Book versus Film Peace Treaty Thead

[Black Breathalizer]

My first reaction to Sister Golden Hair's announcement was to jump in and quote the Webster's definition for that nasty P-word that is evidently considered so derogitory. But the fact of the matter is, the people demanding a literal interpretation of Tolkien's LOTR have taken the p-word as a negative term and somebody's thrown out a truly negative term for the film lovers in response so I do understand and support the admin's position here.

It also seems to me that with the increase of new visitors and posters to this site as the anticipation and excitement builds for the new ROTK film, there has been an equal increase in aggressive film-bashing here. This is a time for all Tolkienites to be celebrating the world's focus on Lord of the Rings instead of engaging in a enthusiasm-sapping civil war.

So being the noble Tolkien message board stateman that I am, I would like to propose a truce. Here are my suggestions for the terms of our truce:

1. No blanket name-calling. In addition to SGH's note about posters, I would propose that this include the film-makers, the books, or the films. You would continue to have every right to like or dislike things about the films. But defend your opinions with arguements that support your position, instead of resorting to simple name-calling. Name calling is not only a lazy person's way of debating (i.e. "Jackson is a hack," "the movies suck", etc.), it's boring to read and doesn't contribute to any ongoing debate or discussion.

2. Remember the popularity of the films are no threat to the books. The two classics can co-exist without one necessarily being better or worse than the other. I may have touched off some initial negative reactions here a year or so ago when I innocently posted that Peter Jackson has improved parts of the story. Gee whiz, I had no idea my comments would turn out to be so provocative! The fact of the matter is, the two complement each other very well.

3. Keep in mind, our opinions are not life-and-death. This is supposed to be fun. If you can't post stuff with a smile on your face, then maybe you should stick to just reading these threads and leave the posting to more mature people.

There you have it!!!! I'm laying down the olive branch to all of my former sworn enemies. (Geez, I sorta feel like Henry Kissinger! Give me the next Nobel Peace Prize!) Okay, so come on over here, jerseydevil and Cirdan and the rest of you p..er, literal adaptation people...let's all have (((a group hug))) and then get in line for the opening of ROTK.

[jerseydevil]

I have certain problems with yout truce.


1) Book fans constantly back up our reasons for disliking the movies. You just choose to ignore these reasons. I will still call Jackson what i think he is - which is a hack. Sorry - but that is the way it is. You can disagree with me - but I suggest you read all my points on my I think this is the case. Just because you ignore my points or disagree - does NOT mean that I and others have not stated reasons for our feelings.

2) "The two classics" - the movies are NOT classics at this point and may never get there. You claim for us not to dislike or criticize the movie before it comes out and say we are wrong in criticizing it. Why is it perfectly fine for you to praise a movie which hasn't even come out and call it a classic?

3) You have given NO indication that you have even read the books. You have gone so far as to post incorrect quotes that you claim characters have said. You then say how neither Jackson nor anyone else could have done a better job than he did.

4) You hardly ever have a smile on your posts and have been condescending toward anyone who does not like the movies. I however have no problems with people liking the movies, I just have a problem with the constant blind praise to Jackson. My criticisms of the movies are backed up with scenes, direction and characters I feel he did not do a good job with. Some I have a stronger feelings against than others.

5) NO ONE is looking for a "literal adaptation" this is another of your erroneous statements yuou keep posting. I have repeatedly said what I would have changed in the books. I just disagree with many of the changes Jackson made. Some very big and unnecessary changes. If you want to call us something - then call us Book Fans - because that is what we are.


If you recognize my points and are able to accept them - I may be willing to negotiate a cease-fire. There are more of us book fans than you or other movie fans would like to admit.

I will say this again - I give the movies a C as MOVIES. I looked through my posts and even though I hated FotR - I had given it a B as a MOVIE when it came out. I have now reduced it down to a C after seeing TT. The dwarf tossing jokes and so forth were unnecessary. I give the movies an F as a Lord of the Rings movie - C as general movie. They are no different than the many other action movies out there. They are typical spoon-fed hollywood action flicks.

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I have certain problems with yout truce.

Why do I suspect it would be easier to achieve lasting peace in the Mideast than to work out a book/film truce?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Why do I suspect it would be easier to achieve lasting peace in the Mideast than to work out a book/film truce?

I guess it's called negotiating - something you are unwilling to do. You want it your way or no way. I refuse to accept your terms as they are written.

[Celebréiel]

I basically agree, I think its time we end this....well...we can only say that until Rotk comes out though...a whole new hoard of things could come from that.
The only thing Im really sick of is the same old things being re-posted over and over,its like, okay we get it.....I think its pretty clear now who likes the movies and who doesnt.

..uhm......on second thought....I think this would be best held off until Rotk. You never know...it could be good enough or bad enough to change peoples minds! Peace.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Pigheaded and stubborn are JD and BB. Silly boys.

You know BB it might be helpful if your PM feature worked. That way you guys could negotiate privately and then come back to the forum with your results, which would leave the rest of us waiting with baited breath to see. How exciting and fun.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Pigheaded and stubborn are JD and BB. Silly boys.

You know BB it might be helpful if your PM feature worked. That way you guys could negotiate privately and then come back to the forum with your results, which would leave the rest of us waiting with baited breath to see. How exciting and fun.

Too late - I'm in the process of massing my armies. There is a general call to arms.

And I'm not stubborn - I'm right. There is a difference.

[Elfhelm]

I, and other people, will continue to avoid this part of Entmoot because of continual violations of common courtesy. I'm glad to see you're trying to bring that back here.

In my opinion, suggesting the murder or various tortures of an artist one disagrees with is unacceptable in any form and should be cause for banning.

That's my 2 cents and I'll be lurking but staying out of these discussions from now on.

Pete

[Sister Golden Hair]

Well BB, I can't say that I agree with all your terms, or your opinions, but I'll give you credit for trying to make peace.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Well BB, I can't say that I agree with all your terms, or your opinions, but I'll give you credit for trying to make peace.

SGH (and JD), can you at least agree with the initial portion of each of the three terms? The part BB has in bold? They sound eminently reasonable to me...

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Valandil
SGH (and JD), can you at least agree with the initial portion of each of the three terms? The part BB has in bold? They sound eminently reasonable to me...

Sorry - it's the small print I don't like. The devil is in the details.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Valandil
SGH (and JD), can you at least agree with the initial portion of each of the three terms? The part BB has in bold? They sound eminently reasonable to me...

Well, I for one am not now, nor have I ever been a hater of the movies, and am willing I think more than JD because of that to try and cooperate with the treaty. JD is willing to negotiate however.

As for just agreeing with what BB stated in bold, well, yes and no. I don't agree with #2 at all.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
As for just agreeing with what BB stated in bold, well, yes and no. I don't agree with #2 at all.

Really...???

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Valandil
Really...???

2. Remember the popularity of the films are no threat to the books. The two classics can co-exist without one necessarily being better or worse than the other. I may have touched off some initial negative reactions here a year or so ago when I innocently posted that Peter Jackson has improved parts of the story. Gee whiz, I had no idea my comments would turn out to be so provocative! The fact of the matter is, the two complement each other very well.

I don't agree with this Valandil, because you can see just from the behavior on this forum between book and movie fans that they cannot co-exist peacefully. Also, I believe that the movies have twisted the story to a degree and in many ways, what was once Tolkien is no more, but movie fans will never know what is Tolkien and what isn't if they don't read the books. Therefore, the popularity of the movies is a threat to the books, and what was once strictly a Tolkien story is now living in the shadow of a PJ revision.

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I don't agree with this Valandil, because you can see just from the behavior on this forum between book and movie fans that they cannot co-exist peacefully. Also, I believe that the movies have twisted the story to a degree and in many ways, what was once Tolkien is no more, but movie fans will never know what is Tolkien and what isn't if they don't read the books. Therefore, the popularity of the movies is a threat to the books, and what was once strictly a Tolkien story is now living in the shadow of a PJ revision.

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

As far as '...behavior between book and movie fans...' - I really think you need the word "extremist" in there somewhere. I am a fan of BOTH! It seems like I'm not alone by any means. The loud shouting comes from the extremists. (EDIT: and they're the ones - especially those who DON'T WANT PEACE - who are keeping some of us away from this forum)

As for the other, I don't see how the book could really be "threatened" by the success of the movie. Some people don't know exactly what Tolkien wrote, so what? Isn't that the case with any movie adaptation from a book? Can you think of any other books you consider 'threatened' thereby?

[olsonm]

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

I doubt this board is a microcosm of the world at large. It's certainly undeniable that sales of the book have skyrocketed since the release of the films. But I don't know any statistics like the one you want. I do know that my mother saw and loved the first two movies and then couldn't wait anymore to find out what happens. So I read it to her: I came up with my own voices and even sang when necessary. Now, my mother has a terrible memory but the book left such an impression that on her that I can now, neraly a year later, briefly describe a scene or mention an important bit of dialouge from the Return of the King and she'll know immediately what I'm talking about. She doesn't seem interested in comparing the book and film, she loves them both and can differentiate between them. Take that as you will.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Valandil
As far as '...behavior between book and movie fans...' - I really think you need the word "extremist" in there somewhere. I am a fan of BOTH! It seems like I'm not alone by any means. The loud shouting comes from the extremists. (EDIT: and they're the ones - especially those who DON'T WANT PEACE - who are keeping some of us away from this forum)

I'm not an extremist - it's just that I have been here for 2 years and had to put up with movie fans coming and going and telling me that I can't judge the movies. That I have to seperate the movies from the boosk, that the movies chouldn't be page by page book to screen. I know all that - I have PARTICULAR problems with the movies. If you want to consider that extreme - that is fine. I have AotC on DVD - I think I have watched it once or twice since i have gotten it. I saw the 12:01 showing. I saw it and have it because it is Star Wars - which at one time I was obsessed with. Do I like the new movies? No - they're dumbed down - simplistic typical hollywood crap. But they're Star Wars.

As for the other, I don't see how the book could really be "threatened" by the success of the movie. Some people don't know exactly what Tolkien wrote, so what? Isn't that the case with any movie adaptation from a book? Can you think of any other books you consider 'threatened' thereby?

Because it creates a commercialized product. There is a REASON why the Tolkien Estate doesn't want Jackson to have a museum in New Zealand. I personally can't wait in a year - all the movie fans will go back into the woodwork and forget about Lord of the Rings. Then we can talk about THE Lord of the Rings.

[Dúnedain]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I don't agree with this Valandil, because you can see just from the behavior on this forum between book and movie fans that they cannot co-exist peacefully. Also, I believe that the movies have twisted the story to a degree and in many ways, what was once Tolkien is no more, but movie fans will never know what is Tolkien and what isn't if they don't read the books. Therefore, the popularity of the movies is a threat to the books, and what was once strictly a Tolkien story is now living in the shadow of a PJ revision.

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

I think you're missing the bigger picture on the "threat" or whatever the movies have on the books. I see it in the light of, since the movies came out, how many people have been brought to the books. Certainly, the book's readers haven't been lost. The shear sales alone of Tolkien's books have never been larger. That in and of itself is not a threat, but it has increased Tolkien's genius for years to come. Granted the movies don't represent every detail of the books, but they have certainly brought more fans that probably would have never read the books...

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Dúnedain
I think you're missing the bigger picture on the "threat" or whatever the movies have on the books. I see it in the light of, since the movies came out, how many people have been brought to the books. Certainly, the book's readers haven't been lost. The shear sales alone of Tolkien's books have never been larger. That in and of itself is not a threat, but it has increased Tolkien's genius for years to come. Granted the movies don't represent every detail of the books, but they have certain brought more fans that probably would have never read the books...

You can't just go by those numbers. I bought a lot of Tolkien books after the movies came out. I also bought my cousin the boxed set (NOT the movie covered book) but he has yet to read them at all. Just because the sales of the books have increased - not everyone has read them or hadn't already read them before.

[Valandil]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Because it creates a commercialized product. There is a REASON why the Tolkien Estate doesn't want Jackson to have a museum in New Zealand. I personally can't wait in a year - all the movie fans will go back into the woodwork and forget about Lord of the Rings. Then we can talk about THE Lord of the Rings.

So then, where's the 'threat'?