New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 51 of 51
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by The Glyphstone View Post
    Spoiler: Dune
    Show
    The Lynch movie was definitely a controversial mess, and part of that was trying to fit the entire book into one movie like you said. But I was thinking specifically of the upcoming Villlineuve version, which is explicitly one book (Dune) split over 2 movies, which is a very ambitious gamble on the level of Bakshi. Even LotR stuck to telling roughly one book per movie.
    Dune (2021) is actually going the opposite route from Bakshi, who attempted (due to all kinds of crazy outside factors) to cram 2 books worth of material into one movie. To me, the splitting of Dune into 2 films for the first book, with no concrete plans for how (and if) the subsequent books might be adapted, seems like restraint.
    The desire to appear clever often impedes actually being so.

    What makes the vanity of others offensive is the fact that it wounds our own.

    Quarrels don't last long if the fault is only on one side.

    Nothing is given so generously as advice.

    We hardly ever find anyone of good sense, except those who agree with us.

    -Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Catullus64 View Post
    Dune (2021) is actually going the opposite route from Bakshi, who attempted (due to all kinds of crazy outside factors) to cram 2 books worth of material into one movie. To me, the splitting of Dune into 2 films for the first book, with no concrete plans for how (and if) the subsequent books might be adapted, seems like restraint.
    It's also a different situation than The Hobbit. We have proof that you can't tell the plot of Dune in one movie, and it's called the David Lynch version. I'm personally quite fond of the Lynch version, but it's undeniable that he had to ditch a lot to cram the book into one movie. And it's still a decently long movie, even if you don't count the extended edition.

    Instead of trying to do a single 3 hour movie, doing it as two 2 hour movies might be better.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Weird thing is how Frodo's part of the book two had like the most hollywoody ending ever and they didn't use it as an ending point for the movie.
    Last edited by Precure; 2021-09-04 at 04:55 PM.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Precure View Post
    Weird thing is how Frodo's part of the book two had like the most hollywoody ending ever and they didn't use it as an ending point for the movie.
    Ditto the Hobbit. If you're going to break it into multiple pieces, the Hobbit has obvious places to do so following each adventure vignette. It was a children's story after all, so it makes sense that it would be represented by manageable chunks that could be read to children by their parents. This was how I was first exposed to it and Fantasy in general - my mother read a chapter a night.

    As such, there are a few obvious break points. The rescue by the Eagles is an obvious one, and is the first clear demarcation between story segments. There's a big climax with the king goblin and Gollum, the party gets split up and reunites, and then you start the next movie by introducing Beorn and using Gandalf telling the story as a recap mechanism for audiences. Not doing that was honestly a bit of a headscratcher, although at least they had the sense to use the eagles as the break point. Not that breaking it into three was a good idea in the first place, mind you.

    Then you have Mirkwood. There's several good drama points to break the story if you want a cliffhanger. All the dwarves getting bound up by spiders is a good "what will our hero do now?" moment. However, that happens before the climax where Bilbo fights the spiders and frees the dwarves. If you do that first, you have a nice secondary cliff hanger of "Bilbo has been heroic, but now the dwarves are spirited away by elves. Oh noes!"

    If you don't want to use that one either, there's a more traditional break point. Bilbo Mission Impossible's the dwarves out of Mirkwood, and we cut straight from them floating down river to them getting out on the shores of Laketown. Pan the camera over to show the Lonely Mountain, and roll credits.

    Instead, the movies did the weirdest thing possible. They covered the first part of the next story (the Dwarves and Bilbo infiltrating the Lonely Mountain), then added an action sequence that wasn't in the books at all. Smaug flies off and...roll credits. What?

    The result is Smaug getting killed 5 minutes into the third movie, and the rest of the movie having to dither around waiting for the big battle at the end. It's a truly surreal decision, and I have no idea why they made it. Even as a three movie structure it doesn't make sense.

    I still maintain that they could have made good movies if they simply split it in two. One movie would have felt rushed - action sequences take longer to tell on screen than they do in the book, and the Battle of Five Armies in particular would have been difficult to do justice unless they followed the book and had Bilbo get knocked out before anything interesting happens. However, two movies would have been ample if they cut out all the filler. Hire Peter Jackson an editor and cut a lot of the dead time. Cut unneccessary subplots (all the Tauriel nonsense, most of the Laketown fanfic and a good portion of the wizards mucking about) and stick closer to the story. They could easily have gotten the party into or through Mirkwood in the first movie, leaving dealing with Smaug, the Arkenstone, and the Battle of the Five Armies for the second movie.

    It still wouldn't have been a good adaptation, but at least the movies would have been good.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by PontificatusRex View Post
    I agree with a lot of what's said before, but no one has yet mentioned what I regard as the movie trilogy's greatest failing. But first, a prelude:

    In his amazing collection of essays Science Fiction in the Real World, Norman Spinrad writes about the adaptation of PK ****'s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep into the the movie Blade Runner. He made the point that even though the book and the movie are vastly different in almost every way, the movie is a true, artistically successful adaptation of the book because it communicates the book's essential message - that the true measure of humanity is not a matter of biology, but empathy. The most important part of the story is when a dying android saves the life of the enemy who he has every reason to hate, because at his own life's end he can't let another being die if he has the power to save them.

    This has had a huge influence on how I view adaptations of books to movies - did the get the essence of the story right, even if they messed with the details for cinematic reasons?

    And I'm afraid I think that in the end Jackson totally blew it. In the book, Gollum destroys the Ring and saves the world. He wasn't pushed by Frodo, there was no fight where he loses his balance, he falls into Mount Doom all on his own. Yes it was an "accident", and yet what other ending could he have that would have been better or more triumphant? If he hadn't fallen in while dancing with joy, Sauron would have come and taken the Ring from him again and probably torture him worse than ever before, for as long as his body could survive.

    Frodo got as far as he could but the Ring was too powerful even for his resolute spirit. It had to be his dark other half Gollum, to borrow some Jungian symbology, who could complete the Quest. BUT - Gollum would not have been there to save the world if every major character in the story had not shown Gollum mercy and pity at some point. Frodo , Sam, Gandalf, Aragorn, back to Bilbo - all of them at one point or another had had Gollum completely helpless and vulnerable before them. It owuld have been totally practical, prudent, and just to put the miserable little murdering creature out of his misery and eliminate the threat he could be, but each character felt pity for his wretchedness and let him live instead. Mercy and compassion are what defeated Sauron in the the end - I really believe that that's the overarching theme of Lord of the Rings, and I think Peter Jackson totally failed to communicate that.

    Even if Jackson thought he had to have Frodo show more agency in the Ring's destruction than he did in the book (after taking away a huge amount of Frodo's ability and agency for most of the movie, as was pointed out above), Tolkien gave him a scene to explain it all for the folks who didn't get it. When Frodo and Sam are waiting for the lava to rise and engulf them, Frodo tells Sam very explicitly so no one misses the point that it was Gollum who completed the Quest, and so they should forgive him. And for some reason I cannot fathom, Jackson cut that insanely crucial bit of explanation from the film.

    So in my view, for all its many good points, the Movie Trilogy was a failed adaptation in the end.
    I get that you put "accident" in quotes, but I think the fate of Gollum and the Ring deserves a bit more focus. The Ring, like all Evil, destroys itself.

    When Gollum ambushes Frodo and Sam on Sauron's Road, near the Cracks of Doom, we get this passage:
    Then suddenly, as before under the eaves of the Emyn Muil, Sam saw these two rivals with other vision. A crouching shape, scarcely more than the shadow of a living thing, a creature now wholly ruined and defeated, yet filled with a hideous lust and rage; and before it stood stern, untouchable now by pity, a figure robed in white, but at its breast it held a wheel of fire. Out of the fire there spoke a commanding voice.

    ‘Begone, and trouble me no more! If you touch me ever again, you shall be cast yourself into the Fire of Doom.’
    My reading (and I know its not universal) is that is the Ring speaking to Gollum. It's done with him. It "knows" (insofar as it is alive or aware) that it cannot actually be cast into the Fire by anyone. It "thinks" it's about to win. From the Ring's POV, the worst that can realistically happens is that Gollum gets fingers on it and goes and hides for centuries more before it can successfully ditch him, again. And so it binds him to the worst punishment it, the Ring, can imagine - destruction in the Fire. And that swiftly comes back and destroys it. Evil both turns on itself and is incapable of self-reflection or empathy.

    And yes, with so many key misses on the nature of things, Jackson's LotR is a failure at conveying the core message of book. I still think it's a fun (sometimes even great) film trilogy, and even a decent LotR movie trilogy, but a failure as a Tolkien movie in several ways. (I'm sort of splitting hairs here - I do like the movies, but I also see their flaws., particularly in this way.)
    Last edited by runeghost; 2021-09-05 at 03:51 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    As far as Faramir goes, i believe it was actually explicit that they made him more of a jerk in the movies to show that he isnt above the power of the ring any more than Boromir was, he just has better judgement. He's just as human and vulnerable as his brother, but because he is ultimately a bit wiser, he recognizes the need to destroy the ring rather than wield it in the end. In the books, there isnt really a lot of soul searching about what to do with it.
    That's actually one element of the story that the films sold me on better than the books - the visceral corruptive power of the Ring, and why The Wise are so wary of it.

    Consider the Ring and it's bearers in the books:

    Isilidur - makes a bad call while on Mt. Doom, the decides he need to go get Elrond's help figuring out what to do with the damned thing.

    Gollum - murdered his brother at the sight of it. Maybe, and I'm going out on a limb here, he was a bad hobbit even before he ever saw the ring. Still, managed to (accidentally) destroy it.

    Bilbo - gifts it to his nephew.

    Frodo - carries it for years and across the continent before finally being unable to destroy it.

    Sam - carried it for a while, gave it back.

    From a casual reading of the books, it's not so much that the Ring corrupts anyone in contact with it, but that you can't bring yourself to destroy it. The movies (through visual and soundtrack) made the Ring more immediately scary.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    England. Ish.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by runeghost View Post
    That's actually one element of the story that the films sold me on better than the books - the visceral corruptive power of the Ring, and why The Wise are so wary of it.

    Consider the Ring and it's bearers in the books:

    ...

    From a casual reading of the books, it's not so much that the Ring corrupts anyone in contact with it, but that you can't bring yourself to destroy it. The movies (through visual and soundtrack) made the Ring more immediately scary.
    I get that the ring has corrupting effects, but the books also show this, also show that other things can corrupt, and manage to do so without reducing people to arrogant thugs.

    Lets expand on that:

    Bilbo: Gifts it to his nephew, but requires a bit of help from Gandalf. Understands fully when he sees the ring again in Rivendell, and is sorry that Frodo has had to pick up the burden.

    Frodo: Carries it for years and across the continent before finally being unable to destroy it. He started showing signs of the ring taking hold right at the beginning of the book, when Gandalf was explaining what the ring was.

    Sam: Carried it for a while, gave it back. This is greatly to his credit - Sam is the only character to fully resist the ring on his own, and probably then only because he carried it for the shortest time. Still managed it, though...


    Now, add the effects on some of the non-bearers:

    Gandalf: Knew its power and took great care to avoid it, is actively afraid when Frodo offers the ring to him.

    Galadriel: Likewise, and wethers temptation when Frodo offers the ring to her.

    All of these are pretty much the same in the book and the film. Then we have:

    Boromir: Seduced by the ring on first sight - it is already starting to affect him in the Council meeting, but it doesn't really take over until the breaking of the fellowship, and even then Boromir immediately realises what he has done.

    Faramir: Knows the rings power and takes great care around it as soon as he suspects that Frodo is the ringbearer. Doesn't want to see the ring at all.

    Denethor: Interesting case, as his fall was down to Sauron via the Palantír rather than the ring (and being broken by the death of his favourite son Boromir, and later by the approaching death of Faramir). None the less, believes that Boromir would have brought him the ring and that he could have used it to defend Gondor.


    And those last three?

    Remember, Boromir and Faramir are foils - they are supposed to be radically different and opposite characters. The book does this, and Denethor even stresses it at some point (not to Faramir's favour - Boromir being the favourite son).

    In the book, all three of them have levels of honor and nobility. All of them treat the hobbits with respect and kindness.

    The film does Boromir very well: He's a brave, honourable warrior, devoted to his Country (it is part of how the ring gets him). He is pretty much as per the book.

    Book Faramir mixes honor with wisdom (it is probably fair to say he is one of the most honourable of the men in the book). He notes that he has to take captive anyone in Gondor without leave, but is prepared to listen to Sam and Frodo, very quickly earns Sam's trust and then doesn't betray it when Sam accidentally blurts out the truth. The film wipes all that out and portrays him more as a thug, in fact actually a worse character than Boromir.

    Book Denethor is somewhat more cynical in his approach (as per his position), but he is still honourable (he told Boromir that there should never be a time when the Steward supplanted the (missing) King), and it is said that if Aragon had come at a time of peace without Sauron muddying the waters that he might well have done so. He is proud and arrogant (for good reason - we have Gandalf's word for that), none the less he is moved by Pippin's offer of fealty, and doesn't treat him unkindly at any time. Again, the film replaces this character with an arrogant bully. The film scene of him forcing Pippin to sing while he eats does not exist in the book.
    Last edited by Manga Shoggoth; 2021-09-05 at 07:56 AM.
    Warning: This posting may contain wit, wisdom, pathos, irony, satire, sarcasm and puns. And traces of nut.

    "The main skill of a good ruler seems to be not preventing the conflagrations but rather keeping them contained enough they rate more as campfires." Rogar Demonblud

    "Hold on just a d*** second. UK has spam callers that try to get you to buy conservatories?!? Even y'alls spammers are higher class than ours!" Peelee

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Titan in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Manga Shoggoth View Post
    The film scene of him forcing Pippin to sing while he eats does not exist in the book.
    That scene is literally in the movie because Billy Boyd wanted to have a small singing moment, and the writers liked his singing so much they made some room for him.
    “Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    hamishspence's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Book Denethor tells Pippin he'd like to hear a song from him at some point - Pippin thinks he'd rather not - and the song never gets sung.

    'What would you do in my service?'

    'I thought, sir, that you would tell me my duties.'

    'I will, when I learn what you are fit for,' said Denethor. 'But that I shall learn soonest, maybe, if I keep you beside me. The esquire of my chamber has begged leave to go to the out-garrison, so you shall take his place for a while. You shall wait on me, bear errands, and talk to me, if war and council leave me any leisure. Can you sing?'

    'Yes,' said Pippin. 'Well, yes, well enough for my own people. But we have no songs fit for great halls and evil times, lord. We seldom sing of anything more terrible than wind or rain. And most of my songs are about things that make us laugh; or about food and drink, of course.'

    'And why should such songs be unfit for my halls, or for such hours as these? We who have lived long under the Shadow may surely listen to echoes from a land untroubled by it? Then we may feel that our vigil was not fruitless, though it may have been thankless.'

    Pippin’s heart sank. He did not relish the idea of singing any song of the Shire to the Lord of Minas Tirith, certainly not the comic ones that he knew best; they were too, well, rustic for such an occasion. He was however spared the ordeal for the present. He was not commanded to sing. Denethor turned to Gandalf, asking questions about the Rohirrim and their policies, and the position of Éomer, the king’s nephew. Pippin marvelled at the amount that the Lord seemed to know about a people that lived far away, though it must, he thought, be many years since Denethor himself had ridden abroad.
    Marut-2 Avatar by Serpentine
    New Marut Avatar by Linkele

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    England. Ish.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    That scene is literally in the movie because Billy Boyd wanted to have a small singing moment, and the writers liked his singing so much they made some room for him.
    Thank you - I did not actually know that. I just assumed it was extrapolated from the scene hamishspence mentioned.
    Warning: This posting may contain wit, wisdom, pathos, irony, satire, sarcasm and puns. And traces of nut.

    "The main skill of a good ruler seems to be not preventing the conflagrations but rather keeping them contained enough they rate more as campfires." Rogar Demonblud

    "Hold on just a d*** second. UK has spam callers that try to get you to buy conservatories?!? Even y'alls spammers are higher class than ours!" Peelee

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by PontificatusRex View Post
    Frodo got as far as he could but the Ring was too powerful even for his resolute spirit. It had to be his dark other half Gollum, to borrow some Jungian symbology, who could complete the Quest. BUT - Gollum would not have been there to save the world if every major character in the story had not shown Gollum mercy and pity at some point. Frodo , Sam, Gandalf, Aragorn, back to Bilbo - all of them at one point or another had had Gollum completely helpless and vulnerable before them. It owuld have been totally practical, prudent, and just to put the miserable little murdering creature out of his misery and eliminate the threat he could be, but each character felt pity for his wretchedness and let him live instead. Mercy and compassion are what defeated Sauron in the the end - I really believe that that's the overarching theme of Lord of the Rings, and I think Peter Jackson totally failed to communicate that.
    I think "totally failed" is a bit harsh. The key theme-stater speech ("many that die deserve life") was included after all, even if only Extended. Could he have made it more explicit, sure, and could he have used "mercy" in addition to "pity", also sure, but it's not nothing.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfWarriorGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    I think "totally failed" is a bit harsh. The key theme-stater speech ("many that die deserve life") was included after all, even if only Extended. Could he have made it more explicit, sure, and could he have used "mercy" in addition to "pity", also sure, but it's not nothing.
    It's in theatrical and extended, and they have a voice-over repeat it towards the end of Fellowship. The filmmakers definitely got the thematic importance behind it, which makes it more disappointing that they stumbled a bit in the final execution.
    The desire to appear clever often impedes actually being so.

    What makes the vanity of others offensive is the fact that it wounds our own.

    Quarrels don't last long if the fault is only on one side.

    Nothing is given so generously as advice.

    We hardly ever find anyone of good sense, except those who agree with us.

    -Francois, Duc de La Rochefoucauld

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Catullus64 View Post
    [*]Tom Bombadil (Does anyone really think that Bombadil could have possibly worked in these movies?)
    I don't think Tom Bombadil worked in the book, much less that he could work in the movies. Frankly, I think the single greatest editorial decision that Peter Jackson made was in taking the step Tolkien's editor should have done before the books were even published and excising that waste of a character. Bombadil adds nothing useful, breaks story's tone, and feels like a silly cartoon intermission in an otherwise serious epic. The story is better off without him.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rodin View Post
    It's also why I'm a lot harder on the Hobbit movies than I am on the LOTR films. The Hobbit movies tried to replicate the feel of LOTR, which is wrong wrong wrong for the bedtime story that is The Hobbit. You can trace almost every problem with The Hobbit back to that one creative decision. It doesn't feel like the Hobbit, it feels like LOTR.
    If only. Honestly the Hobbit movies feel mostly like bad LotR fanfiction.
    Quote Originally Posted by 2D8HP View Post
    Work is the scourge of the gaming classes!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kish View Post
    Neither Evershifting List of Perfectly Prepared Spells nor Grounds to Howl at the DM If I Ever Lose is actually a wizard class feature.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Velaryon View Post
    I don't think Tom Bombadil worked in the book, much less that he could work in the movies. Frankly, I think the single greatest editorial decision that Peter Jackson made was in taking the step Tolkien's editor should have done before the books were even published and excising that waste of a character. Bombadil adds nothing useful, breaks story's tone, and feels like a silly cartoon intermission in an otherwise serious epic. The story is better off without him.
    Not only does the book grind to a halt when we get to him, they then need awkward exposition later about how he's totally powerful and all but just can't help in any way with the quest, guys, so sorry.

    I'm curious whether the Amazon series will also skip him.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Feb 2015

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Re: Bombadil, Forn, Orald, Iarwain Ben-adar
    Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
    I'm curious whether the Amazon series will also skip him.
    Do you mean the Amazon series that will be set in the Second Age? Other than Elrond implying that Bombadil once roved a more extensive forest, there isn't anything to say about him in those days, is there?

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidSh View Post
    Re: Bombadil, Forn, Orald, Iarwain Ben-adar

    Do you mean the Amazon series that will be set in the Second Age? Other than Elrond implying that Bombadil once roved a more extensive forest, there isn't anything to say about him in those days, is there?
    Well, he will still be around somewhere--after all, the Elves call him Oldest because he was already there when they awoke next to Cuivienen. Really don't see that adding him in would offer anything, though.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Spamalot in the Playground
     
    Psyren's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidSh View Post
    Re: Bombadil, Forn, Orald, Iarwain Ben-adar

    Do you mean the Amazon series that will be set in the Second Age? Other than Elrond implying that Bombadil once roved a more extensive forest, there isn't anything to say about him in those days, is there?
    I genuinely didn't know the premise/timeline of it. Given that it's in the past, it's actually more likely that he'll show up since they'll want some recognizable names.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Plague Doctor by Crimmy
    Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Velaryon View Post
    If only. Honestly the Hobbit movies feel mostly like bad LotR fanfiction.
    Well, yes. In many respects they are. That's not actually what I was getting at though.

    If you try to stay faithful to the tone and fail the execution (like LOTR did in places), I'm forgiving because at least they got the tone right. If you tell fanfiction but make it good fanfiction like The Witcher Netflix series did, I'm wholly on board as long as you keep the feel of the original.

    If the Hobbit was just bad fanfiction that felt like it belonged in the Hobbit I wouldn't have taken as much issue with it. Some of the bits with Radagast kind of fall under this in the first movie.

    The biggest problem I had with the Hobbit movies is that even the decent fanfiction (like Gandalf and Elrond discussing the Necromancer) is totally wrong for the movie they were supposed to be making. They wanted to make LOTR again rather than actually tell the tale in front of them.

    I can forgive a lot of plot flaws if they manage to get the right feel. The Hobbit movies completely whiffed on the feel because they weren't trying to make a Hobbit movie.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Divayth Fyr's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidSh View Post
    Re: Bombadil, Forn, Orald, Iarwain Ben-adar

    Do you mean the Amazon series that will be set in the Second Age? Other than Elrond implying that Bombadil once roved a more extensive forest, there isn't anything to say about him in those days, is there?
    Nope. Also, the single shot we saw so far of the series is set way, way before the Second Age... Though I guess it could have most of the action during the SA...
    Quote Originally Posted by Pickford View Post
    I don't understand your point. Why does it matter what I said?

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Dewin Dwl's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Location
    Land of the Red Dragon

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodin View Post
    It's also why I'm a lot harder on the Hobbit movies than I am on the LOTR films. The Hobbit movies tried to replicate the feel of LOTR, which is wrong wrong wrong for the bedtime story that is The Hobbit. You can trace almost every problem with The Hobbit back to that one creative decision. It doesn't feel like the Hobbit, it feels like LOTR.
    As well as not representing the feel of the original material, I also thought that stretching one book into three films would spread it a little thin. (In fairness, that set me against the films a bit before I'd even seen them.) To my mind, two films was the natural choice for "The Hobbit, or There and Back Again".

    On the plus side, the Hobbit films did help me gain some insight to my mother's reaction to the Fellowship of the Ring. She came to the cinema to watch the film at the insistence of me and my brother. This was the first time I'd ever gone to see a film more than once at the cinema: that's how good I thought it was! But her reaction was more measured: it didn't match her impressions from reading the original books some decades previously.

    In the same way, the Hobbit films (particularly the second and third) didn't meet with my recollections of the book. The first film started out well in my eye, but then seemed to lose direction, with the result that I've not had any desire to re-watch them since.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Britain
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings, and Studies in Adaptation

    Quote Originally Posted by Divayth Fyr View Post
    Nope. Also, the single shot we saw so far of the series is set way, way before the Second Age... Though I guess it could have most of the action during the SA...
    Personally I think it'd make sense to start with a quick break down of the creation of the world, the first war against morgoth before the awakening of the elves, creation of the trees etc then start the series plot proper with the birth of Feanor then as the series continues we branch down his family line.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •