RotK review from theonering.net... - Page 2

Millane · 12-03-2003, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Dont't worry - we all make mistakes. Now would you like to have an anti-Jackson banner, an anti-Arwen banner or the general "Pro-Tolkien" banner?

HMM - gives me an idea for a group avatar movement.

JD i just thought it would be interesting to have a search for fun, you have posted all up 34 times in the LotR books forum (58 if you are counting Silmarillion, Hobbit, LotR and Middle Eart forums) and a massive 929 times in the Lord of the Rings movie forum, now this can be seen in a number of different ways way 1) you care more for the movies than the books
2) you would prefer to discuss the movies over the books
3)movies interest you more than the books
4) your a closet Jacksonist
5) maybe you love the books but youd prefer to argue (theres nothing wrong with that either btw

)
i guess it just seemed odd to me that if you hated the movies so much and loved the books so much (because the way it seems around here you have to like one or the other, god forbid we count each seperately on its own merits and like them both

) you would prefer to talk about the books more than the movies...

Quote:

"movie" Tolkienites [tricksy false!]
"book" Tolkienites [the REAL deal].

and is there one for those who like both

it just amuses me that you all claim to be so into tolkien yet you post shitall in the lord books forum and a huge amount in the lord movies forum

jerseydevil · 12-03-2003, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dúnedain
Here is something else interesting that was stated in that thread:

GimliBrokeMyNeck,

Who really stands out?
FOTR had Boromir
TT had Gollum
ROTK has ...

I'd say the hobbits

I think you are wrong - I say Aragorn. I don't think jackson really cares about the Hobbits too much really. Yeh - he goes on and on about them - but his movies don't show anything. The Hobbits should have been central in ALL the movies. The books are about Frodo and his quest.

Dúnedain · 12-03-2003, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I think you are wrong - I say Aragorn. I don't think jackson really cares about the Hobbits too much really. Yeh - he goes on and on about them - but his movies don't show anything. The Hobbits should have been central in ALL the movies. The books are about Frodo and his quest.

Read it again man, the guy was saying that in RotK he thought the hobbits were the biggest characters in it...And I know you can't say one way or the other as you haven't seen the movie yet...

jerseydevil · 12-03-2003, 02:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dúnedain
Read it again man, the guy was saying that in RotK he thought the hobbits were the biggest characters in it...And I know you can't say one way or the other as you haven't seen the movie yet...

That guy is given access for one reason - he's fawning all over jackson and giving good reviews. I don't trust what they say.

thranduil · 12-03-2003, 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jerseydevil
That guy is given access for one reason - he's fawning all over jackson and giving good reviews. I don't trust what they say.

Not everything he said was good. And don't you think it possible that he liked this movie (truly) and wrote what he thought from his own free will? I have yet to make up my mind on that but I am not to the point of distrusting what he says.

Dúnedain · 12-03-2003, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jerseydevil
That guy is given access for one reason - he's fawning all over jackson and giving good reviews. I don't trust what they say.

Read the things he wrote, not everything was good. And he is given access for having his SAG card...

Artanis · 12-03-2003, 03:41 AM

It is sad with all the omissions, I hope much of it will be in the EE. I'm also worried about the Frodo/Sam thing, it seems so totally ooc for Frodo, but I will watch the movie first and see how it turns out before I start criticising it.

The Gaffer · 12-03-2003, 05:56 AM

I agree with you, Artanis. I'll wait and see what it's like for myself. I don't mind omissions or changes to the storyline as long as the essence is captured. This worked in FOTR, didn't in TTT and ROTK sounds awful. If it's as bad as that review sounds, you can use my tater sack to tie PJ up in before chucking him in the river.

justaregularguy · 12-03-2003, 08:44 AM

As a newbie, will someone help me, please, with these two questions:

1. Why do the same people, time and time again, feel such a need to repeat the same tired negativity, on the same topics, in virtually the same words? (Is there some pleasure to it I'm missing)?

2. Here's what Tolkien said about his own books:

Quote:

"The most critical reader of all, myself, now finds many defects, minor and major, but being unfortunately under no obligation either to review the book or to write it again, he will pass over these in silence, except one that has been noted by others: the book is too short." (LoTR I, 9-10)

Is it possible some of the negativity-mongers could emulate this with the movie?

To me, Jackson improved on several aspects of Tolkien's writing, most importantly, putting the Aragorn-Arwen love story in the main movie where it belongs and providing a more balanced and ultimately human rendering of certain characters who, as much as I've always loved the books, I continue to find defectively one-dimensional.

Everyone has a right to his or her opinion. I'm not suggesting that be taken away or externally censored in any way. Thanks for listening and if you have the answers, please let me know.

Black Breathalizer · 12-03-2003, 09:14 AM

Well said, justaregularguy. At a time when excitement is building for one of the biggest LOTR events of all time, I too am surprised to read so much of the same tired old negativity.

Let's see how the entire film trilogy plays out (theatrical AND EE) before we jump to conclusions. I recall scratching my head when I heard Viggo Mortenson was cast as Aragorn and again when I read a spoiler for FOTR that said Boromir has a moment with the ring. But once I saw the film, it all made perfect sense.

Jackson has shown himself to be a great director and a true Tolkien fan. He has certainly earned the benefit of any doubts we may have going into the ROTK. I continue to maintain it will be one of the most incredible viewing experiences LOTR fans will ever experience in a movie theatre.

The Gaffer · 12-03-2003, 09:17 AM

Hello and welcome

I agree that the story needed to be rewritten for the screen, and that some of the changes were for the better.

The Flight to the Ford scene is a great example of this. Cutting out Glorfindel and boosting Arwen's role was fine in itself, but I felt that the breathless drama of the chase was lost in exchange for some rather "Scooby-doo" style Nazgul pawing at Frodo, and Frodo's character was weakened.

So, in this example it was fine to make changes, I just don't think they were particularly well directed.

zinnite · 12-03-2003, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by justaregularguy
To me, Jackson improved on several aspects of Tolkien's writing, most importantly, putting the Aragorn-Arwen love story in the main movie where it belongs and providing a more balanced and ultimately human rendering of certain characters who, as much as I've always loved the books, I continue to find defectively one-dimensional.

The love story didn't improve Tolkien's writing--it enhanced one of the elements of the story (the only major addition I like, even though it is overblown).

justaregularguy · 12-03-2003, 02:53 PM

Fair point about the difference between improving writing versus enhancing an element, and well taken, thanks.

brownjenkins · 12-03-2003, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Either way, I am sure I will enjoy the movie for what it is regardless...

i agree, and with everyone else above who's willing to give it a chance

cassiopeia · 12-03-2003, 08:56 PM

I'm willing to give the ROTK a chance. In fact -- and I'm sure everybody else here does as well -- I want to love the ROTK. I want it to be my favourite movie; I want to watch it again and again and love it more each time.

But when PJ films cheesy scenes and changes characters that I've loved for years, I think I'm allowed to vent my anger.

jerseydevil · 12-03-2003, 09:07 PM

Of course I'll see it - at 12:01am. But the only reason why is because IT'S LORD OF THE RINGS!!

I can't help it - it has Lord of the Rings in the title. They're my favorite books and no matter how much I try - I can't help myself. I wish the studio realized that one of the reasons the movies aree doing so well is because of the fans of the books. Even though I think they are dumbed down action movies - I still want to like them. I wanted so badly to like them. But sadly I don't. It is solely the name that draws me to the theater.

bropous · 12-05-2003, 12:21 AM

the films are not total, trash, but oh my god if you say "Jackson actually improved Tolkien" again, all heck is gonna break loose...

[Welcome to the Moot. Do a search on "Improve" and find a well-fleshed-out thread on just that subject.]

In my opinion, Boyens and Jackson detracted from a story which needed no dumbing down whatsoever. Jackson underestimated the ability of audiences to understand Tolkien's original story, or even the possibility an audience would be rivited by it. This underestimation of not only the audience, but of Tolkien himself, indicates overwhelming hubris on the part of Jackson and Co. which has no basis in reality. He had no business whatsoever to CHANGE the story. He had every right to make at least a DECENTLY accurate version of the original books.

jerseydevil · 12-05-2003, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bropous
the films are not total, trash, but oh my god if you say "Jackson actually improved Tolkien" again, all heck is gonna break loose...

[Welcome to the Moot. Do a search on "Improve" and find a well-fleshed-out thread on just that subject.]

In my opinion, Boyens and Jackson detracted from a story which needed no dumbing down whatsoever. Jackson underestimated the ability of audiences to understand Tolkien's original story, or even the possibility an audience would be rivited by it. This underestimation of not only the audience, but of Tolkien himself, indicates overwhelming hubris on the part of Jackson and Co. which has no basis in reality. He had no business whatsoever to CHANGE the story. He had every right to make at least a DECENTLY accurate version of the original books.

Damn Bropous - I never thought I'd say this "You sound like me"

I'm not tryign to rub it in or anything. It's just odd after all the arguments between you and I - with me saying all these same things to you - that you come back after a long absense and have made a 180 degree turn. Although I did notice a change of heart in some of your posts after TT came out too. Just not this strongly of a change.

Wayfarer · 12-05-2003, 12:34 AM

Is it just me, or does anyone else have a sneaking suspiscion that 'justaregularguy' is a fake alternate login for BB?

I mean, here's someone who's posted something like three posts per month, and always seems to post in support of BB, who will quickly agree with him, and then fades back into obscurity.

Granted, it could just be that he's someone with weak critical faculties who's unimaginative enough to simply regurgitate things he's read BB say. Maybe a trained monkey? ]:-D

jerseydevil · 12-05-2003, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wayfarer
Is it just me, or does anyone else have a sneaking suspiscion that 'justaregularguy' is a fake alternate login for BB?

I mean, here's someone who's posted something like three posts per month, and always seems to post in support of BB, who will quickly agree with him, and then fades back into obscurity.

Granted, it could just be that he's someone with weak critical faculties who's unimaginative enough to simply regurgitate things he's read BB say. Maybe a trained monkey? ]:-D

There have been a lot of little BB's. There was Thranduil, Gen-X, Cassius. They all claimed not to be. I haven't seen them on in a while though.

12-03-2003, 03:41 AM	#27
Artanis Greatest Elven woman of Aman Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Having way too much fun with Fëanor's 7 Posts: 4,285	It is sad with all the omissions, I hope much of it will be in the EE. I'm also worried about the Frodo/Sam thing, it seems so totally ooc for Frodo, but I will watch the movie first and see how it turns out before I start criticising it. __________________ --Life is hard, and then we die.

12-03-2003, 02:53 PM	#33
justaregularguy Sapling Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Fairfax, VA Posts: 12	Fair point about the difference between improving writing versus enhancing an element, and well taken, thanks. __________________ "The ordinary person seeks certainty in the eyes of others and calls that self-confidence. The warrior seeks impeccability in his own eyes and calls that humbleness." Don Juan - Tales of Power

12-03-2003, 08:56 PM	#35
cassiopeia Viggoholic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 1,749	I'm willing to give the ROTK a chance. In fact -- and I'm sure everybody else here does as well -- I want to love the ROTK. I want it to be my favourite movie; I want to watch it again and again and love it more each time. But when PJ films cheesy scenes and changes characters that I've loved for years, I think I'm allowed to vent my anger. __________________ Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try.

12-03-2003, 09:07 PM	#36
jerseydevil I am Freddie/UNDERCOVER/ Founder of The Great Continent of Entmoot Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Plainsboro, NJ Posts: 9,431	Of course I'll see it - at 12:01am. But the only reason why is because IT'S LORD OF THE RINGS!! I can't help it - it has Lord of the Rings in the title. They're my favorite books and no matter how much I try - I can't help myself. I wish the studio realized that one of the reasons the movies aree doing so well is because of the fans of the books. Even though I think they are dumbed down action movies - I still want to like them. I wanted so badly to like them. But sadly I don't. It is solely the name that draws me to the theater. __________________ Come back! Come back! To Mordor we will take you! "The only thing better than a great plan is implementing a great plan" - JerseyDevil "If everyone agreed with me all the time, everything would be just fine"- JerseyDevil AboutNewJersey.com New Jersey MessageBoard Another Tolkien Forum Memorial to the Twin Towers New Jersey Map Fellowship of the Messageboard Legend of the Jersey Devil Support New Jersey's Liberty Tower Peacefire.org AboutNewJersey.com - New Jersey Travel and Tourism Guide

12-05-2003, 12:21 AM	#37
bropous EIDRIORCQWSDAKLMED DCWWTIWOATTOPWFIO Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Littleton, CO Posts: 1,176	the films are not total, trash, but oh my god if you say "Jackson actually improved Tolkien" again, all heck is gonna break loose... [Welcome to the Moot. Do a search on "Improve" and find a well-fleshed-out thread on just that subject.] In my opinion, Boyens and Jackson detracted from a story which needed no dumbing down whatsoever. Jackson underestimated the ability of audiences to understand Tolkien's original story, or even the possibility an audience would be rivited by it. This underestimation of not only the audience, but of Tolkien himself, indicates overwhelming hubris on the part of Jackson and Co. which has no basis in reality. He had no business whatsoever to CHANGE the story. He had every right to make at least a DECENTLY accurate version of the original books. __________________ "...[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.

12-03-2003, 05:56 AM	#28
The Gaffer Elf Lord Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: In me taters Posts: 3,288	I agree with you, Artanis. I'll wait and see what it's like for myself. I don't mind omissions or changes to the storyline as long as the essence is captured. This worked in FOTR, didn't in TTT and ROTK sounds awful. If it's as bad as that review sounds, you can use my tater sack to tie PJ up in before chucking him in the river.

12-03-2003, 09:14 AM	#30
Black Breathalizer Elf Lord Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 828	Well said, justaregularguy. At a time when excitement is building for one of the biggest LOTR events of all time, I too am surprised to read so much of the same tired old negativity. Let's see how the entire film trilogy plays out (theatrical AND EE) before we jump to conclusions. I recall scratching my head when I heard Viggo Mortenson was cast as Aragorn and again when I read a spoiler for FOTR that said Boromir has a moment with the ring. But once I saw the film, it all made perfect sense. Jackson has shown himself to be a great director and a true Tolkien fan. He has certainly earned the benefit of any doubts we may have going into the ROTK. I continue to maintain it will be one of the most incredible viewing experiences LOTR fans will ever experience in a movie theatre.

12-03-2003, 09:17 AM	#31
The Gaffer Elf Lord Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: In me taters Posts: 3,288	Hello and welcome I agree that the story needed to be rewritten for the screen, and that some of the changes were for the better. The Flight to the Ford scene is a great example of this. Cutting out Glorfindel and boosting Arwen's role was fine in itself, but I felt that the breathless drama of the chase was lost in exchange for some rather "Scooby-doo" style Nazgul pawing at Frodo, and Frodo's character was weakened. So, in this example it was fine to make changes, I just don't think they were particularly well directed.

12-05-2003, 12:34 AM	#39
Wayfarer The Insufferable Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 3,333	Is it just me, or does anyone else have a sneaking suspiscion that 'justaregularguy' is a fake alternate login for BB? I mean, here's someone who's posted something like three posts per month, and always seems to post in support of BB, who will quickly agree with him, and then fades back into obscurity. Granted, it could just be that he's someone with weak critical faculties who's unimaginative enough to simply regurgitate things he's read BB say. Maybe a trained monkey? ]:-D __________________ Disgraced he may be, yet is not dethroned, and keeps the rags of lordship once he owned

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
ROTK : EE version Mooter reviews!	Rían	Lord of the Rings Movies	100	02-13-2006 11:59 AM
Incredible ROTK Review (No Spoilers)	Black Breathalizer	Lord of the Rings Movies	18	12-09-2003 11:28 PM
Anduril's Happy Bible Review!!	Andúril	General Messages	8	05-07-2002 10:31 PM
My 1st year anniversary TPM review	IronParrot	The Star Wars Saga	9	06-14-2000 02:28 AM