Your.Name.Here - the movie and book are two different things, I know. My complaint is abuse of the name. When you start changing things, the movie and book aren't set in the same world or don't have the same characters. Why do they use the name, then? For money. But why don't more people complain?
I Hated the LotR movies.
- Thread starter Molikroth
- Start date
Agreed.Your.Name.Here said:
Although I'm a fanboy of the books who nitpicks the films on a regular basis, I don't understand the argument for Bombadil. I'll grumble about Anduril for days (what was Narsil doing in Rivendale anyway?) but I know that the argument is a personal annoyance rather than some commentary on Peter Jackson's vision. The way they delivered Anduril allowed for a very climactic moment in the third film that placated the movie going masses, even if it did miff a few of us fanboys.
But back to Bombadil, that section of the book almost put me to sleep. I love the idea of the character -- an immortal being with nearly limitless power who just likes singing songs and having fun -- but he was really boring. I was actually glad when I heard he was removed.
The same could be said for any novel adapted into film, although LotR is perhaps least guilty of this offense.Molikroth said:
Is there any film adaptation of a book that you feel was completely true to the book, or do you think they all drifted away a bit to preserve the integrity of the film?
It's not the LotR movies were BAD per say, it's just that they had that modern Hollywood feel to all movies. Somewhat kid friendly, somewhere in the middle, adding pieces a modern person can relate to without having to be extremely literate...
All those details.
Overall they were good, just not mainly forthe audience who knew the book universe over the films.
All those details.
Overall they were good, just not mainly forthe audience who knew the book universe over the films.
I hated the LotR for the story. A group of characters of different races fed ex a ring across the world to drop it into a volcano while a generic two dimensional evil named Sauron is after them.
Sauron wants this ring to rule the world *that's right*, even though without it he already manages to raise armies that can crush all opposition and in that brief time he had the ring he was defeated by having his hand cut off. It seems like the smart thing to do is to stay as an eye until everyone is wasted before getting his body back, oh and given that the volcano is his one weakness why was the entrance completely ungaurded?
But on topic all movies will have details cut when translated from books and it is no surprise when the books were as long and as detailed as LOTR that fan loved plot points would be cut.
Sauron wants this ring to rule the world *that's right*, even though without it he already manages to raise armies that can crush all opposition and in that brief time he had the ring he was defeated by having his hand cut off. It seems like the smart thing to do is to stay as an eye until everyone is wasted before getting his body back, oh and given that the volcano is his one weakness why was the entrance completely ungaurded?
But on topic all movies will have details cut when translated from books and it is no surprise when the books were as long and as detailed as LOTR that fan loved plot points would be cut.
I'm in the same boat as you bro. I went to see the first one (ex-gf dragged be), and at the end, I was said, "why didn't they destroy the ring? That was stupid!" Two, what looked to be mid-twenties LARPS, turned around, and in the geekiest voices imaginable said, "It's the first of a trilogy." "Duh, how could you not know that?" I looked at them, shook my head, the dragged the ex out of the theatre.Molikroth said:
It has it's good bits and bad bits.
The Good:
-Gore
-Dragons
-John Rys Davies
-Orcs in general
Bad
-Terrible delivery of lines
-terrible interpretation of the book
-Making things up that weren't in the book when they could have gone with what actually happened.
-Liv Tyler's character, I don't care about her, why did they give here more of a role than her character had in the book when someone as awesome as Tom Bombadil (who even has his own stand alone book) doesn't have any?
-Legolas. I liked him in the book. Thanks to Orlando Bloom I now have a deep set hatred for everything remotely related to elves.
-Hillarious and (for me) humiliating attempts by the New Zealander actors to not speak in New Zealand accents.
-Too long
I guess, by adding up those "points", I'm not particularly fond of the movies.
The Good:
-Gore
-Dragons
-John Rys Davies
-Orcs in general
Bad
-Terrible delivery of lines
-terrible interpretation of the book
-Making things up that weren't in the book when they could have gone with what actually happened.
-Liv Tyler's character, I don't care about her, why did they give here more of a role than her character had in the book when someone as awesome as Tom Bombadil (who even has his own stand alone book) doesn't have any?
-Legolas. I liked him in the book. Thanks to Orlando Bloom I now have a deep set hatred for everything remotely related to elves.
-Hillarious and (for me) humiliating attempts by the New Zealander actors to not speak in New Zealand accents.
-Too long
I guess, by adding up those "points", I'm not particularly fond of the movies.
I enjoyed the movies a lot.
I watch them quite a lot too.
Gives me alot of inspiration to make epic battles on some RTS's
I watch them quite a lot too.
Gives me alot of inspiration to make epic battles on some RTS's
I here Tom Bombadill from people s the #1 thing they wanted to see in the movie. I couldn't get through the first book myself it takes so long for any action to happen why do they have to spend so much time on Bilbo's party?
oh the irony of john rhys davies playing a Dwarf
and i apologise but:
/fanboy mode on
[/quote]
and i apologise but:
/fanboy mode on
Can't argue with Sauron Being 2D. He is just evil. what can i say, it's classic fantasy.hypothetical fact said:
When he was first around he had the ring for a pretty damned long time. And think of the ring like super-steroids (or any drug really), while he had it he was all powerful, but without it he was much weaker than normal.hypothetical fact said:
It wasn't There was an entire army around it, sauron didn't expect anyone to be able to get past, especially two pathetic little hobbits (He's an arrogant bugger) It's kind of a theme of the Books Small things can have big effects (a ring, hobbits e.t.c)hypothetical fact said:
[/quote]
The first two were fine, the third crossed the invisible line of destroying the actual plot.
*Spoilers, but not really*
In the book, when Gollum tries to steal the ring from Frodo at the foot of Mt. Doom, the ring manifests itself into a ring of fire and speaks. It vows that if Gollum ever touches it again it will destroy him. Thus, later on when Gollum steals the ring from Frodo, the ring fulfills its vow by smiting him into the lava. The problem is that Gollum is still holding the ring when this happens and it destroys itself.
The point being, evil destroys itself. The movie opted for a bunch of gibberish and having Gollum just flip out and act like an idiot at this final part.
*Spoilers, but not really*
In the book, when Gollum tries to steal the ring from Frodo at the foot of Mt. Doom, the ring manifests itself into a ring of fire and speaks. It vows that if Gollum ever touches it again it will destroy him. Thus, later on when Gollum steals the ring from Frodo, the ring fulfills its vow by smiting him into the lava. The problem is that Gollum is still holding the ring when this happens and it destroys itself.
The point being, evil destroys itself. The movie opted for a bunch of gibberish and having Gollum just flip out and act like an idiot at this final part.
