Ebert's review

[Elfhelm]

I'm in agreement with brownjenkins. Some fans of the book see a change made by Jackson and say, well at least the glass is half-full. Others see that change and cry that the glass is half-empty. It's a matter of attitude.

My problem is with the people who think they are the sole posessors of absolute truth and the rest of us are idiots for any deviation from their opinions. Frankly, I don't know why they haven't been kicked out of the moot for their flame-baiting and their insults and for turning every single thread into the same boring dispute. I think the admins are either not paying attention or they don't care.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
it's not impossible to keep the movies and the books separate... it is impossible for you to keep the books and the movies separate...

No = I can keep them seperate - as I have said many times. I give them a C as movies. But on a TOLKIEN forum - i will be discussing them in relationship to the books. Also - since they carry the title LORD OF THE RINGs - I will be comparing to how they stand up and compare to the books.

i was hoping that you could learn to accept the fact that some people are different in the way they appreciate a creative work and its interpretations, even if you cannot understand this POV (see my sig)

I can accept people liking the movie s- I don't really care if people like the movies. But I would like to say - that they are NOT intrepretations. They are CHANGED. Where in the books does it given any hint that Arwen's fate was tied to the Ring? Where is there anywhere in the book - that Frodo was carried and half comatose at the Fords? Where is it that Aragorn is running from his heritage and afraid to claim the throne? Those are not interpretations - those are flat out changes. Changes to plot and characterization.

allow people to express there likes and dislikes without attacking their integrity, either directly or implicitly... flame the film, not the poster

I didn't flame the poster regarding whether they were a true fan or not. I was questioning whether JACKSON was a true fan - which I do not think he is. I was asked a GENERAL question as to who I would consider a fan - and I answered - it wasn't directed at anyone. Although - I will bring up someone on this board who hasn't been on in awhile that I do NOT think is a fan of Tolkien's - although calimed to be - and that is BB.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
My problem is with the people who think they are the sole posessors of absolute truth and the rest of us are idiots for any deviation from their opinions. Frankly, I don't know why they haven't been kicked out of the moot for their flame-baiting and their insults and for turning every single thread into the same boring dispute. I think the admins are either not paying attention or they don't care.

As I said Elfhelm - if you want to talk directly to me - talk directly to me. Your snide comments are old and I don't care if you don't like my opinions.

[brownjenkins]

well i'm a true fan of the books and a true fan of the movies... and i do think many of your comments are excessive and counterproductive to the type of friendly debates on the LoTR movies that some people would like to have

i can understand your dissapointment at the movies but i can not understand your vehemence against those who like them... it is just a movie after all... maybe it was a result of BBs posts, who certainly had the same problem in the other direction at times from what i've read

obviously you can say what you like, but a little tactfullness wouldn't kill ya

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
well i'm a true fan of the books and a true fan of the movies... and i do think many of your comments are excessive and counterproductive to the type of friendly debates on the LoTR movies that some people would like to have

Sorry - there aren't aleways friendly debates. I wasn't attacking anyone else - I have been attacking Jackson. You seem to be taking it personally. I have not made any personal comments toward you liking the movies or any other poster liking the movies. I have merely been stating why I do NOT like the movies. if you want to take that as a personal attack - then I'm sorry - that is your problem.

i can understand your dissapointment at the movies but i can not understand your vehemence against those who like them... it is just a movie after all... maybe it was a result of BBs posts, who certainly had the same problem in the other direction at times from what i've read

I have just stated my opinions regarding the movies. I was not attacking anyone's personal love for the movies - I don't care if you think they were the greatest movies of all time. I think yiou would be wrong and I think that they are dumbed down hollywoodized action flicks. Now can you tell me how that is attacking you personally?

obviously you can say what you like, but a little tactfullness wouldn't kill ya

Not when people constantly try to twist my words around - as you and others have done. I'm not going to be tactful under those circumstances.

[Sister Golden Hair]

I don't know why they haven't been kicked out of the moot for their flame-baiting and their insults and for turning every single thread into the same boring dispute. I think the admins are either not paying attention or they don't care.

Sorry, but I have seen no evidence of flaming or flame baiting. If that has occurred, than feel free to point me to these posts. Not all agree on the movies and that is what makes for a debate. The administration does care and I do try to pay attention, but it's a big board and I can't be everywhere at once. If you feel that there is a problem that needs to be brought to the attention of the moderators or administrators, than please feel free to do so. That is what the "report this post" feature is for. The PM system works quite nicely as well. We do not ban people for having a difference of opinion.

[Elfhelm]

Having a difference of opinion is a rather mild way to characterize the tenor of this thread the last few days. You are the admin. It's obvious you do care. My mistake. It's up to you to decide what constitutes personal attack and if I want to influence your opinion on that matter I will have to contact you back channel. But I object to the fact that my thread has been hijacked and is now nothing more than the same boring dispute that three people here have been carrying on with the rest of us for the last couple of years.

[jerseydevil]

Hey - I was discussing Ebert. I agree with him - stated it several times. I will address things that are directed at me though. If you want to get the thread on topic you can get the thread back on topic - but you just seem to want to make it get further off topic by making snide comments directed at me.

If you look - I was NOT having a conversation with myself. Contrary to your apparent feelings - there were others who were talking off topic - which is also not a banning offense - as much as you would like to see me banned. Sorry - isn't going to happen.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Having a difference of opinion is a rather mild way to characterize the tenor of this thread the last few days. You are the admin. It's obvious you do care. My mistake. It's up to you to decide what constitutes personal attack and if I want to influence your opinion on that matter I will have to contact you back channel. But I object to the fact that my thread has been hijacked and is now nothing more than the same boring dispute that three people here have been carrying on with the rest of us for the last couple of years.

Which has become typical of the "Movie Forum" hence the events before the release of RotK, and the admin posted warnings. Would you prefer that I just close the thread? I am not saying that you should influence my opinion on that matter, but if you feel that a post by another member constitutes a personal attack, or that in your opinion they are flaming or flame baiting, then you should contact a mod or admin and bring it to their attention, so that they can either take steps on the forum to defuse the situation, or off the forum with the poster in question.

[Wayfarer]

I feel the need to point out some blatant hypocrasy here.

My problem is with the people who think they are the sole posessors of absolute truth and the rest of us are idiots for any deviation from their opinions.

I find it ironic that this is the same person who began this thread with a personal attack on someone for having a different opinion of the films.

In fact, Elfhelm, in this thread you have repeatedly made insulting and derogatory comments towards people who dissagree with you. You have refused to be reasonable, and from the beginning you have made it clear that you don't consider any dislike of the films whatsoever to be valid.

And then you complain about how other people are flaming you. Right. I've always been amazed about the ability some people have to behave like this and then turn right around and accuse someone else of doing it.

[Elfhelm]

Nonsense. I consider it completely valid to have issues with Jackson's treatment. I do not insult people who disagree with me, like SOME people.

However, I did assume that the anti-Tolkien statements made by this reviewer were upsetting to other people. Obviously SOME people think he's some sort of comrade in arms against the director. I keep trying to point out that Ebert is out to denegrate the entire fantasy genre and is one of the main forces in the movie business who furthers the narrow view that anything fantasy is purely escapist and not deserving of any award whatsoever, except maybe special effects.

Why are you lying about me?

[brownjenkins]

i think you took my comments the wrong way JD... i didn't think you were personally attacking others or me... and even if you were, it's no big deal... i just think your tone makes these kinds of discussions more confrontational than they need to be

if you concentrated on talking about the movie's faults and less upon trying to discredit PJ, i think people wouldn't react to you the way they do and take your points more to heart... if you constantly say what PJ has done with his movies shows that he is not a real fan of tolkien, the implication, spoken or not, is that anyone who likes the movies is not a real fan... and that's no way to approach a discussion

btw - i have found it best to be tactful in life no matter what the circumstances... and with that sentiment in mind, i will try my best not to twist your words any further

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
However, I did assume that the anti-Tolkien statements made by this reviewer were upsetting to other people. Obviously SOME people think he's some sort of comrade in arms against the director. I keep trying to point out that Ebert is out to denegrate the entire fantasy genre and is one of the main forces in the movie business who furthers the narrow view that anything fantasy is purely escapist and not deserving of any award whatsoever, except maybe special effects.

If the movie was better directed - it could have truly have been a great film that would have deserved to be treated as something more than escapism. As it is - it isn't much above that. Since the review is about the movie - I will agree with Ebert in this. I also agree that the MAJORITY of films in the fantasy genre are pure escapism. Excalibur was an awesome movie and deserves far more respect and praise than Lord of the Rings - and I would like to see if Ebert feels the same way about that movie since it would fall into the fantasy genre.

Sorry if you think that just because he denegrates the fantasy genre means that he doesn't have valid points when it comes to Lord of the Rings the MOVIES - but he does in my opinion.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by brownjenkins
i think you took my comments the wrong way JD... i didn't think you were personally attacking others or me... and even if you were, it's no big deal... i just think your tone makes these kinds of discussions more confrontational than they need to be

When people try to tell me how I feel - and think - and misrepresent my views - I get confrontational.

if you concentrated on talking about the movie's faults and less upon trying to discredit PJ, i think people wouldn't react to you the way they do and take your points more to heart... if you constantly say what PJ has done with his movies shows that he is not a real fan of tolkien, the implication, spoken or not, is that anyone who likes the movies is not a real fan... and that's no way to approach a discussion

I have concentrated on the faults of the movies - but the faults of the movies are jackson's fault - so they go hand in hand. Go through the FotR threads - you will see repeated examples my complaints with the movies, I have issued my complaints concerning RotK and TT - including in this thread.

The reason why I bring up his true fan status - is because of his interviews that he did before FotR came out. This goes hand in hand with his creditbility. I don't trust him because of his lies.

[Wayfarer]

Ah. I see now. You're one of those types.

You start off by saying 'The guy has no taste.'. And gone on to make accusations that people who dissagree with you are 'out of touch with humanity'. And so on and so forth. If that's not insulting people who dissagree with you, then I don't know what is. You make ridiculous comments like saying that a bad review of the movie is 'anti-tolkien'.

You're a hypoctite. You say in one breath that you don't mind people who have issues with the film, and in the next you're again spouting off accussations about being 'anti-tolkien' and how 'upsetting' it is. Give it a rest. The guy has made observations about the films which have already been made by numerous other people, and the fact that he sees the bad stuff about Jackson's films says nothing about his opinion of Tolkien- who's writings it has already been pointed out Ebert likes.

This really isn't about Ebert though, is it? You seem to be on some sort of crusade against people who give bad reviews to fantasy movies, even when the bad review is justified. You argue with all the zeal of a conspiracy theorist, and just as little facts.

Why are you lying to yourself, Elfhelm? Are you so insecure and defensive that you can't accept the bad things this reviewer has to say might have merit? He is not Anti-Tolkien in his review. He is not even Anti-Jackson. He has simply stated some things that anyone not already blinded by their own wishes can see for themselves.

[Draken]

Forget whether he's talking about LOTR or not, I've never rated Ebert as a critic, to be honest. I wonder how he got his reputation: years ago some tabloid (Daily Mail? I forget) wheeled him in as critic amidst much hype. I must say I was underwhelmed then, and still am. His reviews are neither especially insightful nor especially entertaining.

[Dúnedain]

Originally posted by Draken
Forget whether he's talking about LOTR or not, I've never rated Ebert as a critic, to be honest. I wonder how he got his reputation: years ago some tabloid (Daily Mail? I forget) wheeled him in as critic amidst much hype. I must say I was underwhelmed then, and still am. His reviews are neither especially insightful nor especially entertaining.

It's like that with the majority of critics, hehe. I often wonder how they become critics, because it always seems their opinions are always the opposite of mine or even of my friends and family. It's weird like that

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Wayfarer
*pokes Ruinel with a stick, just to see what happens*

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

[azalea]

I happen to think the review [edit: going back and reading it, it's really just that second paragraph, and not the whole review, that I find to be ambiguous] was poorly written, because I got the same impression, that he was calling the storyline itself silly, and complaining that people are preferring fantasy over realistic films. Sorry, as good as Saving Private Ryan was, that's not why I spend money to go to a movie. Those kinds of movies need to be done, but I think Ebert went over the line when he upbraided the public for not caring enough about serious issues because they prefer to watch fantasy films. As if our choice of a movie in any way reflects our intellectual involvment in "the issues." That's taking the world of film a little too seriously. Sure, films have a place in interpreting and presenting social issues, but really...
I happen to value Ebert's opinion as a critic more than the average, not that I necessarily agree with him on any given film. But I think his wording here is to ambiguous (and contains more social commentary than I care to read in a movie review. If he wants to make comments about the state of our society, he should put it in the commentary section I liken it to actors putting out statements of their opinion on political matters -- who cares? I want a review of the movie, not a lecture about what I should find entertaining. [edit: okay, I got a little excited here, he jsut used the word melancholy, but it was the tone and implication that I found distastful] He can of course write whatever he wants in his own article, I'm just giving my reasons for thinking it is not his best review [edit: see above -- not the entire review, but I disagree with his including that one comment).
Again, I feel that it's just a poorly worded article [edit: paragraph]. I shouldn't have to read between the lines to get that he doesn't mean that it's the "invented creature takes magic ring on an adventurous quest" story that's what he finds silly; he needs to be more detailed in what exactly it is that he doesn't like in terms of story. [edit: upon my rereading, it's clear to me that he does mean the fantasy element is what inhibits his emotional involvment with the characters, it seems that others read it differently]

[Note: I want everyone to stay on topic and stop the finger pointing. It may not be flaming, but it is off topic. Disagree, but stop making it a personal argument here on the thread. (I wasn't able to be on yesterday, that happens every now and then, or I would have said this then.) Remember, stopping the escalation starts with YOU. Don't make your post about another mooter, make it about the topic at hand.]

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
I'm in agreement with brownjenkins. Some fans of the book see a change made by Jackson and say, well at least the glass is half-full. Others see that change and cry that the glass is half-empty. It's a matter of attitude.

My problem is with the people who think they are the sole posessors of absolute truth and the rest of us are idiots for any deviation from their opinions. Frankly, I don't know why they haven't been kicked out of the moot for their flame-baiting and their insults and for turning every single thread into the same boring dispute. I think the admins are either not paying attention or they don't care.

So far, the flame-baiting I've observed has been yours, and I only posted here to begin with because YOU had laid an insult down, but then later claimed it wasn't intended for the person it appeared to be aimed at. I asked you who it was intended for, but you still haven't really answered that question.

I'm sure you're getting on the admins' good side by insulting them now.


Edit: oops, sorry azalea, I just saw your post.