| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Jim Garten 
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin & Razor Guru
Joined: February 02 2004
Location: South England
Status: Offline
Points: 14693
|
 Posted: June 19 2012 at 03:53 |
I'd say I enjoyed all 3 films pretty much equally & although the Helms Deep dwarf tossing moment made me wince, I'd not say it spoiled the film for me (a few seconds in a 3 1/2 hour film? Nah), neither did Legolas surfing down the steps on his shield 
|
 Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
 |
The Bearded Bard
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 24 2012
Location: Behind the Sun
Status: Offline
Points: 12859
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 06:49 |
 someone_else wrote:
The Return of the King, closely followed by The Fellowship of the Ring. |
|
|
|
|
Snow Dog
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 07:01 |
Return of the King.
Plus enjoyed all the comedy moments and the banter. Nothing ruined for me.
|
|
|
|
SaltyJon
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 08 2008
Location: Location
Status: Offline
Points: 28772
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 18:50 |
|
Yeah, the comedic moments didn't ruin anything for me either. So it's unrealistic, you say? I expected everything about the Lord of the Rings to completely comply with the laws of reality and what seems possible to real-life people!
|
|
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 19:37 |
|
I did not enjoy the comedic additions Jackson made to the story - they were unnecessary and not in keeping with the tone of the Tolkien narrative. Now, sure I could have ignored or overlooked them and carried on enjoying the film for what it was - an entertainment - but I could not because I was anticipating the next pointless gag. If I've read a book then see an adaptation of that book on the big screen that features stuff that wasn't in the book it annoys me, it always has done and always will do. Sorry if that bother some people, I really do wish I was you so I could have enjoyed it as pure entertainment.
|
|
What?
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32476
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 19:57 |
Dean wrote:
I did not enjoy the comedic additions Jackson made to the story - they were unnecessary and not in keeping with the tone of the Tolkien narrative. Now, sure I could have ignored or overlooked them and carried on enjoying the film for what it was - an entertainment - but I could not because I was anticipating the next pointless gag. If I've read a book then see an adaptation of that book on the big screen that features stuff that wasn't in the book it annoys me, it always has done and always will do. Sorry if that bother some people, I really do wish I was you so I could have enjoyed it as pure entertainment. |
But they left out Tom Bombadil, so that rights all wrongs.
|
|
|
|
Barbu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: infinity
Status: Offline
Points: 30845
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 20:02 |
^  Definitely the biggest dissapointement of the Fellowship movie.
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32476
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 21:02 |
Barbu wrote:
^ Definitely the biggest dissapointement of the Fellowship movie. |
It was the biggest disappointment of the Fellowship book. I almost quit Tolkien because of how ridiculous and lengthy it was.
|
|
|
|
Barbu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: infinity
Status: Offline
Points: 30845
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 21:10 |
|
Really? Totally out of context with the storyline, I agree, but that part is pure magic and Bombabil is freaking hilarious. It was a good choice to let it out of the movie but still a disappointement for me.
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32476
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 21:17 |
Barbu wrote:
Really? Totally out of context with the storyline, I agree, but that part is pure magic and Bombabil is freaking hilarious. It was a good choice to let it out of the movie but still a disappointement for me. |
Those parts are long-winded, boring, and it's just Tolkien being funny with language. A hobby of his.
|
|
|
|
Barbu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: infinity
Status: Offline
Points: 30845
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 21:25 |
|
Still...it's there and i'm glad it is. Up to the readers to go back to it or simply skip it and move along.
|
|
Epignosis
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32476
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 21:27 |
Barbu wrote:
Still...it's there and i'm glad it is. Up to the readers to go back to it or simply skip it and move along. |
Skipping in a book is not like skipping ahead on a DVD or VHS.
|
|
|
|
Barbu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: infinity
Status: Offline
Points: 30845
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 21:42 |
|
May even be easier in particular cases, depends on how many times you've red the said book.
|
|
Equality 7-2521
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15783
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 22:36 |
Epignosis wrote:
Dean wrote:
I did not enjoy the comedic additions Jackson made to the story - they were unnecessary and not in keeping with the tone of the Tolkien narrative. Now, sure I could have ignored or overlooked them and carried on enjoying the film for what it was - an entertainment - but I could not because I was anticipating the next pointless gag. If I've read a book then see an adaptation of that book on the big screen that features stuff that wasn't in the book it annoys me, it always has done and always will do. Sorry if that bother some people, I really do wish I was you so I could have enjoyed it as pure entertainment. |
But they left out Tom Bombadil, so that rights all wrongs.
|
I think he makes a rather important point with Tom. Even if you hate that part, it at least explains accurate how the Hobbits got their swords and why Merry can kill the near immortal Witchking with a random dagger.
|
|
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 22:43 |
The books are full of fantastic imagination and a great story. But the storytelling by Master Tolkien leaves a little to be desired for me. The books drag forever and there's so much "filler" (to use rock album terms) that it's quite an epic achievement to read them all complete. I did once. I tried a second time years later and by TROTK I already had to quit.
The movies, on the other hand, are quite exceptional in their genre (I'd say they are great movies, period) and Jackson was quite wise to trim and edit some things around. My favorite is definitely the last one, though all three are quite even.
|
|
|
|
Flyingsod
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 19 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 564
|
Posted: June 22 2012 at 18:29 |
We all have our pet peeves I guess. Mine is also having elves show up at the battle of helms deep. It robs a main character or heroic action AND more annoyingly turns the phrase 'the last alliance of men and elves' into a lie.
I like Tom Bombadill well enough. That section of the book explains well how alive middle earth is. It does not advance the story though. J R R himself mentioned that at the time of writing that part he wasn't exactly sure where the tale was going.
I don't find much filler in the books at all. I see tons of character development that may not be crucialy germain to the plot but nonetheless is very important in making us care about the very large cast of characters. I can scarcely think of any other novels that have so many leading rolls. One of the great things about Tolkiens writing is the huge depth of the world and history thereof. It may be seen as filler by some but to me its very immersive.
I have always been annoyed at them making Gimli into comedy relief. He certainly wasn't so in print. Legolas as action hero was also kinda lame. Damn hollywood and its forcing of stereotypes on otherwise wonderful characters.
|
|
This space intentionally left blank
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The Lord of the Rings Movie Trilogy
