Opinion Thread

[Gerbil]

Another thing... In the beginning, Galadriel says something like history becomes legend, and legend becomes myth, and much is forgotten...' Does anyone else find that to be just a cheap, stupid, inserion of Robert Jordan into Middle earth? (if you don't kno whwat I'm talking about, read the first page of any of the wheel of time books)

Semi interesting fact - did you know the words immediately at the start of the film (The world is changing, I can see it in the newspaper, I can feel it in my shoes and I smell it in my pants or whatever) are in fact taken from the book?

Except of course, it's Treebeard who says it right at the end on his final chat with Gandalf.

Now I've re-read LotR one of the most fun things about the film is matching lines to the book - a lot more than you think ARE from the book, just said by different characters at different times

[thisisthec]

I'd give it a 7

[thisisthec]

Originally posted by KGamgee
You can't recreate Tolkiens magic on the screen. Its impossible. But Peter Jackson got as close as you can get.
9/10.
I thought the wizard fight was stupid, I thought Arwen was stupid, and I thought Sam needed a bigger part (but I think Sam is the main character too, so don't pay attention to that.
Great, great, great movie overall though, make sure you see it.

If you thought these parts were "stupid", then I guess Jackson didn't get as close as you can get. The movie would have been better as Tolkien wrote it. Less Arwen, shorter battle with the troll, no wizard duel, more sense of time passing on the trip south, more time from Bree to Weathertop and the addition of many other small details. Then we really would have had as close as you can get.

[Gerbil]

Eh?
How on earth can you say that?

It doesn't matter what PJ had done there'd be people *****ing about one thing or another, because it's all down to interpretations. The film would be his, but from the books we all have our own, which more than likely will never entirely match PJ's.

You can't please everyone all of the time, and if you try, you'll end up pleasing no-one none of the time.

etc.

[thisisthec]

Originally posted by Gerbil
Eh?
How on earth can you say that?

It doesn't matter what PJ had done there'd be people *****ing about one thing or another, because it's all down to interpretations. The film would be his, but from the books we all have our own, which more than likely will never entirely match PJ's.

You can't please everyone all of the time, and if you try, you'll end up pleasing no-one none of the time.

etc.

What's so hard to understand? KGamgee said it was as good as it could get. I disagree. It seems obvious judging by the large numbers of people *****ing that others also disagree. Do you believe that it was as good as it could get? I didn't want to match Jackson's interpretation. I wanted to match Tolkien's masterpiece. Why is Jackson's individual interpretation more important than any of these *****ing people's. And don't say because he's the director. He was hired to do the movie. He could just as easily followed the book without putting his (and his female co-screenwriters'), in my mind, nauseating stamp on it. He chose to make changes and I believe that he used bad judgement in deciding what to take out and what to put in.

[Gerbil]

Originally posted by thisisthec


What's so hard to understand? KGamgee said it was as good as it could get. I disagree. It seems obvious judging by the large numbers of people *****ing that others also disagree. Do you believe that it was as good as it could get? I didn't want to match Jackson's interpretation. I wanted to match Tolkien's masterpiece. Why is Jackson's individual interpretation more important than any of these *****ing people's. And don't say because he's the director. He was hired to do the movie. He could just as easily followed the book without putting his (and his female co-screenwriters'), in my mind, nauseating stamp on it. He chose to make changes and I believe that he used bad judgement in deciding what to take out and what to put in.

You are really quite ignorant aren't you?
Firstly - PJ was not hired to do the job - he spent years researching it, doing screentests, writting software for the battle scenes and THEN went on a sales pitch. Be grateful he did as good a job as he did - his original pitch was for ONE movie of the whole lot - it was the guy funding who said that PJ's work looked so promising they'd front the cash to make 3 films.
Secondly, you've completely failed to understand the whole thing about interpretations, haven't you? NO-ONE's interpretation would be the same, and NONE would be exactly how Tolkien envisaged it. When you talk about Tolkien's masterpiece, you are actually talking about Tolkien's masterpiece AS YOU INTERPRET IT.
Thirdly, exactly how many perfect films do you know? Even the best have faults.
Fourthly, switch on your brain again next time before you post.

[Captain Stern]

thisisthec has shown no ignorance in this thread, you are just flaming him because he's disagreeing with you.

I think you are giving Peter Jackson's "interpretation" way too much praise. P.J made so many unneccesary changes and left so many things out in favour of battle scenes, political correctness and to boost Liv Tyler's part in the film it can no longer be seriously called a close interpretation.

What Peter Jackson has done is turn a story for intelligent people into a grossly simplified version with changes made to it so that it appeals to the average and below intelligent person ( the biggest market audience ) So forgive intelligent fans of Tolkien's work for being dissapointed.

[Gerbil]

I do forgive fans for being disappointed.
I'm disappointed in many respects too.
But I won't let my disappointments ruin what is a great film.

My point, which you also have either ignored or missed, is that fans would be disappointed NO MATTER WHAT HE DID. I take heart from the fact that most of us are complaining about a few relatively minor issues (OK, Arwen is NOT good, but she took up how much screen time exactly?) when in fact the potential for him to make a bigger hollywood cock-up was massive. He has done a brave thing, and the end result is not perfect, but deal with it.

I have seen so many people complain about this and that, but the bottom line is if those people complaining were given the money and resources he was to do the film, it would have been utter ****. So quit complaining, it could have been a whole lot worse. If you don't like it, don't watch it, it's pretty simple really.
If you really got nothing from the film, then why are you in this forum? If you enjoyed the film but had some problems with it - fine. But too many people assume 'they know best' (heh, yes that DOES make me a hypocrit saying that now), or he did it 'wrong' shows a lack of realism.

We can all dream of the perfect LotR film, I'm sure. But if you saw my perfect version you'd do nothing but complain. As I would about your version. To reiterate, since people seem happy to ignore my points:

- EVERYONE'S VISION OF TOLKIEN IS DIFFERENT.
- IT COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT WORSE.

I for one love the film. Not in the same way as the book, but then why would I? By reality books and films are ALWAYS different.

[thisisthec]

Originally posted by Gerbil

You are really quite ignorant aren't you?
Even the best have faults.
Fourthly, switch on your brain again next time before you post.

How refreshing to meet such an enlightend individual. I admit, after some research, that Jackson was not just "hired" to direct the film. I was not aware of his years of preparation before the film.

I guess I'm completely wrong when I suggest that the film could have been better. It was great. 11 out of 10. How could my opinion have been so clouded? Thanks Gerbil. You're my hero. Let me know the next time you go out in public so I can throw rose petals in front of you as you walk.

[Gerbil]

ACtually I wasn't calling you ignorant for not knowing those facts, because no-one can ever hope to know everything.
I was calling you ignorant for missing the point of my post, which I've had to re-iterate above for Captain Stern's benefit as well.
Which, since it also hopefully answers your post immediately AFTER it shows I guessed right that you really didn't get what I was on about.

As for the rose petals, that would be a nice touch - thanks.

[Laurenis]

oh well i dunno bout the rest of u but i adored the film. i thought it was done amazingly well but thats a personal opinion.

i thought that legolas and gimlis relationship wasnt really shown well so that couldve been a bit deeper but it wasnt like a major issue. and i wasnt sure about the whole thing in lorien.

in the book they all adored Galadriel and even though she is supposed to be a bit weird (as in beautiful and terribly powerful) she didnt really come across that way in the film. i mean i asked my friends that havent read the books what they thought of her and they said that they thought she was a bit evil and werent sure what her deal was... weather she was good or bad. and i know she not supposed to be obviously really motherly or anything but i do have to say that she was kinda scary in the movie!

--Ren*

[Captain Stern]

Sorry, I did get your point, but I really didn't think it justified a response.

Originally posted by Gerbil: So quit complaining, it could have been a whole lot worse. If you don't like it, don't watch it, it's pretty simple really.

It's actually not that simple. Whether you realise it or not, there are people in this world who care a great deal about The Lord of the Rings, it has touched them, moved them, it has caused them to research it and participate actively in forums like this for example.
You can tell me 'to get a life' or that I'm 'a sad case' but the fact remains that I care about the integrity of The Lord of the Rings and it pains me to see a work of increadible imagination and beauty turned into yet another mainstream action movie. I and many other Tolkien fans can't help the way we feel.

[Laurenis]

did anyone else cry when in the movie boromir died? i thought that was really sad and well... im usually the person who always moans at the soppy parts and finds them really cheesy but that was just plain sad

[thisisthec]

Originally posted by Gerbil
(OK, Arwen is NOT good, but she took up how much screen time exactly?)

So quit complaining, it could have been a whole lot worse. If you don't like it, don't watch it, it's pretty simple really.

- IT COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT WORSE.

I guess my threshhold of nausea for Liv Mercury is just lower than yours. Arwen is going to be found where she doesn't belong and take up more screen time in the next movie. Will that bother you?

How can I not watch it when I've been waiting my whole life for it. It's all I've got. The fact that it could have been worse is no solace.

I hate the "If you don't like it, lump it" argument. It's too easy to say I should just accept it the way it is. If I don't like the way a meal is prepared at a restaurant, I send it back. I know I can't send FOTR back and I know Peter Jackson doesn't care what I think. It just sounds like a rant, but then again, I am ignorant.

[Pailan]

Gerbil has good point, about 15 posts back. It is really fun to find the movie dialog which matches Tolkien's writing. I found the changes to be interesting in who says what when to who.

While there is much I would've done differently had I the chance to make this movie, (time and money not withstanding) my version of FotR would come in around nine hours. Still after seeing it several times I'd rate it a 9.5/10.

[Agburanar]

Didn't they pull a lot of good quotes from books 2 and 3? That could mean the next two books are gonna be even more big battles with even less memorable dialogue.

[jerseydevil]

I agree with thisisthec and Captain Stern -

First, who cares if it could have been a lot worse? I think it could have been and should have been a lot better and A LOT closer to the books. Jackson in his interviews kept saying he was staying true to the story, that everyone had copies of LOTR so they could get to know their characters. How could Viggo use the books to get to know his character - his whole motivation was changed. Now he's trying to win the war for Arwen??? He's given up his heritage??? How is that interpretation? That's outright changing the plot.

The only thing that Jackson basically kept were the character's names, place names and the main plot of the story. If that what people are happy with then so be it - I was looking for something a little closer to the books. There was no reason to make the Flight to the Ford scene the way he did, nor to have the wizards duel, or to change the Weathertop scene and have the nazgul's robes catch on fire (in another thread I mentioned about how their robes were fine for the Flight to the Ford scene) and why have the Fellowship walk into Moria with all the the dead bodies around. The reason is - Jackson made it into an action movie with very little character development.

The movie had too many drawn out action scenes. There was also no sense of distance between locations. For instance - between Bree and Weathertop - why in one scene is there snow? No place else during their travel to Weathertop do they encounter snow.

It was an okay movie - but it comes no where near the power of Excalibur. I give it a 6/10 or 7/10. I've seen it a ton of times - I'm trying to like it - but too many of the changes really annoy me though. And like thisisthec, I'm basically seeing it so many times - and I'll get the DVD because it's all I've got. If the movie wasn't LOTR - it's not a DVD I would be rushing out to get right away.

I'm also not going to praise Jackson just because he made the movie. He could have made a far better movie closer to the books that would have still have appealed to the mass market. Instead he dumbed down a really intelligent book.

I also don't know why after FOTR ended - right before the credits - they just didn't have something like -"Continued.... The Two Towers Winter 2002". That way I wouldn't be sitting next to people that say "What the f***, what's this s**t?" or "I guess they're making a sequel."

[Billadillo]

Originally posted by Gerbil
My point, which you also have either ignored or missed, is that fans would be disappointed NO MATTER WHAT HE DID.

- EVERYONE'S VISION OF TOLKIEN IS DIFFERENT.
- IT COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT WORSE.

I quite disagree.

I was willing to give PJ & Co. a lot of leeway when it came to this film. I realize that I had a lot of expectations going in. I also realize that many of those expectations were based on my "vision" as Gerbil puts it.

As an example: I think that Hugo Weaving was a horrible choice as Elrond. That big round forehead and permanent scowl did not match the picture of Elrond I had in my head.

Now, as much as I may think that's true, I'm aware that it's based on my opinion of what I thought he should look like. I think it's important to differentiate between opinion based complaints, and the more substantial complaints about story/characters inconsistancies. Even when it comes to the story, I was willing to overlook alot of minor things, like:

- Gandalf's fear of touching the ring.
- Merry & Pippin "tagging along" instead of choosing to go w/Frodo.
- Ringwraiths charging down the gate in Bree.
- Aragorn not drawing Narsil at the Prancing Pony.
- Frodo figuring out the password to enter Moria.

blah blah blah...I could go on and on. My point is, these things didn't really interfere with my enjoyment of the film. Not at all the way Arwen did. I mean, honestly, it makes me ill when I hear her stupid, bravado, "Come and claim him" line. Barf! >:-O~~~

It's amazing that even though she had such a small amount of screen time, she managed to annoy so many people. Anyhow, before I get into a line-by-line, why-Arwen-sucks rant, let me try to get back to my original point...

I disagree that "fans would be disappointed NO MATTER WHAT HE DID". I think, like me, most fans went to the film with a semi-open mind, ready to give him some leeway. Sadly, the way he twisted and rewrote Arwen & the flight to the ford were simply too much. It's not that it doesn't match my "vision"...I think it offends Tolkien's vision...and that's unacceptable.

[jerseydevil]

I agree with you Billadillo. There is no possible excuse that anyone can give for the Flight to the Ford scene. I hate that scene everytime I see it and it is the worst part of the movie. I'd really like to know why Jackson felt he needed to change a classic scene in the book so drastically and turn it into a joke.

[thisisthec]

You're both ignorant. It was brilliant.