Ralph Bakshi's The Lord of the Rings

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Ok. What is with this thing.

I just finished watching it today, and it was ridiculous. You can see where Peter Jackson stole scenes from it: the scene where the hobbits hide under a tree from the first wraith they meet? That was a complete homage to this version. And the orcs were pretty cool, and whenever they did the live-action bits, it was some pretty sweet animation-y stuff. But other than that?

Legolas looked like Prince Charming. Gimli was, at points, taller than Legolas. Aragorn looked like an Inca. Theoden was apparently called "Eeeoden", Saruman was apparently called "Aruman", and it cuts off just after the battle of Helm's Deep, with a voice-over saying "The day is won! Thanks to Frodo and his friend's, evil has been cleansed from Middle Earth" or something.

And the scene at the fords of rivendell? What was that. I honestly don't know. I remember 5 minutes of Frodo on a horse, and the Witch-king on a horse looking at each other, with the horses making random movements, like, going back and foreward, sideways, in circles. Just starin'. For 5 minutes. With this really trippy background. And then Frodo tries to get away. But then the Witch King is all like "Oh no you didn't!" and forcechokes the horse to death. But then the horse gets better, and finally runs. Then there's a chase scene. And then all the other Nazgul arrive. (They never use the word Nazgul once) Then they're at the ford, and the Nazgul say "Dude, come with us to Mordor or something", in a normal voice, and then say "The ring, the ring, the ring" in a semi-creepy voice? And then say the first thing again. Over and over. And then Frodo draws his sword and is all like "Bitch!" and then he's force-choked, and then they try to cross the river but can't and stuff.

Yeah.

Also, Eomer is mentioned by name once, and has no lines. Oh, and Grima is pronounced "Grime-a", of course, and it's Mine-ath Tirith, of course. Mind you, they pronounce 'mellon' right. It's like a welsh 'll', only less so, so more of a 'khl' sound.

[druid91]

Your talking about the old cartoon right?

If I remember right the whole thing was pretty insane, everyone moving all the time for no reason.

Though the animated version of the hobbit was one of my favorite movies as a kid.

[Dr.Epic]

Meh. Yeah, it's not a great movie, but it's far more accurate to the books and the vision of Tolkien (women shoved into the background). Honestly, I don't mind the look of Legolas or Gimli. Aragorn, a little weird. Boromir...a stereotypical viking helmet? Really? But the biggest fail in terms of characters is by far Sam.:smallannoyed: Seriously, I couldn't even watch past the first 40 minutes the first time I saw it because of Sam.

Also, what was with the mixing of animation and live action. I'm not sure what the technique is called, but they did something to make the live footage look more cartoon. Honestly, some people might like it, but I found it very distracting. It reminded me this is a movie: that two mediums have been merged and it brought me out of the story. Also, I look at the live footage and I can tell those are guys in costumes. That again brings me out of the experience. And the Balrog...what was up with that thing. It suffered from the other stuff I talked about with using live footage and the wings and other aspects of it were all wrong.

But really my biggest problem with the film is there's no sequel. Bakshi never made a part two. Seriously, I could overlook a lot of the problems in the first if the second was good.


Though the animated version of the hobbit was one of my favorite movies as a kid.

That film was way to comical for me (though I was a teenager when I first saw it and I was comparing it to the Jackson films).

[Traab]

Your talking about the old cartoon right?

If I remember right the whole thing was pretty insane, everyone moving all the time for no reason.

Though the animated version of the hobbit was one of my favorite movies as a kid.

I just recently got a copy of the hobbit animated movie. Its not as awesome as I remember it being when I was a kid. The singing was pretty cool though. And yes, Smuag is STILL badass!

[Griever]

Saruman was apparently called "Aruman",

I can't say this for 100%, but I believe they decided to call Saruman "Aruman" because Saruman sounds too similar to Sauron, and they didn't want to confuse children/newcomers.


And the scene at the fords of rivendell? What was that. I honestly don't know. I remember 5 minutes of Frodo on a horse, and the Witch-king on a horse looking at each other, with the horses making random movements, like, going back and foreward, sideways, in circles.

Although it did get a bit trippy at parts, I find it keeps closer to the book that Frodo's uselessness while being strapped to Arwen, Warrior Princess' horse.



Also, Eomer is mentioned by name once, and has no lines.

To be fair, Eomer does not have a big part in the book at all. After meeting with Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas, he heads back to Edoras, is imprisoned and sentenced to death, and then is freed by Gandalf's freeing of Theoden.

Eomer does not ride on Helm's Deep, Gandalf gathers up the remnants of Rohan's scattered troops to help. Eomer was already there with Aragorn and company.


Overall, the animated film is a very decent adaptation to the books and, considering the technology of 1977, what more could you ask? :smallwink:

[druid91]

I just recently got a copy of the hobbit animated movie. Its not as awesome as I remember it being when I was a kid. The singing was pretty cool though. And yes, Smuag is STILL badass!

I have had a taped version most of my life.

Gandalf remains an incomprehensible wizard, The dwarves remain treasure hungry deranged lunatics, and bilbo remains a reluctant traveler in this land of madness, And yes smaug is awesome... in a stay away kind of way.

[Shyftir]

Bakshi made two movies one he called Lord of the Rings, the other Return of the King. They are in fact pretty bad. (I've only seen the second one.) But he did finish the story.

[Traab]

I have had a taped version most of my life.

Gandalf remains an incomprehensible wizard, The dwarves remain treasure hungry deranged lunatics, and bilbo remains a reluctant traveler in this land of madness, And yes smaug is awesome... in a stay away kind of way.

I dunno, while it isnt obvious in any way in the movie, I sort of understand gandalf a bit better now. He has a great deal of things he has to take care of, this quest by the dwarves may be important, but its hardly the ONLY important thing going on. So he has to leave from time to time. The reason he doesnt just casually obliterate every danger they come across is he doesnt want them relying on him. Its THEIR quest, not his. If he is going to handle everything, why even bother bringing them along in the first place? He could just go kill smaug, send thorin a message, and move on.

[Dr.Epic]

Bakshi made two movies one he called Lord of the Rings, the other Return of the King. They are in fact pretty bad. (I've only seen the second one.) But he did finish the story.

No. Return of the King was done by Rankin/Bass.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I have to admit, it was closer to the books in many ways. Much of the dialogue was taken directly from the books. Still doesn't make up for Prince Charming, Aragorn son of Atlahuitlcaqzatl, and Boromir Denethorsson.

[pendell]

No discussion of this horrible movie -- which I saw in a theater as a child, and my childhood was seared because of it -- would be complete without this hilarious review (http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/bakshi/bakshi.htm).


Some excerpts I thought particularly funny:



4. Late '70s Hair.
Everybody in this movie has unspeakably big hair. Pounds and pounds and pounds of it. I swear, I keep waiting for Gandalf to fall over under the sheer weight of it. And Saruman... it's perhaps better not to even talk about Saruman. I mean, he shouldn't have even been able to stand up.

...

8. They Just Can't Hold Still.
There are dangers to having a movie done by amimators. One of them is that it's far easier to animate large, sweeping gestures than it is to animate smaller, subtle movements. Subtleties, however, are often more appropriate to the story - and far more effective.
In this movie, Bakshi seems to have extreme difficulty filming two people who sit down and have a quiet conversation. This is highly unfortunate, since it is Tolkien's elegantly-crafted dialogue which drives the story.
In Bag End, Gandalf just can't sit still. He won't just sit down and talk to Frodo about the Ring; instead he paces around meaninglessly, gesturing like a rabid stork. He raises both hands into the air, squeezes his fists and lowers his hands whenever he wants to make a point, a ludicrous overdramatic gesture which beginning drama students refer to as "Milking the Giant Cow".
If Bakshi could learn how to have his characters just sit down and talk, it would be of great benefit to him as a director.
...Eventually Bag End becomes too confining for all these gestures, and so Gandalf and Frodo must go and walk in the night air where they can move around more. "What a pity that Bilbo didn't kill that vile creature when he had the chance!" Frodo says, curiously jumping up and throwing a rock to emphasize his point. They just can't sit still, for God's sake.
Maybe tranquilizer darts would have helped...?


...

18. How To Recognize An Elf.
- Sappy pseudo-cheerful woodland Elf-music plays whenever they appear.
- They have eyes like Bambi.
- They're all exposed three F-stops too bright.


...

24. Boromir The Hornhead.
Boromir, like Sauron, is wearing a silly-looking horned helmet. I keep waiting for him to say, "Ni!"... or, worse still start singing about Spam. (If Bakshi had filmed Part Two, perhaps we would have seen Denethor demanding that Aragorn prove his heritage by cutting down "the mightiest tree in the forest wiiiiiith... a herring!")

...

34. The Lothlorien Junior High Children's Choir.
Not only is the music unbearably nauseating, but in addition the Elves in the distance are exposed at least five F-stops too bright. Indeed, they're so bright it's hard to even tell they're people.


...

Part Three: Let's All Fight A Lot.
Having discovered that Boromir's fight scenes were moderately effective, and that they could be shot with a minimum of character and exposition, the filmmakers finally abandon the plot to fend for itself and rely on more and more combat to keep the movie going. Without the plot, though, the battles become so confused that even the filmmakers soon have trouble figuring out who's winning.




Respectfully,

Brian P.

[doliest]

I love the crap out of this movie-seriously, I crack up every time I watch it. It's absurd how amusing it is. Ridiculously so. And I will admit to loving every single second of it. Ahem, "ARUMAN OF MANY COLOURSSSSSS!" :smallamused:

[Asheram]

Sam scared me as a little child... Very, very much.

[dehro]

I saw a minute or two of it..online..
didn't see any reason to want to watch the whole thing.
so I didn't

[SlayerScott]

The technique of tracing video is called rotoscoping - I thought it was a pretty cool effect in an otherwise awful movie. Really good examples of this technique can be found in Richard Linklater's films Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly. I bought the Ralph Bakshi version just before Peter Jackson's incarnation came out - boring, nonsensical, imcomprehensible and it makes you just a little queasy. It did have a few moments of cool animation.

I vaguely remember the Rankin/Bass version of Return of the King from when I was a kid -I remember it being awesome but I think time and nostalgia may have improved the movie in my mind. I'll give it a spin if I can track it down, but I'll definitely have tempered expectations.

[pendell]

The best part of Rankin/Bass ' movie was Where there's a whip, there's a way (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y). Taking one line of Tolkien and turning it into a full musical number. Hilarious, and great for motivation!

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Morty]

I remember watching it, rather long ago. My first impression was "Hey, the TV programme says this film is two hours long and it doesn't say that it's Part One or something. How did they stuff the entire story into two hours?". When the film reached only as far as Two Towers after going on for an hour and a half I knew the rest would be compressed, cut or something, but I didn't expect the film to end after Helm's Deep. So the ending was truly bizzare. It's almost as if they were working on the film all casual-like and suddenly they had to release it as it was.

[hamlet]

If you think Bakshi's was bad, you should see the spiritual sequel Return of the King cartoon. Rankin and Bass I think, same folks as did the excellent Hobbit movie.

It had musical numbers!

[CorrTerek]

All this time and no one's mentioned the Balrog's fuzzy slippers? You folks are slipping. :smallbiggrin:

But seriously, I think the funniest thing about this movie is Gandalf's zombie eyes in the scene with Frodo in Bag End. Seriously, he just stares straight ahead for most of the scene, and it's creepy and hilarious at the same time.

[Jamin]

If you think Bakshi's was bad, you should see the spiritual sequel Return of the King cartoon. Rankin and Bass I think, same folks as did the excellent Hobbit movie.

It had musical numbers!

So did the books.

[Zaydos]

I remember the movie. The Balrog looks hilarious, but I liked it as a kid.

No where near as good as The Hobbit movie which is what made me want to read The Hobbit. The musicals (awesome in the movie, and if my roommate wasn't asleep I'd start listening to the song about what Bilbo Baggins hates right now) were better in the book, though, don't ask me how.

The Return of the King movie has the song about Frodo of the Nine Fingers... and the Ring of DOOM which is just awesome.

[hamlet]

So did the books.

True, but not like the cartoon.

Tolkien meets Disney kinda.

[Dr.Epic]

Oh, and I didn't like the look of Treebeard. He looked too much like a cartoon. Yeah, I know it was a cartoon, but the other characters had a nice realistic look to them, and Treebeard, he just didn't look like what a tree person should have looked like in my opinion.

[SmartAlec]

Although it did get a bit trippy at parts, I find it keeps closer to the book that Frodo's uselessness while being strapped to Arwen, Warrior Princess' horse.

Always had a feeling that among other reasons, the main reason they had Arwen bear him away was because trying to give the impression that someone of Frodo's size was riding this horse alone during the chase scene just would not look convincing enough. With him as a passenger, they only needed a couple of shots of Elijah Wood himself.

And I remember this movie. Sam looked like a half-hobbit, half-potato.

[Muz]

And I remember this movie. Sam looked like a half-hobbit, half-potato.

A female half-hobbit, half-potato. (I hadn't read the books when I first saw the movie. I remember when I did read them: "Sam's a HE?")

[Icewalker]

I have heard of but not seen this movie. I have however, seen another of his movies which I believe uses the same rotoscoping style, Fire and Ice. It's cliche and silly at points, but it's got some very cool elements to it as well. I thoroughly enjoyed it, taking it with a few friends, where we could all openly appreciate the legitimate interesting/awesome parts, and mock the ridiculous bits.

[DomaDoma]

Whereas when I read the books, I was absolutely convinced Merry was female until about the Prancing Pony. I just expected someone to be female, I guess.

End-Of-Every-Post-Today Tagline: Today is Unconditional Love Awareness Day. Romantically speaking*, it doesn't make a difference that you're as faithful to your love as a doctor to the dying, if your love does any of the following in return:

- Lies about loving you.
- Goes behind your back with other women.
- Uses you as bait without your knowledge.
- Freaking threatens to kill you.
- Drives those who care about you to suicide.

So yeah, unconditional love needs an awareness day. Love needs conditions.

*Literarily speaking is another matter.

[JonestheSpy]

I thought there was lot of good things in Bakshi's film - it was a dern shame he wasn't able to complete it. I saw it as a wee lad in the theater, and let me tell you, the rotoscoping was a very effective technique for making the Nazgul and the orcs frickin terrifying -it still holds up pretty well imho, though obviously we do have to look at it through the lens of what was possible in the 70's.

And yeah, I agree Bakshi stayed closer to Tolkien's prose than Jackson in a lot of ways - though really it's hard to compare without Bakshi finishing the story, as that's where Jackson really lost it.

As for Gwyn's complaints about the way the character's looked, not sure what to say, especially about the rather bizarre fixation with Aragorn's nose. I mean, he's NOT supposed to be good looking - I liked Viggo M in the Jackson movies quite a lot, but really he was younger and handsomer than Aragorn is described in the books.

And in Bakshi's movie Frodo wasn't a complete wuss the entire frickin time, so that's a big point in it's favor too.

[DomaDoma]

Bakshi is closer to the letter, but it doesn't know what parts of the letter to stick to. Neither one is especially close to the spirit, but at least the Jackson version has a spirit. You can't really say that for Bakshi.

End-Of-Every-Post-Today Tagline: Today is Unconditional Love Awareness Day. Romantically speaking*, it doesn't make a difference that you're as faithful to your love as a doctor to the dying, if your love does any of the following in return:

- Lies about loving you.
- Goes behind your back with other women.
- Uses you as bait without your knowledge.
- Freaking threatens to kill you.
- Drives those who care about you to suicide.

So yeah, unconditional love needs an awareness day. Love needs conditions.

*Literarily speaking is another matter.

[Yora]

This movie is a strange thing.

All in all, I don't like it very much. But I think in many aspects it's far superior to the Jackson movie.
First of all, Frodo. Woods plays an interesting Frodo and does so very well, but his way of acting the character seems like an, lets say unusual choice. It's not a bad performance, but he seems quite different to the book Frodo. The Bakshi Frodo seems far closer to the version of Tolkin.
But on the other hand, yeah, Sam is a total failure in that movie. Probably the one thing that hurts the entire thing the most. Here I like Astins performance much more.
Then again, I also like the Bakshi Aragorn. Others said he seems weird, but I like him. I'm totally with all the fangirls that Vigo Mortensen is hot and that he has shown many great performances, but his Aragorn gives me the shivers. He's creepy and kinda disgusting.