, but people like you make me second guess that decision

It's not too late. I've already got an individual on ignore.

Sween · 10-17-2002, 05:13 PM

osszie · 10-17-2002, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BeardofPants
Didn't quite have the heart to pull it out on another certain individual.
It's not too late. I've already got an individual on ignore.

I can see your point, no reason to state the obvious to him/her/it

You've got someone on ignore?............I don't believe it

bropous · 10-17-2002, 08:03 PM

A few good Blackadder quotes which might fit the moment:

"...thick as a whale omelette...."

"...you twist and turn like a twisty, turny thing....and you can call me Susan if it isn't so!"

Stephen Frey as the Duke of Wellington...

"...Baldric, the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?"

"I'd rather be a lapdog to a mere slip of a girl than a......GIT!"

".....Of course! The slimy one! What's his name.....Osmond?"

"...YUP, THAT'S THE WAY....SHOUT, SHOUT, AND SHOUT AGAIN!..."

However, this whole thread is really degenerating. I have not seen one adequate attempt at defense of the original premise in now 12 pages of soliloquies. I have seen EXCELLENT refutations, though, and I would say that on points, we are WAY ahead on goals.

Blather on, mindless shmoo. You ain't made sense YET.

osszie · 10-17-2002, 08:09 PM

Anyone who quotes Blackadder cannot be wrong

markedel · 10-18-2002, 10:47 AM

This debate is interesting in its pointless rebuttles. It does bring up an interesting point-PJ obviously read the book a certain way. He projected this interpertation of middle earth onto screen. I think it's wrong largely because it shortchanges Aragorn, doesn't delve into Frodo's psychological turmoil, and only lightly skims over the big picture-The story is the last, the end of the mythology, and this tragedy suffuses the book. There is no tragedy in the movie. Tolkien's notes can encompass several dozen Lord of the Rings, and its such depth that makes the books so powerful-they "are" part of something bigger. Their world is not a backdrop as in the movie, but the point.

A movie in relation to literature can do several things-it can reinterpert it, that's what I believe was done. I think it is more then an action flick, though action does dominate. Movies can enhance appeal of a work-and certainly it did so. Movies that "improve" literature usually means that the movie strayed from the book to create something totally new, or that the book was flawed in someway that only in visual representation could the true theme come through.

10-16-2002, 08:08 PM	#221
Starr Polish Elf Lord Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Slow down and I sail on the river, slow down and I walk to the hill Posts: 2,389	You're the victim? Right. I've taken debate, and though I'm by no means good at it, I do recognize some tactics you've been using. Mainly, twisting words to your advantage and misdirection (ie, leading the thread off topic with your little parody...but wait, haven't you berated others for what you think is 'going off topic'? Hmm...). Sadly, you aren't very good at it, because it hasn't poked any holes in the opposing sides points. In most cases, it actually damages your own case! Also, you have constantly stated that this is not a 'film vs. book' thread, but what else could it be? There is no way you could compare the two men without it involving the book and the film. PJ made a movie, he did not write a book. Tolkien wrote a book, he did not make a film. Oh, I see! You're trying to tell us that PJ improved Tolkien the man? Hmm, I'd like to see where you get this idea. I haven't heard about the Professor raising from the dead and asking PJ to teach him. </sarcasm> __________________ “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” –Bertrand Russell Last edited by Starr Polish : 10-16-2002 at 08:10 PM.

10-16-2002, 08:57 PM	#222
bropous EIDRIORCQWSDAKLMED DCWWTIWOATTOPWFIO Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Littleton, CO Posts: 1,176	Well, the one who started the whole thread has shown again and again he is utterly incapable of reasoned argument without resort to ad hominem, then has the unmitigated audacity to cry foul when fire is returned. How droll. However, there IS a bright spot on this thread, and that would be the postings of my fellow VETERAN Mooters which "shine out like a shaft of gold, when all else is dark." Can you guys ever put a snot-nosed move-hypnotized brat in his place again and again. Bravo, brava, encore! We have given this inconsequential pultroon opportunity galore to prove he could back up his original premise, "Jackson Improved Tolkien," and yet he has refused outright to engage on the field of intellectual battle. Not only has he failed to prove his premise, he has also refused to stand by it. If one will make a brash statement like "Jackson Improved Tolkien" on a board "Dedicated To the Works of Tolkien" one had better at least have the strength of character and conviction to weather the storm of criticism and stand by that assertion to the end. In contrast, our illustrious, maladroit worshipper at the Altar of the Silver Screen whines that he is being victimized, that now this is not some book v. movie topic, that he simply throws tangential observations (extended release DVD) or facile, simpering, mind-numbingly predictable and unimaginative slashes at satire such as his little diatribes on BoP, meself and Luthien Tinuviel (two ladies with whom I may not always agree but I do respect the fact they can back up their arguments) in lieu of honing his debating skills and exercising his grey matter. No. It is a wonderful film, but it in no way improves Tolkien. I will again revive the analogy to the Bible and "The Ten Commandments" or "The Greatest Story Ever Told," which remain as some folks' sole exposure to that most important work, and yet which fail to adaquately reflect the original source material. However, considering the modus operandum of the thread starter, I am reminded of ANOTHER film. "The Jerk." __________________ "...[The Lord of the Rings] is to exemplify most clearly a recurrent theme: the place in 'world politics' of the unforeseen and unforeseeable acts of will, and deeds of virtue of the apparently small, ungreat, fogotten in the places of the Wise and Great (good as well as evil). A moral of the whole (after the primary symbolism of the Ring, as the will to mere power, seeking to make itself objective by physical force and mechanism, and so also inevitably by lies) is the obvious one that without the high and noble the simple and vulgar is utterly mean; and without the simple and ordinary the noble and heroic is meaningless." Letters of JRR Tolkien, page 160.

10-16-2002, 10:22 PM	#224
Cirdan Elf Lord of the Grey Havens Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: somewhere else Posts: 2,381	Typical screenplay adaptation. He cut out Bropous' part completely. __________________ There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary

10-17-2002, 12:12 PM	#226
Blackheart Elf Lord Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Darkness Posts: 1,211	Can I eat his brain now? Anyone else object? No? munch munch gobble eeeww. It's all sour and bitter. And filled with images of Peter Jackson in drag. I think I'm going to be ill. __________________ I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ...

10-17-2002, 12:51 PM	#227
Cirdan Elf Lord of the Grey Havens Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: somewhere else Posts: 2,381	Well, at least it's not very filling. __________________ There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary

10-17-2002, 08:32 AM	#225
Black Breathalizer Elf Lord Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 828	Yep. Call me PJ Jr. I cut out that unnecessary bro-Tom Bombadil-pous and expanded the post space for xenaboardofpants!

10-17-2002, 02:25 PM	#228
Black Breathalizer Elf Lord Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 828	The Scene: We see your typical grade school classroom except for a large poster of Peter Jackson's face taped to the chalk board at the front of the room. A group of students are sitting impatiently at their desks when the professor suddenly walks in. He is wearing a black ringwraith robe and hood. Most of the kids snap to attention as their professor enters. Professor BB: Okay class, it’s time for another lesson on why Peter Jackson improved upon Master Tolkien’s wonderful trilogy. Now pay attention class! {Professor BB raps his lecture stick on little Cirdan’s desk startling the poor chap out of his daydreams.) Professor BB: (glaring at the embarrassed Cirdan) Now what was I saying? Cirdan: (blushing) uh…I dunno, Sir. Blackheart: I know, I know…You were talking about Peter Jackson being in drag! (Snickers and giggles are heard from the purist section of the classroom.) Professor BB: (ignoring Blackheart's juvenile remark) Today we will talk about how Peter Jackson improved Tolkien by NOT including Tom Bombadil in his movie. (A stunned silence fills the classroom) BB: While there are fringe elements out there who were actually upset that Bombadil wasn’t in the movie, his disappearance was actually a GOOD thing. As most Tolkien scholars know, JRR included Bombadil in the story early on when he still viewed LOTR as a sequel to his children’s tale, The Hobbit. Once the story took on a more adult and darker tone, he should have eliminated him. But he kept Tom in the story for personal reasons (Tom was, in fact, his son, Michael’s, favorite doll). Paraphrasing what Boromir said to Aragorn, Peter Jackson was able to do what JRR Tolkien could not --- resist the temptation to KEEP the misplaced Bombadil in the story.

10-17-2002, 02:42 PM	#229
BeardofPants the Shrike Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA <3 Posts: 10,647	Pfffft. Tom was the enigma. Tom was the one who gave Merry his 'magic' blade which enabled him to break the spells of the nazgul king. Tom was the one who saved them from the barrow-wights - servants of the nazgul. And not only that, but he allowed the hobbits a chance to rest before going on to face the crap that they had to. A pretty important role if you ask me. But you're not are you? You're just here to stir up the wasps nest. I ask again: WHERE ARE YOUR ARGUMENTS? I want to actually see some debate, regarding your premise that PJ improved Tolkien. You have been consistently shot down by many of the people here because of your rather blinkered statements, but this is still no excuse for falling back on childish parodies. Tell me, how does it feel to be covered in piss? __________________ "Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords Last edited by BeardofPants : 10-17-2002 at 02:46 PM.

10-17-2002, 02:45 PM	#230
BeardofPants the Shrike Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA <3 Posts: 10,647	Oh and here's my rebuttal. __________________ "Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords

10-17-2002, 02:57 PM	#233
Cirdan Elf Lord of the Grey Havens Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: somewhere else Posts: 2,381	BoP, you may as well debate a steaming pile of... oh, and why is Strider walking around with a bundle of swords; pretty silly for a guy who walks everywhere. But then, as BB posted, PJ and his writer admitted to having difficulty in adapting a complex and multi-dimensional story into the standard hollywood action flick format, but somehow they managed. BB in professor robes hehe... I imagined Depends... __________________ There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary

10-17-2002, 05:13 PM	#236
Sween im quite stupid Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cockermouth Posts: 2,058	Who? __________________ Yeah god hes ok but i would rather be judged by a sheep than that idiot

10-17-2002, 08:03 PM	#238
bropous EIDRIORCQWSDAKLMED DCWWTIWOATTOPWFIO Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Littleton, CO Posts: 1,176	A few good Blackadder quotes which might fit the moment: "...thick as a whale omelette...." "...you twist and turn like a twisty, turny thing....and you can call me Susan if it isn't so!" Stephen Frey as the Duke of Wellington... "...Baldric, the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?" "I'd rather be a lapdog to a mere slip of a girl than a......GIT!" ".....Of course! The slimy one! What's his name.....Osmond?" "...YUP, THAT'S THE WAY....SHOUT, SHOUT, AND SHOUT AGAIN!..." However, this whole thread is really degenerating. I have not seen one adequate attempt at defense of the original premise in now 12 pages of soliloquies. I have seen EXCELLENT refutations, though, and I would say that on points, we are WAY ahead on goals. Blather on, mindless shmoo. You ain't made sense YET. __________________ "...[The Lord of the Rings] is to exemplify most clearly a recurrent theme: the place in 'world politics' of the unforeseen and unforeseeable acts of will, and deeds of virtue of the apparently small, ungreat, fogotten in the places of the Wise and Great (good as well as evil). A moral of the whole (after the primary symbolism of the Ring, as the will to mere power, seeking to make itself objective by physical force and mechanism, and so also inevitably by lies) is the obvious one that without the high and noble the simple and vulgar is utterly mean; and without the simple and ordinary the noble and heroic is meaningless." Letters of JRR Tolkien, page 160.

10-17-2002, 08:09 PM	#239
osszie Elven Warrior Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 409	Anyone who quotes Blackadder cannot be wrong

10-18-2002, 10:47 AM	#240
markedel 'Sober' Mullet Frosh Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Queen's Posts: 1,245	This debate is interesting in its pointless rebuttles. It does bring up an interesting point-PJ obviously read the book a certain way. He projected this interpertation of middle earth onto screen. I think it's wrong largely because it shortchanges Aragorn, doesn't delve into Frodo's psychological turmoil, and only lightly skims over the big picture-The story is the last, the end of the mythology, and this tragedy suffuses the book. There is no tragedy in the movie. Tolkien's notes can encompass several dozen Lord of the Rings, and its such depth that makes the books so powerful-they "are" part of something bigger. Their world is not a backdrop as in the movie, but the point. A movie in relation to literature can do several things-it can reinterpert it, that's what I believe was done. I think it is more then an action flick, though action does dominate. Movies can enhance appeal of a work-and certainly it did so. Movies that "improve" literature usually means that the movie strayed from the book to create something totally new, or that the book was flawed in someway that only in visual representation could the true theme come through. __________________ "Earnur was a man like his father in valour, but not in wisdom"

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Research paper on Tolkien	The Telcontarion	Writer's Workshop	10	12-16-2007 12:04 PM
Whats on your Bookshelf?	hectorberlioz	General Literature	135	02-12-2007 07:26 PM
The Jackson haters A to Z	Curufinwe	Lord of the Rings Movies	4	01-25-2004 03:44 AM
Follow on from Gandalf v. HP...Tolkien v. Peter Jackson!	Elf.Freak	Entertainment Forum	3	01-22-2003 02:22 PM
a little orientation needed	DrFledermaus	The Silmarillion	9	02-12-2001 05:48 AM