LORD ot RINGS - horrible, completely lacking

Denarth · Post by **Denarth** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 5:00 am

Of course I am talking about the old animated version. But since you’re here…..

Well, I saw the movie a second time and I still say WOW, magnificent effort. Loved all 3 hrs of it. Way back, when I had heard they were going to make the movie I was scared. I thought if they don’t do this epic trilogy justice I am going to be pi$$ed (and heartbroken). I was also scared because back in college I caught some animated version and can remember being so disappointed. The film was horrible, completely lacking.

I read the books in high school, starting with The Hobbit and was just swept away like so many who read them are. When I started hearing good reviews, I let myself get a little excited. But I remained guarded, because surely these people didn’t love the books as much as I had, and I knew to capture the magic of this story it would have to be a huge, magnanimous undertaking. When I heard of the budget I was even more excited, and when I heard more than one movie, ala Star Wars, I was totally sucked in and rooting for the home team.

But alas! My fears were allayed and then some. All the previous posts about excellent cinematography, f/x (there are many f/x, despite what some posts say, its just that they’re not glitzy and hollywood cheese like so many action films, they’re more subtle I guess), sound, and casting (for the most part, see my nit picks later) I agree with.

Gorgeous elves! Salt-of- the- earth dwarves. Merry hobbits (no pun). Mysterious and powerful wizards. Ugly orcs and Uruk-Hai (how bout that birthing scene). Menacing Nazgul (more later). Were all cast and portrayed wonderfully. Standouts in order are Frodo (pleasantly surprised, he worked amazingly well for me), Galadriel, Gandalf (he grew on me, looks didn’t match for me, a testament I guess to one fine actor), Gollum (which I imagined to be hard to bring to life) fit real well. Legolas, Boromir, Pippin, Aragorn, and orcs (All character races were well represented.). And no I didn’t forget Liv Tyler. She definitely gets two schwings up. But adding Arwen-n-Aragorn was just hollywood for hollywood sake and Arwen can’t be listed with those on the main theme.

Breathtaking scenery, above ground and below!!! Those dudes at the Falls of Rauros simply rock (pun). They were like Mount Rushmore x10. But, Why do I like those Moria scenes so much?! They were amongst my favorites, and I was glad to see mention of that fact in other posts. I guess it’s because when I read the books, I had so many distinct visual images of surroundings, hard not to with Tolkien, that they are implanted there. And to supplant these images would take quite a bit. New Zealand was perfect extreme scenery and complemented my concepts nicely. But getting back to the Moria question, … well reading it I guess it was hard to imagine (for me) an expansive underground, I always pictured narrow hallway-like passages but mostly blackness, that and nothing-ness. But Hollywood pulled it off. They surpassed anything that I could ever have dreamt up for that.. and I would have imagined old JRR giving it the nod himself. The records room, the shafts of light, the grand room, and those bridges… were they cool or what? Add in the near-first person shooter perspective of arrows whizzing buy and glancing off stone, a crumbling bridge with oh-so-real physics (mass, momentum ), not to mention the Balrog and that my friends makes one he!! of sequence in my book. IMOH

Jackson stayed true enough to the original story for me and in parts enhanced my perception, but being a true LotR fan I can’t help but get my nit picks in. So they are – in order of annoyance:

- The Nazgul and shire, bree, weathertop scene etc.– was it just me (for I haven’t seen this beef posted yet) or did they seem a little too keystone coppish. In the book they were absolutely, positively to be feared above all else, save the unmentionable one. They looked fantastic and it felt like they had presence, but their deeds fell way short. In the shire, the first one homed in on them. It was good at first but ‘ the ol’ throw the rock over there’ routine was a farce. Better to let the Nazgul leave none-the-wiser on his own and be left with the impression of sixth sense. The Bree scene was just disjointed. Strider and Frodo just sizing one another up (this dialogue cut way short) then cut to Pippin asleep in bed. Then all four Nazgul, at once mind you lest we wake a small defenseless hobbit up and tip him off in time to attack us Nazgul, thrashing stuffed pillows. Weathertop was no better, missed that Gandalf was passing near and had drawn several away, then again with the outnumbering of the hobbits and the OK lets wait and all walk at once towards him. For them to be right on the heels and sure of the ringbearer identity (according to the movie) and to be the bad muthas they are…. well on to other things.

- The Legolas / Gimli relationship. Legolas was great, (he’s an arrow drawing machine) Gimli was a miss. Not near enough dialogue for these guys to understand their character development. The Two Towers should have ample ground to make this up, but much I’m afraid was lost. Opportunity missed. Gimli looked good, the actor did well, but the dialogue and screenplay didn’t come close.

- Elrond: acted as if he had a stick up his arse. (acting was good but they didn’t capture the tremendous good he stood for) also barely cracked a smile.

- Arwen/Aragorn mini-fling: If your going to have it, take some time to develop the whole story. Which I’m sure most fans know is included in the appendix of RotK. But a mini-fling into a 3hr packed movie didn’t make any sense.

- They weren’t in Moria long enough. Gandalf says it’s a 4-day journey from here (or did he say weeks) then cut to the scene at the 3 path decision towards the end , in which they combine Pippin’s incident. Had they stayed truer to book, they could have done some cool Hitch****-like suspense things with the drums fading in and out.

- Sam not looking in the Mirror of Galadriel. I’ll just throw in here that most of Lothlorien was missed…Spending the night, Gollum, the blindfolds, all of which could be excellent dialogue and character insight.

- Frodo guessing the riddle of the Moria door. Also in Moria before I let it go, can orcs scamper up and down vertical columns of stone? And why shoot like hell at them then surround them without so much as arrow. Not even from some wiseass in the back?

- Bree. I missed Barleyman Butterbur's multi-tasking.

- The whole time crunch thing, which I will yield to practicality here, how do you take a 3hr deal, leave all the action in and give the perspective of a long, long journey without utterly boring everyone. I saw on other posts some would like a 4 hr movie with intermission, and for that matter stretch it to four movies… there is certainly enough material. My idea would be to play the map up. Tolkien was excellent about making maps. So show the map like in the old movies with the line progressing along the travelers’ route. Also done well in Raiders ot Lost Ark. But I’m a map freak so maybe it wouldn’t work.

- The Saruman-Gandalf dual.

- The split of the fellowship at the end. Didn’t feel right. The only example I’ll list is Sam almost drowning, yes he waded out there in the book. But after 3hrs of practically non-stop action, your gonna play Sam up as semi-suicidal by showing long drawn out cuts of him sinking. The visuals also felt too Titanic, and I kept hearing pan pipes playing while Cate Blanchetts whistle blowing and raspy voice ‘Cm back!’ Come back”!

- Casting/character development. Gimli missed. Elrond could have been better. Saruman was decent. Sam, well I couldn’t shake “Rudy”, as he was stepping out of the shire I heard “I’ve been ready for this my whole life”. Aragorn, the jury is still out. Good ranger but I’ve yet to see his growing assertion to Kingliness. But hey we’ve got 2 more movies to go. Merry, jury is still out. Sauron (practically impossible to embody an evil spirit and satisfy everyone) One question though, Why wasn’t Sauron invisible when he had it cut from his finger?

- No gaffer.

all nit-picks, some more annoying than others. But great flick.

Leaving on a good note

Some other favorite parts… the shadow world (again Hollywood enhanced this perception for me) very cool effect. Saurons Eye was also well conceived. The Boromir death scene (those are some thick arrows). The edition of subtitles when speaking in elvish was a great salute to Tolkiens dabbling/devotion in languages.

I welcome all your thoughts on these matters, especially if you agree with me.

Sorry for the cheap marketing trick, which was akin to “if you like sex click here”. But I wanted to start a fresh thread.

O Elbereth! Gilthoniel!

EMINEM · Post by **EMINEM** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 5:49 am

From one Tolkienite to another, let me welcome you to SYM, Master Denarth. Well met! Interesting review. Even if your expectations were not met, look forward to the DVD version, where 58 edited minutes will be restored. Also, keep your eyes peeled for "The Two Towers" trailer due mid-February, though I fear it may just serve to whet our appetites and intensify our hunger for the second installment. 351 days and counting...

[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: EMINEM ]

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 5:56 am

I have to say, and I'm ashamed to admit this, that I haven't seen it yet. I want too, I just haven't found the time. Soon though, yes soon... muwahahahaha...

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 5:59 am

Originally posted by Nippy:
I have to say, and I'm ashamed to admit this, that I haven't seen it yet. I want too, I just haven't found the time. Soon though, yes soon... muwahahahaha...

Same here actually

Probably going to watch it tonight hopefully

Rob-hin · Post by **Rob-hin** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 6:06 am

Originally posted by EMINEM:
 Even if your expectations were not met, look forward to the DVD version, where 58 edited minutes will be restored.

What do you mean with this? Are there 58 minutes cut from the movie, and will these be pasted back into the movie as a whole?

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 6:17 am

Originally posted by Nippy:
I have to say, and I'm ashamed to admit this, that I haven't seen it yet. I want too, I just haven't found the time. Soon though, yes soon... muwahahahaha...

Well I saw it at christmas and didn't find it all that great.

But then again - I've never read the books and I don't think I'll ever bother reading the books (to much other stuff to read).
I find the story to be an okay story and the effects are truly magnificent - but from a movie-viewpoint I feel it has been hyped to much but the countless of Tolkin-fans

But then again - I should be careful what I say, for you peeps would proberly burn me as a herectic

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 6:29 am

Originally posted by Xandax:
but from a movie-viewpoint I feel it has been hyped to much but the countless of Tolkin-fans

I get the feeling i might end up with the same viewpoint

[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: Mr Sleep ]

Nightmare · Post by **Nightmare** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 7:21 am

Originally posted by Xandax:
But then again - I should be careful what I say, for you peeps would proberly burn me as a herectic

Burn him!

Die, fiend, DIE!

Ned Flanders · Post by **Ned Flanders** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 7:40 am

Denarth,

You certainly haven't left anything out. I share many of the same sentiments but feel hollywood did an excellent job of bringing this book to life. I always thought it would be interesting to do six movies (one for each book), but I feel that would only appeal to the die hard fan and Hollywood needs to attract more than the die hard fans.

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 7:57 am

I think a lot of the nit-picks and quibbles, especially those about character development, can be solved by viewing Fellowship of the Ring, not as a single movie, but as the first part of a nine-hour movie. I have not read the books and thought that the relationship between elves and dwarves was at best unexplained and at worst mistreated.

However, my wife says that I should give Jackson the benefit of the doubt and save some of my questions (for instance, why is Gimli so set against seeing the One Ring in the possession of an elf? Is his prejudice against elves personal or is it characteristic of all dwarves?) until all three movies come out.

I thought that the ending was a downer, but if I imagine that everything will come together by the end of Return of the King and that this was just the first act, it makes some of the distaste much more palatable. It's just the waiting two more years for the whole thing to come together that bothers me.

Alienbob · Post by **Alienbob** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 11:09 am

I thought the movie was great. sure it wasnt perfect but its very hard to make a book like Tolkiens into a movie. Everyone who reads the books will interpret and imagine things diferently.

Denarth · Post by **Denarth** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 2:56 pm

@EMINEM - DVD here I come. Interesting? As in you found it amusing?, insulting?, on the mark?, utter foolishness? I had hoped for more from you. Your reputation in these halls preceed you Master EMINEM. But I am glad it held your attention, and thankful for your support.

@Xadax - is there any kindling around here?

@Mr Sleep - is it because you have read the books and liked them? or just hype in general? I was careful not to watch trailers and would turn a deaf ear towards most reports, interviews, etc.

@Ned - 6 movies, that would be something, but your right, the masses wouldn't sit for it.

@HighLord - I suppose you and your wife are correct, at least I hope so. Have you plans to read the book?

Skuld · Post by **Skuld** » Fri Jan 18, 2002 11:59 pm

I too share many of your viewpoints. I think they coulda left out the Arwen/Aragorn mini fling. They definately should've put more dialoge behind Legolas and Gimli because people who have never read the books are gonna see them as minor characters. And someone made a comment about why Gimli doesn't want the ring to be in the hands of elves. And if you've paid attention in reading any Tolkien novels or are even familiar with Norse Mythology you'd see that dwarves and elves are almost exact opposite. In the novels dwarves and elves have always had a history hatred for each other, which is why the Legolas/Gimli friendship is sucha a big deal.

OK here's a small tangent but I promise it won't be long, but I could be wrong. I took mythology in HS and was realy interested in Norse myhthology for no other reason than it was the basis for the races and languages of Middle Earth. Interestingly enough I was doing a little research on my own, and stumbled upon the Norse Eddas. And in the section that contains how the dwarves were created it contains a list of names of the dwarves. And surprisingly almost every dwarves name in Tolkien novels comes straight from there with slight modifications for easier pronunciation purposes. And even the esteemed Gandalf was in Norse Mythology a dwarf that dwelt in the mould none the less. If anyone's interested here's a link to the site I'm reffering to [url="http://www.midhnottsol.org/lore/prose2/006.html"]http://www.midhnottsol.org/lore/prose2/006.html[/url]

Back to the movie... I noticed a few changes in the story. Number one. After Frodo gets stabbed and is on his way to Rivendell to recieve healing they pass where Bilbo met up with the Trolls so many years ago and I think that scene could easily have been swapped for the mini fling. Now for the first change in story that they made. If I recall correctly it was Arwen that came to the rescue of Frodo, when in the book an Elf named Glorfindel met them on the road right after they'd passed the Troll's cave. The second change I noticed was that The Sword That Was Broken was kept in the House of Elrond in the movie, but in the book Aragorn carried it with him in hos travels.

Now for things left out that could've been easilly added at the expense of crap like the mini fling. I think they did a good job with Lorien, but I remember the Elves using ladders in the book and the staircases made it look too much like an Ewok village(I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this after actually thinking about it). I agree that they should have put in the who entry into Lorien sequence. This being the overnight with Gollum's intrusion(giving him a little more screen time, btw they did an awesome job on him). And they should've had to cross the river on the rope and do the whole blindfold thing. Moria was awesome as well, but the whole deal with the drums fading in and out in the background could've been added. When I heard they were taking out my favorite character(outside of the company of course) I almost cried. I know he has nothing to do with the main story but they should've found room for the chapters involving Tom Bombadil and the Old Forest. They could've done a real kick ass job with the Old Man Willow scene.

As someone previously mentioned they thought the movies should be made, one for each book ending with 6 movies that I would guess would be almost 2 hrs each. But the reason for this would be for die hard fans like ourselves who don't want to see even the smallest detail left unmentioned, and to keep Hollywood nonsense like the mini fling outta there. I agree but it will never happen because it would almost definately not be very profitable to the filmmakers, so I'll deal until someone does it again. Personally I would love to see it redone as an animated classic with Hobbits that were almost exactly as I pictured them. But this would have to be done in 3-6 installments. If this is in fact going to be the next Star Wars as some were saying why not do the same and go with 6 films. It'll take longer, but everyone will get what they want out of the deal. OK enough writing now.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 1:50 am

Originally posted by Denarth:
[QB<snip>
@Xadax - is there any kindling around here?
<snip>
[/QB]

Nope - to bad for you heh

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 8:05 am

Originally posted by Skuld:
They definately should've put more dialoge behind Legolas and Gimli because people who have never read the books are gonna see them as minor characters. And someone made a comment about why Gimli doesn't want the ring to be in the hands of elves. And if you've paid attention in reading any Tolkien novels or are even familiar with Norse Mythology you'd see that dwarves and elves are almost exact opposite. In the novels dwarves and elves have always had a history hatred for each other, which is why the Legolas/Gimli friendship is sucha a big deal.

I think this was my biggest question about Tolkein's Middle Earth. My main exposure to elves and dwarves is not through traditional mythology, but through AD&D. In most AD&D campaigns, elves and dwarves get along pretty well. Elves like forests, and dwarves like mines and hills, but both are basically good races that compliment each other. In some cases there is some racial hatred among the good factions, but generally they ally themselves together to ward of the humans, orcs, goblins or other evil races.

I have seen some "Making of . . ." stuff on the Sci-Fi Channel and on Fox and one of the actors (Orlando Bloom, I think) is talking about how Tolkien's elves hold dwarves in contempt for being invasive in their treatment of nature; they mine the earth, horde riches and generally do as they please while the elves build their cities around natural settings, not through them.

The movie did not make this clear, and could have very easily with a little bit of well-place dialogue or a short soliloquy by Gandalf or the narrator.

@Denarth: I do plan on reading the books, but I am trying to decide if I want to read them before or after all three movies come out. I think I may enjoy the movies more if I haven't read the books, but I don't know if I can hold out for two more years.

Denarth · Post by **Denarth** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 3:25 pm

@skuld: ewok village...funny. I couldn't put a name to it, but i remember having the thought 'this looks vaguely familiar..'. Its probably sacrilege to mention but I was never a big Tom Bombadil fan. So i certainly didn't miss it. I always felt Tom was out of place in middle earth. Soemthing about the immortal thing and him not belonging to any particular people/race. And 'Tom'? nothing wrong with the name at all, but he has been around since the beginning of time and he's named 'Tom'?
But yea, the old willow tree and the barrow downs were missed.

[ 01-19-2002: Message edited by: Denarth ]

Denarth · Post by **Denarth** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 4:33 pm

Originally posted by HighLordDave:
 ...talking about how Tolkien's elves hold dwarves in contempt for being invasive in their treatment of nature; they mine the earth, horde riches and generally do as they please while the elves build their cities around natural settings, not through them.

@Denarth: I do plan on reading the books, but I am trying to decide if I want to read them before or after all three movies come out. I think I may enjoy the movies more if I haven't read the books, but I don't know if I can hold out for two more years.

@HighLord
Something to add about the elves/dwarves thing. As i understand it, in the old, old days (in Middle Earth) the elves and dwarves got along fine. Many of the secret doors and weaponry were forged and smithed by the dwarves and the magic aspects of the items were an elfish technology. Two races symbiotic. Then along came Sauron who took advantage of this situation and doled out the 7 rings to the dwarf-lords. The rings being of evil nature corrupted the dwarves. A manifestation of which was their tremendous greed for beautifully wrought treasures, stonework, etc. I think at one time they had a handle on themselves and had always appreciated those things, but eventually succumbed to the rings powers' to the detriment of everyone else and nature.
*looking up info in my book* correction, elves gave the dwarves the 7 rings, but Sauron had his hand in their design. Also of note is that the 7 rings didn't fully corrupt the dwarves like they did wtih men. Attributed to the dwarves stoutness of heart and a pet peeve of Sauron's.

Its all in the book, 2 years is a long time to wait. You could get the books and read the appendix and reference sections. Loads of backround info, history, ancestries, etc. In that way you could get a taste, and not spoil your movies.

[ 01-19-2002: Message edited by: Denarth ]

caution: on second thought, you could spoil the ending if you weren't careful about what you read. Anything in the First Age and Second Age is fair game. The movie takes place towards the end of the Third Age.

[ 01-19-2002: Message edited by: Denarth ]