Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Main:
Books or Movie?
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page Last page  View All

sphdle1
Gondor

Jul 7 2008, 6:14pm

Post #1 of 152 (955 views)
Shortcut
Books or Movie? Can't Post

I'm guessing most people are going to say Books on this one. What did you get more enjoyment out of, LOTR Books or Movie. I am not a reader and find the movies way more enjoyable, however I think part of it is because I am such a huge fan of music, and when reading books, I don't get an awesome score in my head, at least not 1/10 as good as the masters Howard Shore, John Williams, etc. Their scores just make the movies so much better & more emotional/memorable to me. Also, I am a big fan of film & great acting, cinematography, etc., that I don't envision certain newer innovative shots, angles of movement, etc., as some of these newer films have...a perfect example is some of the new innovations made in cinematography shown in the Matrix trilogy with 360 deg slow motion shots.

Anyone else enjoy the movies more than the books?


(This post was edited by sphdle1 on Jul 7 2008, 6:16pm)


Peredhil lover
Valinor

Jul 7 2008, 6:37pm

Post #2 of 152 (401 views)
Shortcut
You know my opinion already, I fear ;) [In reply to] Can't Post

But as you ask: Book. Definitely. The movies are great and gave me faces and some great impressions of places and landscapes, but in the end, the book has more details, more depth, his very own magic.

Well, I'm an avid reader and not a big movie fan anyway, so that's no surprise Wink

I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.


Annael
Half-elven


Jul 7 2008, 6:44pm

Post #3 of 152 (384 views)
Shortcut
definitely the book [In reply to] Can't Post

there's just so much more to the book that the movies had to leave out, plus the movies got some things wrong. I enjoyed the movies, but the book trumps them hands down.

You could always listen to the book on CD!

Our similarities bring us to a common ground; our differences allow us to be fascinated by each other.
- Tom Robbins
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967


Arwen's daughter
Half-elven


Jul 7 2008, 6:46pm

Post #4 of 152 (382 views)
Shortcut
Two seperate things [In reply to] Can't Post

I've read the trilogy in full only once (*gasp*?) and I've watched the movies at least a dozen times each. But I'll always rewatch DVDs and I only rarely reread books. Though I've read bits and pieces of LOTR over the years and I've been meaning to do a full reread.

Which is better? The books. They're richer and deeper than any movie could possibly convey.

Which do I prefer? Both have their triumphs and their flaws. I connect with both in different ways. I rewatch the movie more because it's passive. I can do that while I'm sewing, cleaning, writing, whatever. But there's nothing to compare with sinking into a good book. My mind likes to have a workout and my imagination likes new material. The movies just don't provide that like the books can.



My LiveJournal
My Costuming Site
TORn's Costume Discussions Archive
July Screencap of the Day Schedule


sevilodorf
Gondor


Jul 7 2008, 7:00pm

Post #5 of 152 (371 views)
Shortcut
Books [In reply to] Can't Post

A thirty seven year love affair can not be replace by an eight year fling.

Sev's home away from home: http://burpingtroll.com See what the residents of The Burping Troll were up to during Yule.. http://burpingtroll.com/vignettes.htm


Finally made it to Rivendell!!!!!!!!!




ArathornJax
Lorien


Jul 7 2008, 7:03pm

Post #6 of 152 (396 views)
Shortcut
Books [In reply to] Can't Post

Books for me because when reading, I create and adapt my own adaptation of Middle Earth in my mind. The movies show me Peter Jackson et al's image and interpretation of the book, but the book is the best for me and always will be.

It's been touched on with some posts here, and a poll I would like to see is if those under 34 are more likely to pick the movies, being more of a visual generation and those over 35 would prefer the books because movies and TV were not such a huge part of their lives, or is there no difference?

" . . . (we are ) too engrossed in thinking of everything as a preparation or training or making one fit -- for what? At any minute it is what we are and are doing, not what we plan to be and do that counts."

J.R.R. Tolkien in his 6 October 1940 letter to his son Michael Tolkien.

Come over to the LOTR Movie Thread and discuss the 1981 BBC Adaptation of the LOTR.




Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jul 7 2008, 7:03pm

Post #7 of 152 (384 views)
Shortcut
The books. [In reply to] Can't Post

The world and the story is so much more detailed, there's a depth to it that the movies can't even aspire to. Nearly all my favorite parts of the movies are those that look most like the movie I see in my head when I read the book. My internal movies never bother with a conventional soundtrack, so that part doesn't weigh with me. Though I do sometimes hear water running or birds singing. Smile

There are a couple of movie-only scenes I love (Boromir teaching the hobbits to swordfight, Faramir charging Osgiliath), but that's because they illustrate something about the characters that the movies don't show anywhere else, or expand on an important theme from the book. And sometimes the sheer power of the visual is stunning, even when the storyline is being messed with. I get carried away by Frodo facing the Flying Nazgul in Osgiliath, even though there's a part of me that is always saying, "But he shouldn't even be there!".

I love the movies too, but I loved the books long before. And if the movies hadn't done a decent job of showing the people and places I already loved, I would have hated them. The movies do not stand alone for me, and never really could. I love them as an "and", not as an "or": Books and movies, not books or movies. But the books first.

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


sphdle1
Gondor

Jul 7 2008, 7:05pm

Post #8 of 152 (416 views)
Shortcut
Be kinda kool [In reply to] Can't Post

that would actually be kook if they had Cate Blanchet read, and Howard Shore's score throughout...


sphdle1
Gondor

Jul 7 2008, 7:07pm

Post #9 of 152 (378 views)
Shortcut
music [In reply to] Can't Post

Are you a big fan of the musical score from a movie, like Howard Shore's compositions?


Peredhil lover
Valinor

Jul 7 2008, 7:08pm

Post #10 of 152 (385 views)
Shortcut
Would be interesting [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, I'm 42, and I do favour the book, even if I love the movies Wink

I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.


Idril Celebrindal
Tol Eressea


Jul 7 2008, 7:10pm

Post #11 of 152 (376 views)
Shortcut
Don't forget the radio play! [In reply to] Can't Post

My order of influence:

1. Book. LOTR is probably my favorite book of all; I've lost count of how many times I've read it. It has been a huge influence on my life. Every time I read it, I get something new out of it. When I was young, I focused on the adventure and the escapism of Middle-earth; as an adult, I focus more on the story's sadness and loss. It never seems to get old.

2. Radio play. I've also lost count of how many time I've listened to the BBC's 1981 radio play adaptation of LOTR. Listening to LOTR is an entirely different experience than reading it or watching it. In particular, Tolkien's poems and songs sound much better when sung or read out loud! This dramatization emphasizes certain things that are easy to miss in the book and does an excellent job of showing Gollum's tortured nature and flawed shot at redemption. Any more, the voices I hear in my inner ear when I read it are the voices from the radio dramatization, particularly the actors who played Gandalf, Aragorn, Sam, Frodo and Galadriel.

3. Movies. I really enjoyed Peter Jackson's LOTR movies, although I am not crazy about some of the story changes that made it into the films. However, their complete visual realization of Middle-earth down to the smallest detail was just amazing; in particular, I loved the movie depictions of the Shire, Edoras, Minas Morgul and Rivendell. The casting for the most part was great. I really liked how the character of Boromir was given more depth. The movie has definitely influenced how I visualize LOTR while reading it or listening to it. Oddly enough, the movie's costuming is one of the things that visually influenced my imagination the most, as well as the four locations that I mentioned earlier.

Other adaptations just don't have the same influence. Bakshi's LOTR was an interesting effort that had a number of good points (chiefly how Gollum was portrayed), but it had too many problems to really be considered as a great adaptation (and in any case was never finished). It took me years to purge the image of Boromir in a horned Viking helmet from my head. Don't even get me started on the wretched Rankin-Bass Return of the King animated film, although I did like when the orcs sang "Where there's a Whip, there's a way!" I've never listened to the Mind's Eye radio play, but its reviews aren't very good.

We're discussing the BBC Lord of the Rings Radio Play on the Movie Discussion - LOTR board.

With caffeine, all things are possible.

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

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting


Lunamoth
Rohan


Jul 7 2008, 7:11pm

Post #12 of 152 (375 views)
Shortcut
What she said [In reply to] Can't Post

I'd just be repeating Arwen's Daughter's post, in a way, so I'll just say "what she said." Both have their merits and their place. But I *am* a reader, and don't watch much TV, or get out to the cinema very often. Books were always my first love. And a set of books I've loved for the past 20+ years isn't likely to be usurped by some films, and one persons (or crew of people's) interpretation of them.

I have to add, if LOTR had simply been a not-very-fleshed-out short story or something that was later expanded into films, I'd probably feel differently. But the books were already rich enough in visuals on their own, and I have a vivid imagination.


Luna's LJ
Annals of Elewir



Peredhil lover
Valinor

Jul 7 2008, 7:11pm

Post #13 of 152 (384 views)
Shortcut
Not at all [In reply to] Can't Post

but that is because I am deaf. No score for me at all Frown

I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.


sphdle1
Gondor

Jul 7 2008, 7:13pm

Post #14 of 152 (373 views)
Shortcut
can't imagine [In reply to] Can't Post

sewing, cleaning while watching the movie? I don't think I could enjoy a move while multi-tasking.

How long do you think a movie (the 3 movies) would have to be to tell the entire tail of the book in full detail?


Peredhil lover
Valinor

Jul 7 2008, 7:21pm

Post #15 of 152 (381 views)
Shortcut
I'd say [In reply to] Can't Post

*at least* trice as much as we have already.

Someone (Sean Astin?) once said they had filmed enough to make 5 five-hour-movies - and we *know* there are things they did not even film - the Old Forest with Old Man Willow, Tom Bombadil and the Barrow downs, the scouring of the Shire, the Erkenbrand storyline .. that alone would make a whole film.

I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jul 7 2008, 7:22pm

Post #16 of 152 (364 views)
Shortcut
Yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

the horned helmet is a difficult visual to expunge. Though I still maintain that a Minas Tirith developed along those lines would be something truly unforgettable! EvilSly

Also right up there in my top traumatic LOTR images list is a certain Elven King apparently played by the love child of Kermit the Frog and Yoda. The German accent just tops it all off perfectly. Shocked

Silverlode

"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you."
-On Fairy Stories


sphdle1
Gondor

Jul 7 2008, 7:27pm

Post #17 of 152 (379 views)
Shortcut
not to mention [In reply to] Can't Post

the play. I don't know if there are plays for LOTR, but I was in a play years ago "The Hobbit", it was so long ago, that I don't remember a whole lot about story details, but it was a fun experience to be in, especially being a dwarf and being rolled around in a barrel, and then being a Goblin in another scene and having to do a fight scene (and lose).


Deni
Rivendell


Jul 7 2008, 7:46pm

Post #18 of 152 (374 views)
Shortcut
both!! :) [In reply to] Can't Post

well...i watched the films first so i maybe like the films more than the books ,BUT
there are so many chapters where i could cry...i mainly like eowyn and faramir in the houses of healing....and of course the first book is great because i love the culture of the hobbits...Heart
but of course...the music is the most important thing of a film and iīm a absolutly film-fan as well...i think tolkien spent lots of love in these books when he wrote on them...and of course pj and all of the persons who worked on the films ,too...
tolkien invited middleearht,so his books are very special to me!!!!
but how pj had made the films to it-thatīs amazing!! so i think both of them are awesome!!!
...but i think itīs really too bad that arwen is not that much in the books Unsureand i think itīs a bit too sad (at the end )that the shire is destroyed...
every single sentence concerns me a lot...(in the books and in the films...)
so all in all i think both of them are an adventure for themselves- a real must!!

thanks for the thread deni^^
ps: is matrix a book,too??? hehe...




Aunt Dora Baggins
Half-elven


Jul 7 2008, 8:04pm

Post #19 of 152 (370 views)
Shortcut
Books for me: I'm waaay over 35 ;-) [In reply to] Can't Post

and for thirty years the books were all we had (except for Bakshi and Rankin Bass, of which no more need be said.) So the books for me are the "real" version of the story. I enjoyed the movies, but they will never replace the wonderful images in my mind.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondence, with love from Bilbo; on a large wastebasket. Dora was Drogo's sister, and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"A Chance Meeting at Rivendell" and other stories

leleni at hotmail dot com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



sador
Half-elven

Jul 7 2008, 8:48pm

Post #20 of 152 (355 views)
Shortcut
I'm thirty-seven, so that about settles it [In reply to] Can't Post

But to be serious, with me its not even a question. I've been a bookworm in two languages since before primary school, while I haven't gone to the cinema to see a movie properly in over ten years.

Yes, that's right. And about a certain trilogy I seem to know about - well, ever since I knew the movies were being made, I wondered whether to see them, and where. A DVD pressed on me by a friend was refused because it was illegal; I finally saw the TE of FotR at my sister's (she borrowed the CD for me from a library), and hen found out a neighbour had the trilogy, so I borrowed it and watched them on my PC. I was very pleasantly surprised, and managed to justify some of the changes made by the moviemakers, which those known as 'purists' found hard to swallow - probably because I came with very little expectations, or because I was so bad in visualisation that I had no different vision to reconcile with PJ's (I'm a Bakshi-firster, but that vision didn't really leave a vivid impression on me). So I got the EE as a birthday present last year, but very seldom watch more than one DVD at a time.

So with all due respect to the movies - they interest me more than anything as an interpretation (and I think a good one) of the books. But the books were with me for thirty years, and though I have no idea how, they must have played a part in charting my course in life.

"Don't make jokes about it," hissed Gollum. "It isn't funny. O no! Not amusing. It's not sense to try and get into Mordor at all."
"I am commanded to go to the land of Mordor, and therefore I shall go" - said Frodo.
Sam frowned... his mind was full of doubt.
------------------------------------------------------------
The Black Gate is closed,
but the Reading Room discussion is open.
July 7th-13th.


Aerin
Grey Havens


Jul 7 2008, 8:48pm

Post #21 of 152 (387 views)
Shortcut
I thought you said [In reply to] Can't Post

you had not read the books. So how can you compare the books with the movies? (You ask, "Anyone ELSE enjoy the movies more than the books?") If I understand correctly, you seem to be saying that, for you, no book can ever be better than a movie, because you don't like to read, and you love to watch movies.

Whether to read books or to watch movies or TV is not an "either-or" choice; I greatly enjoy both and have done lots of both, and would not want to give up either activity.

As for LOTR, even though FOTR is my all-time favorite movie, I still enjoyed the book more, and I'm sure I would not have enjoyed the movie as much if I had not first read the book -- a lot of my enjoyment was (and is) in seeing aspects of my own visions of Middle Earth come to life. My first reaction to seeing the movie was to go back and read the book again.

As for TTT and ROTK, I did not enjoy either of these movies as much as FOTR — not just because they seem to get farther and farther from Tolkien's essential story, but because I don't think they work as well as FOTR purely as movies (for reasons we have discussed at very great length on the Movie discussion board in the past, and which there's no need to go into here).

If you have only seen the movies and not read the books, do be aware that you haven't actually experienced the story that Tolkien told, just someone else's take on it. That's fine, and you're certainly not required to read the books in order to enjoy the movies, but don't confuse the movies with the actual "The Lord of the Rings."


Aerin
Grey Havens


Jul 7 2008, 8:51pm

Post #22 of 152 (374 views)
Shortcut
I ought to listen to that again. [In reply to] Can't Post

I heard the original radio broadcasts, and then taped the whole thing on cassettes when it was rebroadcast. I wonder if the cassettes are still OK! It would be interesting to hear the radio play again after having re-read the books several times and seen the movies.


StillCrazy
Bree


Jul 7 2008, 8:58pm

Post #23 of 152 (344 views)
Shortcut
Books [In reply to] Can't Post

Don't get me wrong, I love the movies, they are fun and yes I have probably watched them more times than I have read the books.

But the books take me away into the middle earth. The movies are a view into middle earth. Plus when I am reading the books I can cast different people in the roles. That said the movies do play a big influence on my book interpretation now.

All the worlds a stage.


Eledhwen
Forum Admin / Moderator


Jul 7 2008, 9:00pm

Post #24 of 152 (353 views)
Shortcut
They're different [In reply to] Can't Post

I get a different sort of enjoyment from books and movie. My books enjoyment is more enduring - I've loved the book for 16 years - but the movies give a more visceral, immediate enjoyment.

Figwit Still Lives!



Calling for a Figwit cameo in The Hobbit since May 2008


Donry
Tol Eressea


Jul 7 2008, 10:05pm

Post #25 of 152 (339 views)
Shortcut
Books..... [In reply to] Can't Post

I come from a family that reads, reads a lot and really enjoys reading. The books are it! The movies are great though, don't get me wrong!

What's the matter, James? No glib remark? No pithy comeback?"

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.