Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Fantasy » alt.fan.tolkien » How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie
How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #113630] Mo, 22 August 2005 03:50
Robinsons  
Jackson's first mistake (of many) was trying to cram too much
of the tale into three films. As everyone who loves the book
knows, this is flat out impossible. Once you get past that
there is no point in discussing the many other factual errors
in "Peter Jackson's So-Called Lord of the Rings" because
there is no getting past it. How can you film the tale
accurately and do justice to this literary master-work if you
leave half the story out? On that, I think we are all agreed.

(except for a few movie lovers who do not have a full grasp
of the depth of detail that is present in the book and must
include in any fathful adaptation.)

The question becomes, "How do you divide up the tale?" Many
people on the aft/rabt newsgroups, especially British people,
seem to want to turn it into a miniseries. The trouble is,
we all know miniseries on TV aren't any good, British miniseries
notwithstanding. And the people proposing to DO it that way
aren't offering to pay for it (!) so it's time to consider other,
better options and see who on these newsgroups would
be interested in moving forward with a REAL LOTR Movie.

Besides, the FX in miniseries is nowhere near as good as a series
of, say, TEN OR 20 short length films. That must be our goal.

It is absolutely crucial that the FX in each of the ten films
should be twice as good as Jackson's movies.

Only then will it capture the realism of the books. Many
people will mock me for this idea but I have come up with
a new idea to use CGI elves. Only CGI can capture the beauty
of the elves described in the book. Especially Arwen.

This leaves one problem which I think I have solved. If we,
the on-line community, can produce TEN short, faithful,
non-Hollywood films devoted to TOLKIEN'S LOTR

(not Jackson's PRIVATE FANTASIES) then how the heck do you
market them?????? Many people have asked me that.

The solution is SIMPLE: RE-NAME each movie. Don't use
chapter titles or volume headings. Draw people into the tale.
Let each of the ten films stand on its own brilliant artistic
merit as a faithful adaptation of PART of Tolkien's masterpiece.

Don't call the first movie "LOTR I" or something tacky
like that. Start out fresh, like "Raiders of the Lost Ark",
before it was known as (ugh) "Indiana Jones I".

A FAITHFUL interpretation of the tale will be SO engrossing,
and so different from Jackson's version that viewers will be
sucked in, regardless of how it is marketed. They will not
even notice the comparison to Jackson's substandard version.

Besides, there is sadly NO USE calling the first one "Lord
of the Rings" because average, illiterate Americans will assume
it is a remake of Jackson's version, since they know nothing
of the book but what Jackson has told them.

It's time to
show them the REAL story of how Gandalf died and returned
to save Middle Earth in a language that skeptical movie goers
can understand and relate to. That is why naming is so important.
Tolkien was very concerned with the right name of things.

If you choose the right name for each movie, you will quickly
see how it follows in terms of how to frame the text on-screen,
where the cut-off points in each of the ten movies should be, etc.

--I-- will start out by proposing a title for each movie,
in the new series of films.

What I want each of --you-- to do, is to take each title
(or one of your choosing) and propose a synopsis showing
which events happen in that movie.

In the words of Tom Shippey, this is known as "entrelacement".

We are following in the footsteps of Tolkien here!!!!!


--- Here are the names I would suggest giving each movie: ---


* Easy Black Rider (later identified as film 1
in the Lord of the Rings series)

* Lord of the Rings II: The Balrog Returns

* Lord of the Rings III: The Lothlorien Witch Project

* The Two Towers: Army of Darkness

* Treebeard (TV miniseries, like Clone Wars)

* Hobbits of Ithilien: The Curse of the One Ring

* Return of the King: Kingdom of Heaven

* Frodo and Sam Go To Cirith Ungol

* Fear And Loathing on the Plateau of Gorgoroth

* The Wizard of Hobbiton

C'mon people -- together, we can DO this!!!

Forget Hollywood -- this is the age of the Internet!

If you want something done right, do it yourself,
and this is how I see it done.

-- BRB
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #113631 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 04:28
jgh  
Just checking.

You do realize that this is insane?

John Harkness
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #113632 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 05:34
jayembee  
wrob [at] erols.com wrote:

> Jackson's first mistake (of many) was trying to cram too much
> of the tale into three films. As everyone who loves the book
> knows, this is flat out impossible. Once you get past that
> there is no point in discussing the many other factual errors
> in "Peter Jackson's So-Called Lord of the Rings" because
> there is no getting past it. How can you film the tale
> accurately and do justice to this literary master-work if you
> leave half the story out? On that, I think we are all agreed.

Actually, we aren't "all agreed". Me, I think Tolkien's book is
bloated beyond belief, and Jackson did a good job in keeping the
meat of the story while trimming off all the fat. Just as one example,
look at the simplicity of Boromir's "funeral" in the film in contrast to
how Tolkien does it in the book.

> (except for a few movie lovers who do not have a full grasp
> of the depth of detail that is present in the book and must
> include in any fathful adaptation.)

If movie lovers are agreed on anything when it comes to adaptations of
literary works, it's that film is a very different medium from prose, and one
*has* to be flexible in the way the material is translated from one to
another. "Depth of detail" may be the right way to go in a book, but it can
be deadly in a film. Any film adaptation of LOTR that included all of the
detail that Tolkien put in his novel would make the film as dreadfully dull as
the novel was.

-- jayembee
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #113635 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 06:50
borromini  
wrob*erols.com wrote:
> major snip...
> If you want something done right, do it yourself,
> and this is how I see it done.

I'm willing to recommend to you a few good therapists if you're interested.

borromini
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #113637 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 06:54
Flame of the West  
jayembee wrote:

> Actually, we aren't "all agreed". Me, I think Tolkien's book is
> bloated beyond belief, and Jackson did a good job in keeping the
> meat of the story while trimming off all the fat. Just as one example,
> look at the simplicity of Boromir's "funeral" in the film in contrast to
> how Tolkien does it in the book.

Let me guess: you're from rec.arts.movies.past-films
and not from a Tolkien group.


-- FotW

Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-earth.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #113638 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 07:37
Sean  
jayembee wrote:

> wrob [at] erols.com wrote:
>
> > Jackson's first mistake (of many) was trying to cram too much
> > of the tale into three films...
>
> Actually, we aren't "all agreed". Me, I think Tolkien's book is
> bloated beyond belief, and Jackson did a good job in keeping the
> meat of the story while trimming off all the fat.

Gosh, and I thought all that heroic dialog and descriptive prose
was a big part of the charm. Goes to show how much *I* know about
classic literature. I suppose the _Iliad_/_Odyssey_ are also too
bloated and once the fat is trimmed you could reduce the whole thing
down to a half-hour Saturday morning cartoon (including animated
commercials for Fruit Loops).

Sean
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #114866 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 14:52
urban  
I had thought this was a humourless troll message. Had me going
until I got to the titles:

In article <1124675456.204026.78110 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
<wrob [at] erols.com> wrote:
>
>--- Here are the names I would suggest giving each movie: ---
>
>
> * Easy Black Rider (later identified as film 1
> in the Lord of the Rings series)
>
> * Lord of the Rings II: The Balrog Returns
>
> * Lord of the Rings III: The Lothlorien Witch Project
>
> * The Two Towers: Army of Darkness
>
> * Treebeard (TV miniseries, like Clone Wars)
>
> * Hobbits of Ithilien: The Curse of the One Ring
>
> * Return of the King: Kingdom of Heaven
>
> * Frodo and Sam Go To Cirith Ungol
>
> * Fear And Loathing on the Plateau of Gorgoroth
>
> * The Wizard of Hobbiton
>

You obviously have a deep understanding of film marketing. I will
be fascinated to hear your casting preferences!
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116437 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 15:14
Derek Broughton  
wrob [at] erols.com wrote:

> A FAITHFUL interpretation of the tale will be SO engrossing,
> and so different from Jackson's version that viewers will be
> sucked in, regardless of how it is marketed. They will not
> even notice the comparison to Jackson's substandard version.
>
LOL. PJ's version is what Hollywood & the Tolkien Estate could live with.
Anything more faithful would have never been funded (_especially_ a 10 - 20
parter - Americans don't have that kind of attention span, and it's only
Americans who matter to Hollywood); anything less faithful would have been
nixed by the estate.
--
derek
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116438 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 15:17
Derek Broughton  
Flame of the West wrote:

> jayembee wrote:
>
>> Actually, we aren't "all agreed". Me, I think Tolkien's book is
>> bloated beyond belief, and Jackson did a good job in keeping the
>> meat of the story while trimming off all the fat. Just as one example,
>> look at the simplicity of Boromir's "funeral" in the film in contrast to
>> how Tolkien does it in the book.
>
> Let me guess: you're from rec.arts.movies.past-films
> and not from a Tolkien group.
>
OK, then. I'm from the tolkien groups. The books are certainly not
bloated, and I have problems with the liberties Jackson took with the plot
for reasons that could only have come from his own mind - not any interest
in advancing Tolkien's plot. Even so, I still think they were fabulous
movies, and if they don't show up gift-wrapped for me this week I'm going
to be seriously depressed...
--
derek
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116440 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 16:44
Morgil  
Derek Broughton wrote:
> wrob [at] erols.com wrote:
>
>
>>A FAITHFUL interpretation of the tale will be SO engrossing,
>>and so different from Jackson's version that viewers will be
>>sucked in, regardless of how it is marketed. They will not
>>even notice the comparison to Jackson's substandard version.
>>
>
> LOL. PJ's version is what Hollywood & the Tolkien Estate could live with.
> Anything more faithful would have never been funded (_especially_ a 10 - 20
> parter - Americans don't have that kind of attention span, and it's only
> Americans who matter to Hollywood); anything less faithful would have been
> nixed by the estate.

Your analysis is absolutely correct, exept for the part that
Tolkien Estate had absolutely no saying at all to the films,
which means that they were just as faithful as PJ wanted them
to be, and he had no problem with altering everything he fould
inconvenient or otherwise could not understand.

Morgil
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116441 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 16:45
zip  
"Michael Urban" <urban [at] panix.com> wrote...

> I had thought this was a humourless troll message. Had me going
> until I got to the titles:

Yep... I was thinking "Who does this guy think he is?", then when I read the
titles I was rolling around.

Nice post.

-Paul.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116446 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 17:27
MYNAME  
<wrob [at] erols.com> wrote:

> Jackson's first mistake (of many) was trying to cram too much
> of the tale into three films. As everyone who loves the book
> knows, this is flat out impossible. Once you get past that
> there is no point in discussing the many other factual errors
> in "Peter Jackson's So-Called Lord of the Rings" because
> there is no getting past it. How can you film the tale
> accurately and do justice to this literary master-work if you
> leave half the story out? On that, I think we are all agreed.

Not me. Though I didn't think the films were perfect, this is not my
problem with the films.

>
> A FAITHFUL interpretation of the tale will be SO engrossing,
> and so different from Jackson's version that viewers will be
> sucked in, regardless of how it is marketed.

Dream on...


> If you want something done right, do it yourself,
> and this is how I see it done.

4 words: It will not happen.


--
Martin Koolhoven
http://www.hetschnitzelparadijs.nl
http://www.thebox.nl/schnitzel/schnitzelparadiso.php
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116447 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 17:27
MYNAME  
Derek Broughton <news [at] pointerstop.ca> wrote:

> LOL. PJ's version is what Hollywood & the Tolkien Estate could live with.
> Anything more faithful would have never been funded

More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
this trilogy is.


--
Martin Koolhoven
http://www.hetschnitzelparadijs.nl
http://www.thebox.nl/schnitzel/schnitzelparadiso.php
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116449 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 18:52
Taemon  
Michael Urban wrote:

> I had thought this was a humourless troll message. Had me going
> until I got to the titles:

Same here. I think a lot of people are had by this one :-)

T.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116450 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 20:02
Jette Goldie  
"Martin Koolhoven" <MYNAME [at] xs4all.nlSPAMSHIT> wrote in message
news:1h1phq7.bs896s19l8fwsN%MYNAME [at] xs4all.nlSPAMSHIT...
> Derek Broughton <news [at] pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>
> > LOL. PJ's version is what Hollywood & the Tolkien Estate could
live with.
> > Anything more faithful would have never been funded
>
> More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book
as
> this trilogy is.

Even novelisations of movies written after the movie was
made are rarely as close as PJ's trilogy, for all its faults.



--
Jette Goldie
jette [at] blueyonder.co.uk
Some people are like Slinkies . . . not really good for anything, but
you
still can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116454 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 20:34
Morgil  
Jette Goldie wrote:
> "Martin Koolhoven" <MYNAME [at] xs4all.nlSPAMSHIT> wrote in message
> news:1h1phq7.bs896s19l8fwsN%MYNAME [at] xs4all.nlSPAMSHIT...

>>More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book
>
> as
>
>>this trilogy is.
>
>
> Even novelisations of movies written after the movie was
> made are rarely as close as PJ's trilogy, for all its faults.

He got most of the names right, but aside from that it was
about as anti-faithful as one could imagine. Most of the
themes, characters and events were completely messed up,
and often in fact turned into total opposite of the book.
A faithful adaption would be respective to the themes and
spirit of the book. PJs flicks make mockery of those.

Morgil
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116457 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 20:10
Derek Broughton  
Martin Koolhoven wrote:

> Derek Broughton <news [at] pointerstop.ca> wrote:
>
>> LOL. PJ's version is what Hollywood & the Tolkien Estate could live
>> with. Anything more faithful would have never been funded
>
> More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
> this trilogy is.

You can't honestly be claiming that it _was_ faithful? It's easy to put
together lists of dozens of things Jackson changed. Still, I loved the
movies. I could live without the stupid dream sequences in #2...

It doesn't matter if anybody else ever made a movie more faithful to a book.
The fact is, Hollywood isn't interested in doing that - and they probably
_shouldn't_ be. Film is an inherently different medium from print, and you
get somebody _else's_ vision, instead of the one that you and the author
colaborate on.
--
derek
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116458 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 20:10
Derek Broughton  
Taemon wrote:

> Michael Urban wrote:
>
>> I had thought this was a humourless troll message. Had me going
>> until I got to the titles:
>
> Same here. I think a lot of people are had by this one :-)

OK, I admit it. But it's not fair expecting us to read the _whole_ of a
troll's post before taking umbrage :-)
--
derek
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116459 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 21:31
Taemon  
Derek Broughton wrote:

> Taemon wrote:
>> Michael Urban wrote:
>>> I had thought this was a humourless troll message. Had me going
>>> until I got to the titles:
>> Same here. I think a lot of people are had by this one :-)
> OK, I admit it. But it's not fair expecting us to read the _whole_
> of a troll's post before taking umbrage :-)

True, true. I don't know why I read it all. Car crash-watching
syndrome, I guess.

T.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116460 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 21:18
Notifier Deamon  
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116464 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 21:59
Morgil  
George Peatty wrote:
> In article <ded5sb$ag4$1 [at] nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>, Morgil says...
>
> [snip]
>
>
>>He got most of the names right, but aside from that it was
>>about as anti-faithful as one could imagine. Most of the
>>themes, characters and events were completely messed up,
>>and often in fact turned into total opposite of the book.
>
>
>
> You saw a different set of movies than I did. There are whole passages quoted
> verbatim from the book. One can argue about the visual elements of Jackson's
> movie, whether it actually captures the look of Tolkien's world, but not whether
> the movie captures its themes.

I think we probably saw the same movies, but we must have
read some very different books.

Morgil
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116467 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 22:17
electrictroy  
Morgil wrote:
> George Peatty wrote:
> > You saw a different set of movies than I did. There are whole passages quoted
> > verbatim from the book. One can argue about the visual elements of Jackson's
> > movie, whether it actually captures the look of Tolkien's world, but not whether
> > the movie captures its themes.
>
>
>
> I think we probably saw the same movies, but we must have
> read some very different books.
>
> Morgil




Yep. The books were *boring*. After seeing the movies & throughly
enjoying them, I picked up the books and tried to read them.

I quit halfway through book #2. Tolkien rambles on and on and on.
He's as bad as a politician. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk & virtually
nothing happening.

Well, at least he cured my insomnia.

troy
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116471 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 22:58
Bob  
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:59:12 +0300, Morgil wrote:

> George Peatty wrote:
>> In article <ded5sb$ag4$1 [at] nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>, Morgil says...
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>>>He got most of the names right, but aside from that it was
>>>about as anti-faithful as one could imagine. Most of the
>>>themes, characters and events were completely messed up,
>>>and often in fact turned into total opposite of the book.
>>
>>
>>
>> You saw a different set of movies than I did. There are whole passages quoted
>> verbatim from the book. One can argue about the visual elements of Jackson's
>> movie, whether it actually captures the look of Tolkien's world, but not whether
>> the movie captures its themes.
>
> I think we probably saw the same movies, but we must have
> read some very different books.
>

That may explain a lot.

One thing about books -- they are different for each person who reads
them. Movies are different; we can't "read" as much into them from our own
imagination as we can with books. Some see the essence of the books much
closer to the way Jackson (and his cohorts) do. Others see it quite
differently. So for some the movies are faithful to the books, for others,
not.

Bob
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116472 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 23:02
ojevind.lang  
Martin Koolhoven wrote:

>More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
this trilogy is.

That's an easy one. Here are a few examples, out of many:

"Oliver Twist"
"Sense and Sensibility"
"Persuasion"
"Cider with Rosie"
"Emma"
"Solaris" (Tarkovsky's version, not the American monstrosity)
"Pelle the Conqueror"
"The Emigrants"
"Wuthering Heights"

In order to find something as far removed from the book as Jackson's
LotR films, you'd have to pick seomething like "To Have and Have Not"
or that terrible version of "Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde" where Spencer
Tracy played the charming young American Dr Jekyll, complete with sweet
fianc=E9e. Or "Bram Stoker's Dracula", which was conspicuous for being
so completely inappropriaely named.

=D6jevind
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116473 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 23:05
ojevind.lang  
electric... wrote:

"I quit halfway through book #2. Tolkien rambles on and on and on.
He's as bad as a politician. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk & virtually
nothing happening. "

"Virtually nothing happens"? Wow. Like, man, far out. What are your
criteria - somebody killed on every page?

=D6jevind
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116474 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 22:53
philippa  
On 22/08/05 15:44, Morgil wrote:
> Derek Broughton wrote:
>
>> wrob [at] erols.com wrote:

>> LOL. PJ's version is what Hollywood & the Tolkien Estate could live
>> with. Anything more faithful would have never been funded
>> (_especially_ a 10 - 20
>> parter -

Nightmare on Elm Street?
All those Charles Bronson revenge movies?
Police Acadamy?


I rest my case....



Philippa
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116475 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 23:42
Morgil  
Bob wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:59:12 +0300, Morgil wrote:

>>I think we probably saw the same movies, but we must have
>>read some very different books.
>>
>
>
> That may explain a lot.
>
> One thing about books -- they are different for each person who reads
> them. Movies are different; we can't "read" as much into them from our own
> imagination as we can with books. Some see the essence of the books much
> closer to the way Jackson (and his cohorts) do. Others see it quite
> differently. So for some the movies are faithful to the books, for others,
> not.

Yep, but claiming that movies are faithful requires ignoring
most of the essential things in the book and concentration
in the roughest plot outlines and few superficial details.

Morgil
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116477 ] Di, 23 August 2005 00:03
Matthew Bladen  
On 22 Aug 2005 14:02:29 -0700, =D6jevind L=E5ng (ojevind.lang [at] bredband.net)=
=20
said:
> Martin Koolhoven wrote:
>=20
> >More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
> this trilogy is.
>=20
> That's an easy one. Here are a few examples, out of many:
>=20
> "Oliver Twist"
> "Sense and Sensibility"
> "Persuasion"
> "Cider with Rosie"
> "Emma"
> "Solaris" (Tarkovsky's version, not the American monstrosity)
> "Pelle the Conqueror"
> "The Emigrants"
> "Wuthering Heights"
>=20
> In order to find something as far removed from the book as Jackson's
> LotR films, you'd have to pick seomething like "To Have and Have Not"
> or that terrible version of "Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde" where Spencer
> Tracy played the charming young American Dr Jekyll, complete with sweet
> fianc=E9e. Or "Bram Stoker's Dracula", which was conspicuous for being
> so completely inappropriaely named.

Add "To Kill a Mockingbird" to the list of faithful films. The absence=20
of Atticus's sister in the film is the only difference that registered,=20
and that doesn't affect the heart of the story.
--=20
Matthew
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116482 ] Mo, 22 August 2005 23:55
George Peatty  
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:59:12 +0300, Morgil <morestelx [at] hotmail.com> wrote:

>> You saw a different set of movies than I did. There are whole passages quoted
>> verbatim from the book. One can argue about the visual elements of Jackson's
>> movie, whether it actually captures the look of Tolkien's world, but not whether
>> the movie captures its themes.
>
>I think we probably saw the same movies, but we must have
>read some very different books.

Touché
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116485 ] Di, 23 August 2005 00:34
jwkenne  
ojevind.lang [at] bredband.net wrote:
> Martin Koolhoven wrote:
>
>
>>More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
>
> this trilogy is.
>
> That's an easy one. Here are a few examples, out of many:
>
> "Oliver Twist"
> "Sense and Sensibility"

Bwah!-ha!-ha!-ha!-ha!

S&S is a very nice movie, but faithful it ain't.

--
John W. Kennedy
"...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you
should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman."
-- Rupert Goodwins
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116487 ] Di, 23 August 2005 01:15
Morgil  
John W. Kennedy wrote:
> ojevind.lang [at] bredband.net wrote:
>
>> Martin Koolhoven wrote:
>>
>>
>>> More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
>>
>>
>> this trilogy is.
>>
>> That's an easy one. Here are a few examples, out of many:
>>
>> "Oliver Twist"
>> "Sense and Sensibility"
>
>
> Bwah!-ha!-ha!-ha!-ha!
>
> S&S is a very nice movie, but faithful it ain't.

Nobody said it had to be faithful. Just more faithful then LotR.

Morgil
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116490 ] Di, 23 August 2005 01:39
Apteryx  
<wrob [at] erols.com> wrote in message
news:1124675456.204026.78110 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
<clip>
> C'mon people -- together, we can DO this!!!
>
> Forget Hollywood -- this is the age of the Internet!
>
> If you want something done right, do it yourself,
> and this is how I see it done.

I give it 8 out of 10. It has to be rated a pretty good troll when it got
several so worked up, but it does need work - the best material is in the
suggested titles at the end (and the "C'mon people") and many people never
got that far.

--
Apteryx
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116491 ] Di, 23 August 2005 01:46
Bob  
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 00:42:16 +0300, Morgil wrote:

> Bob wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:59:12 +0300, Morgil wrote:
>
>>>I think we probably saw the same movies, but we must have
>>>read some very different books.
>>>
>>
>>
>> That may explain a lot.
>>
>> One thing about books -- they are different for each person who reads
>> them. Movies are different; we can't "read" as much into them from our own
>> imagination as we can with books. Some see the essence of the books much
>> closer to the way Jackson (and his cohorts) do. Others see it quite
>> differently. So for some the movies are faithful to the books, for others,
>> not.
>
> Yep, but claiming that movies are faithful requires ignoring
> most of the essential things in the book and concentration
> in the roughest plot outlines and few superficial details.

But -- Readers of the books will have differnt opinions of what's
essential and what's superficial. One person's "rough outline" is
another's "essence".
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116495 ] Di, 23 August 2005 02:44
the softrat  
On 22 Aug 2005 14:05:10 -0700, ojevind.lang [at] bredband.net wrote:

>electric... wrote:
>
>"I quit halfway through book #2. Tolkien rambles on and on and on.
>He's as bad as a politician. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk & virtually
>nothing happening. "
>
>"Virtually nothing happens"? Wow. Like, man, far out. What are your
>criteria - somebody killed on every page?
>
>Öjevind

Or laid!

the softrat
Sometimes I get so tired of the taste of my own toes.
mailto:softrat [at] pobox.com
--
Visualize using your turn signal.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116496 ] Di, 23 August 2005 02:44
the softrat  
On 22 Aug 2005 13:17:54 -0700, electrictroy [at] gmail.com wrote:
>
>Yep. The books were *boring*. After seeing the movies & throughly
>enjoying them, I picked up the books and tried to read them.
>
>I quit halfway through book #2. Tolkien rambles on and on and on.
>He's as bad as a politician. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk & virtually
>nothing happening.
>
>Well, at least he cured my insomnia.
>
>troy

Certainly *not* a true Tolkien fan!

When you finished reading the books, did you return to your favorite
'graphic novel'?
the softrat
Sometimes I get so tired of the taste of my own toes.
mailto:softrat [at] pobox.com
--
Visualize using your turn signal.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116499 ] Di, 23 August 2005 04:46
Odysseus  
George Peatty wrote:
>
> In article <ded5sb$ag4$1 [at] nyytiset.pp.htv.fi>, Morgil says...
>
> [snip]
>
> >He got most of the names right, but aside from that it was
> >about as anti-faithful as one could imagine. Most of the
> >themes, characters and events were completely messed up,
> >and often in fact turned into total opposite of the book.
>
> You saw a different set of movies than I did. There are whole passages quoted
> verbatim from the book. One can argue about the visual elements of Jackson's
> movie, whether it actually captures the look of Tolkien's world, but not whether
> the movie captures its themes.

The Devil may quote scripture, they say ...

My impression of Jackson's effort was quite opposite to yours,
although not as negative as Morgil's: I thought the "visual elements"
to be the most faithfully captured, with plot and characterization,
in descending order, rating somewhere between there and Tolkien's
themes -- which seemed to me mostly ignored or misunderstood.

--
Odysseus
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116501 ] Di, 23 August 2005 07:20
ojevind.lang  
John W. Kennedy wrote:

>ojevind.l... [at] bredband.net wrote:
>> Martin Koolhoven wrote:

>>>More faithful? Name me one movie that was as faithfull to the book as
this trilogy is.

>> That's an easy one. Here are a few examples, out of many:

>> "Oliver Twist"
>> "Sense and Sensibility"

>Bwah!-ha!-ha!-ha!-ha!

>S&S is a very nice movie, but faithful it ain't.

The operative phrase is "more faithful". Actually, I thought it was
very close to the book, apart from a few minor tweaks. Jackson, on the
other hand, cut out whole chunks of action and replaced them with
others of his own devising - such as Arwen appearing instead of
Glorfindel and riding off with Frodo, the wargs attacking the refugees
from Edoras on their way to Helm's Deep, Aragorn getting wounded and
dragged off by his horse, Elrond commanding Arwen to set out for the
Grey Havens, the Elves of Rivendell turning up at Helm's Deep, the Army
of the Dead turning up at the Battle on the Fields of Pelennor, Gollum
poisoning Frodo's mind against Sam... and so on, ad infinitum. There
was also the drastic rewriting of characters, with Merry and Pippin
turned into two pranksters, Denethor into an apathetic glutton,
Treebeard into a clueless fool who had no idea that Saruman was cutting
down his trees and Gimli into an idiot and a constant butt of really
demeaning shortass jokes. Some of the dumbing-down of Gimli was
excruciating and made me want to squirm, for example his bragging when
the Fellowship enter Moria that "my cousin Balin" will "serve us meat
rrred on the bone".

=D6jevind
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116502 ] Di, 23 August 2005 07:38
Flame of the West  
electrictroy [at] gmail.com wrote:

> Yep. The books were *boring*. After seeing the movies & throughly
> enjoying them, I picked up the books and tried to read them.
>
> I quit halfway through book #2. Tolkien rambles on and on and on.
> He's as bad as a politician. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk & virtually
> nothing happening.

Too bad you quit. He starts getting pretty racy in the
third volume.

> Well, at least he cured my insomnia.

More proof, if any were needed, that you NEVER EVER watch a
movie first if you're going to read the book.


-- FotW

Reality is for those who cannot cope with Middle-earth.
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116503 ] Di, 23 August 2005 08:56
Robinsons  
Michael Urban wrote:

> I had thought this was a humourless troll message. Had me going
> until I got to the titles:
>
> > * Easy Black Rider (later identified as film 1
> > in the Lord of the Rings series)
> >
> > * Lord of the Rings II: The Balrog Returns
> >
> > * Lord of the Rings III: The Lothlorien Witch Project
> >
> > * The Two Towers: Army of Darkness
> >
> > * Treebeard (TV miniseries, like Clone Wars)
> >
> > * Hobbits of Ithilien: The Curse of the One Ring
> >
> > * Return of the King: Kingdom of Heaven
> >
> > * Frodo and Sam Go To Cirith Ungol
> >
> > * Fear And Loathing on the Plateau of Gorgoroth
> >
> > * The Wizard of Hobbiton
>
> You obviously have a deep understanding of film marketing.
> I will be fascinated to hear your casting preferences!

Your wish is my command.

---------------------------------------

Easy Black Rider:

Christopher Lee as the Pipeweed Pusher "Pura VEEDA, Gandalf!"

Phil Spector as Gandalf

Dennis Hopper as Samwise

Peter Fonda as Frodo

Jack Nicholson as Boromir (or possibly Aragorn)

??? as Tom Bombadil "Porky Pig-a-dillo."

Lawrence Makoare (end of film cameo: dual role)

"What is it? What do you smell?" "Man flesh." "Let's frighten 'em!"

Bob Dylan (uncredited) "Flow Gwathlo" (end credits song)

You retain the in medias res ending from the books, too.


---------------------------------------

Fear and Loathing on the Plateau of Gorgoroth

---------------------------------------

Johnny Depp as Frodo Baggins

"Trapped? Cirith Ungol? Nonsense! I'm... I'm poolside...
at the Caras Galadhon right now!"

Benicio Del Toro as Samwise Gamgee, Frodo's "Gardener"

"Mordor. I saw this back in /Easy Black Rider/, Mr. Frodo.
But I didn't think it was real. Not like this.
Not thousands of 'em."

"They're quite nice people when you get to know them, Sam."

"Know them? I know these orcs in my goddamn blood."

"Don't use that word around here. You'll get them excited."

Tobey Maguire as Gollum

"Mustn't stop here... Mustn't go that way...this is nazgul country!"

-- "...backwoods Nazgul law enforcement officer... oop! Did I
say that?" (Or did I only think it?) "Don't worry, Smeagol,
my gardener was just admiring the shape of your skull. WEREN'T
YOU, SAM?!?"

Billy Boyd as the Extremely Short Waiter Back at Minas Tirith

Christina Ricci as Arwen

"You're just gonna leave her back in Rivendell, Mr. Frodo?"

"Why not? She's strong... she can take it."

Ian Mckellen as the Barker

"Is there any hope, then, for Frodo and Sam?"

"There never was much hope... only a fools hope, as it were."

"Let's get down to brass tacks here... how much for the ape?"

??? as the Receptionist

"What have we here? Two deserters? Get in line!"

FRODO: <wibble>

??? as Shelob

"We left the joint slowly, taking our meals with us.
Even in Mordor, there were rules. It was then that
I knew my gardener had crossed the line."
Re: How To Do A Satisfactory LOTR Movie [message #116504 ] Di, 23 August 2005 09:10
Robinsons  
Apteryx wrote:

> <wrob [at] erols.com> wrote in message
> news:1124675456.204026.78110 [at] f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> <clip>
> > C'mon people -- together, we can DO this!!!
> >
> > Forget Hollywood -- this is the age of the Internet!
> >
> > If you want something done right, do it yourself,
> > and this is how I see it done.
>
> I give it 8 out of 10. It has to be rated a pretty good troll when it got
> several so worked up, but it does need work - the best material is in the
> suggested titles at the end (and the "C'mon people") and many people never
> got that far.

Thank you.

I try hard, you know. There's possum in that troll... and spices too!


--BER


"Now why don't you say us a few words out of the Good Book, Big George."

"And Melko said unto them, I will smite thee, and I will tear thine /head/
/from/ thee, and the host of the Noldoli shall be laid waste for the fowls
of the air, and the fell beasts of the earth."

"AMEN!"

"These Dwarves 'is SHIT!"

"Whyn't you just shut up Bill, an' eat yer gat-damn Dwarves?"

"Never you mind him, Sally, I think you're an excellent cook."

"Who're you?!?"

"A bur... a hobbit."

"Who're you with?"

"Gand- um- I mean, Nobody."

"What do you want?"

"I smelled... Dwarves."
Vorheriges Thema:Re: CotW, Book 4, Ch.7, Journey to the Cross-roads
Nächstes Thema:Visit Mythica
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Mi Mai 23 21:25:10 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,07140 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered