[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Technically, I think Bakshi's goal outstretched his grasp, but I admire him for the effort. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree also. I don't think that he realized the difficulty of the task he attempted until he actually attempted it. If he had known before, I think that he wouldn't have done it. But he couldn't just quit, even if he knew it wasn't going to be as great as he imagined, at least he tried, and I respect him for it.<P>Bakshi did not have the outstanding technology that we have today, as The Saucepan Man pointed out. And he was going for animation which would not capture the realism of live action that PJ's films could. Not only that, you have to look at the money issue. PJ had plenty of funding for his films, yet he was stretched for it, and had to use it wisely. Bakshi did not have that much funding. With the funding he had, he could only produce half of what he intended. He couldn't even finish the rest because he ran out of funding. I'm sure he could have done a much better job if he had sufficient funding. And PJ's film was allowed for three three hour films, whereas Bakshi was only allowed for one film under 2 1/2 hours (not sure on time allotted for Bakshi's film, but it's something close to that). With that said, Bakshi had serious time constraints and couldn't put as much detail and quality into his work. He had to squish all of it together and leave out some parts, which PJ witfully picked up on (All four hobbits hiding under the road from the Black rider, Tom Bombadil, and Glorfindel). Besides that, Bakshi was the first to attempt to bring LotR to film. There was no one before him to follow at all or to learn from. PJ had Bakshi before him. PJ could learn from Bakshi's mistakes and pick up on things that worked. Not only that, PJ knew the pressure that he would go through.<P>I enjoyed the film. It was Bakshi's film that introduced me to Tolkien and it was Bakshi's film that filled me awe from Middle-earth. I've watched it over and over and still do. I do not mind the thousands of flaws. I saw it in the early 90's when my mom bought me the video in a grocery store (I think it was Lucky's because they used to sell video's in the store, it's not Lucky's anymore though, Albertson's bought it out). I did not have any expectations of it at all. I was not around when it first came out. I did not read LotR before I watched it. It was completely new to me and I watched and enjoyed it as a movie. I do feel very differently about PJ's film since that was a different experience. I had expectations for that. I can excuse FotR, but as for TTT, they butchered that too much. The think that dissapoints me about PJ's film is that he had the chance to make it excellent, but he didn't take it. I'm talking about Arwen, elves at Helms Deep, and Faramir (and more too). It was things like that that just dissapointed me.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> How can you possibly think that Ralph Bakshi's cartoon is comparable to PJ's movie?!?!?! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Finwe, as Amanaduial the archer so kindly put it in another thread, each to his own. Please respect other people's opinions.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> In reference to the rescuing of Frodo, in the live action movie, Arwen was at least from Rivendell and so was Glorfindel (i hope, otherwise I'm making a fool of myself) so that made sense. But in the animated one, Legolas came. He's from Mirkwood! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Actually Legolas made more sense. Arwen may have been from Rivendell, but she was only supposed to be at Rivendell. Legolas was at Rivendell anyways. He went there to bring news of Gollum's escape from Mirkwood. And Legolas would be seen throughout the rest of the film, in both Bakshi's and PJ's.<P>Daisy Brambleburr, that's an interesting review, however, I refuse to argue with it. Sarcasm is something that is not very arguable. If the review was serious, then I probably would. Some of it is actually quite funny.