Book versus Film Peace Treaty Thead [Archive]

Black Breathalizer

12-05-2003, 02:59 PM

My first reaction to Sister Golden Hair's announcement was to jump in and quote the Webster's definition for that nasty P-word that is evidently considered so derogitory. But the fact of the matter is, the people demanding a literal interpretation of Tolkien's LOTR have taken the p-word as a negative term and somebody's thrown out a truly negative term for the film lovers in response so I do understand and support the admin's position here.

It also seems to me that with the increase of new visitors and posters to this site as the anticipation and excitement builds for the new ROTK film, there has been an equal increase in aggressive film-bashing here. This is a time for all Tolkienites to be celebrating the world's focus on Lord of the Rings instead of engaging in a enthusiasm-sapping civil war.

So being the noble Tolkien message board stateman that I am, I would like to propose a truce. Here are my suggestions for the terms of our truce:

1. No blanket name-calling. In addition to SGH's note about posters, I would propose that this include the film-makers, the books, or the films. You would continue to have every right to like or dislike things about the films. But defend your opinions with arguements that support your position, instead of resorting to simple name-calling. Name calling is not only a lazy person's way of debating (i.e. "Jackson is a hack," "the movies suck", etc.), it's boring to read and doesn't contribute to any ongoing debate or discussion.

2. Remember the popularity of the films are no threat to the books. The two classics can co-exist without one necessarily being better or worse than the other. I may have touched off some initial negative reactions here a year or so ago when I innocently posted that Peter Jackson has improved parts of the story. Gee whiz, I had no idea my comments would turn out to be so provocative! The fact of the matter is, the two complement each other very well.

3. Keep in mind, our opinions are not life-and-death. This is supposed to be fun. If you can't post stuff with a smile on your face, then maybe you should stick to just reading these threads and leave the posting to more mature people.

There you have it!!!! I'm laying down the olive branch to all of my former sworn enemies. (Geez, I sorta feel like Henry Kissinger! Give me the next Nobel Peace Prize!) Okay, so come on over here, jerseydevil and Cirdan and the rest of you p..er, literal adaptation people...let's all have (((a group hug))) and then get in line for the opening of ROTK.

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 03:47 PM

I have certain problems with yout truce.

1) Book fans constantly back up our reasons for disliking the movies. You just choose to ignore these reasons. I will still call Jackson what i think he is - which is a hack. Sorry - but that is the way it is. You can disagree with me - but I suggest you read all my points on my I think this is the case. Just because you ignore my points or disagree - does NOT mean that I and others have not stated reasons for our feelings.

2) "The two classics" - the movies are NOT classics at this point and may never get there. You claim for us not to dislike or criticize the movie before it comes out and say we are wrong in criticizing it. Why is it perfectly fine for you to praise a movie which hasn't even come out and call it a classic?

3) You have given NO indication that you have even read the books. You have gone so far as to post incorrect quotes that you claim characters have said. You then say how neither Jackson nor anyone else could have done a better job than he did.

4) You hardly ever have a smile on your posts and have been condescending toward anyone who does not like the movies. I however have no problems with people liking the movies, I just have a problem with the constant blind praise to Jackson. My criticisms of the movies are backed up with scenes, direction and characters I feel he did not do a good job with. Some I have a stronger feelings against than others.

5) NO ONE is looking for a "literal adaptation" this is another of your erroneous statements yuou keep posting. I have repeatedly said what I would have changed in the books. I just disagree with many of the changes Jackson made. Some very big and unnecessary changes. If you want to call us something - then call us Book Fans - because that is what we are.

If you recognize my points and are able to accept them - I may be willing to negotiate a cease-fire. There are more of us book fans than you or other movie fans would like to admit.

I will say this again - I give the movies a C as MOVIES. I looked through my posts and even though I hated FotR - I had given it a B as a MOVIE when it came out. I have now reduced it down to a C after seeing TT. The dwarf tossing jokes and so forth were unnecessary. I give the movies an F as a Lord of the Rings movie - C as general movie. They are no different than the many other action movies out there. They are typical spoon-fed hollywood action flicks.

Black Breathalizer

12-05-2003, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I have certain problems with yout truce.Why do I suspect it would be easier to achieve lasting peace in the Mideast than to work out a book/film truce? :)

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Why do I suspect it would be easier to achieve lasting peace in the Mideast than to work out a book/film truce? :)
I guess it's called negotiating - something you are unwilling to do. You want it your way or no way. I refuse to accept your terms as they are written.

Celebréiel

12-05-2003, 04:14 PM

I basically agree, I think its time we end this....well...we can only say that until Rotk comes out though...a whole new hoard of things could come from that.
The only thing Im really sick of is the same old things being re-posted over and over,its like, okay we get it.....I think its pretty clear now who likes the movies and who doesnt. :)

..uhm......on second thought....I think this would be best held off until Rotk. You never know...it could be good enough or bad enough to change peoples minds! :p Peace.

Sister Golden Hair

12-05-2003, 04:31 PM

Pigheaded and stubborn are JD and BB.:) Silly boys.

You know BB it might be helpful if your PM feature worked. That way you guys could negotiate privately and then come back to the forum with your results, which would leave the rest of us waiting with baited breath to see. How exciting and fun.:D

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Pigheaded and stubborn are JD and BB.:) Silly boys.

You know BB it might be helpful if your PM feature worked. That way you guys could negotiate privately and then come back to the forum with your results, which would leave the rest of us waiting with baited breath to see. How exciting and fun.:D
Too late - I'm in the process of massing my armies. There is a general call to arms.

And I'm not stubborn - I'm right. There is a difference.

Elfhelm

12-05-2003, 05:09 PM

I, and other people, will continue to avoid this part of Entmoot because of continual violations of common courtesy. I'm glad to see you're trying to bring that back here.

In my opinion, suggesting the murder or various tortures of an artist one disagrees with is unacceptable in any form and should be cause for banning.

That's my 2 cents and I'll be lurking but staying out of these discussions from now on.

Pete

Sister Golden Hair

12-05-2003, 05:13 PM

Well BB, I can't say that I agree with all your terms, or your opinions, but I'll give you credit for trying to make peace.:)

Valandil

12-05-2003, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Well BB, I can't say that I agree with all your terms, or your opinions, but I'll give you credit for trying to make peace.:)

SGH (and JD), can you at least agree with the initial portion of each of the three terms? The part BB has in bold? They sound eminently reasonable to me... :)

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 05:19 PM

Sister Golden Hair

12-05-2003, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by Valandil
SGH (and JD), can you at least agree with the initial portion of each of the three terms? The part BB has in bold? They sound eminently reasonable to me... :) Well, I for one am not now, nor have I ever been a hater of the movies, and am willing I think more than JD because of that to try and cooperate with the treaty. JD is willing to negotiate however.

As for just agreeing with what BB stated in bold, well, yes and no. I don't agree with #2 at all.

Valandil

12-05-2003, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
As for just agreeing with what BB stated in bold, well, yes and no. I don't agree with #2 at all.

Really...??? :confused:

Sister Golden Hair

12-05-2003, 05:47 PM

Originally posted by Valandil
Really...??? :confused: 2. Remember the popularity of the films are no threat to the books. The two classics can co-exist without one necessarily being better or worse than the other. I may have touched off some initial negative reactions here a year or so ago when I innocently posted that Peter Jackson has improved parts of the story. Gee whiz, I had no idea my comments would turn out to be so provocative! The fact of the matter is, the two complement each other very well.I don't agree with this Valandil, because you can see just from the behavior on this forum between book and movie fans that they cannot co-exist peacefully. Also, I believe that the movies have twisted the story to a degree and in many ways, what was once Tolkien is no more, but movie fans will never know what is Tolkien and what isn't if they don't read the books. Therefore, the popularity of the movies is a threat to the books, and what was once strictly a Tolkien story is now living in the shadow of a PJ revision.

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

Valandil

12-05-2003, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I don't agree with this Valandil, because you can see just from the behavior on this forum between book and movie fans that they cannot co-exist peacefully. Also, I believe that the movies have twisted the story to a degree and in many ways, what was once Tolkien is no more, but movie fans will never know what is Tolkien and what isn't if they don't read the books. Therefore, the popularity of the movies is a threat to the books, and what was once strictly a Tolkien story is now living in the shadow of a PJ revision.

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

As far as '...behavior between book and movie fans...' - I really think you need the word "extremist" in there somewhere. I am a fan of BOTH! It seems like I'm not alone by any means. The loud shouting comes from the extremists. (EDIT: and they're the ones - especially those who DON'T WANT PEACE - who are keeping some of us away from this forum)

As for the other, I don't see how the book could really be "threatened" by the success of the movie. Some people don't know exactly what Tolkien wrote, so what? Isn't that the case with any movie adaptation from a book? Can you think of any other books you consider 'threatened' thereby?

olsonm

12-05-2003, 06:04 PM

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie. I doubt this board is a microcosm of the world at large. It's certainly undeniable that sales of the book have skyrocketed since the release of the films. But I don't know any statistics like the one you want. I do know that my mother saw and loved the first two movies and then couldn't wait anymore to find out what happens. So I read it to her: I came up with my own voices and even sang when necessary. Now, my mother has a terrible memory but the book left such an impression that on her that I can now, neraly a year later, briefly describe a scene or mention an important bit of dialouge from the Return of the King and she'll know immediately what I'm talking about. She doesn't seem interested in comparing the book and film, she loves them both and can differentiate between them. Take that as you will.

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by Valandil
As far as '...behavior between book and movie fans...' - I really think you need the word "extremist" in there somewhere. I am a fan of BOTH! It seems like I'm not alone by any means. The loud shouting comes from the extremists. (EDIT: and they're the ones - especially those who DON'T WANT PEACE - who are keeping some of us away from this forum)

I'm not an extremist - it's just that I have been here for 2 years and had to put up with movie fans coming and going and telling me that I can't judge the movies. That I have to seperate the movies from the boosk, that the movies chouldn't be page by page book to screen. I know all that - I have PARTICULAR problems with the movies. If you want to consider that extreme - that is fine. I have AotC on DVD - I think I have watched it once or twice since i have gotten it. I saw the 12:01 showing. I saw it and have it because it is Star Wars - which at one time I was obsessed with. Do I like the new movies? No - they're dumbed down - simplistic typical hollywood crap. But they're Star Wars.

As for the other, I don't see how the book could really be "threatened" by the success of the movie. Some people don't know exactly what Tolkien wrote, so what? Isn't that the case with any movie adaptation from a book? Can you think of any other books you consider 'threatened' thereby?
Because it creates a commercialized product. There is a REASON why the Tolkien Estate doesn't want Jackson to have a museum in New Zealand. I personally can't wait in a year - all the movie fans will go back into the woodwork and forget about Lord of the Rings. Then we can talk about THE Lord of the Rings.

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
I don't agree with this Valandil, because you can see just from the behavior on this forum between book and movie fans that they cannot co-exist peacefully. Also, I believe that the movies have twisted the story to a degree and in many ways, what was once Tolkien is no more, but movie fans will never know what is Tolkien and what isn't if they don't read the books. Therefore, the popularity of the movies is a threat to the books, and what was once strictly a Tolkien story is now living in the shadow of a PJ revision.

I wonder if there are any stats out there that someone could find to see how many movie goers became Tolkien educated before or after the movie.

I think you're missing the bigger picture on the "threat" or whatever the movies have on the books. I see it in the light of, since the movies came out, how many people have been brought to the books. Certainly, the book's readers haven't been lost. The shear sales alone of Tolkien's books have never been larger. That in and of itself is not a threat, but it has increased Tolkien's genius for years to come. Granted the movies don't represent every detail of the books, but they have certainly brought more fans that probably would have never read the books...

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 06:22 PM

Originally posted by Dúnedain
I think you're missing the bigger picture on the "threat" or whatever the movies have on the books. I see it in the light of, since the movies came out, how many people have been brought to the books. Certainly, the book's readers haven't been lost. The shear sales alone of Tolkien's books have never been larger. That in and of itself is not a threat, but it has increased Tolkien's genius for years to come. Granted the movies don't represent every detail of the books, but they have certain brought more fans that probably would have never read the books...
You can't just go by those numbers. I bought a lot of Tolkien books after the movies came out. I also bought my cousin the boxed set (NOT the movie covered book) but he has yet to read them at all. Just because the sales of the books have increased - not everyone has read them or hadn't already read them before.

Valandil

12-05-2003, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Because it creates a commercialized product. There is a REASON why the Tolkien Estate doesn't want Jackson to have a museum in New Zealand. I personally can't wait in a year - all the movie fans will go back into the woodwork and forget about Lord of the Rings. Then we can talk about THE Lord of the Rings.

So then, where's the 'threat'?

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Valandil
So then, where's the 'threat'?
Because it's just like taking a Dostoyevsky like Crime and Punishment and making a disney cartoon from it - complete with dolls and playing cards. It cheapens the original. jackson has cheapened Lord of the Rings enough by having dwarf tossing jokes, merry and pippin burping or farting, implying that pipeweed is pot, etc.

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 06:31 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Because it's just like taking a Dostoyevsky like Crime and Punishment and making a disney cartoon from it - complete with dolls and playing cards. It cheapens the original. jackson has cheapened Lord of the Rings enough by having dwarf tossing jokes, merry and pippin burping or farting, implying that pipeweed is pot, etc.

Stop repeating the damn crap over and over, jeez...You are sounding like a broken record, we heard you the first 983 times...

That still isn't a threat, that's your opinion on the outcome of the movies...

The movies have still brought more fans to Tolkien than if there was not a movie...

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Dúnedain
Stop repeating the damn crap over and over, jeez...You are sounding like a broken record, we heard you the first 983 times...

I'll repeat it as many times as I want to. If you don't want to hear it - then put me on ignore. i really don't care. What I'm tired of is hearing the movie fans make the comments they have made over and over again. YOU GUYS ARE SOUNDING LIKE A BROKEN RECORD.

That still isn't a threat, that's your opinion on the outcome of the movies...

The movies have still brought more fans to Tolkien than if there was not a movie...
They have brought JACKSON fans - and Orlando Bloom fans. They are NOT racing to Oxford or England - they're racing to New Zealand.

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
They have brought JACKSON fans - and Orlando Bloom fans. They are NOT racing to Oxford or England - they're racing to New Zealand.

lol this is comical. So you are saying that the movies haven't brought any TOLKIEN fans? If that's the case man, that's a pretty obtuse stance to take...

Falagar

12-05-2003, 06:41 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I'll repeat it as many times as I want to. If you don't want to hear it - then put me on ignore. i really don't care. What I'm tired of is hearing the movie fans make the comments they have made over and over again. YOU GUYS ARE SOUNDING LIKE A BROKEN RECORD.

They have brought JACKSON fans - and Orlando Bloom fans. They are NOT racing to Oxford or England - they're racing to New Zealand.
I have to disagree with you there. I have met a lot of people (and when I say a lot, I mean a lot) of people who have watched the movies, then read the books, soon after starting the Silmarillion, and ending up as Tolkien-fanatics (not as Jackson-fanatics).

thranduil

12-05-2003, 06:45 PM

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 06:48 PM

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by Dúnedain
lol this is comical. So you are saying that the movies haven't brought any TOLKIEN fans? If that's the case man, that's a pretty obtuse stance to take...
I did NOT say they didn't bring in ANY fans. I just don't think they brought in as many fans as you would like to beleive. They brought in MOVIE fans. People who want to go to new Zealand. Growing up - I wanted to go to Oxford and England. I have been to Oxford - although sadly only to drive through. But I was excited to be in Oxford and see the streets where Tolkien walked.

The movies are creating fans that want to go to New Zealand. Who want to see Jackson, to see Orland Bloom. I have no desire to go to New Zealand because of Lord of the Rings. The only reason I would like to see New Zealand is because it seem like a beautiful country. I will go to Oxford anf England to see the REAL Lord of the Rings location though. I want to see Tolkien's grave.

thranduil

12-05-2003, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
That's good - because I haven't met any.
SGh has gotten a friend into reading the books - before she loved the movies. Now that she is reading the books - she is quickly becoming a movie hater. But that is only ONE person - in all the people I have talked to.

Geez. Get out more man. :D And I'd say you have it wrong, the movies brought more fanz to the books than YOU would like to believe.

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 07:18 PM

Originally posted by thranduil
Geez. Get out more man. :D And I'd say you have it wrong, the movies brought more fanz to the books than YOU would like to believe.
Did they? How do you know? YOu claim my statement is wrong - do you have anything to back yours up other than perception? I don't see a ton of people flying off and wanting to go to England - I do see a bunch of people wanting to go to New Zealand though.

Elfhelm

12-05-2003, 08:06 PM

Amazingly diverted off-topic. Are we surprised? I say ban 'em. If they can't agree to simple ground rules of common courtesy, they shouldn't be here. There is no acceptable reason for assininity in the Moot.

Black Breathalizer

12-05-2003, 08:08 PM

Wow.

The mere fact that there are actual Tolkien fans who actually feel the novels are threatened by the appearance of the new films speaks volumes...and explains a lot.

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Amazingly diverted off-topic. Are we surprised? I say ban 'em. If they can't agree to simple ground rules of common courtesy, they shouldn't be here. There is no acceptable reason for assininity in the Moot.
I'm wondering who you wish to be banned and who you thihk dragged this offtopic.

As for common curtesy - I was wondering if your definition is the way you acted about my avatar. :rolleyes:

Ruinel

12-05-2003, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Here are my suggestions for the terms of our truce:

1. No blanket name-calling. Ummm... you mean I can't call PJ a [something bad that I can't say here] :( ... oh, I'm sorry... I can't agree to that. :o

2. Remember the popularity of the films are no threat to the books. Yeah, dude, they never were. :rolleyes:

3. Keep in mind, our opinions are not life-and-death. This is supposed to be fun.
*yawn*
There you have it!!!! I'm laying down the olive branch to all of my former sworn enemies. (Geez, I sorta feel like Henry Kissinger! Give me the next Nobel Peace Prize!) Okay, so come on over here, jerseydevil and Cirdan and the rest of you p..er, literal adaptation people...let's all have (((a group hug))) and then get in line for the opening of ROTK.
First of all, back the [heck] up, I'll give you something alright :mad: ...I'm not hugging any movie mor... errr :o... *checks for SGH*... eh... vague screenplay lover :) (see? look... smilie). :p

Anyway... I think your bull [poopie] "peace offering" is just another way to stick it to the people who truely love Tolkien's work. How about this... you go and get LotR... read all three (FotR, TTT, and RotK) ... then we'll talk. ;)

Elf Girl

12-05-2003, 08:24 PM

Ruinel, I'm sure you mean all six...

In any case, I am using this moment to officially resign from all book/movie debates. I'm sick of how poisoned it's all gotten. You'll find me down in GM arguing about gay marraige.

Good-bye.

Ruinel

12-05-2003, 08:30 PM

Originally posted by Elf Girl
Ruinel, I'm sure you mean all six...

I do mean all six books, and the three parts that it is sold in the stores as. :)

We'll miss you Elf Girl, but I'm glad you are putting your efforts into something more constructive than going back and forth with these... misguided individuals. ;)

mithrand1r

12-05-2003, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by Falagar
I have to disagree with you there. I have met a lot of people (and when I say a lot, I mean a lot) of people who have watched the movies, then read the books, soon after starting the Silmarillion, and ending up as Tolkien-fanatics (not as Jackson-fanatics).

I will not claim that I have met many people who have watched the movies, then read the books, . . . since I have not.

One person I have spoken to that (1) did not read the books (2) saw FOTR in theatre.

He could not exactly follw the movie. He thought the movie was too rushed and did not explain everything in a proper fashion. He thought the movie was ok, but a bit long.

I consider him a bright guy, so when he says this, it makes me think of the movie as someone who is not familiar with Tolkien.

Since I am familiar with JRRT LOTR, it is easy for my mind to fillin the gaps that may be present in the PJ&CO LOTR. I did the same with Bakshi's version. (The Tolkien Sarcasm page does an excellent job of showing some of the short comings of Bakshi's film)

He may never read JRRT LOTR or see the other 2 films that PJ produced.

Another two friends of mine think that the Pippen & Merry Firework scene actually occured in the book. (I stopped disagreeing with them since there was no point in disagreeing with over a book/movie.)

Falagar I am glad that you have seen such response to the films.

JD,

I actually have an interest to go NZ, Australia and the UK as well as other areas of the world. (Whether I go is another matter. :p) I will admit that before the films I did not think of NZ as a place to visit. (the movie did show some fantastic sceneary though) I still would see Australia before NZ.

BB,

I think a truce could be worked out, but more details will need to be worked out.

(1. ) sounds good on surface, but I would change it to:
People should be respectful of others. If they make statements, they should back up their statements with proofs and/or evidence that shows why they think the way they do.

This may still require sum finetuning and several amendments. After all the jerseydevil is in the details. ;)

(2.) time will tell

(3.) yes this is supposed to be fun. :p

Purposely making statements and/or topics that are sure to generate a reaction, on an almost continous basis is not my idea of fun, although it would appear to be for other people.

If one is going to make outrageous claims/statements they should be able to back their claims/statements with facts. If facts are not available then clearly indicate that their claims/statements are their opinions.

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I'm wondering who you wish to be banned and who you thihk dragged this offtopic.

Now you know how we feel about every single thread in this forum. Even on threads where we were telling people about a new video that was out or a new review or something like that, someone somewhere came in bashing something about it and took the thread off-topic. That's happened to a number of threads in the movie forum...

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Ruinel
I do mean all six books, and the three parts that it is sold in the stores as. :)

We'll miss you Elf Girl, but I'm glad you are putting your efforts into something more constructive than going back and forth with these... misguided individuals. ;)

It's funny but there were no problems in this forum until the people who complained about every damn thing PJ and Co. did in every damn thread, even one's that didn't warrant it...

mithrand1r

12-05-2003, 09:29 PM

Originally posted by Dúnedain
. . . someone somewhere came in bashing something about it and took the thread off-topic. That's happened to a number of threads in the movie forum...

I think that statement is a fair statement.

I also have noticed that a thread will proceed on a given topic, then someone will make a statement that is not related to the topic at hand. This will usually lead toward the path of
1=>reply
2=>counter-reply
3=>repeat steps 1&2 ;)

Perhaps something should be added in that "peace" offereing about not inserting off topic comments in a thread. or maybe having all replys ot off topic comments taken to a new thread.

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 09:36 PM

I have no problems or issues with topics changing, because ultimately they usually do get back on topic. The only problems or issues I have are when it goes off-topic and turns into a fight or mudslinging contest, ya know?

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by Dúnedain
Now you know how we feel about every single thread in this forum. Even on threads where we were telling people about a new video that was out or a new review or something like that, someone somewhere came in bashing something about it and took the thread off-topic. That's happened to a number of threads in the movie forum...
Oh - obviously you haven't had a chance to look at the 1 YEAR HISTORY of BB's posts to know what had been going on here. How long have you been back? One month? And YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON? Give me a break. Read BB's posts. Read his constant bashing. I'm tired of it and I will state my opinions whether anyone likes it or not. If anyone wants to see all the things I have said beside the hack comments - look at my 2 YEARS worth of posts.

As for the review thread - there were only a couple of off topic posts and I was talking to Bropous - go into the FotR threads BEFORE you were even here. Bropous and I used to get into heated arguments - he made a post that surprised me about him hating the movies. I responded to him and joked around with him - he was VERY MUCH like BB is. If you find that offensive or out of line that is fine - but it is the truth. It then went back on topic.

As for the review topic - sorry - but questioning the review and making comments about it is STILL on topic even if it negative to the review. Were we expected to just accept the review when the reviewer gets all these benefits from Jackson?

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Oh - obviously you haven't had a chance to look at the 1 YEAR HISTORY of BB's posts to know what had been going on here. How long have you been back? One month? And YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON? Give me a break. Read BB's posts. Read his constant bashing. I'm tired of it and I will state my opinions whether anyone likes it or not. If anyone wants to see all the things I have said beside the hack comments - look at my 2 YEARS worth of posts.

As for the review thread - there were only a couple of off topic posts and I was talking to Bropous - go into the FotR threads BEFORE you were even here. Bropous and I used to get into heated arguments - he made a post that surprised me about him hating the movies. I responded to him and joked around with him - he was VERY MUCH like BB is. If you find that offensive or out of line that is fine - but it is the truth. It then went back on topic.

As for the review topic - sorry - but questioning the review and making comments about it is STILL on topic even if it negative to the review. Were we expected to just accept the review when the reviewer gets all these benefits from Jackson?

Get off your high-horse for christ's sake. Just because I wasn't posting for a while or have only been registered for about a year doesn't mean I haven't read things. I have no problem with people voiceing their opinions whether they are negative or positive, but it does get annoying when the SAME negative comments are made over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and well you get the point. It's happened in a number of threads. Don't believe me? Then I suggest YOU go read them.

Get over yourself...

Dúnedain

12-05-2003, 09:43 PM

And for the record once again.

I am not only talking about people who don't like the movies. BB pisses me off too. I'm sick of him saying the same sh1t over and over again as well. Harldy any discussion or thread is safe here anymore, because we are either gonna hear the same thing from BB or the same thing from JD.

How about this for a compromise?

Make one thread and title it "Over and Over again, a Hobbits tale" :p

jerseydevil

12-05-2003, 09:48 PM

Originally posted by Dúnedain
Get off your high-horse for christ's sake. Just because I wasn't posting for a while or have only been registered for about a year doesn't mean I haven't read things. I have no problem with people voiceing their opinions whether they are negative or positive, but it does get annoying when the SAME negative comments are made over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and well you get the point. It's happened in a number of threads. Don't believe me? Then I suggest YOU go read them.

Get over yourself...
Why don't you get off yourself. Yes - your not being here does have a bearing on whether your opinions are valid concerning the current blowup. You haven't been here and you haven't seen all that has been going on. It would be good if you got off your damn high horse.

Yes - things do get repeated over and over and over again. It is also because if you see - a lot of time the person who is being responded to is a movie newbie with less than 10 posts. Or it's with BB going on and on and on and on about how Jackson is king. As I said before - you don't like what I have to say - put me on damn ignore.