The OT.com J. R. R. Tolkien & Middle Earth Discussion Thread — Page 4

Generalfrievous, have you ever had a positive thought about anything in your life?

Ok I was very harsh.

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people. What we now know is that Jackson does not respect Tolkien's books at all, except as a cash machine to exploit. Even in the LOTR films every theme from the source material is cut out for longer battle sequences. The characters in the movies have nothing in common with the books except their names. I have a hard time believing that anyone who is a fan of Tolkien's writings honestly likes the Hobbit trilogy. Frodo and Bilbo Baggins were the central characters of those two books, and they were barely in the films at all! Imagine if Peter Jackson made a film version of Moby-Dick and left the white whale on the cutting room floor; that's the level of respect he has for these works.

And yes I have plenty of positive thoughts in my life, they're just not on these message boards, much like Bilbo in the third Hobbit movie.

It'd be hilarious if frevious saw TFA and loved it, but convinced himself he hated it just so he could keep his signature.

DominicCobb said:

It'd be hilarious if frevious saw TFA and loved it, but convinced himself he hated it just so he could keep his signature.

 No if TFA was good I would just change my signature. 

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

Whatever happened to Left and Right Earth?

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

 Jackson and Tolkien are like oil and water. Tolkien was an Oxford professor who spent decades building Middle-Earth, and he put detail into names, languages, places, and history. He has subsequently influenced every single high fantasy novel in the last 60 years. Jackson was just some gore-obsessed exploitation filmmaker who couldn't restrain himself. He based his version of LOTR on fuzzy memories of the Ralph Bakshi cartoon when he was a kid, and hustled his way into filming the live-action versions to satisfy his own ego. And now he can't make a coherent or subdued film if his life depended on it. Did Jackson spend years getting every detail right, perfecting the internal chronology, fine-tuning the characters, keep focus on what the book were really about? Of course not! He was just a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. He's pissed that he can't milk that cow anymore now that Christopher Tolkien (who helped write LOTR and the Silmarillion) stepped in and kept his father's work in safe hands from the next Peter Jackson wannabe.

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

 Jackson and Tolkien are like oil and water. Tolkien was an Oxford professor who spent decades building Middle-Earth, and he put detail into names, languages, places, and history. He has subsequently influenced every single high fantasy novel in the last 60 years. Jackson was just some gore-obsessed exploitation filmmaker who couldn't restrain himself. He based his version of LOTR on fuzzy memories of the Ralph Bakshi cartoon when he was a kid, and hustled his way into filming the live-action versions to satisfy his own ego. And now he can't make a coherent or subdued film if his life depended on it. Did Jackson spend years getting every detail right, perfecting the internal chronology, fine-tuning the characters, keep focus on what the book were really about? Of course not! He was just a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. He's pissed that he can't milk that cow anymore now that Christopher Tolkien (who helped write LOTR and the Silmarillion) stepped in and kept his father's work in safe hands from the next Peter Jackson wannabe.

 When I respond that you should shut up, I don't know why you think I'm asking you to post more.

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

 Jackson and Tolkien are like oil and water. Tolkien was an Oxford professor who spent decades building Middle-Earth, and he put detail into names, languages, places, and history. He has subsequently influenced every single high fantasy novel in the last 60 years. Jackson was just some gore-obsessed exploitation filmmaker who couldn't restrain himself. He based his version of LOTR on fuzzy memories of the Ralph Bakshi cartoon when he was a kid, and hustled his way into filming the live-action versions to satisfy his own ego. And now he can't make a coherent or subdued film if his life depended on it. Did Jackson spend years getting every detail right, perfecting the internal chronology, fine-tuning the characters, keep focus on what the book were really about? Of course not! He was just a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. He's pissed that he can't milk that cow anymore now that Christopher Tolkien (who helped write LOTR and the Silmarillion) stepped in and kept his father's work in safe hands from the next Peter Jackson wannabe.

 When I respond that you should shut up, I don't know why you think I'm asking you to post more.

 Was Frodo in the movies the same character as in the books? Aragorn? Gimli? Faramir? Denethor? Elrond? Merry & Pippin? The characters we saw in the movies were the polar opposites of the characters portrayed in the books. Frodo Baggins was supposed to be a hero, not some dumbass that got stabbed every five minutes.

Maybe if Peter Jackson respected the characters in the first place I would have nothing to complain about.

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

 Jackson and Tolkien are like oil and water. Tolkien was an Oxford professor who spent decades building Middle-Earth, and he put detail into names, languages, places, and history. He has subsequently influenced every single high fantasy novel in the last 60 years. Jackson was just some gore-obsessed exploitation filmmaker who couldn't restrain himself. He based his version of LOTR on fuzzy memories of the Ralph Bakshi cartoon when he was a kid, and hustled his way into filming the live-action versions to satisfy his own ego. And now he can't make a coherent or subdued film if his life depended on it. Did Jackson spend years getting every detail right, perfecting the internal chronology, fine-tuning the characters, keep focus on what the book were really about? Of course not! He was just a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. He's pissed that he can't milk that cow anymore now that Christopher Tolkien (who helped write LOTR and the Silmarillion) stepped in and kept his father's work in safe hands from the next Peter Jackson wannabe.

 When I respond that you should shut up, I don't know why you think I'm asking you to post more.

 Was Frodo in the movies the same character as in the books? Aragorn? Gimli? Faramir? Denethor? Elrond? Merry & Pippin? The characters we saw in the movies were the polar opposites of the characters portrayed in the books. Frodo Baggins was supposed to be a hero, not some dumbass that got stabbed every five minutes.

Maybe if Peter Jackson respected the characters in the first place I would have nothing to complain about.

 Purple monkey dishwasher.

timdiggerm said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Whatever happened to Left and Right Earth?

 Well, Left Earth, aka Valinor, was removed from the normal world when the world was made a sphere at the end of the Second Age. Right Earth is never really talked about.

Ask a silly question, get a serious answer. 

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

 Jackson and Tolkien are like oil and water. Tolkien was an Oxford professor who spent decades building Middle-Earth, and he put detail into names, languages, places, and history. He has subsequently influenced every single high fantasy novel in the last 60 years. Jackson was just some gore-obsessed exploitation filmmaker who couldn't restrain himself. He based his version of LOTR on fuzzy memories of the Ralph Bakshi cartoon when he was a kid, and hustled his way into filming the live-action versions to satisfy his own ego. And now he can't make a coherent or subdued film if his life depended on it. Did Jackson spend years getting every detail right, perfecting the internal chronology, fine-tuning the characters, keep focus on what the book were really about? Of course not! He was just a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. He's pissed that he can't milk that cow anymore now that Christopher Tolkien (who helped write LOTR and the Silmarillion) stepped in and kept his father's work in safe hands from the next Peter Jackson wannabe.

 When I respond that you should shut up, I don't know why you think I'm asking you to post more.

 Was Frodo in the movies the same character as in the books? Aragorn? Gimli? Faramir? Denethor? Elrond? Merry & Pippin? The characters we saw in the movies were the polar opposites of the characters portrayed in the books. Frodo Baggins was supposed to be a hero, not some dumbass that got stabbed every five minutes.

Maybe if Peter Jackson respected the characters in the first place I would have nothing to complain about.

 Purple monkey dishwasher.

 I just want to enjoy the LOTR movies again, that's all.

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

TV's Frink said:

generalfrevious said:

But I'm concerned that Jackson's version of Middle-Earth is eclipsing the real version in the eyes of most people.

First world problems.

 Jackson and Tolkien are like oil and water. Tolkien was an Oxford professor who spent decades building Middle-Earth, and he put detail into names, languages, places, and history. He has subsequently influenced every single high fantasy novel in the last 60 years. Jackson was just some gore-obsessed exploitation filmmaker who couldn't restrain himself. He based his version of LOTR on fuzzy memories of the Ralph Bakshi cartoon when he was a kid, and hustled his way into filming the live-action versions to satisfy his own ego. And now he can't make a coherent or subdued film if his life depended on it. Did Jackson spend years getting every detail right, perfecting the internal chronology, fine-tuning the characters, keep focus on what the book were really about? Of course not! He was just a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. He's pissed that he can't milk that cow anymore now that Christopher Tolkien (who helped write LOTR and the Silmarillion) stepped in and kept his father's work in safe hands from the next Peter Jackson wannabe.

 When I respond that you should shut up, I don't know why you think I'm asking you to post more.

 Was Frodo in the movies the same character as in the books? Aragorn? Gimli? Faramir? Denethor? Elrond? Merry & Pippin? The characters we saw in the movies were the polar opposites of the characters portrayed in the books. Frodo Baggins was supposed to be a hero, not some dumbass that got stabbed every five minutes.

Maybe if Peter Jackson respected the characters in the first place I would have nothing to complain about.

 Purple monkey dishwasher.

 I just want to enjoy the LOTR movies again, that's all.

 Arglebargle.

Kltpzyxm.

generalfrevious said:

 I just want to enjoy the LOTR movies again, that's all.

 It sounds to me like you have never enjoyed them, and thus cannot enjoy them again.

In any case, I have read The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and I enjoy them all, and I enjoy the movies in spite of their differences.  No movie is faithful in every way to its source.  To make it so would in fact be poor storytelling.  Imagine an extra half hour devoted to Tom Bombadil.  I'd hate to see any film adaptation that included that subplot.

darth_ender said:

generalfrevious said:

 I just want to enjoy the LOTR movies again, that's all.

 It sounds to me like you have never enjoyed them, and thus cannot enjoy them again.

 Actually you're wrong. I really loved them a lot, especially the extended versions. Which is why I'm so disappointed to learn that Jackson cares less about   Tolkien's work than I do. 

How could you enjoy them before and not now?  The movies haven't changed.  Only your perception, and only because you've now read the books and found them to be so different.  I agree, there are a number of differences, but I enjoy them as separate takes on the same tale.  You may have a preference, but there's no need to use rape analogies and such extreme hyperbole when you are disappointed in the creative liberties taken by the makers of a film adaptation.  And I might go so far as to say there is no need to take such an extreme view in any discussion you have.  I feel like you must be a miserable person because you dwell so extensively on what you are unhappy with in the world, and it makes me sad.  Try to enjoy things a little more, and try not to let your disappointment overwhelm you so.

generalfrevious said:

... ...a greedy bastard who bashes the system for the very thing he is guilty of. The Hobbit/Lord Of the Rings means nothing to him except as an intellectual property he can milk to build his second mansion. 

 While I usually don't think building narratives about creators is a useful way to analyze work, it might be worth noting that Peter Jackson still lives in the same house he lived in before starting LOTRs.