10-19-2002, 01:33 PM | #261 | ||
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
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 |
||
10-19-2002, 03:30 PM | #262 |
'Sober' Mullet Frosh
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Queen's
Posts: 1,245
|
I enjoyed the movie-but in some parts the relation to the book was only in passing.
__________________
"Earnur was a man like his father in valour, but not in wisdom" |
10-19-2002, 03:47 PM | #263 |
EIDRIORCQWSDAKLMED
DCWWTIWOATTOPWFIO Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Littleton, CO
Posts: 1,176
|
Absolutely agreed, Cirdan.
__________________
"...[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. |
10-19-2002, 04:51 PM | #264 | |
protector of orphaned rabbits
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Kalamazoo... yes, its a real place!
Posts: 1,236
|
Quote:
correction your not brilliant. your dumber than ham. AND I LOVED LEGEND! your absolutley right he could have done a sweet job on LotR! hmm i should rent that... i haven't seen it in a while. haha it was funny, the first time i saw legend, i woke up at three am and it was on commercial free, so im sitting there totally enthralled and wondering what the hell i was watching. things are trippy when your half asleep and legend makes it even more so!
__________________
|
|
10-19-2002, 04:55 PM | #265 |
the Shrike
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA <3
Posts: 10,647
|
You know, we should all make a point of ignoring BB, since it is increasingly obvious that he is not after an intellectual debate at all, but rather, is more interesting in stirring up the ants nest and getting reactions from us.
I would liked to have seen kubrick's version of LOTR... would have been a bit bleak though, knowing him. Ridley Scot is a bit dubious - he has his good moments, and then he'll produce a turkey like G.I Jane or Black Hawk Down.
__________________
"Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords |
10-19-2002, 05:32 PM | #266 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 828
|
I'm the only one who has offered any discussion points in the past few pages. The rest of you obviously feel the only way you can offer a comeback to my iron-clad arguements is to attack me personally.
|
10-19-2002, 06:47 PM | #267 | |
im quite stupid
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cockermouth
Posts: 2,058
|
Quote:
he doesnt do it as well as me though you see BB the secreat is not to get them to direct it at you but set them against each other Heres a tip insult america and jerseydevil will come running
__________________
Yeah god hes ok but i would rather be judged by a sheep than that idiot |
|
10-19-2002, 06:52 PM | #268 |
Domesticated Swing Babe
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Reality
Posts: 5,340
|
What a tip Sween! I kind of thought it was sort of.... be liberal in your foriegn affairs, or conservative with everything else, (and JD will come running) is this accurate JD?
__________________
Happy Atheist Go Democrats! |
10-19-2002, 06:54 PM | #269 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 797
|
Tim Curry is excellent - I don't think I've seen him in a film (no matter how bad) where he doesn't impart something special to his character. Legend is cool - from the cheesy yet cool Tangerine Dream soundtrack, via Unicorns (stupid woman!) and the Devil to the constant floaty dandeliony stuff in the air (a 'prop' Ridley was later to use again in Gladiator at the end with all the rose petals in the air). Hell, he even got a young Tom Cruise in there
Almost as good as Labyrinth, but that's only cos I like David Bowie and Jennifer Connolly in that film is simply the most gorgeous girl ever to have existsed ever. |
10-19-2002, 10:21 PM | #270 |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
When I watched The Count of Monte Cristo the other day, Eichard Harris struck as someone who would make an excellent Gandalf. Ireally liked Ian's portrayal but there was something about Harris than struck me as closer to Gandalf.
__________________
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 |
10-20-2002, 02:28 AM | #271 | |
Viggoholic
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
I think BB is just a troll, maybe he should go out in the sun....
__________________
Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try. |
|
10-20-2002, 05:09 AM | #272 |
Hobbit
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 26
|
Questions for BB
Its 4 am., I had nothing better to do than reread this whole thread.
BB, I had some questions for you, because I do not understand your argument. It seems you idea has become clouded by the intense bantering of this thread. I cannot figure out how you have come up with this. When you say Jackson has improved Tolkien, (the title of your thread), do you mean only small parts of the story, or the entire story as we have seen it so far? -the title would imply entirety, but your arguments retract from that stance a bit. -can improvement be anything but an all or nothing thing? How do you measure improvement? Is there any non-subjective scale we can use? -I have read this tread over and over, but I have not seen alot that is not subjective. - Earlier in the tread, you asserted that Pete's film would become the definitive version, (similar to the "Wizard of Oz"). Is that true for the masses in general, or only the people who see the movies and also read the book, (assume movies seen before books read)? If someone hated the movie, thought it could be better, or thought it was a good movie but not an improvement, are they necessarlity a purist? -some people who have not read the books may have found the movie boring or poorly done. Obviously, they would never appear on this Moot, if these existed, do they affect this thread at all? -can someone who read the books be critical of the movie, as a movie? I am afraid your initial statement is so controversial, some people, (myself included), are immediately dismissive. It seems your message has been muddled by anger, replies that are too quick, and ideas that are not clearly expressed. Can you explain these things to me so I can understand what you are exactly proposing? I love when people have ideas that no one else agrees with. Makes us rethink why we believe what we believe. When everyone agrees, life is boring and evolution of ideals stunted. theworkhorse |
10-20-2002, 10:41 AM | #273 | ||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 828
|
Re: Questions for BB
I would like to thank theworkhorse for his efforts to get this thread back on topic.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Most fans I know love the movie while remaining enough of a nit-picker to wish they could have directed one or two scenes. But pardon me if I find it odd that some self-professed Tolkien fans are dismissing the movie entirely. If you liked parts of the movie, then I'm NOT talking about you. But there are some here who have said the movie didn't do it for me at all--and you people know who you are. Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||
10-20-2002, 10:44 AM | #274 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 828
|
Here is my list of areas where I thought Peter Jackson's script made the overall story better (thus, dare I say it?, improving Tolkien):
1. No Tom Bombadil. He was unnecessary to the book and a welcomed omission from the movie. 2. Increased drama and tension with the ferry scene. Having the riders chase the hobbits to the ferry was cool. 3. The increased sense of drama and tension in Rivendell. I loved Elrond's line, "The Ring cannot stay here." Reading the book, you understand the Rivendell will eventually become an island in a sea of darkness. But you don't get a sense that there is any immediate danger. The change, while absolutely necessary for a movie, added an extra element of tension. 4. Moria. It was absolutely incredible. Okay, to be honest, Jackson didn't improve on Tolkien here, but he certainly captured the magic of Tolkien's descriptions and gave us stunning visuals. More than that, he gave us an action/adventure sequence that while fantastical, was grounded in a sense of reality that made the audience feel and understand the terror of the Fellowship's predicament. 5. Boromir. We have discussed this before. One of Jackson's biggest improvements on the story was to give us a more well-rounded and human Boromir than Tolkien did. And for every person here who rolls their eyes at Bean's "My brother..." line, there are a 1000 who find it the most heartwrenching moment of the film. 6. The Breaking of the Fellowship. Jackson's version works better. I've talked about it before and don't need to go into it again. 7. Frodo. Jackson and Woods took some risks with Frodo and, in doing so, gave audiences a well-rounded person that millions of people identify with (even though he is a "hobbit") while staying true to the character that Tolkien created. Some of you disagree with this statement but the aspects of Frodo's character that people here seem to have problems with are in the book. The issue is really just the level of emphasis. 8. Aragorn. Jackson and Viggo not only captured Tolkien's great action hero, but they really dug into the character to bring out qualities in Aragorn that made him more well-rounded and believable. Again, those qualities were not created by Jackson, he just brought them to the surface in a way that made Tolkien's great warrior come to life. Is everything in the movie an improvement on Tolkien. Of course not. But while I can be accused of misleading readers here with my thread title, I have yet to have any of you clearly articulate why I am wrong. Tell me why Tolkien's Boromir is so much better than the character Sean Bean gave us? Tell me how much better it was to have Frodo leave everyone without a word? Share with us why the highlighting of Aragorn's insecurity and temptations was a bad thing. Tell us why Tom Bombadil was necessary to the story? Quote:
|
|
10-20-2002, 10:55 AM | #275 |
Lady of Westernesse
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canada (Help! Our parliament building is melting!)
Posts: 761
|
Yes, though I've got my complaints, I still think that a live-action movie is the best thing to ever happen to the LOTR world.
Lothlorien was fantastic. It was just like how it was described in the book! It really gave me that kind of "mysterious, and yet so open" feeling. Seeing the movie first really helped me understand Tolkien's work better (all that long describing can confuse me). Yes, sure there's things in the movie that are left to be desired, but it's a good movie nonetheless.
__________________
Yada, yada, yada |
10-20-2002, 11:07 AM | #276 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 828
|
The best part about Jackson's Lothlorien, durin's bane, is that the best is yet to come. The Extended FOTR DVD is supposed to give us ALOT more of Lothlorien than we got the first time around.
|
10-20-2002, 11:09 AM | #277 |
Lady of Westernesse
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canada (Help! Our parliament building is melting!)
Posts: 761
|
Really? Oh man, I wish I had a DVD player!
__________________
Yada, yada, yada |
10-20-2002, 03:49 PM | #278 |
'Sober' Mullet Frosh
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Queen's
Posts: 1,245
|
You have your points BB-and the changes were necessary to make a good movie. However to they simplify several multilayered concepts, and its this complexity that makes the story more then just a good yarn. The movie is a great adventure but not much else. The book approaches the grandeur of myth-which is the point.
Not that I mind the movie as the movie, its just that there's no point comparing them.
__________________
"Earnur was a man like his father in valour, but not in wisdom" |
10-20-2002, 05:16 PM | #279 | ||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 797
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Oops, running out of space - TBC. |
||||
10-20-2002, 05:35 PM | #280 | ||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 797
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, and I noticed you were pleased yet again he was more rounded a character |
||||
|
|
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 |