PaulKM wrote:Whoops, Miss your reply Meta. As an avid fan of Tolkien, I hated the films. Jackson, et al, butchered the language, the story, and the characters-- they might as well have taken turns skull-f**king Tolkien's remains on screen for 558 minutes straight. I'll stick with the Radio 4 production, cheesy sounds effects and all. Bakshi at least gave us Peter Woodthorp as Sméagol/Gollum, and the BBC was smart enough to get him to reprise the role. Best,Paul
Badmike wrote:I can never thank Jackson enough for leaving out Tom Bombadil, worst character in the entire Tolkien canon....I skip over that entire section everytime I re-read the trilogy.
PaulKM wrote:As an avid fan of Tolkien, I hated the films. Jackson, et al, butchered the language, the story, and the characters-- they might as well have taken turns skull-f**king Tolkien's remains on screen for 558 minutes straight.
Badmike wrote:Anthony Hopkins as Gandalf.
Kingofpain89 wrote:I almost pissed myself during Theoden's war speech and when the Rohirrim rode onto the Fields of the Pelennor. That was fecking brilliant moviemaking. And it wasnt the only time I got goosebumps or caught myself holding my breath during those films. Only movies that "move" me tend to do that. Very few do so.I respect your opinion Paul. But if someone made a Lord of the Rings movie exactly as it was put down in the books with no deviation or creative license whatsoever, it would be about as entertaining as a movie about The Bible done in the same fashion. Very few people would enjoy it, only a handful of people would understand what the characters were saying, it would lose a gargantuan amount of money, and no production company would take a chance on another fantasy film for twenty years or so.Oh, and as an avid Tolkien fan myself, I loved the movies. I could nitpick the crap out of them but its not really all that fun for me.
Kingofpain89 wrote:He does a pretty good Odin though.
Badmike wrote:...and a sword swinging Rutger Hauer as the invented evil sidekick of Sauron called "Ringcutter"... with a sword swinging Gollum played by Harvey Keitel as Frodo (played by Freddie Prinze) watches helplessly.....
Badmike wrote:Well, that was a comic book movie, and I thought Hopkins was great, because at this stage of his career he's been chewing through scenery like no one elses business, and any comic book movie character should be over the top. He's about as subtle as a warthog at a picnic at this point in his career My point was there are very few places I can point to in the LoTR trilogy and say "What were they thinking casting _____ as that?" And I bet Jackson had to fight tooth and nail to get guys like Viggo in the film over, say, a Keanu Reeves or more well known name that would be "boffo" box office. And I agree with King, if this had been crap, it would have killed any big budget fantasy film for the next generation. Tolkien fans owe Jackson a debt of gratitude they can never repay, and they call him a hack. Gentlemen, I would say you have NEVER seen a George Lucas film of the last 20 years if you want "hack" defined.....You not only got the BEST movie you could, you got BETTER than that, and people still bitch. Try being a Howard fan and see piece of shit after piece of shit smeared all over the screen as they destroy one character after another, assuring a Howard movie true to the spirit of his books will never be made in our lifetimes. When the original "Conan" movie, which only had the word "Conan" in common with Howard's depiction of the barbarian, is held up as a great example (actually, the BEST example) of his work you realize you are damn lucky not to have gotten Brad Pitt as Faramir, Angelina Jolie as Eowen, and a sword swinging Rutger Hauer as the invented evil sidekick of Sauron called "Ringcutter" in the final battle at Mount Doom with a sword swinging Gollum played by Harvey Keitel as Frodo (played by Freddie Prinze) watches helplessly.....I've tried over the years to get Tolkien fanatics to realize the absolute armageddon that could have been, and how lucky they are to get something actually watchable, and they just refuse to see it.... I won't even get into what the movie "Dungeons & Dragons" did to any hope of ever having a film franchise worth spit built out of our favorite game. Just to say.....that could have been LoTR. Mike B.
PaulKM wrote:I had not thought of Goldberry as Bombadil's, "hot wife" before.
PaulKM wrote:Lucas has become a thing I abhor, but once upon a time he was anything but a hack.
Badmike wrote:a sword swinging Gollum played by Harvey Keitel
Kingofpain89 wrote:I have always thought of this as a darn good representation of Goldberry
JohnGaunt wrote:Second picture: What is that miniature doing to the candle?
benjoshua wrote:Keeping it from blowing out? Is this a trick question?
JasonZavoda wrote:Mike, The way you see the Conan movies I see the filth poured out from Jackson for the LotR films. These were not the 'best' anymore than the Conan casts were the 'best'. For you they could have been worse, for me they are a crime and Jackson should be beaten with iron rods till he is a bag of blood and broken bones for making them.
Badmike wrote:Ok, I can see that. But it's nowhere as bad an adaptation as the Conan movie, which didn't even use a Howard story as it's basis (imagine Jackson making LoTR a generic S&S flick and not paying any attention to Tolkien's book and that is a better comparison). You could at least follow the dots during Jackson's script....Conan, forget it. And if the new movie isn't based on a Howard story it's another slam against the memory of Howard. Why can't those motherf**kers just adapt Red Nails or Beyond the Black River or Tower of the Elephant? I would honestly cut off my left nut to have Jackson do one of the above Howard stories with the same attention he showed the LoTR trilogy.Mike B.
JasonZavoda wrote:Mike, I'd have been standing there with the clippers if I could have gotten him to do Conan instead of LotR and if he had any balls to start with I would have cut his off for good measure.
