'An attrocious movie which is a despicable insult to a wonderful book'

[davem]

Those are the words of Jonathan Cainer today in the (UK) Daily Mirror. I wanted to share that with other downers. That's it. That sums up the whole ugly monstrosity that P.J. & his cronies have dumped on us. You know, in other threads earlier, I said TT was a great movie. I want to take that back. Its not. Its vile. Its an ugly, cruel, cynical, stupid thing. It is a despicable insult, to the book & the fans. PJ has used us, the fans. The films are dreadful. The only time theres any magic or wonder on the screen is when the 'writers' & director let their guard down & some of Tolkien's original genius sneaks thru. Their own stuff is moronic ('Even the smallest person can change the course of the future' - GOD ALMIGHTY!)<BR>More than that, they give more ammunition to those critics who accuse the book of being simplistic . The writers have taken a work of profound insight into the human condition & made it trivial & superficial. <BR>Let's stop making excuses for PJ et al. They didn't have to make the movie. If its too difficult to put such a book on the screen, then DON'T DO IT. Leave it alone.<BR>I just thought, maybe PJ, Fran & Phillipa will read this, & feel hurt by these comments - maybe they really do love the book & will feel upset by these negative comments, well, I don't care. LotR changed me. I read that book 25 or more years ago. I think I'm a better person for having done so. I think I'll never forgive them for this.<BR>Tell me I'm over reacting - maybe I am, but the more i think aboutwhat they've done to 'my' book (you all know what I mean by that - we all feel that LotR belongs to each of us in a special way) the angrier I feel.<BR>And I know RotK will be worse. The hardest blow is still to land.

[Liriodendron]

I disagree, I enjoy the movies, blah, blah blah. There are many people, with many opinions, I do not accept this one as being "right". Maybe you do....so what. This has been hashed and rehashed, It's obvious beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have a headache...<p>[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Liriodendron ]

[Dimannûnien]

That would be the well known critic who writes the astrology column then, who doesn't seem to be aware that there is more than one movie?

[littlemanpoet]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> The only time theres any magic or wonder on the screen is when the 'writers' & director let their guard down & some of Tolkien's original genius sneaks thru. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><B>davem:</B> Good to 'see' you again. The above quote sums it up quite nicely for me as to HOW P.J. et. al. 'sold out'.<P>Um, knock the critic personally and you have exploded the argument? I'm afraid it's not that easy. Even if 99% of a writer's stuff is bs, it still does not remove the truth of the true 1% said.

[Lush]

In an attempt to be concise (not curt, rude, or otherwise unpleasant, just concise):<P>You = a person in need of a massage, or stiff drink, or nice cozy nap, or all of the above. Even I didn't react this way when they cast Liv Tyler (this girl just pops up everywhere there's trouble, eh?) as Tatiana in "Onegin." Please, I don't want you to have a heart attack over a <I>movie</I>.

[Tigerlily Gamgee]

Wow. Why let a movie disrupt your life in such a manner? It's just a movie. If you don't like it then just forget about its exhistance so that it doesn't bother you anymore and go back to the books only.<P>I, personally, am very pleased with how the movies turned out. I think that they are in no way a disgrace. I am looking forward to the final one because I think that they are wonderful to behold. We disagree in that manner, so I'll enjoy the books and the movie while you just enjoy the books.

[Gorwingel]

I don't agree, it was not a terrible film, I enjoyed it thoroughly. I would have to say I don't agree with that reviewer at all.

[The Necromancer]

What exactly made you reconsider TTT and decide it was so awful, Davem? I partially agree/disagree with you there. It could have been a LOT better and it did lose a lot of aspects in the book like the characters growing, maturing etc. and no, it wasn't nearly as deep as the book. I try to enjoy the movies and the books seperately, though, so I still liked TTT and can't wait till ROTK!!! You never know, it might be a great movie and they might make it closer to the book.

[kharank]

I personally loved the films, and i think its great that, after seeing the movies, so many people are now reading the books. Its opening up the genius of Tolkien to generations who probably wouldnt have bothered otherwise...

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

It was a flawed masterpiece. There were many parts which could and should have been done better, the most obvious being character development.<P>However, the scenery and settings, the action, the simple morals which it puts through which are horribly lacking in todays culture, there are many plus points to the movie.<P>And if you can separate the movies from the books, then you've got it made!

[Tar-Palantir]

What a pity. First you were able to enjoy something new, now you can't. In fact it sounds like you want to convince others that they also should shun these movies. That is not nice. There are other arguments for and against PJ & company that are far more "discussable" than yours - it seems like a rant which is a pain to argue against. So I'll just say I liked them for what they added to my LotR experience and that they certainly didn't take anything away from it.<P>Lush - Your posts seem to repeatedly hit the proverbial 'nail on the head'. cheers and thanks!<p>[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Tar-Palantir ]

[Diamond18]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> There are other arguments for and against PJ & company that are far more "discussable" than yours - it seems like a rant which is a pain to argue against. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>That is very true, which leads me to wonder why this thread was begun in the first place. It's basically just another TTT - Overall Impressions thread, only it starts out by putting anyone who liked the movies even a little in an automatic defense mode. I don't think it's right to put forth your ideas like they are the absolute truth and anyone who disagrees is delusional or brainwashed (i.e., "Stop defending PJ"). Plus, in the end, what does this thread accomplish besides killing a skwerl?

[Pookabunny]

I'm all about respecting people's opinions, but I'm going to have to be a little more direct in my response to this thread.<BR> It's fine to disagree, but it is NOT cool to banter on about one's terse and negativity towards a subject that people feel so passionately for.<BR> I want to thank the many that posted comments in a very respectable and intelligent manner. The following are those I enjoyed the most:<P>I would like to quote <B>Tigerlilly</B> first, because I truly respect her opinions and the manner in which she expresses them:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It's just a movie. If you don't like it then just forget about its existance so that it doesn't bother you anymore and go back to the books only. <BR>I, personally, am very pleased with how the movies turned out. I think that they are in no way a disgrace. I am looking forward to the final one because I think that they are wonderful to behold. We disagree in that manner, so I'll enjoy the books and the movie while you just enjoy the books<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Amen sister!<P>Next, a great quote by <B>Liriodendron</B><BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>This has been hashed and rehashed, It's obvious beauty is in the eye of the beholder.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Right on!<P>And another wonderful one from <B>Eomer of the Rohirrim</B>:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It was a flawed masterpiece....And if you can separate the movies from the books, then you've got it made!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>That whole post from Eomer was really well stated, but I really enjoyed those captions.<P>Last, and certainly NOT least is a quote from <B>Tar-Palantir</B>: <P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>What a pity. First you were able to enjoy something new, now you can't. In fact it sounds like you want to convince others that they also should shun these movies. That is not nice.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <BR>It is this quote that I really would like to point out, because as I stated in the beginning of my schpiel here, I can respect opinions. HOWEVER, when one changes their opinion based on the powerful words and negativity of others (such as an article), that's something I wouldn't admit to others. Have pride in what you believe in, stand by your beliefs until PROVEN wrong. NO ONE can prove to you that LOTR sucks, that's an opinion we should make on our own. And to those who think LOTR sucks, I suggest more understanding and conversation with people who like LOTR. <P>Back on topic, I agree that YES - the films stray from the books. I agree that YES - there are some parts of the movie that are SO HARD to watch because they are NOT part of the original story. I KNOW that YES - LOTR is a story that exists in books and our hearts and it is IMPOSSIBLE to bring that to the screen. I DISAGREE with the statement that the movies suck and shouldn't be attempted to come to the screen. The movies are just another way to tell the epic saga told in LOTR - just like a book would be. Albeit and expensive and less true to form way of telling the story, it's still one way. And the thousands of people who have spent years, if not their LIVES bringing this to screen deserve a certain level of respect. Tolkien certainly recieved it, and telling the story in movie form is in NO WAY disrecpecting Tolkien - it is a way of HONORING him. These films have introduced more and more people to the Tolkien Universe and for that, PJ and all the people who are making the films possible have unconditional support from me. And no matter what happens in Return of the King, no matter how many articles I read and no matter how many people I talk to who HATE the books AND/OR the films, NO MATTER WHAT I will STILL feel the same way.

[Iarwain]

VERY GOOD!! I like it Davem, but it certainly took a while for you to come to this conclusion. (I was thinking these thoughts less than an hour after I first saw the movie) I will quote myself as I have before:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> With each blow to the defense of Helm's Deep, and each step Frodo took away from Mordor, I looked ahead in my mind to the RotK, and watched the white tower of Minas Tirith crumble, and the armies of Gondor shrivel and fail. I fear now that Frodo will fail in his quest, and that the Morgul army will get past the second circle. Arwen will set sail, and Faramir will be excecuted by Denethor. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I love that paragraph! It expresses my feelings oh so well. Here's another one:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> For those who call this abominable film an "interpretation" by Peter Jackson, I would really like to hear what was written in your copy of LotR. When Frodo gets dragged by an ally-gone-bad about forty miles in the wrong direction to a place where he should never have been, to do things that he would never even considered doing in his greatest ring-fit, I believe that the term "interpretation" can no longer be sensibly used.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>And heres some stuff about Faramir:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> It is true that none of the characters are really the same, but that does not mean that we should cease to recognize the film as an attempt at the recreation of the Books. And as a recreation of the book, PJ and Franny did a smelly job indeed. But of course, you say, the characters are being developed to become what they should be. And this is my answer: humans may be susceptable to temptation, but temptation does not rule the human heart. They may be longing for the ring, but they can refuse it also. And if character development has to start from a base character completely devoid of will power, then the part of the character (namely Faramir's part) can pretty much be abandoned and replaced with the non-"wizard's pupil" power hungry guy we see in the film. Character development can shatter plot development.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Of course, I'm over my anger now...<P>Fiery,<BR>Iarwain<P>[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]<p>[ January 25, 2003: Message edited by: Iarwain ]

I LOVED the movies! I think they were excellent, and that PJ did a great job on them. My mum agrees as well, and no offense, I think that the first book dragged on a bit....i got so bored that I actually skipped it and went on to TTT, then ROTK, which I finished in 2 or 3 days.

[Iarwain]

Welcome to the Downs, Psycho You! As your corpse is probably still warm, I'd like to wish you a happy death, and an enjoyable posting experience! <P>The first time I read LotR, I skipped over the first book of the Return of the King, and then went back and reread it.

[Blue Elf]

I personally didn't like TTT either. For one, they MANGLED my favorite character, Gollum. A lot of people think he came out great, and, he did. He just isn't the Gollum I pictured. The movie Gollum was nothing more than a sad joke of what the result of the Ring was. They made him laughable, not piteable.<P>The Battle of Helm's Deep was much too long. I could keep ranting about the movie, and my friends think I am over critical of it. Maybe I am. Judging it as a movie alone, as though it was never based off a book, I still do not think highly of it. It was too long and drawn of, too much excessive drama, and a huge hunk of the movie was Helm's Deep. The crane shots there were beautifully done. The close up shots may as well have never been there, because you couldn't tell what was going on.<P>Knowing me, I will come to like the movie a little more, as I did the Fellowship. But I don't know...

[Coral]

The man uses big words, therefore we must all believe him

[Iarwain]

As others have said, this thread is likely doomed, and will be gone soon. It has been discussed and discussed, lines have been drawn and drawn again, and in the end there is never a solid conclusion. I'd say that we should all prepare for a mysterious dissapearance in the near future...<P>Iarwain

[Coral]

Your right Iarwain, we should all just walk away. WHO'S WITH ME!<BR>*Coral walks away*

[Darkside]

HEAR! HEAR! Davem! Those were my thoughts (or pretty close to them ) after my first, and only, viewing of TTT. I stayed that angry for a couple of weeks. Then I calmed down and became very sad. Sad that such an abomination has Tolkien's name attached to it. Now, after reading your post, I am all worked up again. Thanks! <P>I don't think anyone is out to convert the "likers of the films" into the "non-likers". But can you imagine a host of infuriated Tolkien (book) fans marching up to Jackson and his cronies and demanding a proper rendition of LotR? That would be a sight to behold!<p>[ January 26, 2003: Message edited by: Darkside ]

[Rosolas]

Well if it wasn't for the films, I would never have dreamed of reading the books!<P>I enjoyed the films, and what I have read of the books (I have completed the Fellowship, and I am nearly half way through the Two Towers) I have enjoyed the books too. <P>I think it is very difficult to stick to a book 100% when outing it on film. Something has to give somewhere, but if you feel that strongly about it don't watch the films! <P>I know a couple of English teachers who have both read the books and seen the films, and they have now problems with it either. They said the same as I say. If these films get people to read who would never normally read the books then that is a good thing.

[Iargwath]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Well if it wasn't for the films, I would never have dreamed of reading the books!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Exactly! I'm not one of those people (i read the book prior to the film), but i was going to put a point across about people who didnt even know the books existed. Not only were the movies good (every book adaption film has its flaws, it is an adaption after all) but they did give people who hadnt read the books, a tendancy to discover more of Middle earth for themselves. Which for me is a positive in many perspectives.

[maikafanawen]

I have grown up knowing Tolkien's stories all my life. And the movies are spectacular. Get over it. <P>It's like a painting. The artist paints it with blues and greens. But you don't like blues and greens ... you like reds and oranges. However, Davem, there are a lot of people who like blues and a lot who like reds, and some who like both. So you go paint with you colors, and let others paint with theirs. In the end we all have our paintings fit just to our taste. So if you love the books, pretend the movies were never made. Be content that you have the choice of shunning the movie, and enjoying the books. Do not criticize those who are openminded and can enjoy both blues and reds however, for those are the true lovers of all the paintings. And so ... who are the true lovers of all of Tolkien.

[The Saucepan Man]

Well, I've said my piece on many other threads, so I'm not going to repeat myself here. Suffice it to say that I've been a fan of the books for 25 years and have thoroughly enjoyed the films.<P>But, I feel that two points are worth reiterating.<P>First:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> You know, in other threads earlier, I said TT was a great movie. I want to take that back. Its not. Its vile. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>davem, I would be intersted to hear why you enjoyed TTT, and then changed your view based upon one article in the Daily Mirror ... and:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Well if it wasn't for the films, I would never have dreamed of reading the books! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Well said, Rosolas, for the many people who have been encouraged to read the books on seeing the films (my wife included).

[The Fifth]

Basically, what most people are saying is "I like the movies, and you don't have to complain about it in a thread that has been discussed for far too long". But, there are others who say "I agree and the movies stink. I'm going to sue Peter Jackson for ruining the name of Tolkien!"<P>As a few people have said before, it is just a movie. If you are angry about it, that is fine, but try calming down a bit, and thinking. I am sure Peter Jackson tried his best, especially when he's making a movie that other people (AKA "people have haven't read the books but are still interested in the movies") would want to watch. As a result, not everyone is satified. You can never make everyone happy. There are too many varied opinions.<P>It's a movie.

[Lush]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I don't think anyone is out to convert the "likers of the films" into the "non-likers". But can you imagine a host of infuriated Tolkien (book) fans marching up to Jackson and his cronies and demanding a proper rendition of LotR? That would be a sight to behold!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I don't know about you, my friend, but I have better things to do with my time than <I>that</I>. Such as watching paint dry. <P>Seriously I mean no disrespect, but this thread has the same impact on me as an over-blown, over-dramatic, badly-scripted Spanish soap opera. In other words, it makes me laugh.<P>I can understand your passion for the works of JRR Tolkien, but to turn that passion into a reason to hate Peter Jackson is, in my opinion, an act of misplacement. And a waste of your passion in general. Cocktail, anyone?

[Darkside]

Well, Lush, my dear, the paint on my wall had just dried, so I thought I would hop onto the Downs and get a little crazy. <P>Oh! I don't "hate" Peter Jackson. I just don't care for his work. I agree - hate is so tiring and not usually worth the energy.

[Inderjit Sanghera]

I nearly dropped my breakfast when I read those words in 'The Look' supplemeny. Though, I think he is right in a way-the movies were to 'Hollywoody' and at times very corny, I never remember cringing whilst reading LoTR. And as for changes to the 'static' Faramir. Has Mrs. Boyens even read the books and understood the whole POINT of Faramir? Mrs. Boyens strikes me as being arrogant and up her own ***, I mean even if Tolkien's character was a little stataic, at least he wasn't a complete idiot like 'your' Faramir.

Well my own thoughts on the movie are this, PJ took too many creative liberties with it and did not stay as true to the book as he did with FOTR. He took out half of the first part of the book and half of the second part of this book and he ruined Helms Deep by added an army of Elves. Personally I think he could have done better.

[Arien]

mmmmm.. first of all let me say The comment is just a load of Buzz words...really I'm telling the truth read it!!!..The Daily Mirror... very, very educational newspaper, very.....they slam and praise almost every movie, may I suggest you read the Daily Telegraph? Unfortunately it dosen't have a reading age of 8!! <P>Ok on a serious note all of you are right, what you think is what you want to think, no-one can change that. We all had our own views of what the film would be like......but we can't all be pleased, and PJ can't consult the whole Tolkien reading world every second to see what to do next. Say if the film had been made in the way...(random name by the way) Lush would have wanted it maybe Davem you still would be unhappy, but be pleased with what you got, most people are and if you are not no- body really cares!!!! <P>And is there not even one tiny bit of the movie you enjoyed????? And what made you change your mind about iT?<p>[ January 27, 2003: Message edited by: Arien ]

[thunder_goddess]

I completly disagree. I thought the movies were great. I wasn't familiar with Tolkiens works, i only knew that he wrote Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit, but i hasn't read any of them before. After i saw the first movie on DVD, i went to see the seccond one. And i can call my self a Tolkien-a-holic. Before the movies came out, i didnt read any of his books, and now i've read the Hobbit, FoTr and TTT. I think the movies got a lot more people interested in the books, then disgusted in them. Most of my friends didnt even know Tolkien wrote anything, and now, we are completly crazy about his books. The movies got a whole generation interested. Its like they woke Tolkien up from the dead or something <P>-----------------------------<P>"Save me Master, I'm drownded" ~ Samwise

[dunadan_aragorn]

i loved the movies. I LOVED THE MOVIES. there i said it. now, i know that pj did make the movie less good by takin out all the meaning and representation. i hate that. but overall, ttt is my fave movie of all time

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Arien, I was just about to ask if anyone had actually read the Daily Mirror. Credibility anyone?

[Cazoz]

Maybe <B>davem</B> is not from the UK, and thus thinks the Daily Mirror is worth wiping one's arse with?!<P>Anyways, I agree with the majority here that the movies are excellent. I think the major problem here is people being narrow-minded. If you don't like the film, you don't like the film. Fair enough. But what people need to do is to be able to separate book from film and realise that both have different intentions, limitations and necessities.<P>Surely the purists cannot be agrieved that every single bloody song hasn't been included! I for one thought they were rather tedious, with only a few exceptions. And they wouldn't have made good cinema.<P>Tolkien had nobody to answer to, and no constraints to what he included in his work. He had artistic freedom. This is why his works are 1000s of pages, full of the rich fruits derived from academic eccentricity such as all of the languages and theology and many of the other little intricacies.<P>Peter Jackson had many constraints, however. Time. Technological limits. Money. He answered to New Line. He had to sate certain demands from Hollywood and the public, whereas Tolkien was free to write anyway he pleased, without having to appease anybody or any institution.<P>Thus, separate the two. Don't whine about the differences between the two, as there are generally valid reasons for most of these. Remember that most people <I>won't</I> have read the books (let alone repeatedly like we all have!) so yes, they did have to modernise and Americanise the language in parts, and throw a bit of slapstick humour in for younger viewers. And of course, they had to soup up the love story. Comes down to simple demand and supply.<P>And for heaven's sake, don't act so offended and take things so personally. You are but a movie stub in these people's eyes. <p>[ January 28, 2003: Message edited by: Cazoz ]

[Darkside]

Cazoz: It would be easy to keep the movies and the books separate if they didn't have the same name. Not to sound flippant, but if I pay to see a movie entitled LotR, I'd better see something that was pretty close to the books I had read. Otherwise, call it LotR: A Loose Interpretation.

[Cazoz]

Well duh!<BR>I wasn't trying to imply that the two should be completely different, I was merely saying that using hindisight (once we've seen all 3) hopefully we might be able to see that certain plot differences might be beneficial, or more practical to filming. And that keeping to Tolkien's work down to the letter will not necessarily lead to the best film. So people should be open-minded and prepared to sacrifice certain elements of the books to allow the films to be better.<BR>Could you imagine an unabridged audio recording of LoTR, let alone such a faithful film?! It would be agonising, sorry!

[Darkside]

Well, actually I can imagine an unabriged audio version of LotR. I just finished listening to one and it was wonderful!!<P>I do understand that the entire story could not be shown on film (I can still dream, can't I ) and things need to be left out. However, I do not understand MAKING UP ridiculous scenes and adding them in place of what Tolkien actually wrote. Shame on Peter Jackson for thinking he could ever improve Tolkien's story!

[Cazoz]

I wouldn't go that far!!<BR>I wouldn't say so much that he was an egotistical type, like Lucas or Spielberg with a God complex, but more that he thought he was improving it. I'd merely say that he was making it more practical in the most part for film production and also simplifying the plot by streamlining arcs/characters (cutting Bombadil, Glorfindel and so on) to make the film more watchable. If a part of a book confuses you, you can go back and re-read the passage/chapter. You cannot do that in a movie theatre thus it needs to be easy to follow. (Then again, if it was confusing, you might sell more dvds!) <P>Is the unabridged version BBC? I've never seen that and I have previously worked in the BBC/ABC audio department for some time.<P>And all of this having been said, I'm not a total PJ sycophant. He's not perfect, and obviously he has made mistakes and chnaged things that irk me. But on the other hand, many things about Tolkien's work I found irritating and inane too. Nothing <I>is</I> perfect. But the Faramir changes, whilst pragmatic in a way, really ****ed me off simply because I liked him so much as a book character. If I didn't like him so much, I wouldn't have minded. Equally with the Elrond sterness, and the whole Council really. But I digress, at least PJ cut Bombadil!

[Darkside]

I agree with the Bombadil cutting, even though I loved his character. Too confusing for those new to Tolkien.<P>I have to say all of Jackson's TTT irked me. Maybe not a God complex, but very irreverent. Sorry, but I never really had a problem with Tolkien's writings. Well, when I read LotR for the first time (many,many years ago) I did get Sauron and Saruman confused. <P> I might have misunderstood you, it was an unabridged reading of the books, not a performance.