The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Is the Hobbit trying to be Avatar?



Maggot_farms
Registered User

Oct 16 2010, 3:43pm


Views: 1921
Is the Hobbit trying to be Avatar?

 PJ's production of the Hobbit is starting to sound much less Hobbit like and more like a sterile effects driven monster. "In a Two-Part 3D Production of Extraordinary Scope"
If the new Hobbit movies are trying to be larger and greater in scope, both visually and thematically than the LOTR's it's in trouble. I am really worried about this production now and plan on not following the news much further. I was very excited at first when I heard about the incorporation of the back stories. However, it sounds like PJ has lost the Hobbit's scale and scope in favor of box office dollars.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 3:47pm


Views: 988
Well either people either complain

that the special effects aren't good enough or that there's too many of them.

It's a completely imaginary world full of stuff that doesn't exist in real life. What, exactly, are you expecting?

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 3:52pm


Views: 971
"It's a completely imaginary world full of stuff that doesn't exist in real life."

Since when? Middle earth is real, don't you know. You think all these people just hang around hear talking about some place that doesn't exist? EvilEvil

Kangi Ska

The Hobbit is almost here.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 3:54pm


Views: 953
I'm sure you're old enough to remember Nancy Reagan

when she said "Just say NO" to drugs, Kangi. Evil Angelic Wink

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


ranger123
Rivendell

Oct 16 2010, 3:55pm


Views: 958
*facepalm*

It is a "Production of Extraordinary Scope" because it has been in pre-production for years, will probably have a 370+ day shoot and due to delays/legal actions/size of production have a massive budget of several hundreds of millions of dollars.

In two words : "extraordinary scope".





Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 3:55pm


Views: 946
Could you be a little more specific about your worries?

What precisely do you think Jackson is going to do because of 3D that is going to damage the films? Fo example, do you think he's going to remove pages and pages of dialogue and replace them with slow, lingering bullet-time shots of 3D dragons flying in our faces?

What is it about the word 'scope' that worries you so much?


(This post was edited by Flagg on Oct 16 2010, 3:56pm)


ranger123
Rivendell

Oct 16 2010, 3:57pm


Views: 915
lol

Bullet time Bilbo!


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 3:59pm


Views: 899
I am sorry. I did not listen.//

 

Kangi Ska

The Hobbit is almost here.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Patty
Immortal


Oct 16 2010, 4:01pm


Views: 887
Best laugh all day. N/t

 

Permanent address: Into the West

Must. Have. The Precious! Give us the LotR EE Blu-ray Ultimate Box Set!



Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 4:05pm


Views: 900
It becomes Lord of the Rings (Hobbit version) On Line.

or Beowulf 2 or...not. Everything works out because of the global legalizationEvil of pipeweed in August of 2012 and everyone relaxes.

Kangi Ska

The Hobbit is almost here.

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 16 2010, 4:26pm


Views: 899
*facepalm* indeed

 


Captain Salt
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 4:31pm


Views: 921
Actually, I though Cameron's decision to make Avatar was

clearly inspired by LotR...Crazy

Samuel L. Jackson for Bilbo, Woody Allen for Thorin, Lewis Black for Bard and Gilbert Gottfried for Smaug!

MAKE IT HAPPEN, PETER AND...WHOEVER!!!


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 4:35pm


Views: 887
And Dances With Wolves. And Pocahontas. And The Smurfs.

It's unfortunate how the pioneer project of 3D filmmaking was so creatively bankrupt...


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 16 2010, 4:43pm


Views: 1016
Yeah, yeah...

it's so funny to take potshots at other movies...

Originality is overrated, pretty much everything is derived from something.


(This post was edited by Estel78 on Oct 16 2010, 4:44pm)


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 16 2010, 4:44pm


Views: 841
Add The Last Samurai //

 





(This post was edited by macfalk on Oct 16 2010, 4:44pm)


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 16 2010, 4:45pm


Views: 859
I don't think it's overrated at all //

 





Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 16 2010, 4:48pm


Views: 865
My point was...

...originality is really hard to find these days since pretty much everything has already been done before if you look for it.

It's the execution that matters. And the details.

Hobbit is an adaptation of a book, how original is that, ey? In fact, when was the last time PJ made something original?


(This post was edited by Estel78 on Oct 16 2010, 4:56pm)


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 4:53pm


Views: 957
Yes, everything is derived from something else

but some things are more derivative than others. Tolkien may have been inspired by Wagner, and Norse mythology, but he didn't copy those stories plot-point-for-plot-point. For a converse example, here is an image which demonstrates how formulaic Avatar is:

http://www.mkeriksson.se/...atar-pocahontas1.jpg

I have no problem with films that copy others – I usually just avoid them. But Avatar is such a milestone in cinematic history that I can't help but wish it was a little bit more... creative.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 4:55pm


Views: 864
You need to read more books.

There are things out there that have not been done. It requires requires risk. And willingness to bet on the unknown is rare.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 5:01pm


Views: 848
No, a good orginal story matters just as much as execution and details.

And The Hobbit happens to be a good original story, by the way. Smile

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 16 2010, 5:26pm


Views: 811
Of course story matters...

Hobbit - the movie - however is not an original story since it's based on a book. I don't mind that PJ hasn't done anything original in over a decade, though.


(This post was edited by Estel78 on Oct 16 2010, 5:28pm)


L. Ron Halfelven
Grey Havens


Oct 16 2010, 5:27pm


Views: 815
Can't wait to see Bilbo bond with the Attercops and realize Mirkwood is rightfully theirs./

 

I don't want to go to work today
But the master of the whip says nay, nay, nay.


dormouse
Half-elven

Oct 16 2010, 5:28pm


Views: 820
Warners will certainly be hoping....

... to outdo the box office success of Avatar (and I doubt if they know or care much about the story of The Hobbit).

But Warners aren't actually making the film. With Peter Jackson and co at the helm I'm sure they will be trying to make The Hobbit - with a few references and foreshadowings of Lord of the Rings. They put so much effort into doing justice to Tolkien's work before that I can't see why they'd be any different now. Wait and see - and till it happens, just try to enjoy the ride.


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 16 2010, 5:37pm


Views: 806
Warners never make a film

it's the film crew that makes the film, not the suits, they just give the money. Of course in some cases, the suits have more influence over a movie than in other cases.

As for outdoing Avatar financially, i doubt that's in the cards and i think Warners knows that and don't expect it to do that. Both films combined may match Avatar, though.


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 6:57pm


Views: 775
it's original to the movie world

and anyway intentially and explicitly basing off of something (eg: a book) is different from basing heavily on previously done stories and possibly thinking you were being original is different from using previously heard/seen stories for inspiration (this last is unavoidable anyway - there's no such thing as a completely original idea, everything comes from somewhere)


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 7:01pm


Views: 521
which is basically

Dances with Wolves

we like to pick on Avatar, but sometimes we forget that it's not there are other unoriginal plot lines


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 16 2010, 7:03pm


Views: 511
The last one applies to Avatar

 


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 7:03pm


Views: 551
yeah, I don't know where you guys are

but I was just talking to Elrond a minute ago ... wait, my post count says I'm in Gondor ... I mean I was just talking to Ioreth Tongue


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 7:07pm


Views: 509
I'm not saying one way or another

there's a reason I didn't include movies titles in my post Wink

I'm not sure where I am on the issue of the originality of Avatar
some parts were quite original, some, well, not so much


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 7:19pm


Views: 513
But where did all of those absolutely unoriginal ideas come from?

They had to start somewhere..

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 7:21pm


Views: 512
Early myths and legends I suppose?

 


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 7:24pm


Views: 501
yes they did

it was a hyperbole

(and not one like x^2 - y^2 = 1 Tongue )


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 7:27pm


Views: 553
It the combination of ideas

or the recombination or unique manipulation of ideas that builds originality. Some writers & film makers and other artists are just better at it than others.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


R11
Lorien

Oct 16 2010, 8:36pm


Views: 531
You know how it is

There's a significant portion of the population that always expects the worst no matter what. Whether it's born of ignorance, (not stupidity, but simply being under informed), paranoia or just general negativity, the sky is always falling for them. Peter Jackson has shown himself to be a highly intelligent, thoughtful film maker. I have no doubt that he understands the ramifications involved with bringing The Hobbit to the big screen and wouldn't compromise anything that would weaken his end result for all movie goers. I'm quite sure viewers will find the movies to be heart warming, exciting, immersive and engaging in all aspects, whether they see them in 2D or 3D.

I have never really doubted this whole process would come to fruition sooner or later. But I have to say that I'm extremely happy the stage is now set for them to hit the ground running so everyone will finally be able to see The Hobbit, in a way that is truly worthy of it's source, on screen as soon as possible! I expect the movies will be outstanding and highly satisfying for all but the most critical or cynical.


ron


acheron
Gondor


Oct 16 2010, 9:01pm


Views: 500
While I want to trust PJ, I trusted George Lucas before The Phantom Menace, too. //

 

For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much -- the wheel, New York, wars, and so on -- while all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man, for precisely the same reasons. -- Douglas Adams


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 9:06pm


Views: 479
Star Wars Episodes IV–VI weren't written with Episodes I–III in mind

The Lord of the Rings *was* written with The Hobbit in mind.


Zizix
Rivendell


Oct 16 2010, 9:08pm


Views: 475
?

I don't see the OP complaining about the amount of special effects. I don't see anybody saying the movies will suck because of the 3D. Just that it might/will not be as good as it would have been without it. And I find it ridiculous to suggest that people who expressed their dislike for something are just "too negative".


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 9:13pm


Views: 487
You don't have to trust PJ - trust Tolkien

Lucas actually had to write the prequels.

Besides it's hardly fair to transfer Lucas's mistakes to anyone else.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 9:17pm


Views: 464
I have read that the entire saga was outlined before IV was shot.//

 

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Zizix
Rivendell


Oct 16 2010, 9:25pm


Views: 458
I have heard conflicting stories

about whether the prequels were supposed to be made from the start or not.

The good point acheron makes though, is that pretty much every filmmaker (any artist) sooner or later makes something that is inferior to their other work or even stinks. I do not expect this to happen with PJ and The Hobbit, but PJ isn't a 100% assurance the movies will be terrific.


R11
Lorien

Oct 16 2010, 9:35pm


Views: 463
I suggest

You reread my post because your reply doesn't seem to really reflect on what I said at all... I never said a thing about special effects. My whole post was about people worrying for no reason and simply suggested a number of different possible causes, general negativity being one, that may cause them to do it. If you just want to be mad at me for no reason though that's cool too Cool


ron


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 16 2010, 9:49pm


Views: 479
Actually I know the real deal on this one

Lucas wrote a very broad outline for the whole story and then picked the part that he though was most exciting and made it into the first Star Wars. The story constantly evolved even during that process. So when he said later than he had the prequels in mind - he did - but only in a very broad outline sense - nothing like an actual story or script. And when I say broad outline I'm being charitable. Very very rough idea is an even better description.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 9:53pm


Views: 455
We will certainly see.//

 

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Zizix
Rivendell


Oct 16 2010, 10:20pm


Views: 441
Well


In Reply To
You reread my post because your reply doesn't seem to really reflect on what I said at all... I never said a thing about special effects. My whole post was about people worrying for no reason and simply suggested a number of different possible causes, general negativity being one, that may cause them to do it. If you just want to be mad at me for no reason though that's cool too Cool


ron


My post was a response to a more general overreaction to people expressing dislike, only my last line referred specifically to you.


Ruijor
Rohan


Oct 16 2010, 11:33pm


Views: 425
Comparing The Hobbit with Avatar...

... is like comparing Tolkien with JK Rowling imo...


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 16 2010, 11:34pm


Views: 492
Rudeness


In Reply To
There's a significant portion of the population that always expects the worst no matter what. Whether it's born of ignorance, (not stupidity, but simply being under informed), paranoia or just general negativity, the sky is always falling for them. Peter Jackson has shown himself to be a highly intelligent, thoughtful film maker. I have no doubt that he understands the ramifications involved with bringing The Hobbit to the big screen and wouldn't compromise anything that would weaken his end result for all movie goers. I'm quite sure viewers will find the movies to be heart warming, exciting, immersive and engaging in all aspects, whether they see them in 2D or 3D.

I have never really doubted this whole process would come to fruition sooner or later. But I have to say that I'm extremely happy the stage is now set for them to hit the ground running so everyone will finally be able to see The Hobbit, in a way that is truly worthy of it's source, on screen as soon as possible! I expect the movies will be outstanding and highly satisfying for all but the most critical or cynical.


ron

That's incredibly disingenous. There are quite a few LOTR fans (maybe not so many on these boards) who think quite the opposite about Peter Jackson - that he in untalented, unthoughtful precisely does not understand the "ramifications" involved with "bringing the Hobbit to the big screen", and made many unecessary compromises. People are allowed to think this, and usually "purist" positions are not "born of ignorance" - quite the opposite in fact. Most purists are lifelong fans of the books, people who are familiar enough with the books to know the glaring hack job the movie made of them.

Having said that, I'm looking forward to this, and I'm quite excited.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 11:53pm


Views: 423
I sense an internal contradiction in your reply..

The movies aren't the books, nor could they be. There is room enough in the world for both. Just think of the movies as a new telling of an old myth. This is from a lifelong fan of the books who has found a way to reconcile the differences.


Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 16 2010, 11:57pm


Views: 401
and?

You can compare and contrast. There are obviously differences but there are similarities.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


verityfate
The Shire


Oct 17 2010, 12:00am


Views: 418
meh...

I'd say its like comparing Tolkien to Twilight, to be honest. Say what you will about how good it was, but HP was at the very least creative.

well, green has always been my favourite colour...;)


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:09am


Views: 400
You think Jackson is 'untalented'? Really?

Let's see... his adaptation of The Lord of the Rings included over twelve hours' worth of material, earned almost three billion dollars worldwide, won so many prestigious awards that I can't even list them and was praised by the vast majority of both critics and Tolkien fans as one of, if not the best film trilogy of all time.

Don't you think your belief that he is 'untalented' might be slightly influenced by your rejection of any adaptation which is not 100% identical to the books?

Do you really believe that the tiny minority of hardcore purists are right and everyone else on the face of the planet is wrong? Peter Jackson is fantastic.


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:14am


Views: 422
He didn't say that was his opinion

he said that "There are quite a few LOTR fans" who think that way

anyway, there is no right and wrong in regards to PJ's talent, it is a matter of opinion
You can't say that someone doesn't feel the way that they say they do, they have a right to have their own opinion



The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 12:24am


Views: 430
On rereading: You ar right he did not say it was his opinion.

and I agree with you that all are entitled to their opinion regarding personal tastes. But I personally believe that they should be willing to explain and defend their explanations. This is the Socratic method of teaching and learning. Everyone learns and the world becomes a better and more enlightened place.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:27am


Views: 479
I know that

I only directed my post towards him because he seems to be the only 'representative' of the über-purists in this discussion. My post was really meant for the über-purist community in general.

I disagree with your belief that talent is a matter of opinion. Sure, how an individual feels may affect how much they themselves enjoy a person's work, but that has no influence on how talented the creator is. Some people are simply more talented than others.

For example, JRR Tolkien had more talent than Stephenie Meyer does. This is a fact and anyone who disagrees with it is wrong. Evil


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:29am


Views: 416
See I just learned something!

Seriously yes that's the point of a discussion board - to discuss. Why throw out an opinion if you're not going to explain it? Not to mention it's handy for spotting trolls - who seldom explain anything and just throw verbal bombs - NOT that I'm calling anyone here a troll.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 12:35am


Views: 432
Please translate "meh".

A comparison is possible and can be a good thing especially in coming to an understanding of what makes one book or movie superior to another. A simple statement of personal taste without comparison is not valid criticism. So I will end by asking you what you mean by creative and how it applies to the situation.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 17 2010, 12:35am)


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:39am


Views: 406
I think modern art is a fine example

Two people may look at a painting which is, say simply royal blue with a couple white lines. One may say that it is brilliant, innovative and has great motion and energy. The other may say that his two year old son could have painted that. They are looking at the same painting, but have widely different views of the talent of the artist. Maybe the disagreement regarding PJ's talent is like this.

Perhaps instead there really is no disagreement at all. Perhaps the PJ fans are talking about his talent in creating an exciting, well-balanced movie, while the others are talking about his talent in adapting books precisely.

Or maybe it's a bit of each situation

and if we are going after the Socratic method: how who you define talent? AngelicEvil


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 12:40am


Views: 416
I was a troll once.

In primary school. You know "Three Billy Goats Gruff"...the troll under the bridge and all that. It was fifty five years ago. I did not throw bombs.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 12:44am


Views: 411
"Tallent is the ability to make finely crafted things." Joesef Fox.

The greatest teacher I ever experienced. This was one of the first questions in his discussion of aesthetics.

Now pick apart the answer and we will learn together.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:50am


Views: 400
Not even verbal bombs?

"I'm not a troll but I play one on TV"

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 12:51am


Views: 398
here goes

what would you say is the quality that a finely crafted thing has that makes in a finely crafted thing?

And what about those who have a talent for mathematics? Is an elegant solution a finely crafted thing? What about the ability to find the answer quickly?

What about a talent for reading quickly? What is the finely crafted thing in that case?


I would like to point out that you are very talented at distracting me from my physics homework Tongue


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:00am


Views: 394
one more comment

as for the JRRT / Stephenie Meyer comparison
I would not disagree that as an overall writer JRRT is by far superior
However I would like to point out that depending on how you define the aim, the success varies
Stephenie Meyer is very talented at writing an addicting read, one which is hard to put down, even if you don't want to like the story (speaking from experience). Now if we are talking about deeper meaning, and don't think anyone would disagree when I say Meyer did not accomplish that.

Okay, I lied, I had two more comments.
I want to be careful to point out that I am not advocating an "everything is opinion, there is no truth" stance, nor do I have the truth, I just have my current opinion about what the truth might be


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 1:05am


Views: 401
Skill, ability and wisdom.

A fine made thing can be material or intellectual. Craft is the process of making.

Ability (for the sake of discussion) can be limited to ones innate capacity to learn.

Skill is the outcome of learning through the utilization of ability.

Wisdom is the understanding of the limits of ones ability and skill.

If you accept these definitions then we have started to build the arena for our discussion.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 17 2010, 1:09am)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:11am


Views: 385
Resident Skeptic pfaw - more like Resident Socratic Zen Master //

Sly

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:18am


Views: 471
but can't one improve their ability

by learning how to learn better? We may start off with an innate capacity to learn, but doesn't our capacity to learn improve over time? Surely you are better at learning after graduating from high-school than you were in elementary school, and even better once you've graduated from college. If this is true, then surely our ability has improved, if ability is the capacity to learn. An author's ability to write is not the same when they are two and don't yet know how the world works, than when they have built a life for themselves, even if they already knew how to physically write letters.


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 1:21am


Views: 383
Just a poor reflection of my Master Mr. Fox.

The last thing he told me was that his lawn was going to kill him.
They found him dead on his riding lawnmower 4 months later.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Ruijor
Rohan


Oct 17 2010, 1:22am


Views: 393
Harry Potter creative?


In Reply To
I'd say its like comparing Tolkien to Twilight, to be honest. Say what you will about how good it was, but HP was at the very least creative.


Maybe it was but to my standards you can compare Tolkien to J.K.Rowling in terms of greatness, sorry. It´s just like comparing Avatar, a recycled script put together with state of the art technology for the sole purpose of visual delightment, to the entricate mithology created almost from scratch almost one hundred years ago.

For me Harry Potter emulates a little too much Tolkien´s Universe, probably one of the reasons of my dislike, added to the fact that it is more child- oriented; Dumbledore screams Gandalf everyday of the week and Potter is like an alternative Frodo Baggins.

I would like to state that this is only my opinion on this subject not universal law so with that said...


Ainu Laire
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:25am


Views: 394
An addicting read?


In Reply To
as for the JRRT / Stephenie Meyer comparison
I would not disagree that as an overall writer JRRT is by far superior
However I would like to point out that depending on how you define the aim, the success varies
Stephenie Meyer is very talented at writing an addicting read, one which is hard to put down, even if you don't want to like the story (speaking from experience). Now if we are talking about deeper meaning, and don't think anyone would disagree when I say Meyer did not accomplish that.

Okay, I lied, I had two more comments.
I want to be careful to point out that I am not advocating an "everything is opinion, there is no truth" stance, nor do I have the truth, I just have my current opinion about what the truth might be


Warning: strong opinion ahead

Are you sure you are not mistaking Meyer for Rowling? XD Rowling is addicting- Meyer is a talentless hack who happens to have an agent who is a brilliant businessperson who knew that many female teenagers don't give a darn about decent characterization and only need their hormone fix.

This comes from the personal experience as well.

/end strong opinion

As for "there is no truth, only opinion" in art, the majority of it *is* opinion, and very, very few artists can be considered "talented" without debate. Usually these guys have been around for 100s of years. Even artists who are a couple hundred years in the making don't get off the opinion hook (I'm looking at you, Joseph Conrad...)

And, of course, people who are talented can make some horrible pieces of art, or have their shortcomings elsewhere. I am still of the opinion that, while Tolkien was incredibly talented, his shortcoming was writing romance. Thank goodness there is not too much of it.

My LiveJournal ~ My artwork and photography

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
NARF since age 8, when I refused to read the Hobbit because the cover looked boring and icky.


grammaboodawg
Immortal


Oct 17 2010, 1:25am


Views: 408
This kinda reminds me of

when LotR was coming out and it was being compared to Harry Potter... that they were some sort of competition. For me, it was apples and oranges. This is, too. Middle-earth and LotR have been so firmly planted for me that even if these 2 Hobbit films are done in 3D (which I really don't want them to be), there's no danger of me seeing them as following Avatar in production styles. If anything, Avatar gleaned a few tricks from LotR ;)

sample sample

I really need these new films to take me back to, and not re-introduce me to, that magical world.



TORn's Observations Lists
Unused Scenes



Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:34am


Views: 373
a couple years ago

my friend forced me to read the Twilight series.
I went into it saying "I'm not going to like it," but was sorely disappointed with myself when I couldn't put it down. However, when I got to the end of each book I closed the cover and said to myself "what was the point of that? and what in the world made it so addicting." Of course then I'd give my friend back her book, she'd be ecstatic that I actually took the time to read it, hand me the next one, and it would happen all over again.

and yes, everyone has their blunders. Actually I think that if we don't see a talented person as not having any blunders we are probably not paying enough attention and/or are wearing rose colored glasses


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 1:35am


Views: 377
So do you want to dispute the definition of ability that I offered?

Capacity and ability are not the same thing. Skill comes from learning to better utilize ones ability. Current studies indicate that the individual's process of learning (the apprehension and understanding of experience) actually slows as one matures. Babies learn an entire language, how to control a human body, what behavior is acceptable and how to get what they want and need in an astonishingly short time. I am fully ripened. I am lucky to learn a few new things each day (Old Dogs you know.)
Skill and wisdom comes from learning and applying the knowledge gained.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Ruijor
Rohan


Oct 17 2010, 1:36am


Views: 383
Well said.

My thoughts exactly...


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 1:45am


Views: 373
Tolkien did not write for a market

In today's publishing world only a miracle would get them into print annd even back then it was nearly a miracle as it was. Publishers today demand that writers write to a market. In the old days they called this hack writing. Today there are genre with very specific rules for inclusion. This would have been a big problem for the Professor.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:50am


Views: 363
I was trying to keep ability and capacity separate

with their own definitions. That being said, as one improves, so does the other, at least if we work off your definition of ability as the capacity to learn.

While your overall capacity to learn surely is tremendous as an infant, your specific capacity to learn how to compose good literature is not. For this you must first develop an appropriate knowledge base to work off of. You are not going to learn to write good stories if you do not first know how to write, have a developed vocabulary and sense of grammar, knowledge of what is and is not possible, etc.

To quote Tolkien:

Quote
For creative Fantasy is founded upon the hard recognition that things are so in the world as it appears under the sun; on recognition of fact, but not slavery to it
-- On Fairy Stories


We must first have a basis of knowledge and experience to create something for which people would say we have talent, at least when it comes to writing


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:56am


Views: 354
definitely not denying that

Tolkien did not exactly have a talent for giving the publisher what they asked for. "Sequel to The Hobbit," or sweeping epic thick with complicated themes, same thing, right? Tongue

Just saying that Stephanie Meyer must have a talent for something if she can get so many people to read her books, even if for many it is only out of curiosity for what so many people are talking bout


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 1:56am


Views: 366
I have to retire for the night.

Three AM comes far too soon. I will pick this up tomorrow. Now back to those physics.Wink

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:59am


Views: 448
grumble, grumble

okay, back to physics
get some sleep ... 3 am, yikes Crazy


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows

(This post was edited by Oiotári on Oct 17 2010, 2:00am)


Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor


Oct 17 2010, 2:04am


Views: 460
Ahhh...


Quote
Thank goodness there is not too much of it.

but that is precisely why I prefer Tolkien's version of romance in literature. ;)


**********************************


NARF
NABOUF
Certified Curmudgeon


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 2:22am


Views: 456
Oh! The moral outrage

Frown

Ok, I don't want to get into a purist vs. gusher stoushe, but really, accusing me of hypocrisy is plain unfair. My point is to allow those of us who hold contrarian views to hold them without calling us "ignorant". That's all. And as for using the old canard - books and films are different "medium", well, you can do better than that. If you like the films so much, be prepared to defend them properly. Don't expect those of us who actually care whether or not Frodo's character was dealt with well enough, (or Faramir's, Gimli's, Aragorn's, Denethor's, Galadriel's etc) to pander to your moral outrage and shut up.

As for the films earning money - so what? This says nothing at all about the quality of the translation from film to book, merely that people like slash and hack sword epics. It manifestly does not intuit that the films were faithful adaptations, as I believe they were not.

As for the barely veiled accusation that I'm a troll, and therefore a kind of parasite, allow me to exonerate myself and reclaim my dignity. I am fully aware that there is such a thing as the Socratic method, and it should be obvious that I don't hold my views simply to outrage people. How insulting. If you think I'm the only "uber-purist" out there, check out the Reading boards, or better yet, this thread:

http://www.minastirith.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=001478;p=1

Many of my own arguments and thoughts are articulated by others in this forum. It is extensive, and deals with every aspect of the film making process, the films themselves, the motivations etc of the directors, producers etc.


(This post was edited by tumhalad on Oct 17 2010, 2:31am)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 2:25am


Views: 449
Now be careful

This says nothing at all about the quality of the translation from film to book, merely that people like slash and hack sword epics.

That in your moral outrage at being called ignorant (understandable) you don't commit the same crime yourself.


King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 2:32am


Views: 443
oh the humanity

I have a right to be morally outraged, me and my kind were labelled "ignorant". Angelic


(This post was edited by tumhalad on Oct 17 2010, 2:34am)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 2:37am


Views: 444
Hey you're entitled to your opinion of the movies

but you can't speak for anyone but yourself - so you really can't say why anyone else likes the movies without making some uninformed assumptions. Take me for example. The movies were much more to me than hack and slash. See? Smile

*ah your edit adds some tone to your previous post I couldn't detect before so perhaps I needn't drive my point further. Wink

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.

(This post was edited by Tim on Oct 17 2010, 2:39am)


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 2:42am


Views: 432
Respect

MadNo I still don't "see".Mad There is plenty of evidence that many others hold similar or identical views with regards to the films as I do. Check out the forums above, for example. As such, I can reasonably claim to represent a particular point of view, while acknowledging that there are of course various emphases etc that others ascribe (think different pet hates). All I'm asking is that all "purists" who share this kind of opinion are respected.

Moreover, I am obviously not ascribing to you the opinion that the films are "hack and slash". But I'm under no obligation to qualify my opinion every time I make it. I don't hold to the mantra that all opinions are equal, I certainly respect your right to have an opinion, but I think there is more evidence to suggest the films were poorly written and poorly executed in terms of plot, tone, moral meaning than otherwise.

So, and yes this is an edit, so I'm not sure if it adds "tone" (I maintain the right to edit my posts):

-I respect your right to feel any way you like about the films, however
-I do not agree with you and I reserve the right to say so
-I am not seeking to lecture people, only to defend my intellectual integrity.
-The fact that there are not many others like me on this board does not negate my position or make it a void truth-claim. Purists are vocal elsewhere.
-I am asking only to be respected
-I am looking forward to the Hobbit, despite misgivings.


(This post was edited by tumhalad on Oct 17 2010, 2:49am)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 2:49am


Views: 442
No I think you misunderstand me

I'm not saying it's impossible for others to have views close to yours - what I'm saying is you can't presume to know why the movie made a lot of movie because then you're saying you've magically jumped into millions of peoples heads and found out why they dug the movies. Thus I would never say something like "Everyone who hates the movies is a book purist." See what I mean now?

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 2:52am


Views: 422
Well nobody's under any obligations at all

But I'm under no obligation to qualify my opinion every time I make it.

But it weakens your point when you call out someone on something then do that very thing yourself. That's all I'm saying.


King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 3:00am


Views: 408
Ok

Sure, I think I understand you better. But I'm making the claim that people generally are inclined to like the LOTR due to the most part for its action, its scenery, its music and not the particulars of its adaptation. Of course I have no direct evidence of this, but I don't think its an unreasonable claim, and what's more you will have a hard job convincing me that people like the films because they were faithful to the book.

My own opinion is that those who say that do not know the books as well as they could. PiratePiratePirate *tries to deflect a rain of moral outrage, again*. The books are objective entities, and while it's certainly true that people can gain different "meanings" from the book, certain things, including the particulars of the ring quest itself, cannot be doubted.

For example, in the books it is explicitly clear that the Ring must be destroyed not only lest it fall into Sauron's hands but also lest it fall into the hands of the "good". In case there is some doubt about this, let me make it clear. This is the central moral message of the book. I wouldn't have minded so much about superficial things like Frodo's age, the Elves at Helm's Deap, the absurd Radioactive Scrubbing Bubble episode in RoTK (euh!) if Jackson et al. had got this right. Instead, they fudged it, fundementally altering the moral landscape of the story. Instead, "only Sauron" can use the ring according to Aragorn, as it "answers to [him] alone". This is a fundemental difference between the books and the movies, not a mere aesthetic one designed to couch the transition from book to script. It is gratuitous and unecessary, and worst of all cheapens the central message of the story. If you really think this is debatable, go watch the movies again, go read the books. Now, obviously the fact that this is changed does not mean much to most audiences, or they wouldn't have gone along to see the film in droves. But they did come away with a misguided appreciation for what is ostensibly meant to be Tolkien's story. Therein lies the tragedy.


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 3:10am


Views: 403
I'm not asking this of anyone


In Reply To
But I'm under no obligation to qualify my opinion every time I make it.

But it weakens your point when you call out someone on something then do that very thing yourself. That's all I'm saying.




No, I'm not saying people need to qualify their opinions every time they make them. Be prepared to defend them, sure. All I'm asking is that mine be respected as valid.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 3:13am


Views: 457
I'm sure there are other points you could bring up

but I would address the one you made about the temptation of good. This is not glossed over in the movies - both Gandalf and Galadriel are dramatic examples of the Ring's power to corrupt even those who are good and would use it for good. As a matter of fact, it's emphasized even more in that it blatantly tempts Aragorn and (unlike the book) he says he won't take the Ring within 100 leagues of Minis Tirith. There are more examples I could name but...

But, um, we may be taking this thread too off topic... not sure.

Would I have liked the movies to stick closer to the book? Yes. On the whole though I thought the movies kept enough of the book that I enjoyed it anyway. But hey that's just me.

I hesitate to make claims that people generally liked the movies for one thing or another not just for the reasons I've previously stated - but it also astounds me constantly the variety of viewpoints exhibited just on this little message board. I mean reasons for liking or not liking things just pop out of people's mouths that I would have never even considered. Again just my perspective and perhaps food for thought.

Cheers!

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 3:20am


Views: 414
The Ring


In Reply To
but I would address the one you made about the temptation of good. This is not glossed over in the movies - both Gandalf and Galadriel are dramatic examples of the Ring's power to corrupt even those who are good and would use it for good. As a matter of fact, it's emphasized even more in that it blatantly tempts Aragorn and (unlike the book) he says he won't take the Ring within 100 leagues of Minis Tirith. There are more examples I could name but...


I didn't say it was glossed over, i said it was dealt with poorly. Yes, the ring tempts, but this is a contradiction in the movie. Aragorn is at once tempted while also filmed saying that it "answers to Sauron alone". As for Galadriel and Gandalf, in the movies the nature of the temptation seems to be that it can be used, but then the film contradicts itself time and time again. "Aragorn is right. We cannot use it" Gandalf says at the "council" of Elrond. The whole message is lost, diluted in a morass of bad script writing. What is the point of showing the temptations of the ring if it only answers to Sauron. Strangely enough, this is a paradox the book never had to deal with. I just find it absurd that the filmmakers were not more aware of their source material.

Anyhow yes it probably is off topic; thanks for the discussion.


Arwen Skywalker
Lorien


Oct 17 2010, 5:18am


Views: 401
The big picture

Temptation one of the Ring's methods of answering to its master. This is a means to ensure its own, and in turn, Sauron's survival. The Ring isn't looking out for Frodo, Boromir, Gollum or anyone else. It's only looking after Sauron. It doesn't answer to its victim any more than Palpatine answers to Anakin Skywalker by stroking his ego.

And besides, Aragorn says: "You cannot wield it. None of us can. The One Ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master." That has a different connotation than merely using it. He means that it cannot be a weapon against Sauron, as Boromir tried to argue just one line earlier. In other words, wielding is a specific way of using. It should also be noted that Aragorn says nothing about only Sauron being able to use the Ring. I do agree with you that Gandalf would have been more accurate by saying "we cannot use it against Sauron" but on the other hand, shouldn't it be obvious that he was only addressing one way the Ring could be used? The message of the story isn't lost just because this isn't spelled out in big capital letters.


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 17 2010, 7:50am


Views: 365
No, tumlahad

That's the book's message according to you - I haven't seen it set in stone anywhere. Have you?

I have read the books three times and I say that is not the message of the book. I say PJ is a very, very brave and talanted filmmaker. You see? This is my opnion, it's not worth more than your opinion in any way, but don't come here and claim that you have found the official message which is the "correct one" and that the discussion should be ended. "hack and slash"... gee.





Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 8:09am


Views: 356
"You can only come to the morning through the shadows."

You Got this right (3:07 US Central Daylight Time) Good Morning Middle-earth!

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 8:12am


Views: 356
Obviously a good story teller and writes to her market.//

 

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 8:19am


Views: 386
Terry Pratchett said outloud to me

That J K Rowling was a talented hack that lifted the core of her stories from J R R Tolkien and himself and that she should acknowledge the fact. (This is not an exact quote but very close,) I was surprised. By the way I love all three writers.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 8:42am


Views: 358
Hay, I was not trying to insult you.

I had no intent of attacking you or your views and it was not I that slung around the term ignorant (As I know we all are to a point). And I was not saying that the Lord of the Rings books & the Lord of the Rings were different medium but that the stories will differ (to a large extent) because of the limits of the medium. They also differ as to the intent of the story teller.
I love The Hobbit & The Lord of the Rings books, else I would not have spent over thirty years reading and studying them. I enjoy The Lord of the Rings movies for what they are, this being a visually stunning retelling of the masters epic. There are valid things that can be said in criticism of both sets but this post is not the place for that. I do not think we need to get our feathers ruffled. Or go on the offense-is-a-great-defense war path. I advocated the Socratic method because it is based on the negotiation of mutually acceptable terms from which might spring understanding and respect.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 8:45am


Views: 361
Aren't we all?

And I would like to point out that I do not travel with a flock. Being white tends to make one stick out in a black mob.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Mithrandír
Lorien


Oct 17 2010, 9:00am


Views: 365
I wouldn't be too worried

A press release from a studio is band to use big words.I wouldn't pay much heed to it.

Social Science's biggest problem, is social science.



"The ring has awoken. It's heard its masters call"



Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 9:03am


Views: 359
I respest your rights as a human being.

I respect your right to have opinions. Respecting your opinions requires discussion in terms that we agree upon. Anger and name calling are the end of discussion and the root of war. I am all for peace and understanding if at all possible.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 9:10am


Views: 363
The ring is looking out only for its self.

As it contains an essential part of Sauron's former power it needs him to be whole again just as Sauron needs the ring.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 10:28am


Views: 360
Wielding the Ring


In Reply To
Temptation one of the Ring's methods of answering to its master. This is a means to ensure its own, and in turn, Sauron's survival. The Ring isn't looking out for Frodo, Boromir, Gollum or anyone else. It's only looking after Sauron. It doesn't answer to its victim any more than Palpatine answers to Anakin Skywalker by stroking his ego.

And besides, Aragorn says: "You cannot wield it. None of us can. The One Ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master." That has a different connotation than merely using it. He means that it cannot be a weapon against Sauron, as Boromir tried to argue just one line earlier. In other words, wielding is a specific way of using. It should also be noted that Aragorn says nothing about only Sauron being able to use the Ring. I do agree with you that Gandalf would have been more accurate by saying "we cannot use it against Sauron" but on the other hand, shouldn't it be obvious that he was only addressing one way the Ring could be used? The message of the story isn't lost just because this isn't spelled out in big capital letters.

It is confused. He says "the ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master." This serves to confuse the central matter of the story. The point is, they can wield the ring, and they could do so very effectively if they wanted to.


tumhalad
Bree


Oct 17 2010, 10:30am


Views: 376
For goodness sake,


In Reply To
I respect your right to have opinions. Respecting your opinions requires discussion in terms that we agree upon. Anger and name calling are the end of discussion and the root of war. I am all for peace and understanding if at all possible.



I called no body names and I got angry because my opinions were labelled ignorant.


(This post was edited by Altaira on Oct 17 2010, 2:47pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 11:35am


Views: 454
I was not

making accusations or criticizing your approach. I was merely making a general philosophical statement about discussions and arguments(War being the social form of ultimate argument). I admit I was being formal but that seems necessary to breach the impasse that we might come to an understanding.

So if you want to talk, say something and we can discuss it. I promise that I will not attack you, though I might criticize what you say. And here I am meaning criticism to indicate: The process of analyzing, classifying, interpreting, or evaluating assertions.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Altaira on Oct 17 2010, 2:47pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 1:01pm


Views: 427
A talent is equal to 6000 drachmas.//

 

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 1:59pm


Views: 424
You are misrepresenting me

I did not say that you were 'the only über-purist out there'. I specifically said that I had directed my post towards you because you 'seem to be the only representative of the über-purists in this discussion'. I also stated that 'my post was really meant for the über-purist community in general'. Nowhere did I even come close to implying that you were the only one who held these views. In fact I outright acknowledged the existence of a wider community of you.

In case you were wondering, I would define 'über-purist' as 'someone so fixated on the canon of events described in the book that they will dislike or hate any interpretation which is not identical or nearly identical to it, solely because of its differences from the source material'.

I would call myself a highly optimistic normal-level purist. As lovely as it would be for the filmmakers to use the books as the script for a ninety-hour epic, it's also ridiculous. Peter Jackson's adaptation was far better than anyone could reasonably expect it to be. The difference between us is that I am willing – even glad – to overlook the deviations and just enjoy this visual retelling of my favourite story for what it is, while you seem so focused on what you perceive as Jackson's unforgivable desecration of Tolkien's work that you will never be able to enjoy the films like the rest of us.

I do not respect the opinions of what I call 'über-purists'. (I am talking about über-purists in the general sense here, not just you or Tolkien ones.) I think that they are unreasonable and ungrateful. Especially the ones who gather together on message boards and spend hours pointing out and gloating over the flaws in adaptations, constructing detailed lists of reasons to hate 'revisionist' adaptations, and just generally rolling around in their own hatred. I only come to message boards to talk about things that I actually, you know, like.


Arwen Skywalker
Lorien


Oct 17 2010, 2:59pm


Views: 413
It's all about control


Quote
It is confused. He says "the ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master." This serves to confuse the central matter of the story. The point is, they can wield the ring, and they could do so very effectively if they wanted to.


The Ring can be wielded as a tool, as Frodo and Bilbo did to become invisible. But I will remind you that this was not the type of use Gandalf was referring to in the Council and he would have been derailing the topic if he did that. You can temporarily use the Ring for your own purposes but in the end, it controls you. Meaning that you can't use it against Sauron, no matter how much you want to. He is the only one who can use the Ring while still having control over it and this is why he is its only master. I don't see what's so confusing about that.



(This post was edited by Arwen Skywalker on Oct 17 2010, 3:03pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 3:09pm


Views: 422
RE;He (Sauron) is the only one who has control over the Ring.

I would suggest that this be modified slightly. I would say: Sauron is the only one who has absolute control over the Ring if he has it in his possession. Others can use it but they will absolutely control it for "the ring has a will of its own" and this will distort and ultimately defeat anyone of power who attempts to wield it. I do not see this out of line from what is stated in the movies.


Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Arwen Skywalker
Lorien


Oct 17 2010, 3:46pm


Views: 411
Alternative Frodo?

The fundamental difference was that practically no one expected Frodo to take on the burden of the Ring. Everyone in the wizarding world expected Harry to have a special destiny for most of his life. I admit I haven't read the HP books in a while but the only thing Harry and Frodo have in common is that their missions involve destroying objects that contain the essence of the Dark Lords of their universe. I was not thinking of Dumbledore at all when I was first introduced to Gandalf. And I don't remember Dumbledore ever getting pissed off at any of his mentees.

That's not to say there aren't parallels between Middle Earth and the Potterverse. To name one example, both stories frown upon the search for immortality. The Hobbit does remind me of HP in the sense that it is initially a childish story that gets progressively darker. But there are enough differences to say that Rowling was not merely recycling Tolkien.


(This post was edited by Arwen Skywalker on Oct 17 2010, 3:47pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 4:05pm


Views: 409
Rowling

was certainly influenced heavily by Tolkien. She was also influenced by Terry Pratchett (though as far as I know she has never admitted it.) I do not se her recycling anything. The seven books are a delightfully entertaining read and are as a whole an amazingly complex structure. They lack the depth of Tolkien and the incredibly humorous insights into the workings of western society that Pratchett's volume of work shows. But they are good and are destined to become classics (in my opinion) I have not read any of the Twilight books as I like my vampires Del Toro style and I am so far past my teenage years that they have been consumed in the mists of time. I did see the first Twilight movie with my then 19 year old son and his girlfriend and they laughed all the way through it.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 17 2010, 4:06pm)


Lindele
Gondor

Oct 17 2010, 4:20pm


Views: 420
GOODNESS!!!!!!

LET'S ALL JUST KEEP COMPLAINING!!!! God forbid we enjoy the weekend after hearing such great news!


squire
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 4:26pm


Views: 405
Yes, anyone of sufficient power can wield the Ring, and defeat Sauron

At least, that is the nature of the Ring in the book, as revealed at the Council of Elrond. Elrond explains, when Boromir suggests using the Ring against the Enemy:
‘We cannot use the Ruling Ring. That we now know too well. It belongs to Sauron and was made by him alone, and is altogether evil. Its strength, Boromir, is too great for anyone to wield at will, save only those who have already a great power of their own. But for them it holds an even deadlier peril. The very desire of it corrupts the heart. Consider Saruman. If any of the Wise should with this Ring overthrow the Lord of Mordor, using his own arts, he would then set himself on Sauron’s throne, and yet another Dark Lord would appear. And that is another reason why the Ring should be destroyed: as long as it is in the world it will be a danger even to the Wise.' (Elrond speaking, in LotR II.2, bold emphasis by squire)
This is, as has been mentioned, quite different from the answer given in the film, at this point, in response to Boromir's question:
STRIDER
You cannot wield it. None of us can.
The one ring answers to Sauron alone...it
has no other master.
[they debate about Aragorn's identity]

GANDALF
Aragorn is right...we cannot use it.
ELROND
You have only one choice..the ring must
be destroyed. (New Line Pictures, The Fellowship of the Ring)

So the film, while using some of the same language ("...too great for anyone to wield at will..." vs. "You cannot wield it.") conveys a much simpler message about the Ring's essential evil. In the book, the Ring can be wielded "by those who already have a great power of their own", i.e. Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Saruman. Such a great lord or lady could in fact destroy Sauron with the Ring's power. But the end does not justify the means, and the result of using the Ring for that purpose is that they would become just as evil as Sauron, and replace one Dark Lord with another. It is a subtle lesson of huge implications that Tolkien wishes us to learn: Evil is not an aspect of Sauron (and his Ring); rather Sauron (and his Ring) is an aspect of Evil, which is defined by Tolkien as the use of Power to dominate and direct other free wills.

The film, for what some might say were obvious reasons of simplicity and dramatic presentation, smooths this sophisticated moral message into something more easily digestible: Evil is circularly defined as meaning everything that is bad. It is a temptation from without, which we may respond to or resist, depending on whether we are already more bad or good inside. The evil Ring is an embodiment of this outside temptation. If it is used by anyone except Sauron, it delivers its user to Sauron no matter what the user's initial intentions were.
So the book presents a Ring of Power, whose Power, even when used to do good, is ironically the essence of Evil; while the film presents a Ring of Evil, whose possession just turns one into a bad person. Although much of the film's basic plot still works under this simpler construction of the Ring's nature, what is missing are the repeated scenes in the book wherein the Ring tempts people like Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, Faramir, Denethor, and Sam to use its Power to do good.



squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd (and NOW the 4th too!) TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary


= Forum has no new posts. Forum needs no new posts.

(This post was edited by squire on Oct 17 2010, 4:34pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 4:27pm


Views: 404
People feel the way they feel.

Some times talking about it eases the pain of an imperfect world.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 4:30pm


Views: 405
I was wondering where you were.

I knew you had the knowledge and resources to clear this up. Thanks.

Kangi Ska Resident Cynic

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 4:44pm


Views: 405
Actually the movie does touch on this book point

For example in the scene where Frodo is trying to give Gandalf the Ring Gandalf says:

Don't tempt me Frodo! I dare not take it. Not even to keep it safe. Understand Frodo, I would use this Ring from a desire to do good. But through me, it would wield a power too great and terrible to imagine


And this point is further hammered home when Galadriel is temped and says:

In place of a Dark Lord, YOU WOULD HAVE A QUEEN! NOT DARK, BUT BEAUTIFUL AND TERRIBLE AS THE DAWN! TREACHEROUS AS THE SEA! STRONGER THAN THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE EARTH! ALL SHALL LOVE ME, AND DESPAIR!

So the point made at the Council Aragorn is right...we cannot use it. is further expounded upon in these two spots. The movie does this frequently so as to draw out the narrative and make it more digestible for a 3 hour movie instead of a long middle narrative and a 5 hour movie. One can even say the point "bookends" the point made at the council.

If I recall correctly I also remember a point being made that even if someone like Gandalf or Saruman or Galdriel did gain possession of the Ring the contest between them and Sauron would not be without uncertainty. It would still be possible for Sauron to overpower the new Ring wielder and take back his Ring. In the long run it all boils down to the same thing. There will be a Dark Lord on the throne and so movie Aragorn is right. The Ring has no other master than a Dark Lord. Who that Dark Lord's name is in the end is irrelevant.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.

(This post was edited by Tim on Oct 17 2010, 4:45pm)


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 5:10pm


Views: 386
You're picking apart semantics

I always assumed that when they said no one but Sauron could wield the ring, they meant that no one but Sauron could successfully wield the ring and survive in their original form without being consumed by it. That wielding the ring against Sauron was in theory possible, but that it wasn't an option for the White Council because the wielder would invariably become the next Dark Lord.

And Tim is right; the films do acknowledge that the ring could in theory be used against Sauron. Both film-Gandalf and film-Galadriel are tempted by it, but reject it because they know that it will consume them. I really don't see the problem here.


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 17 2010, 5:27pm


Views: 370
Good summary Tim. //

 





Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 5:32pm


Views: 362
Gracias! //

Smile

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


dormouse
Half-elven

Oct 17 2010, 5:40pm


Views: 377
I'm not sure about that.

Taken at face value, yes, of course you're right that the wording has changed from book to film and with it some of the layers of meaning. Inevitable, I suppose, given that film is a much more compressed medium. But I think they did try for more subtlety than you're allowing: first, because the meaning of 'cannot' in 'you cannot wield it.... we cannot use it' is not as straightforward as you're suggesting. You're assuming that that means 'the Ring won't work for us' but couldn't it also mean 'we can't allow ourselves to use it' as it does in the book? In the same way I might say 'I can't drive my brother's car'. In fact I can, having a valid driver's licence. But his car is much bigger and more powerful than mine so I wouldn't drive it, for fear of the consequences. I can, but I choose not to.

Then, as Tim says, the films do show various characters - Gandalf, Galadriel, Aragorn, being tempted by the Ring - and since they're essentially good characters doesn't that imply that the temptation might be wearing 'good' clothing? The films achieved this rather beautifully, I think, by conveying the seductive voice of the Ring, different for each person. You might even argue that they went further than the book in allowing it to tempt Faramir. And for anyone who wanted to think more about what was meant, the Extended Edition DVDs have some discussion of the nature of evil and of the Ring as Tolkien presents it....


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 6:38pm


Views: 354
ha ha ha

I will accept that definition Laugh


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Oiotári
Tol Eressea


Oct 17 2010, 6:42pm


Views: 355
complaining about complaining is still complaining //

 


The wide world is all about you:
you can fence yourselves in, but you cannot for ever fence it out

You can only come to the morning through the shadows


Altaira
Superuser / Moderator


Oct 17 2010, 7:40pm


Views: 354
Not to worry, Lindele

Many of us are ecstatic and thoroughly enjoying all the great news. There's evidence of that all over the board, I promise. Smile

Also, don't mistake critical analysis, or speculation, for complaining. I see a lot of that going on too. But, yes, when all is said and done there are people who will always see the glass half-empty. It's just human nature. The best thing I've found is to not let it frustrate us glass 'half-fullers' (and vice versa).


Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.



"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower

"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase



TORn Calendar


Arwen Skywalker
Lorien


Oct 17 2010, 7:45pm


Views: 348
This reminds me of....

that age-old question among schoolchildren: can I go to the bathroom? I think all of us can remember a time when a teacher wouldn't let us go until we said "may I." We can theoretically go but we'd get in trouble if we go without a hall pass. But even when we grow up, most of us still say "can I" unless the language police was around. If I'm making the wrong assumption, maybe I don't get out enough. I personally don't know anyone who says "may I" as their default way of asking permission. People in real life often don't use the word "can" in a straightforward way, so like you, I'm not sure why some people don't understand it when that happens in a story.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 8:09pm


Views: 333
That is

(unless the language police were around) Just funnin'. The language police kill a living language.


Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


verityfate
The Shire


Oct 17 2010, 10:01pm


Views: 331
explanation:


In Reply To
A comparison is possible and can be a good thing especially in coming to an understanding of what makes one book or movie superior to another. A simple statement of personal taste without comparison is not valid criticism. So I will end by asking you what you mean by creative and how it applies to the situation.


Well, obviously superiority is mostly about individual taste, but I do think that Tolkien was more creative than Rowling. What I meant was that Rowling recycled old cliches and made them interesting again, but in Avatar, the story is basically the same as others like it except it takes place...in space!

I mentioned Twilight off the top of my head, because, imo, it can't compare to Tolkien, whereas Rowling, although not in any way a challenge in terms of creativity, was at least written well and had an interesting story. Basically, I think that Tolkien is superior to Harry Potter, and Harry Potter is far above Avatar in creativity, ect.

well, green has always been my favourite colour...;)

(This post was edited by verityfate on Oct 17 2010, 10:02pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 17 2010, 10:13pm


Views: 316
Thanks for the explaination.

 I can not judge Twilight (Except by the first movie) But I agree with your ranking of Tolkien and Harry Potter.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Maggot_farms
Registered User

Oct 18 2010, 12:17am


Views: 314
Thankfully your probably correct.

When studios begin posturing about up coming projects they do tend to direct the attention of the advertising in varying directions. I just hope these films stay faithful to Tolkien's vision, rather than trying to equal the grandeur of the LOTR's literary scope. Fingers crossed.


Maggot_farms
Registered User

Oct 18 2010, 12:33am


Views: 306
what is troublesome about the two movies

My concern is that the project is going to try and increase the story so much that there will only be a skeleton left of the original Hobbit story line. Tying in the two books is a great idea for the movies but at what cost? I have my fingers crossed that PJ and his crew will be respectful. I really liked what they did with LOTR. I'm surprised by the reaction this post has gotten. I guess this website is more of a Peter Jackson fan website than a pure Tolkien one.
I'm definitely anti-3D though. I think its just a cheap marketing ploy.


Maggot_farms
Registered User

Oct 18 2010, 12:35am


Views: 395
my thoughts exactly

 


Plurmo
Rohan

Oct 18 2010, 1:03am


Views: 385
Cause for concern.

"You cannot wield it. None of us can. The One Ring answers to Sauron alone. It has no other master."

Perhaps we shouldn't be reading this too literally. Sauron here works as an embodiment of Evil: "the ring answers to Evil alone, it has no other master," and that's all. It doesn't mean one cannot substitute Sauron as an embodiment of evil by means of the Ring.

If there is a cause for concern about this line is how much the filmmakers write what the characters say based on what emotions they want to highlight in a particular moment. In this case Aragorn reacts as if he was trying to protect the people around him. He doesn't even answer Boromir's challenge after that. It is the (as I told you in my other reply) "Aragorn on parole."


Plurmo
Rohan

Oct 18 2010, 1:41am


Views: 386
The HP series explores the idea of hidden worlds in plain sight.

It has far more relation to the present world than people would expect. But people are more wise than they suspect themselves to be and are drawn towards anything that could bring to light what is already been seen by their intuition.


sphdle1
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 1:59am


Views: 387
I hope so

"In a Two-Part 3D Production of Extraordinary Scope"... that sounds pretty awesome to me! The bigger the better, I say.

I trust Jackson et al with the writing, producing and directing of these 'movies' so no double the will both be simply awesome, and nothing to worry about.



Silmaril
Rohan


Oct 18 2010, 6:55am


Views: 372
the stories are very different and..

i think PJ & Co.'s approach to tolkien's middle earth did not change.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 12:46pm


Views: 356
On that topic...


In Reply To
Do you really believe that the tiny minority of hardcore purists are right and everyone else on the face of the planet is wrong? Peter Jackson is fantastic.


And do YOU seriously believe that everyone on Earth is a devoted fan like most of the people on TheOneRing.net? I hate to break it to you, but hardcore fans are always a minority of the people who liked a film when it came out. Fast forward several years and it's an even smaller minority.

Also, I am just as skeptical as people claiming that a film director (or most any other artist) is objectively good as someone claiming that person is objectively bad. How exactly are you supposed to argue that when the qualitative assessment of art is inherently subjective?



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



(This post was edited by Eldorion on Oct 18 2010, 12:48pm)


Bound
Rohan


Oct 18 2010, 2:03pm


Views: 345
To quote a friend...

Just because it's shot it 3D doesn't mean you HAVE to go see it in 3D . Most 3D films gets released in 2D also. You can't alienate people who don't like 3D or alienate the cinemas that don't have digital projetors...


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 2:17pm


Views: 364
The qualitative assessment of art is only partially subjective.

There are many objective things that can be said about art including film.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


sphdle1
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 3:08pm


Views: 389
Am I the friend you are quoting?

I have said that all along, on many previous posts... I wouldn't want 3D to be at the expense of the 2D experience, so I hope they have it in both, and film the movies with 2D in mind; however I do hope they definitely have it in 3D as well, as that is my preference.

When someone starts a thread that suggests that its wrong to have The Hobbit in 3D, that is when I completely disagree and do not see it as a problem.


(This post was edited by sphdle1 on Oct 18 2010, 3:17pm)


sphdle1
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 3:23pm


Views: 338
What' wrong with PM?

One of the best movies of all time...I even like Jar Jar and Yippee!

That movie brought SFX to a whole new level... I hear a lot of people complaining about that movie, but I thought it was awesome.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 3:59pm


Views: 341
Fair enough...

...but at the end of the day, whether a film was overall good or enjoyable is a personal question. I may be able to note and appreciate the artistic qualities of any given movie, but that doesn't mean I liked watching it or would want to do so again. That doesn't invalidate anyone else's opinion on it, though, because there's no right or wrong answer.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 4:06pm


Views: 413
Err, no...

...but I do seriously believe that the vast majority of people on the planet enjoy good films.

When did I say that the majority of people who liked the LotR films are hardcore fans? I don't recall saying that. I do recall saying that the majority of fans were also people who enjoyed the films, however. Perhaps you're getting mixed up.

The three-billion dollar box office revenue was provided by casual filmgoers, not hardcore fans. Almost all fans, critics and non-fans alike think that Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings is great. I think this gives some indication of its objective quality.


duats
Grey Havens

Oct 18 2010, 4:21pm


Views: 445
It's difficult

To use box office as a measuring stick for quality.

Case in point: The Transformers franchise.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 4:32pm


Views: 309
The Transformers franchise

was a commercial success, a critical disaster and a failure in the eyes of most fans.

The Lord of the Rings was a commercial success, a critical success and a triumph in the eyes of most fans.

I was not using profit as the sole indicator of the films' quality, but it is still an important sign of entertainment value which should definitely be taken into account.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 4:48pm


Views: 324
In film

There are structural facts involved in filming and editing. There are also general rules of story telling that are applicable and utilizable in the process of evaluation. These have long historic precedence and go beyond personal taste. People are capable of liking bad movies and hating good ones. The critical facts remain.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 18 2010, 4:49pm)


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 18 2010, 4:53pm


Views: 308
You can also add the seventeen Oscars and the golden globes //

 





Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 4:54pm


Views: 368
It was a heck of a lot better than the one that followed it

and maybe equal with the last one. (This is a coin toss for me.) but IV & V were the winners.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 4:57pm


Views: 310
From the post I responded to:


Quote
Do you really believe that the tiny minority of hardcore purists are right and everyone else on the face of the planet is wrong? Peter Jackson is fantastic.


Maybe I misinterpreted you, but I think this statement implies that the vast majority of all humans think Peter Jackson is fantastic and that only "hardcore purists" disagree. If I misinterpreted you, then I apologize for that.

However, based on your latest post, you do seem to think that the vast majority of people think the that PJ's LOTR was very good. I'm not exactly sure how you can come to that conclusion just based on box office data. Titanic and Avatar were even greater box office successes than LOTR, and they have had nowhere near universal acclaim. The same can be said for most successful movies (whether you judge success based on revenue, critical response, or awards).



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 4:59pm


Views: 307
"Fact"

There are general rules and tropes that most film-makers follow, but there are also plenty of movies that break those rules. Some of them are even praised as innovative and groundbreaking for doing so. I fail to see how this in any way disproves my claim that the question of whether or not a film is good is subjective.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Aragorn the Elfstone
Tol Eressea

Oct 18 2010, 4:59pm


Views: 329
Maybe this has to do with...

...the fact that I was only 15 at the time, but I also love TPM. It will forever be my 'Star Wars Experience'. There was something really special about seeing a new Star Wars that belonged to my generation. I loved everything on the screen (including Jar Jar). Liam Neeson will forever be the ultimate Jedi as far as I'm concerned. I prefer it over the latter 2, though I find RotS to be the most emotional of the 3. But I still have the most fun watching TPM.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:10pm


Views: 370
I was trying to say

that the 'tiny minority of hardcore purists' are the only ones who hate the films and that everyone else thinks they're great. I was exaggerating, or course (I'm aware that there are non-LotR purists who don't like the films, and I guess there might be some hardcore purists who like the films anyway), but I think my statement is essentially true. The loudest complaint I hear about the films is that they supposedly weren't close enough to the book.

As I've said earlier, I'm not trying to make out that box-office revenue and objective quality are directly proportional. I'm just trying to say that when you look at (a) the huge financial success, meaning that the public in general enjoys these films (b) the critical success, meaning that people who actually make a living by dissecting and discussing films enjoy them, and (c) the very high level of satisfaction amongst the fanbase, it seems to me that Peter Jackson didn't really do anything wrong. There are no chinks in his armour. It's difficult to disagree that he did a great job.

If it's held as a huge success in the eyes of fans, critics and casual filmgoers alike, doesn't that mean that it's objectively good? If that doesn't make it good, then what does?


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 5:16pm


Views: 295
They break the rules by creating new ones.

With skill this can be done well. Without skill everything is an accident.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:18pm


Views: 299
I know I way you can come to a conclusion based on the box office data

However, based on your latest post, you do seem to think that the vast majority of people think the that PJ's LOTR was very good. I'm not exactly sure how you can come to that conclusion just based on box office data.

Unlike Titanic and Avatar people had a chance to demonstrate loss of interest after The Fellowship of the Ring in offerings of The Two Towers and The Return of the King and they kept coming back for more - in even greater numbers. That's how the box office data is useful in this case.


King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:18pm


Views: 300
Interesting...


In Reply To
The loudest complaint I hear about the films is that they supposedly weren't close enough to the book.


The people who care enough to go on the Internet and complain about the films may be largely purists, but the people who saw the films in theatres or on DVD and just went "meh" or "I've seen better" probably wouldn't care enough to join Tolkien fan forums and start debating or complaining about the films. The people you meet on a fan forum are not going to be a representative sample of all moviegoers.


In Reply To
it seems to me that Peter Jackson didn't really do anything wrong. There are no chinks in his armour. It's difficult to disagree that he did a great job.


I don't really think this thread is the place to get into a debate, but I think the pace of the films slows to a crawl in a few places in the EE. I dislike PJ's disregard for realism in having characters move as fast as they do or perform physically impossible acts like galloping down a cliff (both complaints neatly exemplified by Helm's Deep). I also think that some of the characterization, in particular Denethor the drooling madman, was rather weak. All in all I enjoyed the films, but I think they had some significant flaws.

In any event, I'm not denying that they were very successful and popular, but popularity does not automatically mean quality.


In Reply To
If it's held as a huge success in the eyes of fans, critics and casual filmgoers alike, doesn't that mean that it's objectively good? If that doesn't make it good, then what does?


There's an implicit assumption here that films can ever be objectively good. When individuals' criteria for assessing films differs as much as it does, I don't see how one can try to label a film objectively good. It's like music: the artist can be technically excellent and meet all the expectations of her genre, but some people just won't like it.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:20pm


Views: 295
So?

It still goes to show that these "rules" are not objective laws of moviemaking that can be used to determine quality as a fact.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:22pm


Views: 359
Good point

But while that shows LOTR attracted enough people to have them come back for more, Flagg's claim that "[a]lmost all fans, critics and non-fans alike think that Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings is great" still do not follow from it. Many is not the same as almost all.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:22pm


Views: 356
Interesting you brought up music

It's like music: the artist can be technically excellent and meet all the expectations of her genre, but some people just won't like it.

Mozart, Beethoven, etc., are widely known and respected as being brilliant and composing wonderful music. They're even held up as standards in school. Is this not objective excellence even if some don't like the music?


King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:25pm


Views: 356
No

It's objective popularity, success, and acclaim. However, being popular does not always go hand in hand with being good. Or do you think that every single book/movie/album that is a bestseller or is taught in schools is good?



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



macfalk
Valinor


Oct 18 2010, 5:26pm


Views: 347
Eldorion

Well...the vast majority did consider them as "great". Look at any site or whatever (ROTK and FOTR are currently on top 15 films list in cinema history on IMBD with 400,000 votes), the 17 oscars and the golden globes.

I rest my case.





(This post was edited by macfalk on Oct 18 2010, 5:28pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 5:26pm


Views: 348
It does illustrate a trend but

It would have to be adjusted to inflation, access to cinema, population increase etc. to be validated..

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:30pm


Views: 344
Hmm

What reason do you have for thinking IMDb users and Oscar voters are a representative sample of all people? IMDb users are disproportionately tech-savvy Internet users (and has been pointed out in a previous thread, trolls) and Oscar voters are movie industry professionals.

Also, I might as well repeat at this point that I never denied that LOTR was very popular and successful.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:31pm


Views: 351
LOL so it's objective popularity, success and acclaim

and that has nothing to do with excellence. Interesting.

I think you're missing the point of the pattern. A one hit wonder of course is not evidence of excellence but repeat after repeat after repeat, well, that's another thing altogether now isn't it? As human beings we all have things in common even though we are individuals. There are universals to truth, hate, love, etc that that belong to this our human race. The same goes for excellence. Not everything is subjective.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:33pm


Views: 342
No there's not enough time in between movies

to take really any of that into account in my humble opinion.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:34pm


Views: 347
How about addressing my point then?

Do you think every single popular creative work is good? Because, if you don't, then you've just contradicted your implicit claim that popularity indicates objective quality.

I'd also be interested in seeing the evidence and/or logic behind your claim that excellence is objectively identifiable in the way that truth is (assuming truth itself is objectively identifiable).



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



macfalk
Valinor


Oct 18 2010, 5:34pm


Views: 340
Well

As far as I know, LOTR equals quality to most people I've talked with and heard of. And the critics, too.





Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:35pm


Views: 339
I did address your point.

Did you miss the one-hit wonder thingee I said?

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 5:36pm


Views: 340
No but they can be used to determin the facts about quality.//

 

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:36pm


Views: 334
The same is true for me

But I know that I haven't discussed LOTR with most people I've met, much less most people I've ever seen, much less most people who watch movies. The people I discuss LOTR with are mostly on forums such as this, which implies that they're already fans. Wink

However, I'm not going to argue that LOTR was overwhelmingly well-received by professional critics. That much is easily observable.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:38pm


Views: 333
Perhaps you did not read the body of my post:

The point I was referring to was this:


Quote
Do you think every single popular creative work is good? Because, if you don't, then you've just contradicted your implicit claim that popularity indicates objective quality.


Whether something is a one-hit wonder or a repeating wonder is irrelevant to that point. For example, the Twilight has had numerous successes.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



(This post was edited by Eldorion on Oct 18 2010, 5:38pm)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:38pm


Views: 328
It's quite simple really

I'd also be interested in seeing the evidence and/or logic behind your claim that excellence is objectively identifiable in the way that truth is (assuming truth itself is objectively identifiable).

Take a man standing on a stage doing a complicated sophisticated tap-dance. To us humans, even if we're not necessarily into tap-dance, we'll acknowledge that that is excellence in dancing.

Then take another man standing on the stage shuffling his feet barely to the beat of the music. All of us humans, even if some of us like it, are going to have to admit - that ain't excellent dancing.



King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:39pm


Views: 342
How? What are the SPECIFIC objective laws of movie-making? //

 



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:43pm


Views: 325
You still assume that popularity is due to excellence

Do you think McDonald's is a restaurant with excellent cuisine? Do you think Twilight has excellent writing? Do you think Justin Bieber is an excellent musician? Substitute different examples to taste; I am sure you will find at least one successful and popular artist who you do not think is excellent.

If every single person who saw LOTR agreed that it was technically excellent I wouldn't be having this discussion, but that's hardly the case, even if you count only people who were generally favorable towards the films.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:44pm


Views: 323
Well no I did address the point

A one hit wonder cannot be an example of a good author. That addresses your point. And, it doesn't contradict my point of using a pattern of excellence to ascertain objective excellence. So no contradictions there that I can see.

Though, a one-hit-wonder may touch on other things that we as a species recognize as something objectively universally good. Who knows we'd have to take that on a case by case basis.

Twilight is obviously a standard for excellence according to us humans - just not maybe on the level you and I are looking for the excellence. Teenage girls are the same everywhere or so it's said. Wink

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:47pm


Views: 317
No but look deeper

Do you think McDonald's is a restaurant with excellent cuisine? Do you think Twilight has excellent writing? Do you think Justin Bieber is an excellent musician? Substitute different examples to taste; I am sure you will find at least one successful and popular artist who you do not think is excellent.

No but McDonalds is objectively excellent at providing cheap tasty food for people on the go. I already addressed Twilight. Justin Bieber falls into pretty much the same category as Twilight - these all meet some universal objective human need for excellence in one form or another.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:48pm


Views: 337
A few points


In Reply To
A one hit wonder cannot be an example of a good author.


An author who writes only one successful work can not be good? Could you explain the logic behind that?


In Reply To
Twilight is obviously a standard for excellence according to us humans - just not maybe on the level you and I are looking for the excellence.


If you and I have different standards for excellence than teenage girls, than clearly all humans do not have the same universal standards for excellence.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 5:49pm


Views: 316
No! It is all opinion and only mine matters.

Now that is objective. EvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvilEvil




Its a joke son...

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:51pm


Views: 308
Now you're changing the meaning of the word excellence

I began this discussion with Flagg over whether or not the LOTR films were good. I've assumed you were using excellent in the same sense as good was being used. It sounds like you're essentially saying that filling a need means that something is of good quality. That's a very different sense than I was using it, and if I am correct in ascertaining your definition, than I may not have a disagreement with you, even if I dislike your definition.

Smile



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



(This post was edited by Eldorion on Oct 18 2010, 5:52pm)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:54pm


Views: 302
I'm not speaking for the teenage girls

If you and I have different standards for excellence than teenage girls, than clearly all humans do not have the same universal standards for excellence.

They speak for themselves in sheer numbers reading and enjoying the books. It has nothing to do with my taste, I'm talking about universal human reactions. If a giant meteor falls out of the sky we might all think different things but we're all going to be scared (unless of course we're insane or suicidal). Teenage girls are an aspect of all us that is the human experience.




King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 5:56pm


Views: 321
Take a film course at the University near you.

There are also a whole sections in good libraries on film making and art criticism. Also the philosophical study of aesthetics. I do not have the time to speak to that here and now. Perhaps others can supply what you request.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 18 2010, 5:57pm)


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:56pm


Views: 311
Umm...


In Reply To
If a giant meteor falls out of the sky we might all think different things but we're all going to be scared (unless of course we're insane or suicidal).


I wouldn't argue with that, but the reaction to Twilight (or, for that matter, to LOTR) has been quite varied: from the fangirls, to the people who read it as a "guilty pleasure", to those who don't care, to those who actively dislike it. I think you picked a poor analogy with the meteor.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 5:57pm


Views: 425
Sorry, that's a cop-out

You can at least summarize them in a short bullet-list or give a link to a relevant website. If you have time to continue this back-and-forth for as long as you have, you have time to spend five minutes on Google. Otherwise it sounds like you're just making these "laws" up out of thin air.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 5:58pm


Views: 416
Re: Twilight

(I hope this message goes through this time; it turned up blank the last couple of times I tried to post it.)

Twilight and its sequels have all received mixed to negative critical response and none of the films or books have won any prestigious awards. The series is hugely popular among its target audience – that is, teenage girls – but ask anyone outside that audience what they think of Twilight and the odds are they won't exactly give you a glowing recommendation. Most people outside the target audience regard Twilight with disdain and think of it as something to be mocked (which, in my humble opinion, it is).

The Lord of the Rings has recieved praise far more unanimous and prestigious than Twilight, so the comparison doesn't really work for me.


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 6:00pm


Views: 409
Not unanimous - that's my point

Was LOTR's reception largely positive? Sure, probably.

Were the majority positive? Possibly.

But unanimous, or near-unanimous? I don't think that's the case.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 6:03pm


Views: 414
First off what exactly do you mean by good?

1. Being positive or desirable in nature; not bad or poor: a good experience; good news from the hospital.2. a. Having the qualities that are desirable or distinguishing in a particular thing: a good exterior paint; a good joke.b. Serving the desired purpose or end; suitable: Is this a good dress for the party?3. a. Not spoiled or ruined: The milk is still good.b. In excellent condition; sound: a good tooth.4. a. Superior to the average; satisfactory: a good student.b. Used formerly to refer to the U.S. Government grade of meat higher than standard and lower than choice.5. a. Of high quality: good books.b. Discriminating: good taste.6. Worthy of respect; honorable: ruined the family's good name.7. Attractive; handsome: good looks.8. Beneficial to health; salutary: a good night's rest.9. Competent; skilled: a good machinist.10. Complete; thorough: a good workout.11. a. Reliable; sure: a good investment.b. Valid or true: a good reason.c. Genuine; real: a good dollar bill.12. a. In effect; operative: a warranty good for two years; a driver's license that is still good.b. Able to continue in a specified activity: I'm good for another round of golf.13. a. Able to pay or contribute: Is she good for the money that you lent her?b. Able to elicit a specified reaction: He is always good for a laugh.14. a. Ample; substantial: a good income.b. Bountiful: a good table.15. Full: It is a good mile from here.16. a. Pleasant; enjoyable: had a good time at the party.b. Propitious; favorable: good weather; a good omen.17. a. Of moral excellence; upright: a good person.b. Benevolent; kind: a good soul; a good heart.c. Loyal; staunch: a good Republican.18. a. Well-behaved; obedient: a good child.b. Socially correct; proper: good manners.19. Sports a. Landing within bounds or within a particular area of a court and therefore in play: The first serve was wide, but the second was good.b. Passing between the uprights of the goal and therefore scoring, as a field goal in football.20. Used to form exclamatory phrases expressing surprise or dismay: Good heavens! Good grief!n.1. a. Something that is good.b. A good, valuable, or useful part or aspect.2. Welfare; benefit: for the common good.3. Goodness; virtue: There is much good to be found in people.4. goodsa. Commodities; wares: frozen goods.b. Portable personal property.c. (used with a sing. or pl. verb) Fabric; material.5. goods Slang Incriminating information or evidence: tried to get the goods on the crook.adv. Informal Well.Idioms: as good as Practically; nearly: as good as new. but good Informal Used as an intensive: The pipe started to leak but good. for good Permanently; forever: I'm moving to Europe for good. good and Informal Very; thoroughly: I'll do it when I'm good and ready. no good Informal 1. Worthless.2. Futile; useless: It's no good arguing with them. to the good1. For the best; advantageous.2. In an advantageous financial position: ended up to the good.
[Middle English, from Old English gd; see ghedh- in Indo-European roots.]Usage Note: Good is properly used as an adjective with linking verbs such as be, seem, or appear: The future looks good. The soup tastes good. It should not be used as an adverb with other verbs: The car runs well (not good). Thus, The dress fits well and looks good. See Usage Note at well2.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket

(This post was edited by Kangi Ska on Oct 18 2010, 6:04pm)


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 6:04pm


Views: 418
Non sequitur. //

 



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



(This post was edited by Eldorion on Oct 18 2010, 6:05pm)


Idril Celebrindal
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 6:09pm


Views: 421
Of course Middle-earth is real!

10,000 TORNsibs can't all be wrong. Cool


With caffeine, all things are possible.

The pity of Bilbo will screw up the fate of many.

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

(This post was edited by Idril Celebrindal on Oct 18 2010, 6:10pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 6:12pm


Views: 401
It is not a cop out.

I am married to an artist with 3 studio degrees in painting and drawing. I have attended writers work shops, studied the history of art and am grounded very well in the subject. Art criticism is a very complex subject.

I would sum up what you seem to be saying. If I like it, it is good enough. I would add: think about it, then tell me why in concrete / objective terms you like a specific film. I bet you can do it.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 6:13pm


Views: 407
We were having a discussion

Refusing to give meaningful replies and saying "go take a University class" is not conducive to having interesting or insightful discussions, nor is it polite to the other people in the thread.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



(This post was edited by Eldorion on Oct 18 2010, 6:14pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 6:17pm


Views: 391
Are you going to take on logic next?

I think, therefore I am.

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Eldy
Gondor


Oct 18 2010, 6:18pm


Views: 404
I'm through

Yet another non sequitur and a refusal to have a real discussion. I have no patience for trolling of this sort right now, so I'm out of the thread.



There's a feeling I get, when I look to the West...



Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Oct 18 2010, 6:21pm


Views: 391
For what its worth,

I know no one in my circle of friends and workmates who have seen the Twilight films and disliked them. A lot of people don't like the movies, but a lot of people outside the perceived target audience of teenagers *are* fans and shouldn't be disregarded through generalisation.

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 6:27pm


Views: 383
Very True

even I liked the first two Twilight movies though I haven't read the books yet. I quizzed my daughter about them quite a bit though I wonder if I get credit for that? Wink

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim.


Flagg
Tol Eressea


Oct 18 2010, 6:35pm


Views: 486
Unanimity

'Was LOTR's reception largely positive? Sure, probably.
Were the majority positive? Possibly.
But unanimous, or near-unanimous? I don't think that's the case.
'

LotR's reception was overwhelmingly positive. I think that's well-known by this stage.

As for unanimity: as with most things in life, it is not possible to achieve a one hundred per cent approval rating for The Lord of the Rings. As the saying goes: 'There's always one!'. There will always be those with contrary views or beliefs; for example, those who detest fantasy will not like LotR; those who dislike certain actors may not like LotR; those who do not pay attention to the story may not like LotR; those with bad taste in films may not like LotR. None of these facts reflect poorly on the quality of the films themselves in any way; they only mean that the films alienated certain viewers in order to reach out to others. Maximising the appeal of a work is an important part of ensuring its quality; after all, if *everyone* loves it then there is no subjective dislike for the work in existence, and the work is objectively perfect by default. If a few fringe groups (eg Tolkien
über-purists) dislike a film because it brushed them and their tastes aside on its way to critical acclaim and commercial triumph, so be it. Smile

Films don't get much closer to unanimous agreement of excellence than The Lord of the Rings.



Ataahua
Superuser / Moderator


Oct 18 2010, 6:49pm


Views: 367
*awards invisible extra credit* ;) /

 

Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."

"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded b*****d with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.


Ataahua's stories


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 18 2010, 6:52pm


Views: 415
Twilight? No thanks! //

 





(This post was edited by macfalk on Oct 18 2010, 6:52pm)


Kangi Ska
Half-elven


Oct 18 2010, 6:53pm


Views: 397
I am at work and I really do not have time right now. Perhaps I will return to the discussion when I get to my home computer.//

 

Kangi Ska Resident Bird Brain

The Hobbit is here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.

Photobucket


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 18 2010, 9:02pm


Views: 353
Not the 2 best examples to make your point


In Reply To
However, based on your latest post, you do seem to think that the vast majority of people think the that PJ's LOTR was very good. I'm not exactly sure how you can come to that conclusion just based on box office data. Titanic and Avatar were even greater box office successes than LOTR, and they have had nowhere near universal acclaim. The same can be said for most successful movies (whether you judge success based on revenue, critical response, or awards).


Both, Titanic and Avatar didn't end up making what they did due to a huge opening but out of this world legs (longetivity), which were on a whole other level than LOTR, a sign of fantastic word of mouth. Both were nominated for a plethora of Oscars, including best picture, Titanic went home with 11 Oscar wins, including best picture.

They may not be quite up there in terms of universal critical acclaim ("professional" - in quotes - critics) but it's not a huge disparity.


elentari3018
Rohan


Oct 19 2010, 5:16am


Views: 326
I agree-- Meyer is talentless...Twilight is only for teenage girls. (sorry if there are any in here:P)


Quote
Meyer is a talentless hack who happens to have an agent who is a brilliant businessperson who knew that many female teenagers don't give a darn about decent characterization and only need their hormone fix.


"By Elbereth and Luthien the fair, you shall have neither the Ring nor me!" ~Frodo

"And then Gandalf arose and bid all men rise, and they rose, and he said: 'Here is a last hail ere the feast endeth. Last but not least. For I name now those who shall not be forgotten and without whose valour nought else that was done would have availed; and I name before you all Frodo of the Shire and Samwise his servant. And the bards and the minstrels should give them new names: Bronwe athan Harthad and Harthad Uluithiad , Endurance beyond Hope and Hope Unquenchable.." ~Gandalf, The End of the Third Age , from The History of Middle Earth series


macfalk
Valinor


Oct 19 2010, 8:41am


Views: 319
"trolling"

I cannot recall seeing anyone "trolling" in this thread. A weak excuse.





Bound
Rohan


Oct 19 2010, 8:42am


Views: 324
I'm afraid not...

I wasn't quoting you but I don't discredit that you were talking about it in previous threads..


acheron
Gondor


Oct 19 2010, 1:13pm


Views: 319
Start here

Hope you have 70 minutes free.

http://gizmodo.com/5429692/epic-70+minute-phantom-menace-review-justifies-the-existence-of-the-phantom-menace

That review is far more worthwhile than the actual movie.

For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much -- the wheel, New York, wars, and so on -- while all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man, for precisely the same reasons. -- Douglas Adams

(This post was edited by acheron on Oct 19 2010, 1:13pm)


sphdle1
Gondor


Oct 19 2010, 3:33pm


Views: 364
I must be one of the few

Original Star Wars trilogy (New Hope, TESB, ROTJ), who loved those movies, yet found the newer prequels to be equally as good as the originals if not better. I would have been 9 when I first saw the first Star Wars movie - AKA 'A New Hope' ... PM gives me just as fond memories as the original did.


sphdle1
Gondor


Oct 19 2010, 3:36pm


Views: 299
Yeah I'd likely disagree with everything in that

Just have to agree to disagree on this one, because I don't think I'm going to convince you or the people from that review that your all wrong...Sly


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 19 2010, 3:47pm


Views: 290
Definitely won't convince me I'm wrong

I've watched the Phantom Edit of both Phantom Menace and Clone Wars and it's amazing what some real editing can do to improve both movies - haven't seen that editors version of Revenge of the Sith yet though.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim?


Bound
Rohan


Oct 19 2010, 4:33pm


Views: 285
I'm just hopping in here..

This isn't direct at you Tim or anyone specifically.. but the star war prequels are an inferior set of movies.

I don't care what edit / version of the movies you are considering. There are many things wrong with them - over use of CGI, lack of characters, uninteresting political stories/ badly written etc etc

But the main reason the prequels don't work is simply - because they are prequels. When you have a main story likes the original movies and then you go back to write prequels you are essentially telling a story that really doesn't have a natural purpose. There's zero tension because you know how where the characters end up in the end. You spend far too long hinting towards stuff that you know will happen - but it comes off being cheap and tongue in cheek.

This won't be the case in the hobbit because it's not a prequel it's the story that came before the lord of the rings but it wasn't written after the fact.

I should point out that I’ve read many prequels from series of books and I feel the same way - unless you are telling a story that happens before the main original story but doesn't revolve around it - then you are telling a pointless story.
If you want one simple example of how the star wars prequels ruin the natural story of Star Wars – this one does it for me. The end of The Empire strikes back is considered a monumental moment in the series and in film history – The Luke I am your father moment, along with the great “noooooooooooooooooooooo”
However if you watch the six star wars movies in chronological order – the drama and gravity of that scene is gone. We know that Anikan skywalker is darth vader and we know he has two kids…
Pointless story telling !

Rant over :)


Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 19 2010, 6:10pm


Views: 209
Agreed although

I am probably a little more interested in prequels than you are if it's a good story overall. But yes even with the excellent edits Phantom Menace and Clone Wars don't even approach how good the original trilogy was.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?
Tim: There are some who call me... Tim?


Bound
Rohan


Oct 19 2010, 9:40pm


Views: 455
That's cool

I wasn't having a dig at you.. I mean i don't mind that other people enjoy something that i don't like.

I agree if it's a good story - thats all that matters. I have a thing about how irrelevant prequels are.. ahh well