Lord of the Rings & Tolkien Appreciaton

[troutman]

Perhaps the hottest game of 2024:

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/...r-middle-earth

https://www.rprod.com/en/games/duel-for-middle-earth

https://boardgamewire.com/index.php/...ber-bgg-stats/

And in 2025:

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/...ck-taking-game

[photon]

The Rohirrim movie was a lot better than I thought it was going to be. I really liked it.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Like I said before, despite many of LOTR's (film) shortcomings, Jackson all in all did an excellent job. I love some of the subtleties he added specifically for fans of the books. For instance, in FOTR during the Balrog battle, Gandalf was visibly worn out before we even see the Balrog. That is because Gandalf and the Balrog are both on the same hierarchy of angels (see OP) and they were mind battling before the physical battle happened.

Many of LOTRs shortcomings were simply a function of bringing a book to screen, and I don't blame Jackson for it's many flaws. But the Hobbit? Jeezus. I wanted to puke at the end of the movie lol.

I walked out of the first one and have never bothered to watch the rest. It was so terrible.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

More things should be animation instead of live action.

Especially fantasy.

It’s such a better medium for so many types of story.

Agreed. I especially liked things like Vox Machina and Castlevania.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I walked out of the first one and have never bothered to watch the rest. It was so terrible.

And the first one is the best of the three.

[GreenLantern2814]

Re: the Silmarillion.

It helps if you read it out loud, in the best Tolkien accent you can.

And if you’ve got an illustrated copy.

Otherwise… yeah. It’s a heavy read.

I suspect the reason it was unpublished is because Tolkien himself was like “this is… a lot. Perhaps too much. One cannot read this to children at bed time, though it surely will be put them to sleep.”

Just open it to a random page and read for a bit. We are truly lucky as fans that it exists at all.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Re: the Silmarillion.

It helps if you read it out loud, in the best Tolkien accent you can.

And if you’ve got an illustrated copy.

Otherwise… yeah. It’s a heavy read.

I suspect the reason it was unpublished is because Tolkien himself was like “this is… a lot. Perhaps too much. One cannot read this to children at bed time, though it surely will be put them to sleep.”

Just open it to a random page and read for a bit. We are truly lucky as fans that it exists at all.

I tried to read that bitch several times.

"Heavy Read?"

Thats an understatement. That bitch of a book is like trying to read the entire Vatican Library. Thanks but No Thanks.

I dont care who begat what...

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Wastedyouth

I walked out of the first one and have never bothered to watch the rest. It was so terrible.

If you search in the right places you can find "The Cardinal Cut" which trims out pretty much all the garbage and makes it watchable. Cuts the total runtime down from around 9 hours to less than 4.

[afc wimbledon]

I really couldn't stand any of the movies, thought they all butchered the meaning of the books, I didn't mind that they had to edit out sections to give it a reasonable run time, it was that it seemed Jackson didnt really get the point of the books at all

[Locke]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I really couldn't stand any of the movies, thought they all butchered the meaning of the books, I didn't mind that they had to edit out sections to give it a reasonable run time, it was that it seemed Jackson didnt really get the point of the books at all

[Jacks]

When I first saw Fellowship in the theatre I really didn't like it but those movies have grown on me over time.


The crazy thing is that the LOTR and The Hobbit were both given 3 movies. If anything LOTR had enough material for more movies but The Hobbit should have been doable in 1 long film, maybe 2 @ 2hrs maximum.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Has anyone seen the Rohirrim movie? I thought it was so good.

I wasn't sure how I would feel about the animation, but it works so well. Characters, plot, visuals, etc, everything was great.

Seeing Helm Hammerhand was awesome.

I skipped it due to bad/mediocre reviews...maybe I should watch

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I skipped it due to bad/mediocre reviews...maybe I should watch

I read some of the critics reviews and I just can't agree with them at all. Highly recommend seeing it for yourself as it is fun and well done IMO.

Maybe critics just love when stories subvert expectations or something and get annoyed are more focused films.

Brian Cox was terrific.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Felt like it trampled very familiar ground as The Two Towers but obviously wasn't nearly as good or exciting. Character animation was a little choppy too but got used to it (background art was excellent though).

It was still enjoyable as 'lighter' Tolkein fare, which hasn't traditionally been a thing.

So maybe serves as a nice entrance for kids/younger audiences who aren't familiar with anything middle earth.

We found the context for revenge story pretty funny. Also Wulf's impulsiveness.

Perhaps they can do more animations for other stories, such as Arnor/the Witch King.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I really couldn't stand any of the movies, thought they all butchered the meaning of the books, I didn't mind that they had to edit out sections to give it a reasonable run time, it was that it seemed Jackson didnt really get the point of the books at all

Which themes do you think were not expressed in the films?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Themes...ngs#References

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

He's just an angry book nerd who has to talk down on talented creators for having an "incorrect" interpretation of the original work because everything has to be rigidly and orthodoxically faithful to every detail to be worthwhile, even though this is all fiction and fantasy to begin with.

That without considering that what works well in the medium of film doesn't translate seamlessly from some books, especially with the immense detail of Tolkein. If it was faithful to a tee it probably would be objectively godawful and overstuffed.

These people exist within the fanbase of every book-to-film adapted franchise throughout history.

They're great books and great films for their own exclusive reasons.

[bdubbs]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I read some of the critics reviews and I just can't agree with them at all. Highly recommend seeing it for yourself as it is fun and well done IMO.

Maybe critics just love when stories subvert expectations or something and get annoyed are more focused films.

Brian Cox was terrific.

I watched this last night and I have to disagree. I thought the movie was pretty mediocre at best, with several plot points seemingly forced. The main female protagonist at times was the smartest and simultaneously dumbest character in the movie and it drove me, and my friends who watched along with me, absolutely nuts.

I rated it a soft 6/10.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by troutman

Which themes do you think were not expressed in the films?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Themes...ngs#References

To me (and I get it's just my view) the whole point of LoTR and the Hobbit (but mostly LoTR) was is was an ode to the simple and yet profound strength of ordinary basically rural working class English folk, the point of the book to me was always that in the end none of the 'heroes' matter, Sauron is ultimately defeated by Sam, a gardeners son, not even Frodo, in much the same way the Lord of the Nazgul was ultimately brought low by Merry.
The last act of the book is the liberation of the Shire, again I have no problem with them cutting this for time's sack, but the liberation essentially is Tolkien showing us that when (or if in the real world) these plain simple folk knew their own strength they would become unstoppable.

The films though, in true Hollywood style, are driven by 'the heroes' Aragorn and Gandalf, the films emphasize the great battles and heroic charges while playing the hobbits as mostly comic foils, again the major bad guy in the film outside of Sauron and Saruman is the Lord of the Nazgul, a great king of men brought low by the power of a secondary ring, not the one ring but a lesser ring, in the book Gandulf explains that Gollum was a hobbit like creature before he was warped by the ring, but even he retained some measure of self that the great wring wraiths, Boromir and the like could not maintain.

The book comes back to the theme that these humble simple folk are ultimately far far more powerful than the great figures who they are compared to constantly

My issue with the films was I just didn't think Jackson ever understood this, he made a great fantasy film about heroic battles and shinning knights in armor with a bit of light comic buddy relief from the hobbits

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

To me (and I get it's just my view) the whole point of LoTR and the Hobbit (but mostly LoTR) was is was an ode to the simple and yet profound strength of ordinary basically rural working class English folk, the point of the book to me was always that in the end none of the 'heroes' matter, Sauron is ultimately defeated by Sam, a gardeners son, not even Frodo, in much the same way the Lord of the Nazgul was ultimately brought low by Merry.
The last act of the book is the liberation of the Shire, again I have no problem with them cutting this for time's sack, but the liberation essentially is Tolkien showing us that when (or if in the real world) these plain simple folk knew their own strength they would become unstoppable.

The films though, in true Hollywood style, are driven by 'the heroes' Aragorn and Gandalf, the films emphasize the great battles and heroic charges while playing the hobbits as mostly comic foils, again the major bad guy in the film outside of Sauron and Saruman is the Lord of the Nazgul, a great king of men brought low by the power of a secondary ring, not the one ring but a lesser ring, in the book Gandulf explains that Gollum was a hobbit like creature before he was warped by the ring, but even he retained some measure of self that the great wring wraiths, Boromir and the like could not maintain.

The book comes back to the theme that these humble simple folk are ultimately far far more powerful than the great figures who they are compared to constantly

My issue with the films was I just didn't think Jackson ever understood this, he made a great fantasy film about heroic battles and shinning knights in armor with a bit of light comic buddy relief from the hobbits

A bit too simplistic. In the book, Aragorn's arc finishes with him becoming an Ultraman - the greatest swordsman, the greatest moral beacon, the greatest captain, the greatest healer, the greatest king who descends for near demi-godlike humans. Tolkien doesn't shy away from his heroes.

But you aren't wrong about Tolkien's theme about ordinary country folk having great power within to achieve great things. And I think Jackson did a decent job of showing that in the films (Frodo volunteering to take the ring, Frodo making up his mind to depart the company and go to Mordor alone, etc) and underscoring it at the scene when all the lords and captains kneel to the hobbits at Aragorn's coronation.

It is impossible to adapt a true version of the books to screen, so the films are excellent for what they are.

Note: strictly speaking of LOTR. Hobbit movies suuuuucked.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by bdubbs

I watched this last night and I have to disagree. I thought the movie was pretty mediocre at best, with several plot points seemingly forced. The main female protagonist at times was the smartest and simultaneously dumbest character in the movie and it drove me, and my friends who watched along with me, absolutely nuts.

I rated it a soft 6/10.

Dang, really? I thought the protagonist was well done because they didn't make her infallible, but also didn't make her a blundering idiot.

I absolutely loved that she

Spoiler!

warning big spoiler

Spoiler!

choked that ####ing bastard Wulf to death

I rate this movie the 4th best Tolkien picture of all time, only behind the LOTR films. I rate Bakshi's & Rankin/Bass stuff ahead of The Hobbit trilogy and Rings of Power.