Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message

LOTR

Posted on 4/10/15 at 7:39 pm
Posted by TexasTiger1185
New Orleans
Member since Sep 2011
13070 posts
Posted on 4/10/15 at 7:39 pm
I'm reading the books for the first time since the movies came out. This makes it my second read through.

I'm finding myself less interested in the movies (my favorite series of movies) as I re-introduce the characters from the books into my life.

They are almost entirely different characters. Specifically the hobbits. All much more brave than the movies. I can hardly put the book down.
Posted by heatom2
At the plant, baw.
Member since Nov 2010
12810 posts
Posted on 4/10/15 at 7:53 pm to
I agree that they changed some characteristics a good bit in the movies. Frodo especially is much more stout in the books.

I still enjoy the movies for the visuals and the story.
Posted by nes2010
Member since Jun 2014
6763 posts
Posted on 4/10/15 at 8:01 pm to
Even some stuff that the movie recreates exactly like the books doesn't have the same impact to me.
Posted by heatom2
At the plant, baw.
Member since Nov 2010
12810 posts
Posted on 4/10/15 at 8:08 pm to
Still light years ahead of the Hobbit movies.

The first two I was ok with, not thrilled but ok.

I was visibly angry watching The Battle of the Five Armies.
Posted by Tackle74
Columbia, MO
Member since Mar 2012
5260 posts
Posted on 4/10/15 at 10:39 pm to
quote:

I was visibly angry watching The Battle of the Five Armies.


Worst for me was Dain Ironfoot riding a fricking PIG, I mean there is so much wrong but that just killed me.
Posted by heatom2
At the plant, baw.
Member since Nov 2010
12810 posts
Posted on 4/10/15 at 10:44 pm to
quote:

Worst for me was Dain Ironfoot riding a fricking PIG, I mean there is so much wrong but that just killed me.


Yeah especially since I thought Billy Connolly was a great choice.
Posted by swagsurfin7
Founder of the Alex Morgan Fan Club
Member since Dec 2009
6993 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 1:50 am to
Yep. The beginning of FotR is awesome because it follows the hobbits journey to Bree so well. I love it.
Posted by Aubie Spr96
lolwut?
Member since Dec 2009
41149 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 2:08 am to
I still say that the LOTR series is the best screen adaptation of any book to movie I've seen.
Posted by Tiger Voodoo
Champs 03 07 09 11(fack) 19!!!
Member since Mar 2007
21785 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 7:24 am to
It's a great adaptation considering the sheer epic scale of the books.

That said, they completely sold Faramir short. Sucks, because he may have been my favorite character in the books. Could have taken 15-20 minutes of the repetitive battles over Two Towers and ROTK to expand his character and it would have been a more complete representation of Tolkiens mythology imo.

He is after all the successor to Aragorn and regarded as one of the greatest kings of men.

Eowyn was also nowhere near as engaging in the movie as she was on the page. One of the only casting miscues of the series imo.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
108541 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 7:45 am to
quote:

He is after all the successor to Aragorn and regarded as one of the greatest kings of men.



Faramir was never king nor was he Aragorn's heir. If Aragorn had died without having a son, then Faramir would now technically be in charge, but he would still just be a steward and not a king.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
108541 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 7:51 am to
quote:

Still light years ahead of the Hobbit movies.

The first two I was ok with, not thrilled but ok.

I was visibly angry watching The Battle of the Five Armies.



I agree. Didn't care for the Battle of the Five Armies at all. The only scenes I feel that worked were Bard killing Smaug and Thorin's farewell to Bilbo. And guess what? Those were two scenes that were actually in the book. It's just incredible to me that the scenes Jackson knows he can't frick up he does masterfully, but then shits the bed in everything else. The dwarves crashing Bilbo's house, the troll scene, riddles with Gollum, captured by spiders, and Bilbo's encounter with Smaug were all fantastically adapted to the big screen.

The Battle of the Five Armies was pure filler that should have lasted no more than 45 minutes. I do think that the Hobbit should have been split, but into 2 movies not 3. It was just whoring out knowing that nerds everywhere would watch all three no matter what.
This post was edited on 4/11/15 at 7:54 am
Posted by catholictigerfan
Member since Oct 2009
56011 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 8:07 am to
I don't mind the changes for the LOTR trilogy. They don't have to stick exactly to the book that is to difficult.
Posted by heatom2
At the plant, baw.
Member since Nov 2010
12810 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 8:09 am to
Agree. There are parts of the trilogy that were fantastic. I thougj Smaug as a whole was really well done. And like you said, the scenes that were canon were spectacular. Couldve done without Tauriel and the made up Thranduil shite. Not to mention all the azog mess. 2 movies would have been perfect and he could have stuck to canon.

If none of that makes sense I finished a night shift a little while ago and Im not sure Im totally coherent.
Posted by Tiger Voodoo
Champs 03 07 09 11(fack) 19!!!
Member since Mar 2007
21785 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 8:17 am to
Gotcha, haven't been able to finish a re-read in years, since before the movies were released.

Looked on wiki and Aragorn created the title of Prince of Ilithien for him which was then passed down to his and Eowyns son.

He also ruled as his Steward in times of his absence, which is why I mistakenly remembered that he actually assumed the crown at some point.

Still, he is clearly one of the greatest leaders of the time, and huge part of the transition to the age of Man.

The films still pay him short shrift compared to the other main players in the books imo
Posted by Mr Gardoki
AL
Member since Apr 2010
27652 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 8:30 am to
My biggest gripe was always that liv Tyler should not even be in the movies.
Posted by Thurber
NWLA
Member since Aug 2013
15402 posts
Posted on 4/11/15 at 10:47 am to
I re read this every few years too. The characters are so much different in the books, even Aragorn.
Posted by DannyB
Bagram, Afghanistan
Member since Aug 2010
6141 posts
Posted on 4/17/15 at 8:49 am to
I got up and walked out of Return of the King close to the end because the ending was completely changed from the books to appease the masses of drooling retards that can't read and only watch movies.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89551 posts
Posted on 4/17/15 at 8:56 am to
quote:

I still say that the LOTR series is the best screen adaptation of any book to movie I've seen.


True - but still very flawed. It is impossible to recreate the written word. In some cases, choices and the skill of the filmmaker exceed the printed word (classic example is Blade Runner - only superficial similarity between the novel and the film) - but more likely you get a lot of bad, Hollywood compromises. Jackson did a great job with LOTR, IMHO, and not so good with the Hobbit.

It happens.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram