|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 12:48pm
Post #51 of 152
(5308 views)
Shortcut
|
I get more enjoyment out of thinking about a movie, than I would reading the book, thus I have a deep fullfillment from within myself, its just reading that I don't like doing. Remember, everyone's makeup is different, especially when it comes to a persons brain, and mine is not equiped to enjoy reading. We have differing anxiety levels, differences in how we process thoughts & memory when reading, and for me it equates to no enjoyment at all. I enjoy so many things that involve my own thoughts, my own creativity with art and music, etc., as well as external things like movies & theme parks. I am definitely more of a right hemispheric thinker for sure. Reading was encouraged when I was a kid, but I never enjoyed it. My kids didn't take after me because they can enjoy both reading & movies.
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Jul 8 2008, 1:53pm
Post #52 of 152
(5305 views)
Shortcut
|
but for diff (and similar!) reasons. Simple as that.
Love, Truth, Honor, Adventure
|
|
|
sherlock
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 3:59pm
Post #53 of 152
(5303 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I know you're not asking me but
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I love Shore's LOTR music. My order of favorites is book, music, movies.
|
|
|
a.s.
Valinor
Jul 8 2008, 4:19pm
Post #54 of 152
(5304 views)
Shortcut
|
|
of course you have, that's not my point :-)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
My only point is you cannot compare LOTR book and LOTR movie and say which you "prefer", as you haven't read the book.
Your choice entirely. I can't understand your choice at all--and you can't really be "quite up on the book" without reading it--no matter how many discussions "about" it you have with friends.
But I think I've already said this so am bowing out here. I hope you change your mind one day. You are missing so much by only knowing the movie version, which is nice but simplified in many ways beyond just plot simplifications.
a.s.
"an seileachan"
Pooh began to feel a little more comfortable, because when you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 4:29pm
Post #55 of 152
(5296 views)
Shortcut
|
I can compare the two at certain levels, general and technical, and not even by a close margin I know the movie would always be far better than the book for me. I don't need weeks of torture reading a book to prove that to anyone.
Think of it like this. I write/compose songs. I love playing piano and creating songs by ear...I hate reading music.
Also I so much prefer the music than the lyrics. I don't like writing lyrics, but love making up the melodies...right hemispheric thinker...
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 4:31pm
Post #56 of 152
(5291 views)
Shortcut
|
what's your favorite piece of music from all 3 films?
|
|
|
grammaboodawg
Immortal
Jul 8 2008, 5:01pm
Post #57 of 152
(5284 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Don't make me choose!!!! *swoon, kerplunk*
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Oh man! I love the books first, then the films. BUT BUT BUT I've found that my read is SO much better since the films came out. They've melded in so many ways. The characters in the book are still intact as they always have been in my mind, but they have a heartbeat now. The lands are greener or darker, the grandeur... grander! Then there's the music. *sigh*
Yes. If I was stranded on an island... give me the books. But I prefer the perfect world I'm living in right now where I can have BOTH! :D
"Barney Snow was here." ~Hug like a hobbit!~ "In my heaven..."
TORn's Observations Lists
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 5:17pm
Post #58 of 152
(5309 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm most happy with the story I experienced in the movie & wouldn't want a thing to change. I think it's better than Tolkien's original story from the book as my friends so vividly described & read important parts to me to prove their point. Jackson is a genius who took a great story and made it better. Like in the 2nd movie at Helm's Deep, where the elves came to fight along side men to honor an alliance they once had...'way better than the book'. Also, the whole driving of orcs into the trees, which led to their demise, didn't appeal to me as much as how Jackson's version is in the movie...sorry, just IMHO.
To me 1/2 the experience & enjoyment is the story, 1/4 is the music, and 1/4 the special effects/cinematography. The book would only have 1/2 the enjoyment & I don't like the themes and story-lines as much as the movie, as explained to me in great detail on many occasions.
Jackson made a good movie, although I'm quite certain even he wouldn't have the temerity to say his movie was better than the books. As far as the Elves coming to Helm's Deep, many folks consider that sequence as one of the most farcical in the movies, particularly since they completely disappear after the battle -- not to mention there wasn't much of a chance of a troop of Elves marching unscathed through areas held by Saruman, or that the Elves were already preparing for, or were actively engaged in, battle in Lothlorien (plus eliminating Elrond allowing his sons, along with the Dunedain, to join Aragorn later -- one of the high points of the book). You are not taking the story in context, nor can you understand the depth in which Jackson altered the nobility and demeaned the characters of Faramir, Denethor and even Aragorn (yes, even his stature is lessened in the movie).
Without reading the books you are missing out on an integral understanding of the story (and from a cosmological and chronological sense, the entire expanse of Tolkien's legendarium -- most of which shall most likely never appear on film). Having someone 'describe' the original story to you is akin to someone describing the Sistine Chapel to a blind man -- it doesn't compare to the spectacle and the depth of experiencing it personally. By saying you think the movie is better than the book without having read it, you are arguing points with one hand tied behind your back, and the effect is to trivialize your opinions of either.
But I will not try to convince you further, as I cannot offer any points in vivid technicolor with an orchestral soundtrack in the background booming out in DTS; although I can perceive the entire epic story, moving characters and rich dialogue completely in my mind, and it is those memories I shall always cherish, unmarred by a visually great but plot-flawed movie adaptation.
THE EARL OF SANDWICH: "Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
JOHN WILKES: That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
John Wilkes (1727-1797)
|
|
|
Peredhil lover
Valinor
Jul 8 2008, 5:38pm
Post #59 of 152
(5274 views)
Shortcut
|
Also, the whole driving of orcs into the trees, which led to their demise, didn't appeal to me as much as how Jackson's version is in the movie...sorry, just IMHO.
Now you have me confused. Could it be that you know only the TE? In the EE the Huorns are there, in accordance with the book. The orcs are first attacked by Erkenbrand's men (Éomer in the movie) and then the surviving orcs fly into the trees and are squashed there.
Look at the first picture in this post
How is that different from the book? Or are you talking about a completely different part of the book?
I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.
|
|
|
Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor
Jul 8 2008, 5:39pm
Post #60 of 152
(5271 views)
Shortcut
|
The only thing I can say Jackson improved for me was the character of Boromir.
|
|
|
entmaiden
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 8 2008, 5:49pm
Post #61 of 152
(5281 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Depends if you want to be credible.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
From the perspective of someone who knows both the books and the movies well, your comparison is not believable. I would say that if you want your opinions about the books to be taken seriously, you should have more knowledge of the books than what you've gained listening to other people's summary.
It's fine if you want to like the movies exclusively and never read the books. That's your right to choose. But you're not in a position to compare the two to the extent I will accept your reasons since your understanding of one is so incomplete.
Each cloak was fastened about the neck with a brooch like a green leaf veined with silver.
`Are these magic cloaks?' asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
`I do not know what you mean by that,' answered the leader of the Elves.
NARF since 1974.
Balin Bows
|
|
|
Aerin
Grey Havens
Jul 8 2008, 6:37pm
Post #62 of 152
(5286 views)
Shortcut
|
when you say, "I find it sad when someone can only enjoy books, and don't get the art form of film/acting/etc., and be able to just let the movie take you on a journey," then don't be sad. I get tremendous enjoyment from movies and TV, and I'm a connoisseur of acting (and of writing for movies and TV).
Though watching movies and TV is a very different experience from reading, reading has its own rewards; what is sad is that you will never get to experience those particular rewards. Have you ever been diagnosed as dyslexic? From the way you describe reading, that's what it sounds like. (Please don't blame it on pop psychology theories of hemispheric dominance, which have been thoroughly debunked by neuroscience. Yes, the hemispheres differ, but their interactions are much more complex than pop psychologists would like to make them -- unless, of course, your corpus callosum has been severed -- and being "right-brained" does not account for a dislike of reading.)
What you say about watching movies and TV as a social experience is revealing -- it sounds like you need to see or hear the reactions of other viewers in order to fully experience what you are viewing. I'm exactly the opposite. I much prefer to watch TV and movies by myself. I find that when I watch shows or movies with friends, their reactions distract me, so that I can't get fully absorbed in the show or movie itself -- especially if their reactions are different from my own. I'll go to a movie with friends, of course, but their presence makes it a purely social experience and prevents me from fully experiencing the film itself. If I really care about the film, I have to go back and see it alone.
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 6:54pm
Post #63 of 152
(5276 views)
Shortcut
|
I spent in the last couple of years, more hours combined discussing/debating this with friends of mine in "great intricate detail" that I could have watched all 3 movies more than 8 times over. I might as well say I read 1/3 of each book just from the amount of pages they read to me from the book, or in several cases had me read for myself, when comparing to how it happened in the movie vs book. That's not to mention the level of detail on characters, themes, story line, etc., that we mulled over & over & over from the perspective of both the book and movie.
(In the context of debate and comparison of book vs movie, I didn't mind reading those parts of the book, but wouldn't enjoy it nearly as much just to sit down and enjoy the book in and of itself)
So I wouldn't go so far to describe this as "other people's summary" and do think I am in a position to compare the two, as my understanding is far greater than you may realize. The only things I don't think we touched in the books were places that were nearly the same in the movies anyway, according to my Tolkien self proclaimed expert friends. So I think I have earned the right to compare and have my comparison accepted by those who choose to, at least on some levels. I can tell you I have a better appreciation for the book now than if I had to read it word by word, front to back. I don't expect you to accept my reasons, but my understanding is far more complete than you may think. I learned things about the books and themes/story lines in the last couple of years, that some readers take much of their adult life researching to find out (after reading over several times and researching more). So I would think I have at least as good a concept of the book as someone who just read for the first time, and better when it comes to the literary concepts & themes, and even history behind the book.
|
|
|
Arwen's daughter
Half-elven
Jul 8 2008, 7:08pm
Post #64 of 152
(5270 views)
Shortcut
|
If someone were to come into this thread and say that they had read the books and had seen a few scenes from the movies and talked about the movies vs. the books for hours and hours, would you honestly accept their opinion on which was better? If you really would, then you're perhaps a better person than most.
Watching a few disjointed scenes from the movie (even up to 1/3 of it) and talking about it with others couldn't possibly convince them of the grandeur of PJ's creation. Especially if they have decided ahead of time that they won't like the movies. The music has to build, the scenes have to flow, the characters have to arc. The experience is different if you're wholly immersed in something than if you're analyzing it bit by bit. And the same can be said of the books.
There's nothing wrong with not being a reader. Some of my friends and family have never read a full book in their lives. But I would recommend that you pick up the audio book or if you need the social interaction, what about having some of your friends sit down and read them with you/to you? When you have honestly experienced the books in their entirety I think you'll find that your opinion on them will carry more weight around here.
My LiveJournal
My Costuming Site
TORn's Costume Discussions Archive
July Screencap of the Day Schedule
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 8 2008, 7:56pm
Post #65 of 152
(5261 views)
Shortcut
|
..as far as which was better when it came to specific story lines and themes and characters as presented in both, I could accept their opinions on that. And whereby the sum of all that equals the whole of their critical opinion on which is better the movie or the book overall, I can accept that. (excluding the overall experience, because if you factor that in, you are then comparing apples to oranges, because we all experience things in different ways and have different likes, so that is not something that can be factored into which is better from the standpoint of which Helm's Deep was the better story line...)
If they say they decided a head of time they won't like the movies because they do not enjoy watching any movies at all, then yeah I can accept that.
I think someone can easily get the grandeur of PJ's creation without seeing the entire film, especially if an expert on film or Jackson himself explained it to you & the theory behind in great detail.
As far as experience in terms of 'enjoyment', now that's a different thing. They won't enjoy the movie as much as a whole if they only know its parts, but if they don't enjoy 'any' movies at all anyway, then they are just not going to enjoy it regardless of how genius it is. But I can accept if they recognize his genius even without having watched the movie in its full flow. I don't have to watch the entire Star Wars ROTS movie to get chills from John Williams score at various points. Some movies I will actually just watch the middle part or last half, just because I may not have time to watch the entire movie, but I can still experience & enjoy it the same as if I watched the first half. Some movies I've not even seen all of, but can get the genius and see how the flow and build of the score is, by listening to various parts.
|
|
|
Elberbeth
Tol Eressea
Jul 8 2008, 8:38pm
Post #66 of 152
(5249 views)
Shortcut
|
|
After following both of your threads
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I don't quite understand why we can't just agree to disagree. There's no sense in beating someone around the head because they don't see things the way others see them. *scratches head*
"There are some things that it is better to begin than to refuse, even though the end may be dark."
|
|
|
Artanis
Rohan
Jul 8 2008, 8:58pm
Post #67 of 152
(5240 views)
Shortcut
|
admit that is a hard question for me, as I have only read the book once through - a couple of months ago, but I have seen the films countless times (perhaps too many  ) So I am almost tempted to say I like the films the best.
But, being "bookish" myself I know that although I have only read it once, I know the book will stick with me for years now I have started the journey, and because it is such a huge book, I think there will be less scenes that I know by heart perhaps. Having said that, again I love the films, and also love the music (it is constantly on my mp3 and in the stereo), and it is so good when needing a "Hobbity" boost.
Artanis
Reading: Unfinished Tales -Tolkien, The letters of J.R.R. Tolkien, Father Brown Selected Stories - G.K. Chesterton
Listening: LOTR Trilogy Soundrack, The Silmarillion
Random Delights: Tea, bourbon biscuits and TORn
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Jul 8 2008, 10:06pm
Post #68 of 152
(5225 views)
Shortcut
|
To understand the alarm that some here have expressed, at your inability to appreciate the books not on their quality as books but on their very existence as books, try imagining how things will be a hundred years from now, when some people are completely unable to appreciate Jackson's films, or any films, because they lack the immersive quality of whatever the major entertainment of the day is (say, holographic-interactive games enhanced by designer drugs). The films will seem, to some, so old-fashioned and unegaging.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Jun. 30-Jul. 6 for "The Passage of the Marshes".
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions
|
|
|
Eledhwen
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jul 8 2008, 10:37pm
Post #69 of 152
(5218 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I'm probably not representative ...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but I'm in my late 20s, was an LOTR book-firster, and am what you'd call an avid reader. If I don't finish at least one book a week there's something seriously wrong. And I know loads of people my age and younger who reads. Interestingly my younger brother didn't use to read much at all but now he does - though his tastes are narrower than mine. So hopefully the under-25s you know are just an odd bunch! 
Figwit Still Lives!
Calling for a Figwit cameo in The Hobbit since May 2008
|
|
|
Magpie
Immortal
Jul 8 2008, 11:51pm
Post #70 of 152
(5214 views)
Shortcut
|
My son does read (he's 21) but not a lot. He does, however, listen incessantly to audio books. There's probably lots of reasons people don't read for pleasure. Some of those reasons wouldn't be surmounted by listening to audio books but the reasons he tends not to read are. (Mostly, he's just really active and doesn't enjoy sitting still. He listens to the audio books at night when he's falling asleep.)
I would also say that many people find the first half of FOTR a bit slow. But it kicks in about half way through. So when someone is considering reading it for the first time, I tell them not to be discouraged if they don't connect with it immediately. I'll even suggest that, before they give up on it, to skip ahead past the Council of Elrond and read a few chapters from there. If it's going to work for them, it will by then. If not, then it's not their cup of tea.
Whether you read the books or not is your business, of course. I have many friends who haven't read it or did and found it 'okay'. I, on the other hand, found it one of the most profound experiences of my life. The movies enhance my relationship with the book but I enjoy the movies more by knowing what they don't/can't show. The movies on their own could never satisfy me. The books always do.
magpie avatar gallery ~ soundtrack website ~ Torn Image Posting Guide
|
|
|
Huan71
Lorien
Jul 9 2008, 12:06am
Post #71 of 152
(5220 views)
Shortcut
|
Then they ARE an odd bunch. LOL
I'm also going on a news story i heard a few months back.
It said that in some parts of the county (England...) about 1/3 of the Harry Potter books that were sold would not be read. They were just the thing to have. A fashon accessory if you will.
You know, this is one of the most entertaining and interesting, threads i've read on here!
Just look at the amount of views and responses it's had in a short time!
But there is a serious point amongst all the verbal fisty-cuffs and entertaining indignation.
I genuinely see reading as a dying form of expression and sharing of experience.
I mean the above sentence literally. ie.REAL reading. The odd Harry Potter chapter or skimming the Red tops for the latest bit of gossip or sound bite doesnt count!
We're living in a world of text speak and ever abbreviated language.
Deep thought and expression are neglected in favour of quick symbols and functionality.
I think it's a combination of fashon and schools meeting targets and the necessity of the world of work..
|
|
|
Morthoron
Gondor
Jul 9 2008, 12:24am
Post #72 of 152
(5212 views)
Shortcut
|
They won't enjoy the movie as much as a whole if they only know its parts, but if they don't enjoy 'any' movies at all anyway, then they are just not going to enjoy it regardless of how genius it is. But I can accept if they recognize his genius even without having watched the movie in its full flow. I don't have to watch the entire Star Wars ROTS movie to get chills from John Williams score at various points. Some movies I will actually just watch the middle part or last half, just because I may not have time to watch the entire movie, but I can still experience & enjoy it the same as if I watched the first half. Some movies I've not even seen all of, but can get the genius and see how the flow and build of the score is, by listening to various parts.
You rather enjoy throwing the word 'genius' around, particularly in reference to PJ Jackson; yet you discount the Genius who is generally considered to have nearly single-handedly engendered the genre (generic as it has become) from which your supposed genius generated (gratefully) a mere generalization of the genuine article.
THE EARL OF SANDWICH: "Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!"
JOHN WILKES: That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress."
John Wilkes (1727-1797)
|
|
|
Peredhil lover
Valinor
Jul 9 2008, 10:26am
Post #73 of 152
(5175 views)
Shortcut
|
as too much detail. The more, the better 
I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 9 2008, 11:54am
Post #74 of 152
(5176 views)
Shortcut
|
but on my ability to enjoy them. I think it's my anxiety levels and patience for reading is just not condusive.
Anyway, interesting thought you have there. It is likely that many many years from now, people will look back and see LOTR movies as we see the old black and white silent movies. "...the LOTR movies aren't even in 3D..." I can hear it now. Good post.
|
|
|
sphdle1
Gondor
Jul 9 2008, 11:55am
Post #75 of 152
(5174 views)
Shortcut
|
and can appreciate our differences.
|
|
|
|
|
