Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Recommended Posts

I completely left out (above) what I was going to say in the first place. I read somewhere that Tolkien added the Scouring of the Shire because at the time he was writing his books, his childhood home and paradise was being destroyed by, who would of guessed, big bad :) Mega Corporations :FIREdevil: with millions of bucks who ripped down green growing things :clover: and built factories that belched pollution into the air and did no good whatsoever. He wanted to warn the world of what would happen if we let this continue.

I'll stop there because I'll get carried away again if I go on :crying:

~Battement Cloche

***I just can't help myself, Mister Frodo! It's just too sad!***

Link to comment

Acting in my capacity as Board Traffic Cop, I'd just like to mention that ideally we should keep the thread reasonably close to the topic of the film (and the books in contrast to the film) and avoid branching off into too many different areas. (This isn't aimed specifically at you, BattementCloche. :)) Thanks for your cooperation!

Link to comment

Not to say I don't like the movie versions, I like them alot. But I do think some of the choices are bad...like inserting that silly bit about Aragorn riding off a cliff and then having his horse lick his face and then the long ride back to Helm's Deep. What does this addition do to enhance an already thrilling story? Better to have left such things out and included the scenes of Saruman at Bag End: the whole drama of the quest, the victory, & destruction of the Ring and all that the hobbits must endure and overcome, only to return home and find evil on their own doorstep: that, for me, is one of the most powerful and chilling concepts in the books.

OK, someone give me $1,000,000,000 and I'll make my own film versions...with Russell Crowe as Tom Bombadil.

Link to comment

The Tom Bombadil and Scouring of the Shire arcs were left in the published books for reasons that even Tolkien himself had trouble figuring out. Tom Bombadil was the name of a favorite doll of his daughter's and the Scouring was put in for the reason BattementCloche mentioned. When he was editing LotR for final publication, he left them in, without entirely understanding why. His attitude seems to have been, "Perhaps some readers will know, and then THEY will tell ME!" :) JRRT was a big supporter of the right of the reader to interpret!

Link to comment

Never having seen any of the "Ring" films, or read any of the books, I have been impressed with all the enthusiasm I had read on this thread--and I thought, well, this time I will go to see the film. That was before I read Caryn James article in today's Times. She resurrected my apprehension when she called it a "boy's toy". She said "Any movie so popular has to grab an audience across all lines of age and sex. But both demographic and empirical evidence suggests that the trilogy is still primarily a boys' toy. The well calculated hype and exaggerated praise (the New York Film Critics circle last week voted 'Return' best picture) has obscured what the series really is: an FX extravaganza tailored to an adolescent male's fear of sentiment and love of high-tech wizardry." Whew :D I have concluded that the film is not for me---the only war book I ever enjoyed reading was "The Seven Pillars of Wisdom".

Link to comment

Caught it this weekend. I don't have much time today except to echo Mel and say that this is a war movie -- and a very moving one, IMO. (I also read the James article. Not every woman in the world watches LOTR in order to ogle "Viggo", thank you very much, Caryn.)

I would not recommend the movie, good as it is, to people who haven't seen at least one of the earlier installments or have not boned up on the story beforehand. It is a lot to take in.

Also: it may be worth noting at this point that the series, which is now being discussed by some as if it were a safe bet by a big studio, was a big risk taken by a small company, New Line Cinema.

Link to comment

Not to mention the production unit, Weta Workshop. (A "weta", by the way, is a very large, lumbering cricket-sort of insect that weighs twice as much as a mouse and can cover the palm of your hand. They're thoroughly inoffensive, and not interested in biting people - they eat a lot of cellulose, so your cottons could be in trouble, and also your books, but they're probably safe, because the weta is so heavy it can't jump, or climb very well. If you don't like broccoli, call one over, he'll help you with it.)

Yes, you need a background to see this one, but the films have spread the Tolkien phenomenon, and generated a lot of reading of the books, and even the books ABOUT the books. And these are just the teens! Anything that does that is terrific!

It's the sort of medievalism that one would expect from a scholar whose most excellent work came in the "Beowulf" tradition - a really EARLY boy toy. The strongest female character is the villain's mother, the Witch of the Sea Bottom. She trashes the hero pretty good.

Link to comment

Having just returned from seeing ROTK, I would like to give props to Peter Jackson et. al. for the focus of their vision. The LOTH novels cover a vast amount of ground, with an intense amount of detail, and function VERY well as novels. Film is a very different medium. Things which occupied several paragraphs in the books, for example Tolkien's unsurpassed descriptions of the landscapes of Middle Earth, are shown in a heartneat or two on screen. Things Tolkien leaves to the imagination of the viewer (and rightly so), such as the details of the epic battle scenes, require great finess in the use of technology and in older theatrical skills (writing, music, ect.) to portray realistically onscreen.

As a result of this, I believe that Mr. Jackson had selected one aspect, or theme, from the multitude that are included in Mr. Tolkien's work (loyalty, home, eviromentalism, the Christian gospel) and focused on it in each of the movies. Of course the vehicle for that theme is a timeless story of good and evil.

In TFOTR, it seems to me that the over-riding arc seems to be temptation. In the very beginning we see Bilbo's struggle to give up the ring. Gandalf denys the ring as Frodo offers it to him. We see Saruman succumb to the power of the one who made the ring. The Nazgul go to great lengths to try and aquire it. We see it divide the forces of good in the council of Rivendell. Eventually we see Boromir's lust for the Ring destroy the fellowship.

In TTT the theme seems to be redemption. We see Frodo struggle to find the good in Smeagol, and Smeagol try to find the good in himself. Faramir's release of Frodo and Sam seems to recompense the actions of his brother. The Ent's assault on Isengard redeems their earlier decision for neutrality. The elves' sacrifice at Helm's Deep redeems their leaving Middle Earth in the hands of Sauron. We see the King of Rohan rescued from his weaknesses in the last charge at Helm's Deep. Even Wormtongue cries at the realization that his people are not safe in Helm's Deep.

In TROTK, perseverance seems to be the keyword. We watch Frodo and Sam struggle against impossible odds, not by killing dragons or other "heroic" acts, but by walking. We see Sam cling to his friendship with Frodo, despite Gollum's machinations. Even Arwen perseveres against her father's will to help bring about the return of the king. Gandalf and Aragorn never give up on Frodo. Even in the face of their wounds and great age, Frodo and Bilbo persevere to be taken to Valinor. We see that the hobbits will persevere in the children of Samwise Gamgee. We see that the race of men will persevere under the rule of Aragorn and his children.

My greatest fear when I heard about these movies being made (other than the fact that Elijah Wood was too cute to be a hobbit) was that in an effort to include EVERYTHING that was in Mr. Tolkien's works, his overall vision would be lost. Fortunately, by narrowing his vision, Mr. Jackson gave us a powerful series of films true to Mr. Tolien's vision. These films, despite near exclusion from the Academy Awards, will be held up as the seminal film works of the decade.

S.

Link to comment

atm711, don't believe everything a critic writes! :rolleyes: Seriously.

I read The Hobbit and the Trilogy of The Rings many, many moons ago. Tolkien was an extremely deep thinker and very in tune with the world about him.

I have not been keeping up with this thread, but believe you me - I am not, nor will I ever be a "war movie" buff. I also dislike gratuitous violence in films.

If you don't want to just write off one of the best series of movies ever, do yourself a favor and watch the first one. Then, if you liked it, watch the second. If you get this far, you'll be bound and determined to make it to The Return of the King.

Recently, I spoke to my brother-in-law, an avid reader though not a movie goer, and was shocked to hear he'd never read the books. His response was "I only read books or see movies about people." Oh that silly man! These books and, thus, the movies are very much indeed about people AKA human nature, good and evil and the choices one makes.

To paraphrase Gandalf, the Good wizard and champion of Middle Earth, "it's not how long you have on this earth, but how you choose to spend it." Mel, if you have the exact quote, I'd be eternally greatful to have it. :yes:

dancersteven and dirac - nice posts!

Peace in 2004. :wub:

Link to comment

Good thoughts, dancersteven. I am a great fan of the books, and thought the movies were very good, and though they were not as good as they might have been, nor as true, they could have been much worse.

I think the quote that BW is looking for is this one- I love it too. :wub:

Frodo: I wish the ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened.

Gandalf: So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring. In which case, you were also meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought.

Happy New Year to all!

Link to comment

Very nice post from you, too, BW.:D Isn't it funny how people assume that a work of fantasy can't be about "people" and that a fantasy film on the grand scale with special effects must be a kind of cartoon? Of course LOTR is about people, and human dilemmas.

dancersteven, in re the Oscars, talk is that the Academy has been waiting until the last installment. However, they've never given the Big One to a film fantasy, so we'll see. Based upon the other major contenders for the award that I've seen, if Return of the King doesn't get Best Picture we should feel free to view the entire ceremony as a big joke. (Which it is most years, anyway.)

Link to comment

Well, the movie didn't suprise me, but there were a lot of beautiful pictures. And I liked it.

But when I saw the first part of the trilogy, I said "It was awful, Tolkien wouldn't do it in that way!" - my own, imagined by reading, "Tokien-world" was completly different from the world depicted in the movie.

That's why I didn't go to the cinema to see the second part.

Now I have a distance to that movie, I don't take it so emotionally, so I can say, that I liked "The Return of the King".

Link to comment

Quick question: I know ROTK was nominated for a slew of Oscars (11?), how many did it win?

I'm not up on this stuff, usually, but I'd like to know...using my amazing guessing abilities :), I'd say Best Song and Best Composer (Howard...Shore, I think...he had to have taken all), Best Director, Best Picture, Costume Design...

Am I right?

Link to comment

Yes, and if Sean Astin had been nominated and won, it would have broken the previous record for Oscars won. As it was, ROTK just tied it. :)

It might almost seem like overkill. "Gee Peter, we LOVED your trilogy! Sorry we ignored you for two years! Here, have some Oscars! Your hands are full? We'll put a couple in your pocket! And here's one for the goody bag....."

Link to comment

If we consider LotR as one humongous ten-hour movie, it's collected more little metal guys than any other picture in history, but that's just temporizing. It is, however, the first time I can recall ever seeing a clean sweep by a movie that had more than nine nominations win in every category in which it was nominated.

Link to comment

What were the eleven nominations? I know a few...

(Best) Director

Song (Into the West)

Composer

Cosume Design

Others I'm not so sure on...

(Best) Picture?

Cast?

Special Effects? (Is there even an Oscar for effects???)

Set Design ???

[Original] Score???

I'm missing two, and possibly more if any of the above 5 I'm guessing at are wrong...

[added later]

P.S. Just a thought: Possibly Best [Original] Screenplay ???

Link to comment

Tolkien’s estate is suing New Line Cinema:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7240421.stm

Tolkien's estate, along with publisher HarperCollins and The Tolkien Trust charity, have claimed compensation and punitive damages, according to court papers.

The estate has also asked for a court order giving them the ability to terminate any rights the studio have to make films based on other Tolkien works, including The Hobbit.

Director Peter Jackson, who was behind the Lord of the Rings trilogy, has already signed up to make the two-film prequel to the story, which is scheduled for release in two to three years' time.

Hard to tell from news reports, of course, but taking Hollywood accounting practices into, um, account it wouldn’t surprise me if the suit has merit.

Link to comment

We'll have to see, as the case proceeds, and I agree that a court is the best place to sort this kind of thing out. I may be a bit biased on the question, as I have some experience in how tetchy Estates can be about intellectual property. Ever see a ballet set to Richard Strauss' "Four Last Songs" performed in SILENCE because the Strauss estate enforced the composer's Curse of the Cat People from his will, forbidding any use of his music which he had not approved for dance use during his lifetime ever to be used for dance as long as the Estate had force? Dukas had a similar provision in his will.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...