Both Views

[hectorberlioz]

why do we (lord of the rings fans) have to be only one extreme? if your a tolkien 'purist' then you cant like the movies? im not saying everybody, just to the people to who it applys. im for both(obviously, since im writing this) im sure more people than me are, and i salute them for not being on one extreme.
-hectorberlioz
postscript: i hope im not considered judgemental:)

PLEASE REALIZE I HAVE REGRETED POSTING ALL MY THREAD STARTERS (DUE TO PEOPLE'S IGNORING MY APOLOGIES) THEREFORE I WILL NEVER POST ANYTHING UNLESS ABSOLUTELY 100% NECESSARY. PLEASE REALIZE MY REGRET AND REFRAIN FROM POSTING ANYTHING 'HURTFUL'.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Well, a Tolkien purist has basically come to mean those who feel that PJ did a poor job of adapting the book. It is someone who would prefer movies that were "purer", i.e. truer to the book. Obviously, we do not expect a word-by-word adaptation; such a thing is ridiculous. We just feel basically

And for the record, I'm rather fond of Bakshi's LOTR and the Rankin-Bass Hobbit and RotK. I feel that they stayed truer to the story, and while they are not superb films, I consider them quite watchable, and think it more important that it's true to the story than that it has x amount of action scenes, etc.

And no, you don't seem judgmental. :)

[Ruinel]

FIRST: just because I think that JRRT's classic works should not be changed by some hack does NOT mean that I didn't think there were things about the movie that were ok. (I liked the weapons crew, the special effects crew, the costume designers, and the CG crew)

SECOND: what PJ did to JRRT's beautiful story is BLASPHEMY!!! PURE BLASPHEMY!!!! ACK!!!!!!!!!! :mad:

.... must ... stop... EEEEEAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

[hectorberlioz]

I apoligize again,sorry.
-hectorberlioz

postscript: if youre wondering hector berlioz is a french classical music composer whom i admire very much. so i use that as my username. I actually admire that hobbit cartoon a bit.

[hectorberlioz]

Okay i wont get offensive to the tolkien purists, and i will look at both viewpoints, so please read on: peter jackson had no right to move glorfindel out of his place just because arwen was more important, he also had no right to make gimli look humourous during battle with wargs and orcs( the wargs are supposed to be extra large wolves, not creatures that look relative to the beast that padme fights with in attack of the clones( okay, you might not care ),elrond is not supposed to look mad 20/4/7, haldir does not die and pj had no right to kill someone unless it happened in the books, and to what exact purpose does frodo rolling down a hill serve?. I went to see two towers twice, first in the view to enjoy and like, second time: to criticise and exploit weakness. Overall though i liked the film ( fellowship did better with following story for sure ). gollum i must say was the highlight of good in the two towers. Faramir needed therapy though. Why does helms deep have to be the majority of the film? there are other important aspect of the book to bring out than just a spectacular battle, and eowyn hugs aragorn amidst troubled times? yeah right. No, i did not like arwen and aragorn almost-love-scene either. :mad: Not to mention aragorn falling off of a cliff for no apparent reason save arwen getting sad and coming to kiss him in his sleep.
Okay now to like the movies. there is no problem im sure with anyone about costumes, sets and so on. Just the way pj put the story on film and messed with carachters. To look at the films in a better light than most of you have( im not criticising )you really have to forget all the vices that pj did to lotr so far, and look at it the way he did, his interpretation of carachters and themes. Its easier to improve pj's work in your mind than it would be if you were in his shoes. You might have done better, yes in your mind, but there are so many tolkien purists that would disagree with you regardless of your bieng one. Problems with how you interpreted things vs what they think is the correct interpretation. The public also has some thing to do with it, the studio probably wanted what the movie-goers wanted, action and humour, a mix i dearly detest. Then you could think 'would peter jackson have done better in my opinion if he could have?' maybe, maybe not. - Your truly,HECTORBERLIOZ:confused:

[Cute_Elfik]

:rolleyes: Without the movie.....no one from the Tolkien fans...weren't speaking about it.....the movie is the advertisment to te world...about that we are still excist!:D
And the book..is the real thing.....and of course the best!:p

[Shadowfax]

I look at the book and the movies as two separate things now. I love the book so much, and I don't think anyone would be able to create it perfectly on screen ever. I also really like the movies, if I think of it not as LotR, but as an adaptation of LotR.

And also, off topic, I know,
Originally posted by hectorberlioz
postscript: if youre wondering hector berlioz is a french classical music composer whom i admire very much. so i use that as my username. Who was wondering?

[hectorberlioz]

I think you looked at lotr books and movies in the right view.
( well someone might be wondering who in the world hector berlioz is )

[gollum9630]

Originally posted by hectorberlioz
I think you looked at lotr books and movies in the right view.
( well someone might be wondering who in the world hector berlioz is )

at least you didnt spam and make anothr post for it.




With the movies, i really like them. They are probably my favorite movies. But thats only movie-wise. They were far from being true to the book, and that was PJ's mistake. We cant change it now. All the people that dont want it to show are losers in my oppinion. Enjoy the book as the true form of LotR, and the movie as a movie.:)

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally posted by gollum9630
All the people that dont want it to show

Eh? Don't want it to show?

[gollum9630]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
Eh? Don't want it to show?

i know a few people that wish LotR was never made into a movie. I am glad it has been because a lot of people that saw the movie decided to read the book for the first time. At least, a lot of people that i know anyways

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by gollum9630
... I am glad it has been because a lot of people that saw the movie decided to read the book for the first time. At least, a lot of people that i know anyways
But I know a lot of people that I can't get to read the books because they say they've seen the movie. :( They don't hear me when I tell them that the movie is far from the story that was told by Tolkien.

[LutraMage]

The films are terrible! :mad: The films are the best thing that were ever made! :D The films are heresy! :mad: The films improved on the books! :D The films should be burned and never allowed a public showing! :mad: PJ improved on Tolkien!:D

Sheesh you guys - I've only been on the Moot for about a month and I'm already tired of hearing the same arguments being posted on different Threads on the Movie Forum both for and against the films. :p Can't we just agree to disagree and leave it at that? I guess the feelings run too deep. :rolleyes:

I shall say this only once and then I'll let you guys get back to arguing. IMO The book is the greatest work of literature ever written. The films are a cinematic treat, vastly entertaining and very well put together - they are not the book so I ain't getting excited about their impact on the known world.

End of snooty rant, will now go back to lurk in background until someone shines torch in eyes again....now, where's my Precious? :p

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally posted by LutraMage
Can't we just agree to disagree and leave it at that?

Personally, I wouldn't mind that in the least. The vast majority of the anti-movie sentiment here has been the result of controversial (or blasphemous :p) statements made by one Black Breathelizer. A number of times, I've asked (some might say begged or pleaded :p) along the same lines.

Originally posted by LutraMage
1) IMO The book is the greatest work of literature ever written. 2) The films are a cinematic treat, vastly entertaining and very well put together - they are not the book so I ain't getting excited about their impact on the known world.

1) I must say that I probably agree with you. To me, Tolkien is the best author I've read. Some have come close, but none reach him. Although I'd probably put Silmarillion over LOTR.
2) A cinematic treat, very well put together, I agree. Vastly entertaining...well, to me they just seemed a little Hollywood cliche. I do think that they are above average movies, and among the best fantasy movies ever made. I wouldn't get excited, 'cept my Mom won't read the book, since she's seen the movies. :(

[gollum9630]

Originally posted by Ruinel
But I know a lot of people that I can't get to read the books because they say they've seen the movie. :( They don't hear me when I tell them that the movie is far from the story that was told by Tolkien.


yah, there are those losers that think the book would be as childish as HP. ( i like HP btw). But who cares, they wont get to enjoy what everyone on entmoot enjoy, the best books ever written :D