Why all the anger?

[The Saucepan Man]

Weeeeeeell, Aratlithiel ... OK, then. <P>But, you might understand my reaction when you consider that I first read LotR age 10/11. At that time, I considered myself to be the BIGGEST Tolkien fan ever (I was amongst my friends and family). After reading it (and again, and again, shortly thereafter), I was desperate to hear more of ME and the characters that I had grown so fond of. I tried reading the Silmarillion, but found it heavy going, and there was little else around at that time. <P>Some 25 years later, I hear that a film of the books is being made. This is a mouth-watering propsect and I go to see FotR with glee. I enjoy it. Some changes are made, and bits are left out, but overall I am astounded by how the film captures this world just how I had imagined it all those years ago.<P>I read the books again. At the same time, my wife (who had never thought that she would be interested before seeing the film) starts reading the books for the first time, and loves them.<P>A year later, I see TTT. I am preoccupied by the changes, which are more radical than they were in FotR. But, on reflection, I can understand why changes needed to be made. I consider it a good film, nonetheless. I go to see it again and still enjoy it, while developing a slight irritation over the bits that I feel don't hang together (see above).<P>My fresh interest in JRRT's works, remains and I discover this site and make a renewed attempt on the Silmarillion (which I am currently thoroughly enjoying).<P>Just a potted history, but I hope it goes some way to showing where I am coming from. I enjoyed these films purely as films, and can see them as distict from the books on that level. But they have also re-awakened my love for the books and prompted me to go further in my exploration of them. They have also introduced my wife to the books, for which I am very grateful.<P>What you say does give me some understanding of why TTT has prompted so much reaction, possibly more than any of the other responses on this topic and many thanks for that . But, this is just a film. Whether you enjoy it or not, it in no sense devalues JRRT's works for those who know and love them.<p>[ January 19, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]

[The Saucepan Man]

Just thought that I would resurrect this topic, since there are a number of good points made here (both for and against the films) which might be of interest to those who post regularly in this forum (going by a number of recent postings here).<P>Also, I would be keen to hear the views of those who have joined more recently. In particular, I am interested in <B>why</B> you reacted to the films in the way that you did (whether positively or negatively) rather than <B>what</B> it was in the films that you particularly liked or disliked.

[Mariska Greenleaf]

As a relatively new member here at the Downs, which until now, I have enjoyed very much, I would like to ad my point of view.<P>First of all, I would like to tell you how I got to know Tolkien's work.<BR>I read the books when I was about 16, and I was immediately in love with it. But I must confess, this happens with a lot of books I read... <P>Still, the Lord of the rings was something different than other books I had read. I read a lot of fantasy books when I was a teen, but never did they have such an impact on me as lotr.<P>When I first heard that a film was made, I thought it would be totally impossible to do so. I couldn't imagine how on earth they could ever make a movie out of such a monumental work, not only the decors and battles, but also the story itself.<BR>Even with three movies, I thought it would be impossible to cover the book.<P>When I got to see the fotr, I was speechless. It was amazing. It was the best movie I had ever seen! Some time had passed since I first read the books, so after seeing the first movie about 5 times, I started reading the books again.<BR>The fact that PJ left out Tom Bombadil was a bit dissapointing, but still, I thought it was absolutely great!<P>So, I read the books again, and I couldn't wait to see TTT. I notice now that a lot of people have doubts about this second movie, about the changes PJ made, about the continuity,...<BR>I can understand and partly agree with those complaints. But...<P>My very first thought was that TTT is again a great movie, and it must have been a massive job for PJ and the crew to make it happen. I can only admire this, and I really have the feeling that, despite of the changes, this movie, just as the first one, is made by people who love the books, and are willing to do justice to them.<P>I am a huge fan, of the books, and of the movies. Maybe I'm even a little too fanatic, well that's what my family and friends tell me...<P> <P>Anyway, I can't wait to see the rotk, I'm sure it will be great!<P>(sorry if my english is a bit childish, but it is difficult for me to come up with proper sentences and hard words. Therefor I use easy words to express my thoughts )

[The Only Real Estel]

I think my reaction to it is better described as disapointment or dismay than anger. Sometimes when I am posting comments about the changes made to TTT I use the mad smiley face ( ), but usually that is only because it is the best way to describe my feelings toward it. Although I like FotR & can tolerate TTT, this is ONE of my reasons for disapointment/dismay. When I heard they were FINALLY coming out with the movies I was overjoyed, because now I would get to see the books on screen ( not word for word, scene for scene but you know what I mean ). When FotR came out, it was exactly what I expected, a bit left out here, a bit added here, but nothing earth-shattering about those things. I LOVED the movie. Then when TTT came out & made all those changes, I was thunder-struck for a while. Then I realized the reasons for the changes, although that didn't really help me much. Just one quick example: People say PJ 'ruined' Farimir to add more drama to the movie, but that really doesn't make sense. Which would add more drama, Farimir & the lame Frodo/Nazgul scene at Osgiliath? Or Shelob & Frodo (which they'd have had time for had they left OUT Osgiliath & left Farimir alone)? The same drama would've been created, if not more. It's all right when there is a genuine reason, but when people start to make up things, that is just pathetic.

[Elentári]

Ok, I first read Lord of the Rings when I was in year 6...about 11 I think, and The Fellowship came out when I was in year 9...so it looks like I'm a lot younger than some of the people on here...oh well, it's a great site, and there are great discussions on here.<BR>Then I read it again before I saw the Fellowship, and I thought that it was really quite brilliant...I was glad they left out Tom Bombadil, for me he was too...otherworldy, I guess, for him to be fairly portrayed.<BR>Then I read it another three times before the Two Towers came out, and I was distracted by the changes I couldn't concentrate on the film...my memory of it was slightly hazy. But then I decided that I should just forget about the books while I'm watching the film because they are completely different. So I did that the next two times and enjoyed it. But Faramir, frankly, is annoying. I was disappointed that they left out the 'Boromir's body in the boat' experience, but there is a rumour that it's in the Extended version, so I'm hoping it is...<BR>So why did I get annoyed? Well, I guess I was just thinking 'this is completely wrong! What the hell is happening here???' Especially when Aragorn was dragged off the cliff, and Faramir...I won't start.<BR>Oh, and someone made a comment about proper fans not being those rabid fangirls of Orli etc etc....well I love Orli, and I love the books, and I think the films are great. So what does that make me?

[Estella Brandybuck]

Great topic, <B>Saucepan Man</B>. Some really good points have been made in this thread. <P>I'm certainly not angry with the movies... it was only after seeing the first movie that I decided to read the books. Sometimes that leads me to believe (judging by other members' posts here) that I'm not a "true fan."<P>But anywho... After reading the first book, I thought that the first movie followed it very well. Any additions and subtractions were made for the good of the film itself (in my opinion, anyway).<P>However, I was a bit disappointed with TTT film as an adaptation. I loved it as a movie by itself, though. The portrayal of Faramir's character, the scenes in Rivendell, the whole Aragorn-falling-off-a-cliff thing - they really took away from the movie for me. But I understand why they were done, because this movie wasn't made only for the people who had been fans of the books before. That'd be rather selfish, wouldn't it? And besides - even if you were upset with the movie, it's not as though PJ personally went around and tore out pages in your copies of the books. Those books will always be there for you to enjoy.

[The Saucepan Man]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> If anyone keeps fussing about all the "unbearable/disappointing/dismaying" changes, then they should to go film school, get trained, and make a movie themselves. If they don't want to do that, then they should just shut up and stop whining. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Finwe, while I am a great fan of the films and disagree with many of the criticisms that are put forward concerning the changes that were made, I am not sure that it is really helpful to tell people to stop whining and make their own films if they don't like them. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I am quite interested to hear why it is that people feel the way that they do about the films, whether positive or negative. It's why I started this thread in the first place. <P>The purpose of this thread is not to engender criticism of those who hold opposite views, but to explore why it is that some people react with anger and/or disappointment and/or dismay at some or all of the changes that were made, while others are happy to accept them.<P>Edit: While I appreciate that you were seeking to defend your point of view in light of what Finwe said, Estel, the point made above goes for everyone. This thread is <B>not</B> for people to attack or criticise those who hold different views. If it degenerates into that kind of debate, I will arrange for it to be closed. Now, since I believe that would be a shame, I trust that this discussion may now proceed in more reasonable fashion.<p>[ July 16, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]

[Niluial]

It was a disappointment but hey read the book! Don’t get me wrong the movies were good but I suppose it is hard to capture all that with out making it drag! At least we know the whole story when the movie fans only got half of it !

[Finwe]

Forgive me mellyn! I was in a bad mood when I wrote that post, and now, as I look back at it, I think that it was quite out of line. I'm really sorry if I have offended some people, and I sincerely apologize for that. I think that sometimes I have a bit of Fëanor's temper, and that does get me into trouble at times. I'm really sorry!

[Elentári]

Ah, don't worry Finwe...and I'm glad you said that in a way, because of that nice long reply the real Estel wrote, listing some of the minor changes, which I really needed some help on for my speech at school. And that long reply is a good argument for those people who actually mean what you said, Finwe, and don't mind offending people in the process.

[Ophelia]

I am really ok with the films . In any case it would not be too interesting to wach those films if they would be excactly done by the book (and it would take 36h long film to do so) . And there is one advice that never fails - if you do not like it do not wach those films . You will save a whole lot o'anger to your selves and especially to the others . <BR>And actually I had not even read the book when I saw TTT but I knew it was not what I was waiting for but that does not disalow me to enjoy the beatyful work and be greatful for the films are done extremely good by knowing todays audiences wish to see fights , blood , cliches and what else . But though a job may be done so good that there is no nothing to point out there will always be people to say that the job is fake or bad done or so . The only thing you can do is choose sides and remain there . <P>Pheew...... When I read this all over again I feel the need to ask pardon for my no-sence-making reply .

[Tinuviel of Denton]

Well, I've come late to this thread, as usual, but I will post my opinion anyway.<P>For myself, I really liked the movies, though I did make some nitpicky remarks when I watched them, but angry doesn't really sum up my feelings. Hurt, perhaps, or maybe disappointed. I thought that TTT would have followed the story at least as well as FotR, but...I will survive, and I can always read the books and make my own pictures in my head. When I'm reminded, I rant and rave about the differences, like Faramir, and the Elves at Helm's Deep, but mostly, I just enjoy the vision of ME come to life right in front of me. For the first time, I can <I>see</I>, with real physical eyes, Rivendell and Lothlorien and Minas Tirith. I appreciate the work that went into the movies, as an actress myself, I know how hard it is to really live up to a character in a classic story. I just hope that RotK makes up for TTT.<P>I apologize if this was garbled.

[Kaiserin]

FACT: The original books are more often, if not always, better than the film versions.<BR>I have to say that the changes in the films were rather upsetting - though not really angering. Great books are impossible to squeeze into a 3 hours of film. <BR>The alterations were at first appalling (Arwen rescuing Frodo, Faramir, the elf army, etc.), but I must admit that I <I>did</I>appreciate the synaesthetic appeal. If I consider the movies <I>apart</I> from the books, I would have to admit that those movies were good work: not-perfect-but-good actors, breathtaking sets, and extreme attention to detail (i.e., notice the petrified William the troll and co. in the background of FotR). <BR>Consider this: Jackson is himself a Tolkien fan, and the movies he made were just his expression of admiration. Think of his movies as "fan art". If several different Tolkien fans were given the opportunity (and resources) to make their movie versions of the same trilogy, I'm sure they'd come up with several very different interpretations. <BR>Still, <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> some of the storyline was changed and or simply left out.<P>What annoys me is that some of the scenes just don't make sense.<P> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I feel the same way

[Lyra Greenleaf]

I go through phases- sometimes I mind the changes, sometimes I don't. Usually I have to say when I'm watching the film I fall into the world and everything seems real, believable and perfect... Well, everything except the hatchet job on Faramir, that came in for lots of gnashing teeth. It's only afterwards that things start to niggle. <P>Maybe it's because I wasn't a long time fan of the books. The first time I saw FOTR I was half way through ROTK (the book), so as you can imagine my impressions, ideas and thoughts weren't too settled. This means that although I can claim to be a book first person (just about), when I think about it most of my visions of people and places are pretty much impossible to disconnect from the film. By the time TTT came out, I'd read the books 5 times (I think) so I was more able to snipe at little things... Perhaps that's why I can never think of bad things to say about FOTR. Well, apart from Arwen, warrior princess.<P>I think I can understand anger coming from people who have had a fixed idea of what things should be, but the problem is that everyone's will be different and you couldn't please everyone even if you stayed strict to Tolkien. I mean people would start arguing about Legolas' hair or the Balrog wings again! <P>In the end, there's a simple solution if you hate the film: don't watch it. Or if you like the film, like the book but can't see how they fit together- try not to think of them together. Think of them as two different versions of a similar story. Try looking at the film as a certain interpretation and analysing whether it's good or bad on it's own terms. I have to say- I think it's great!

[Sirithheruwen]

I was disappointed more than angry at the way TTT turned out. Don't get me wrong, I thought it was an awesome movie, better than the first action-wise, but I especially didn't like how they changed Faramir. I loved his character in the book, and how nice he was to them, but in the movie he was horrible. I don't mind changing little things, because as you say, the book isnt being changed, but changing a whole character's PERSONALITY???

[Snowdog]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I've read a lot on various discussion threads about people being really angry with the way in which the story was changed from the book to the films. I am curious to know why this is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Show me a movie made from a book that faithfully steps each and every of the story? It don't happen. I have to agree that I was <I>disappointed</I> in the way Arwen was brought into the story even though I <I>understand</I> why PJ did it. Other changes like those of Faramir was to bring him into a <I>cinematic</I> character vs his <I>book</I> character, and again I understand why PJ did it but am disappointed at <I>how</I> he did it. I hold hope that the ['book' Faramir' will emerge in Return of the King. But if not, I remember as I watch these films that this is Middle Earth and the tales of old as seen and interpreted by PJ, not b me, and I hold to my own visions and interpretations from what I have read from the same tales of old.<P>What I think <I>PJ did</I> in the movies that <I>enhanced my vision of the story?</I> one word: <I>Boromir.</I>

[The Saucepan Man]

Bumping this up for the post-RotK/RotK EE reaction.

Re-reading the thread, there are some interesting thoughts expressed both pro- and con- the films. It's a bit of a slog, given the formatting changes, but worth the effort. Hmm, perhaps I should heed HerenIstarion's advice and try tidying it up at some point.)

Given that the films still seem, on occasion, to generate strong feelings either way, I would be interested to hear further thoughts - from members new and old.

[Essex]

A few people mentioned their hopes in Faramir's character being restored to bookish proportions in ROTK. I think, especially in the EE, this has happened.

Reading this thread and, of course, the Gandalf v Witch King thread, I don't think I've ever put forward how I watch the films. Whenever they stray from the book or just leave passages out, I still have the book in mind when I watch the films unfold.

For example, the film Hobbits DID meet Tom Bombadil (and therefore Pippin and Merry had amnesia when they mentioned the Old Forest when they were near Fangorn!!!). Therefore the Sword Merry has was the sword from the book which enabled him to unkit the WK's 'magic' and enable Eowyn to get the killer blow.

Therefore, the movie characters ARE the book characters to me when I watch the films. I still feel the same fellings when I watch emotional parts of the film, and if I hadn't read the books, the strength of my feelings would be NO WAY as near as they actually are. For example, I wouldn't have cried like a baby when Aragorn knelt infront of Frodo and Sam (aren't I clever? ) in the movie if I hadn't read the books.

Therefore this is why I feel no anger towards PJ (and to be honest, in my opinion the main force of change was Phillipa Boyens watching all the dvd extras) along with the fact I mentioned in the GVWK thread that I now understand movie making a whole lot more than I did 4 years ago.

[The Saucepan Man]

Thanks for the reply, Essex.

My approach is different. I keep the book and the films separate in my mind, although I have adopted aspects of the films (particularly the imagery) into my interpretation of the book.

But it seems that, while there are many here who are prepared to vent their frustration (and sometimes quite forcefully so) over particular scenes (or include barbed comments about the films in their posts on book matters, where such comments rarely have much relevance), there are few who are prepared to explain exactly why, on a more general level, they feel the way that they do. (I do not, of course, include those who have replied previously to this thread).

Anyone have any further thoughts ... ?

[Boromir88]

I think one may express which one they like better, this particular scene in the book vs. the movie, or maybe, what might have worked better in the movies/books. (Yes this can work both ways).

I think the MoS is an example of it would have been better to treat like the book. Where he rides back in shame, and the banter between him, Gandalf, and Aragorn I deeply miss. I would just find that to be downright better then Aragorn simply chopping off his head.

Then on the other side...

I like that PJ switched some lines around. For example, instead of in the book Gandalf saying, "Too long have you (Grima) haunted her (Eowyn's) steps...etc." PJ gives this line to Eomer, which I think has a lot more effect hearing it from her brother, then it does from Gandalf. (Although that is rather insignificant I just think that line works a lot better with Eomer saying it, instead of Gandalf).

What bothers me is when people try to take book occurences and explain why a particular scene doesn't work in the movie. I think if one is going to say why this scene doesn't fit well, they have to explain it within the movie's context.

[The Only Real Estel]

My approach is different. I keep the book and the films separate in my mind, although I have adopted aspects of the films (particularly the imagery) into my interpretation of the book

I've tried to do much the same thing. Earlier in my barrowdowns days (full of now embarrassing posts ) I would get extremely bent out of shape about all the changes (mostly Faramir); but now I try to keep them seperate as much as possible. Of course I am still disappointed in some changes, & some of the RotK changes I still need to get used to (mostly Denethor's death), but for the most part I try to remember that both are great in their own areas--the books are great books & the movies are great movies. It's not worth it for me to get overly caught up in PJ not putting Tolkien's books down on screen completely accurately, it ruined the expierence of the movies & made me mad when I read those parts in the books.

[The Saucepan Man]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I think one may express which one they like better, this particular scene in the book vs. the movie, or maybe, what might have worked better in the movies/books.

Agreed. Although I was really trying to understand why it is that some people just dislike the films generally. As you know, there are many threads devoted to discussions of particular scenes. Having said that, it can be useful for people to give specific examples of scenes to explain why they did not like the films, or why those scenes 'tainted' the films in some way for them.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

What bothers me is when people try to take book occurences and explain why a particular scene doesn't work in the movie. I think if one is going to say why this scene doesn't fit well, they have to explain it within the movie's context.

Good point, and one that I agree with entirely.

[Nurumaiel]

Boromir88 said:

What bothers me is when people try to take book occurences and explain why a particular scene doesn't work in the movie. I think if one is going to say why this scene doesn't fit well, they have to explain it within the movie's context.

I too agree with this, Boromir88. And with the example of Aragorn and the Mouth of Sauron fresh in my mind... as you and others have pointed out in your Was it out of character? thread, it's rather absurd to be angry about it because 'Aragorn in the book wouldn't do such a thing,' when we're dealing with Aragorn in the movie, who is in many ways different.

But there's another sort of anger that doesn't bother me, and that I indeed feel myself when watching the movies. Considering that the movies were based off of the books, it's not very unreasonable to be upset because the movies strayed from the books in one way or another. Using the same example, one of the reasons I don't like Aragorn's disposal of the Mouth of Sauron is because Aragorn of the books wouldn't do it. But I think there is a lack of absurdity in this because my complaint is not with this one scene 'because it wasn't in this books,' but with this one scene coupled with others that shows what my real problem with it is. Aragorn wasn't like this in the books, and I think there's a problem with the translation of his character from book to film.

To be brief, it's not a nit-picky little anger that says this scene is wrong because it wasn't in the books (that is, as Boromir88 said, trying to argue against the movie from the books' context, which can easily be out of context with the movie), but this character is wrong and so causes this scene to be wrong.

I have a slight fear that I'm not being exactly clear, so I'll try to phrase it once more to make sure.

From this my very post:

it's rather absurd to be angry about it because 'Aragorn in the book wouldn't do such a thing,' when we're dealing with Aragorn in the movie, who is in many ways different.

My anger is not that 'Aragorn in the book wouldn't do such a thing,' but 'Aragorn in the book isn't such a thing, and so wouldn't do such a thing, and I don't think it was necessary for that to be different in the movies.'

Another example is Frodo. From the Fellowship, one little thing that bothered me was the scene on Weathertop, where he trembles, drops his sword, and falls helplessly to the ground, whereas in the book he actually took a shot at the Nazgul. My reason is not: 'Well, in the context of the book Frodo wouldn't have done such a thing,' because, if my memory serves me correctly, Frodo very well could have done such a thing even in the books, and the scene in the movie actually isn't even out of context. But Frodo is out of character, and that's the problem. It's only one of a few scenes where he trembles and falls back, when, in the books, he stood straight and fought.

For me, and perhaps for others, it isn't a problem of the scene being out of character (and book's context), but the character being out of character. And the anger from the point of view of the book, not from the point of view of the book's context, seems excusable.

[Guinevere]

I feel exactly like Nurumaiel ! It's the changing of the characters that bothers me ; above all Frodo, Denethor, Aragorn, Faramir and in RotK even Gandalf ! (Has any one else noticed that he is quite without hope in the last debate ?!)
When watching the movies I sometimes feel like I am surrounded by dear old friends affected by schizophrenia : they look so familiar and "right" but sometimes they suddenly talk and behave not like themselves at all.

Like I said in the thread about Gandalf and the Witchking: they made everyone more "human" because they apparently thought those "superhuman" characters, wiser, nobler and less flawed than we are, wouldn't be believable to the movie public. But in changing those characters, they changed something essential about the whole story. (Especially through the altered character of Frodo)

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Guinevere

When watching the movies I sometimes feel like I am surrounded by dear old friends affected by schizophrenia : they look so familiar and "right" but sometimes they suddenly talk and behave not like themselves at all.

Did anyone else hear voices in his/her head when first watching the movies? No, not like that...I mean that as I had all of the dialogue from the books up in my head that when I saw the movies, I would either be (1) expecting specific dialogue or (2) expecting specific dialogue from a specific character. Constantly I would be thinking, "But he said that, not him..."

Luckily TTT started to diverge from the books, and I gave up hope by ROTK, and so there were less voices. My wife (who never read the books) and I would discuss the movies after our annual 'date,' and on the way home I would be ranting about how PJ had changed who said what.

And PJ said time and again that he might change the story (just a little?!?), but the Tolkien world would look right.

[The Saucepan Man]

Interesting. Thanks for your comments.

It was inevitable that, to adapt the book to film, there would be changes, including changes in the characters, plotline etc. But I can understand that, when people who know and love the books see such changes as unnecessary, it can put them off. Personally, I think that most (although not all) of the changes can be justified on a film adaptation rationale. In particular, as far as character changes are concerned, they felt that they had to make changes in order to tie in with the themes that they wanted to emphasise and/or enhance the appeal of the characters for modern (non-book reading) film audiences. On the latter point, I have some sympathy for the view that perhaps they were under-estimating audiences and should have taken a punt with the characters as Tolkien wrote them. Although I can also understand why they didn't want to take a risk on such a big budget film.

It does seem to me that, to really enjoy the films (or at least not to feel anger, frustration etc at them), one has to either accept that they tell a slightly different story with slightly (or, in some cases quite markedly) different characters, like I do, or look for the book characters in the film characters, like Essex does. Even then, of course, there are minor points of irritation - for me these occur where the films are internally inconsistent or where a scene seems to me to be gratuitous. But then, few films, if any, can match the expectations of their audiences perfectly.

Originally Posted by alatar

i mean that as I had all of the dialogue from the books up in my head that when I saw the movies, I would either be (1) expecting specific dialogue or (2) expecting specific dialogue from a specific character. Constantly I would be thinking, "But he said that, not him..."

Yes but, like you, I gave up on this with TTT. I did feel uncomfortable with the changes when I first viewed it, but then it occurred to me that I should not view it as telling the book story, but as telling a slightly different story.

And PJ said time and again that he might change the story (just a little?!?), but the Tolkien world would look right.

But to my mind, the films did capture the look of the world (almost) perfectly.