Okay, so what do you think NOW? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

mark12_30 · 09-08-2007, 08:45 PM

Underhill, Bethberry Nice to see you around.

As of summer 2007: My chief delight in the movies is that my sons can watch them and gain some (partial) understanding of Where Mom Comes From. They're too young yet for the books, so for me the movies are a godsend. Someday they'll be ready for the books, and then a whole new depth of nobility, virtue, and even holiness will open up to them; I'm looking forward to that.

But in the meantime, I'm glad they've got the movies-- even with flambuoyant Legolas, oscillating half-aged Frodo, belching Gimli, and some tomatoes thrown in. Maturity will come with time. They'll love the books when they are ready for them. Their english is almost good enough now that I could start reading them The Hobbit for a bedtime story. Hmmmmmm. They love the cartoon. There's another place where there's far more meat in the books than in the movie, or in this case the cartoon. But that doesn't make the cartoon a flop.

Meanwhile my nephew has instantiated himself as a hobbit-burglar in some vast online game, and has reread The Hobbit to refresh his skills. And all my nephews play Middle-Earth Risk together. Proud Auntie.

Meriadoc1961 · 09-12-2007, 01:33 PM

Mister Underhill,

I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post. Something within its contents made me think of something my wife and I do occasionally, and that is we will find ourselves quoting lines from the movie, such as Pippin's incredulous, "But what about second breakfast?" in FotR. Although that is not a line lifted directly from the book, it is a line that I as a lover of the books am completely satisfied with in the movie for it does not change the character but actually reinforces Tolkien's view, which in this case is that hobbits love to eat, and they eat as many meals a day as they can.

I do really like the movies, and my only real complaint is the way so many of the major characters had their, well, character changed and for no really good reason at all.

Lalwendë · 09-12-2007, 03:08 PM

TT was on Channel 4 on Sunday and I had it on while doing other stuff - maybe that in itself says something, that the films are 'background noise' now rather than things to sit down in front of and seriously watch? But I digress...

It was with TT that I started to get the 'ump with Mr Jackson. It was here that he really altered the story - and I don't mean by leaving out this or that character or scene, but he altered it so much that it became 'his' not 'Tolkien's'. This in itself I would not feel quite so annoyed about but he was so inconsistent in his storytelling! I found myself tutting and asking myself what else I expected of someone who was known for making Zombie films.

An example? When Frodo holds up the Ring to one of the Nazgul at Osgiliath. It's not in the story of course, but what really did it for me was that had he done this, it would have made the rest of the story, even as presented/re-interpreted by Jackson, inconsistent. I don't like that to this day, I can't reconcile it, despite many discussions, including some here. I keep thinking that if they did something like this with an episode of Doctor Who the discussion boards would be going ape about rubbish writing, and I'd be right - many people who saw the films but had not read the books brought this exact problem up with me and I failed entirely to explain it. Because it is was inexplicable.

I am still annoyed about things like that now. The only way I can deal with it is by looking away or skipping scenes - it's like when a TV show has a scene of an operation on it...

alatar · 09-15-2010, 08:30 AM

Peter Jackson's "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy was on TV again this past weekend. Strangely, I found that, for once, I *couldn't* watch it. Not sure why.

It's like I was actively trying to avoid it, almost as if to continue watching would be painful in some way. A reminder of how much time has past since it was released? The differences between the books and the movies?

Thoughts?

Morthoron · 09-15-2010, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alatar

Peter Jackson's "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy was on TV again this past weekend. Strangely, I found that, for once, I *couldn't* watch it. Not sure why.

It's like I was actively trying to avoid it, almost as if to continue watching would be painful in some way. A reminder of how much time has past since it was released? The differences between the books and the movies?

Thoughts?

My daughter was watching it for awhile on TV, but in between the thousands of commercials (damnable Orkish marketers!) I just watched while doing other things. And it was not the extended version, rather, it was the movie version, so there was no Mouth of Sauron when the Black Gates opened. I also watched the infamous 'green scrubbling bubbles' scene, and it was just as irritating as the last time I saw it. Great cinematography, great bigatures, but deplorable scripting.

Funny thing, I can watch Lawrence of Arabia, another movie with remarkable cinematography, once a year, but I can't even sit through Return of the King.

09-08-2007, 08:45 PM	#1
mark12_30 Stormdancer of Doom Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Elvish singing is not a thing to miss, in June under the stars Posts: 4,349	.....in whose eyes? Underhill, Bethberry Nice to see you around. As of summer 2007: My chief delight in the movies is that my sons can watch them and gain some (partial) understanding of Where Mom Comes From. They're too young yet for the books, so for me the movies are a godsend. Someday they'll be ready for the books, and then a whole new depth of nobility, virtue, and even holiness will open up to them; I'm looking forward to that. But in the meantime, I'm glad they've got the movies-- even with flambuoyant Legolas, oscillating half-aged Frodo, belching Gimli, and some tomatoes thrown in. Maturity will come with time. They'll love the books when they are ready for them. Their english is almost good enough now that I could start reading them The Hobbit for a bedtime story. Hmmmmmm. They love the cartoon. There's another place where there's far more meat in the books than in the movie, or in this case the cartoon. But that doesn't make the cartoon a flop. Meanwhile my nephew has instantiated himself as a hobbit-burglar in some vast online game, and has reread The Hobbit to refresh his skills. And all my nephews play Middle-Earth Risk together. Proud Auntie. __________________ ...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve.

09-12-2007, 01:33 PM	#2
Meriadoc1961 Wight Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 101	Mister Underhill, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post. Something within its contents made me think of something my wife and I do occasionally, and that is we will find ourselves quoting lines from the movie, such as Pippin's incredulous, "But what about second breakfast?" in FotR. Although that is not a line lifted directly from the book, it is a line that I as a lover of the books am completely satisfied with in the movie for it does not change the character but actually reinforces Tolkien's view, which in this case is that hobbits love to eat, and they eat as many meals a day as they can. I do really like the movies, and my only real complaint is the way so many of the major characters had their, well, character changed and for no really good reason at all. __________________ "If I yawn again, I shall split at the ears!"

09-12-2007, 03:08 PM	#3
Lalwendë A Mere Boggart Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: under the bed Posts: 4,737	TT was on Channel 4 on Sunday and I had it on while doing other stuff - maybe that in itself says something, that the films are 'background noise' now rather than things to sit down in front of and seriously watch? But I digress... It was with TT that I started to get the 'ump with Mr Jackson. It was here that he really altered the story - and I don't mean by leaving out this or that character or scene, but he altered it so much that it became 'his' not 'Tolkien's'. This in itself I would not feel quite so annoyed about but he was so inconsistent in his storytelling! I found myself tutting and asking myself what else I expected of someone who was known for making Zombie films. An example? When Frodo holds up the Ring to one of the Nazgul at Osgiliath. It's not in the story of course, but what really did it for me was that had he done this, it would have made the rest of the story, even as presented/re-interpreted by Jackson, inconsistent. I don't like that to this day, I can't reconcile it, despite many discussions, including some here. I keep thinking that if they did something like this with an episode of Doctor Who the discussion boards would be going ape about rubbish writing, and I'd be right - many people who saw the films but had not read the books brought this exact problem up with me and I failed entirely to explain it. Because it is was inexplicable. I am still annoyed about things like that now. The only way I can deal with it is by looking away or skipping scenes - it's like when a TV show has a scene of an operation on it... __________________ Gordon's alive!

09-15-2010, 08:30 AM	#4
alatar Doubting Dwimmerlaik Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Heaven's basement Posts: 2,466	Peter Jackson's "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy was on TV again this past weekend. Strangely, I found that, for once, I couldn't watch it. Not sure why. It's like I was actively trying to avoid it, almost as if to continue watching would be painful in some way. A reminder of how much time has past since it was released? The differences between the books and the movies? Thoughts? __________________ There is naught that you can do, other than to resist, with hope or without it.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode