logo Sign In

The Lord of the Rings (Films vs. the Books) — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: THX
[interweb mode]

Book-accurate movies of LOTR would have been: a) far less successful; b) worse. Criticizing a film adaptation because it's different from the book is senseless.

[/interweb mode]


[answering unsupported statements mode]

Book-accurate movies of LOTR would have been a) far more successful; b) amazingly superior. Criticizing a film adaptation because it is different from the books can often make a lot of sense in many situations.

[/answering unsupported statements mode]

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Mike O
He wanted to do it because he likes mindless action and because he had the elf actors on hand and wanted to give them more screen time.

I don't ever remember be so exhilarated by an action sequence. And I really, really doubt that that was the reason. I really, really, really, really doubt it. Not saying that I agree with the change. I just don't think that was why.

Did I say it was a non-exilherating action sequence? I proposed the possibility that Jackson likes mindless action in the context of putting Elves at Helms Deep. I believe that he didn't even consider the change beyond thinking about how cool it would be to display Elves in combat once more. Well, that and while he was filming the sequence he thought it would be neat to give his elf cast more screen time, considering the work he went through to assemble them. You can doubt my assumptions here if you want, but, until I learn more, I believe my two guesses here are fair and accurate.


Originally posted by: Mike O
Concepts that didn’t even exist in the slightest way until Jackson stuck them in. I can’t forgive that.


Like?


Well, we've already been talking about Elves at Helms Deep. That drastically wars with the spirit behind what Tolkien wrote his mythology to be. We were also just talking about Gollum sprinkling crackers. Remember? That didn't exist anywhere in the books. We also mentioned Denethor falling off of a cliff while on fire.


Originally posted by: Mike O
Jackson has a simple mind


Umm, I don't think that that is entirely true.


I never said he had an "entirely" simple mind. Seriously, how could I enjoy his films if I thougth he was simple in every sense?

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Of course! I thought they were great movies! I even loved many of the changes when they perfectly upheld the spirit of the books (which was often rare unfortunately).

Good to know. I thought that you thought that they were meritless and pointless.

Book-accurate movies of LOTR would have been a) far more successful; b) amazingly superior. Criticizing a film adaptation because it is different from the books can often make a lot of sense in many situations.


That's a bit general. You could be right, I just think that the issue is more complex than that.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Mike O

Book-accurate movies of LOTR would have been a) far more successful; b) amazingly superior. Criticizing a film adaptation because it is different from the books can often make a lot of sense in many situations.


That's a bit general. You could be right, I just think that the issue is more complex than that.


No, really?!

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
I never read the books but what bothered me tremendously about the movies was the mucked up colors and digital grading. It looked so unnatural that it took me out of the movie. It was like having a different one of the component RGB cables not connected every 10 minutes.
Some scenes (usually overbrightened and having that painful Enya singing) were way overdramaticized.
The camera work during the fight scenes was atrocious. Don't give me this crap about trying to convey chaos, watch the battle scenes in slow motion. Notice how rarely the camera shows anything in frame much less in focus.

Take back the trilogy. Execute Order '77

http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Author
Time
Post link
You're the first person I've met that criticizes these movies on technical grounds.

Hey look, a bear!

Author
Time
Post link
I'm usually a big fan of fantasy which I belive ought to be colorful and breathtaking. Legend (1985) is one of my favorite movies. But screwing with the colors on any movie pretty much makes shooting on 35mm film pointless. You go to great length to capture the most vivid, vibrant colors possible and then throw it all away.
[url=http://www.uploadfile.info]http://www.uploadfile.info/uploads/35a122a542.jpg[/url]
vs.
[url=http://www.uploadfile.info]http://www.uploadfile.info/uploads/b48aad361f.jpg[/url]

Take back the trilogy. Execute Order '77

http://www.youtube.com/user/Knightmessenger

Author
Time
Post link
I watched Legend in my English class for the past couple of day and I have no idea what the hell is going on hahahaha
Author
Time
Post link
And I have to respectfully disagree about the extensive color timing done for Jackson's LotR. He got the colors he wanted that were simply not available in the actual photography, no matter how true to color it may have been. The example that comes most quickly to mind is the lush green of Hobbiton, which was simply not there during original photography.

So, with the tech toolbox now available, what's a filmmaker to do? Leave the drab green that 35mm film captured perfectly? Or render the color timing to result in beautiful green for the fantasy film?
Author
Time
Post link
If their ever was an argument for classic literature to stay as text these films reaffirm it.

Author
Time
Post link
I'm still working my way through the Lord of the Ring books, actually.

Speaking about the films just as films, I was annoyed with the 2nd one when the dwarf was constantly tripping over himself, falling behind when they're running, being told to lower his axe, falling off his horse, unable to get his armor to fit properly, saying "Toss me..." because Aragorn's holding out to make him say it, etc. I felt a lot of this stuff was really over the top and generally served no real purpose other than to make the dwarf look bad and make Aragorn and the elf look good by comparison. It also threw off the drama and tension of certain scenes.

A couple of the weepier speeches by Sam could have been left out. The scene in the Extended Edition of Two Towers where Eowyn gives Aragorn the crappy stew made her look bad.
I'd like a qui-gon jinn please with an Obi-Wan to go.

Red heads ROCK. Blondes do not rock. Nuff said.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/greencapt/hansolovsindy.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
I never read the books but what bothered me tremendously about the movies was the mucked up colors and digital grading. It looked so unnatural that it took me out of the movie. It was like having a different one of the component RGB cables not connected every 10 minutes.

Some of the digital re-coloring was a bit overdone and sloppy, but I'm pretty sure that, in general, I'd rather have the movie with it than without it. Though I agree with your later statement that Legend is a beautiful film to watch from a visual standpoint (as well as others).


Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
Some scenes (usually overbrightened and having that painful Enya singing) were way overdramaticized.
The camera work during the fight scenes was atrocious. Don't give me this crap about trying to convey chaos, watch the battle scenes in slow motion. Notice how rarely the camera shows anything in frame much less in focus.


Enya is pretty good if you ask me, but I agree about the overdramatization. Too many of the scenes lacked all sense of subtlety in the way movement was portrayed or in the way emotional reactions like pain or worry were portrayed. It's as if Jackson believes his audience is too stupid to recognize anything that isn't as obvious as he can make it (the Star Wars prequels were also this way).

And I hate much of the combat filmwork. What's so spectacular about seeing nothing but a soldier's chest as the camera twists and we pretend he's being hurt by Sauron's giant mace?

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup

Enya is pretty good if you ask me,

Enya is ALWAYS good.


but I agree about the overdramatization. Too many of the scenes lacked all sense of subtlety in the way movement was portrayed or in the way emotional reactions like pain or worry were portrayed. It's as if Jackson believes his audience is too stupid to recognize anything that isn't as obvious as he can make it (the Star Wars prequels were also this way).

So the virus is spreading then?


And I hate much of the combat filmwork. What's so spectacular about seeing nothing but a soldier's chest as the camera twists and we pretend he's being hurt by Sauron's giant mace?

Don't virtually all films today have this problem?
I'd like a qui-gon jinn please with an Obi-Wan to go.

Red heads ROCK. Blondes do not rock. Nuff said.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/greencapt/hansolovsindy.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Enya is ALWAYS good.

Yeah, I agree there. I own some of her albums and like listening to them. Some of the songs might be a bit dull at times but never anything bad as far as I know.


Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Don't virtually all films today have this problem?


Hmm, now that i think about it, the prequel Star Wars films were able to film combat pretty well. You could always see what was happening (if the Jedi weren't moving too fast) and the combat was always fun. But, yes, most other, modern films seem to have that problem.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Enya is ALWAYS good.

Yeah, I agree there. I own some of her albums and like listening to them. Some of the songs might be a bit dull at times but never anything bad as far as I know.

I've never heard bad Enya.

Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Don't virtually all films today have this problem?


Hmm, now that i think about it, the prequel Star Wars films were able to film combat pretty well. You could always see what was happening (if the Jedi weren't moving too fast) and the combat was always fun.

Fair enough.

But, yes, most other, modern films seem to have that problem.

One of the few things I disliked about Batman Begins - I couldn't tell who was hitting who and where in some of those fights.
I'd like a qui-gon jinn please with an Obi-Wan to go.

Red heads ROCK. Blondes do not rock. Nuff said.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/greencapt/hansolovsindy.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
And I have to respectfully disagree about the extensive color timing done for Jackson's LotR. He got the colors he wanted that were simply not available in the actual photography, no matter how true to color it may have been. The example that comes most quickly to mind is the lush green of Hobbiton, which was simply not there during original photography.

So, with the tech toolbox now available, what's a filmmaker to do? Leave the drab green that 35mm film captured perfectly? Or render the color timing to result in beautiful green for the fantasy film?

As long as he leaves it that way. It's not like Jackson went mucking with the color after the release. He modified it to create what he wanted for the cut of the film.

Too many of the scenes lacked all sense of subtlety in the way movement was portrayed or in the way emotional reactions like pain or worry were portrayed.


Some worked beautifully; Lothlorien, the Black Gate, some of the Frodo/Sam stuff at the Cracks of Doom, Gimili's mourning in Moria, Gandalf's death the death of Theoden. Others were overblow, such as the Denethor stuff and the weird "Sauruman is possessing Theoden" thing.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Mike O
As long as he leaves it that way. It's not like Jackson went mucking with the color after the release.

Well, he did post-release remove the errant car speeding across the digitally color-timed fields of brilliant hue.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

One of the few things I disliked about Batman Begins - I couldn't tell who was hitting who and where in some of those fights.


I know! I hated that. The movie was fairly perfect otherwise. I heard they didn't want to show batman fighting and looking silly like he had in the other movies, but I'm sure that even a silly approach would have been preferable to the totally-zoomed shots of nothing but shaky camera work. That can hardly be called art since there's actually nothing to see.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
Originally posted by: Mike O
As long as he leaves it that way. It's not like Jackson went mucking with the color after the release.

Well, he did post-release remove the errant car speeding across the digitally color-timed fields of brilliant hue.


That was fixing an error. That's the kind of thing the SE should have been.

4

Author
Time
Post link
Yeah, but I'm really fond of film errors. I know it's more legitimate to fix those, but it's still revisionism - which I hate on principle.

I love the way they pick and choose among errors, too. No cobra glass-reflection in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but they leave in the truck's roof-rack falling off during the chase, and then being back in place. Or the clasps on the book coming open when Jones slams it down on the library table, only to be shown unclasping them manually in the next shot.

If your mission is to fix the errors, you as the filmmaker should be familiar enough with the piece to know where every error is ... and then spend the money to fix them. Don't just fix the easy ones. Otherwise, leave your film alone ... it's a piece of history if, like Raiders or Star Wars, it made a huge impact when first released - warts and all.







.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

One of the few things I disliked about Batman Begins - I couldn't tell who was hitting who and where in some of those fights.


I know! I hated that. The movie was fairly perfect otherwise. I heard they didn't want to show batman fighting and looking silly like he had in the other movies, but I'm sure that even a silly approach would have been preferable to the totally-zoomed shots of nothing but shaky camera work. That can hardly be called art since there's actually nothing to see.


I didn't think Batman looked all that silly in the fights from the other films, but that's just me.
I'd like a qui-gon jinn please with an Obi-Wan to go.

Red heads ROCK. Blondes do not rock. Nuff said.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/greencapt/hansolovsindy.jpg
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones

Enya is ALWAYS good.


Yeah, I agree there. I own some of her albums and like listening to them. Some of the songs might be a bit dull at times but never anything bad as far as I know.

I've never heard bad Enya.



Are we thinking of the same Enya? Every time I hear her, I want to shove a power drill down my ear canals.

http://i.imgur.com/7N84TM8.jpg

Author
Time
Post link
I like both of the films and the books but in the books they left so much stuff out but i have all the books and the extended versions of each film. Peter Jackson is the next George Lucas in my opinion.
http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d167/dragon_1987/115975295212642.gif
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Lord_Of_The_Sith
I like both of the films and the books but in the books they left so much stuff out but i have all the books and the extended versions of each film. Peter Jackson is the next George Lucas in my opinion.


he's never going to release another decent movie then?