![]() |
![]() |
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Wisest of the Noldor
|
Also, as I've already said, I have a general problem with the fact that so many defences I've seen of this film rest on the claim that the other party is, for one reason or another, unfit to critique it in the first place. I very much dislike this type of argument, just on principle.
I mean, davem– you realise you've now effectively said "anyone who doesn't like this movie is an idiot"? Giving a pass to people who haven't seen the original trilogy makes little difference– you're still denying the right of (I should think) most of the general audience, not to mention pretty much literally every single member of this forum, to form an opinion. Sorry, but that's about as unreasonable as it gets.
__________________
"Even Nerwen wasn't evil in the beginning." –Elmo. Last edited by Nerwen; 12-27-2012 at 03:54 AM. Reason: added comment/ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
![]() ![]() |
Yep. I am saying that anyone who watched the LotR films and went to AUJ expecting anything other than what they got is a bit of an idiot. Isn't the definition of insanity something like doing the same thing repeatedly but expecting different results? If you go to a Peter Jackson film expecting to see anything other than a Peter Jackson film then you aren't firing on all cylinders frankly.
I'm not saying everyone should like the film, but quite honestly, complaining that you went to see a Peter Jackson film and when you got there you actually found yourself watching a Peter Jackson film is a bit odd. And, honestly, I have never gotten angry at anything on the Downs ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | ||
Wisest of the Noldor
|
![]() Quote:
...And you really think that's a perfectly sound, reasonable position to take? Really? Quote:
__________________
"Even Nerwen wasn't evil in the beginning." –Elmo. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
![]() ![]() |
I never said only positive reactions are legitimate. I merely pointed out that its a Peter Jackson film and everything in it is exactly what one would expect -whether one liked it or not. Or was there a single episode in the film where you felt that it was completely out of character for Jackson to do that?
I'm saying its entirety valid to either like or to dislike the film, but to complain that Jackson has done exactly what one would expect based on his previous films makes no sense. Did you honestly not know what the film would be like given the director? And knowing that, why would you even go? Its like going to see an 18 certificate Scorsese gangster film and complaining about the violence, or that you found that Terry Gilliam film a bit surreal. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Wisest of the Noldor
|
![]() Quote:
By the way, I haven't even seen this film yet. Maybe I'll like it, maybe I won't. I just hope that if it does, after all, turn out to be a pleasant surprise, I'll be able to convey my satisfaction without directly insulting people who happen to think differently. ![]() Anyway, I don't know there's much point in continuing this discussion. By my lights, the position you're taking is, well– not one that's likely to result in us ever finding a common ground. And one thing the internet certainly doesn't need is another flame war.
__________________
"Even Nerwen wasn't evil in the beginning." –Elmo. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Wisest of the Noldor
|
And, Lal, I *have* read the thread. I'm sorry, but in my opinion davem has now gone much further than anyone else when it comes to rudeness and extreme statements.
__________________
"Even Nerwen wasn't evil in the beginning." –Elmo. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
![]() ![]() |
Hmm, I think you should have a look at the mobbing of a newbie earlier on. And one who has read the books. I wasn't going to post on here, I just chunnered last night about how sad I was about a Flame thread existing, because that is what it is. If someone can dish it out and all that....maybe this is not the site for Brooker-esque stuff. I was quite looking forward to new fans joining.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
![]() ![]() |
Hmmm. I understand pefectly well what davem means. I absolutely hate Simon Cowell and what his X Factor things has done to pop music (and I mean hate - let's think: burning, incandescent rage here) so you know what is going to happen if I watch it. So I don't. Except if I feel like being nasty and trying to make people laugh. Then I watch it.
That's why some went to see The Hobbit. Fair enough, nothing wrong in that, but their views are not objective in any way. I know I make people laugh when I refer to the winner of X Factor as 'Paper Plate Face Coke Can Fringe Man', which is precisely what eggs me on to be rude. It's actually quite easy to be nasty. I learnt my craft from reading too much Charlie Brooker ![]() And anyone who went along somehow hoping it wasn't going to be like a Peter Jackson film (as though Peter Jackson's body had been occupied sf style by that of, oh...let's say....Lars Von Trier) was indeed foolish. Quote:
As for anger, isn't the whole thread a bit like Monty Python's Argument Room? ![]()
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Pilgrim Soul
Join Date: May 2004
Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle...
Posts: 9,461
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
However many of us who expected to dislike the films werr told that they should see the films before judging presumably expecting pj to take the cow and produce beef wellington rather than the anticipated hoofburger, even though a definition of madness is to do the same thing repeatedly expecting a different result.
For some I suspect it isn't the fact that it wasn't as expected that is the disappointment but that it wasn't the best use of the cow. Being long convinced that despite some of the cast I would enjoy the film as much as a vegan does a barbie I have stayed away but according to many that means I can't comment even in an observational way. that sort of person would probably insist I try cream of parsnip soup despite having a dislike of parsnips that borders on the pathological being lactose intolerant and not being overfond of soup generally.
__________________
“But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.”
Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace Last edited by Mithalwen; 12-27-2012 at 09:34 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Gruesome Spectre
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Heaven's doorstep
Posts: 8,039
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
The above comment is valid though. So which is it? Are the critics unfair for having prejudicial ideas about AUJ based upon past experience, or are they "idiots", to use davem's term, for having higher expectations this go around? Seems as if those inimical to PJ's Tolkien treatments can't win regardless.
__________________
Music alone proves the existence of God. Last edited by Inziladun; 12-27-2012 at 07:58 AM. Reason: typo correction |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Wisest of the Noldor
|
![]()
Lal, if you're referring to Annatar, well, he came in guns blazing himself– and it seemed to me that many of his arguments were pretty ill-reasoned.
Nonetheless, I'll certainly give it to him that he did try to answer the criticisms fair and square– rather than trying to disqualify the opposition.
__________________
"Even Nerwen wasn't evil in the beginning." –Elmo. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | ||
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
![]() But I'm with davem on failing entirely to understand why someone would go to watch this film with hope that it's going to be amazing when they really hate the original trilogy. It's why I never waste my money on wine - it's never going to change its essential nature of being foul to my taste. Quote:
This is what always happens. I'm long in the tooth and know that what always happens is outrage when someone fires off with something contrary. Kind of: "Why did he hit me back?!" ![]()
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Newly Deceased
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Above a brook, beneath a tor, with longing look behind the door.
Posts: 6
![]() |
Quote:
__________________
"...only a small part is played in great deeds by any hero." |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Regal Dwarven Shade
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: A Remote Dwarven Hold
Posts: 3,593
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]()
I think the point regarding "When going to a Peter Jackson film, you have to expect to see a Peter Jackson film" is well made. However, I don't think the validity of this point negates the ability of critics of the films to express their points of view.
Speaking personally, and as a self-confessed (and in some respects, fairly harsh) critic of the films, there are three things in particular that really get my goat, even knowing that it is a Peter Jackson film. The first is how needless so many of the especially silly changes from the books are. I do understand that changes have to be made when moving a story from book to film. However, that reason is used as an excuse to justify the most ridiculous alterations to the story that don't even make much sense when taken just within the context of the movie. They certainly aren't necessary for transitioning from book to film. The second is this sort of Panglossian attitude that these are the best of all possible Tolkien films in this the best of all possible worlds. That is just nonsense. As I just said, many of the changes imposed by Jackson and Co. are needless and have the effect of making the story worse and more confusing rather than better, even from a film perspective. The third is the sort of cynical exploitation of Tolkien and his fans that Jackson seems to be indulging in at this point along with Jackson's turning of the work of a better mind into his own little ego project. Now, all that being said...Yes I went and saw the film and yes I bought some of the merchandise to give to my Father as part of his Christmas presents. Does this make me a hypocrite? Some might say so. I don't think it does. Some might say that I was giving Jackson and Co. another chance, in hope rather than in expectation. A rather Tolkienish attitude if I do say so myself. ![]() Personally, at bottom I have a rather strong wish that somebody other than Jackson had made these films and overall I feel perfectly justified to express my opinions and impressions about what I saw. Its what we do here. Besides, if we didn't discuss this stuff, there wouldn't be a Downs at all. ![]()
__________________
...finding a path that cannot be found, walking a road that cannot be seen, climbing a ladder that was never placed, or reading a paragraph that has no... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 | |||
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
![]() ![]() |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Oddly, my biggest disappointment was the "burrahobbit" joke not being included. I think I'd have ignored all the other things not to my taste had that been included, I like it so much ![]()
__________________
Gordon's alive!
Last edited by Legolas; 12-27-2012 at 01:46 PM. Reason: removed quote of offensive language |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 | |
Regal Dwarven Shade
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: A Remote Dwarven Hold
Posts: 3,593
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() Quote:
However, in my own view it's not exploitation in the same way because the Estate owns the material. Jackson and Co. in my view have sort of expropriated it for their own purposes and in my opinion misused it. Christopher Tolkien has not gone through and re-written Lord of the Rings in an attempt to sell more books. He has edited some of his father's work and published the results of his editing, but he has always been explicit as to what he has done.
__________________
...finding a path that cannot be found, walking a road that cannot be seen, climbing a ladder that was never placed, or reading a paragraph that has no... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 | |
Loremaster of Annúminas
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,330
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
The one exception I can think of is CT's endorsement of and limited lobbying for the Hammond-Scull corrected text which issued as the "50th Anniversary edition;" but this was motivated chiefly by an interest in accuracy, and clearing out five decades of accumulated typos and textual errors. Naturally, the big leather-bound gold-edged Superduperdeluxe edition was HC's idea.
__________________
The entire plot of The Lord of the Rings could be said to turn on what Sauron didn’t know, and when he didn’t know it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,737
![]() ![]() |
I don't know... The estate must surely have a final say on whether new editions are published and indeed not published; it was they who had The Tolkien Family Album withdrawn and not reprinted after the first run so they must retain privileges. I hope so anyway. In a weird way, I'd rather it was them exploiting poor saps like me who are suckers for nice books than Rupert Murdoch, who owns Harper Collins and is about 10,000 times more sinister than Jackson could hope to be.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |