|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
weaver
Gondolin
Jan 7 2010, 11:41pm
Post #2 of 37
(723 views)
Shortcut
|
I couldn't get to the story from your link, but I clicked back and got the Salon home page and the articles can be accessed there...
Here's a direct link to the page with the articles -- not sure this will work any better than your original link, but here goes:
http://www.salon.com/...0/01/06/against_lotr
Based on this guy's comments, he'd probably wonder about someone like me who's still talking about Jackson's trilogy so many years later..!
I felt better after reading the comments -- wish he had quoted some of the remarks from those who disagreed with him as well, just for more balance, but ah well...
I thought the article in the middle -- about how fantasy works still get no respect -- was the best of the bunch!
Weaver
|
|
|
Rivendweller
Menegroth
Jan 11 2010, 12:00am
Post #3 of 37
(627 views)
Shortcut
|
that I particuraly agree with is one that noted the amount of hours people spend watching episodes of Lost, or Desperate Housewives or even True Blood, yet they complain the LOTR trilogy is " too long". 
There's something of everything here, The Shire and the Golden Wood and Gondor and kings' houses and inns and meadows and mountains all mixed.
....and there are Elves when you want them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Formerly A'amel from days gone by.
|
|
|
Malveth The Eternal
Menegroth
Jan 12 2010, 2:19am
Post #4 of 37
(582 views)
Shortcut
|
The reason for this 'lack of love' is that the films aren't that good. The bigness is impressive, the detail etc. but they're hopelessly sluggish & overblown & ineptly scripted. Jackson lacks the sensitivity of a truly great director - he gets the scale right, but as both "king Kong" and "The Lovely Bones" show, the nuances escape him. The Rings films enjoyed unusual public attention but they ultimately appeal mostly to Tolkien fans. It's not surprising that they're not ranking high as pure cinema - cinema craft are their weak points. Just my opinion...
|
|
|
Malveth The Eternal
Menegroth
Jan 13 2010, 1:15am
Post #6 of 37
(543 views)
Shortcut
|
Ha ha. No, I'm not. But note my repeated use of "opinion". It's a matter of taste. But I'm not surprised to see that the films aren't as highly regarded as many other, smaller films. I find "Pan's Labyrinth", at about 2 hours length, to be more satisfying on all levels than all 9 or 12 hours of PJ's trilogy. I didn't say they were bad films - they have wonderful moments, but the parts are stronger than the whole, upon repeated viewings. That is how it has been for me so -- I'm "not surprised" that it has been the same for others.
|
|
|
Malveth The Eternal
Menegroth
Jan 13 2010, 1:47am
Post #8 of 37
(517 views)
Shortcut
|
LOL. Ok! You know what the man said about pleasing "all of the people all of the time" or something along those lines? Maybe we should adapt Tolkien's verse:
The Lord of the Rings
(Movies) are one of those things
If you like (them) you do
If you don't, then you boo!
|
|
|
fmaximus
Ossiriand
Jan 13 2010, 1:59am
Post #9 of 37
(521 views)
Shortcut
|
I still think your'e joking. 
At least it's very hard for me to take those comments seriously ... sorry.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Jan 13 2010, 2:46am
Post #11 of 37
(513 views)
Shortcut
|
but why stick around to dis them. I really do not get it. You wont see me hanging around the Twilight sites trying to get someone to rise to the bait. So please explain your motivation.
Kangi Ska
At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
fmaximus
Ossiriand
Jan 13 2010, 2:58am
Post #12 of 37
(498 views)
Shortcut
|
And yes I have to admit that it is hard for me to believe that someone might not like these movies.
I'm pretty narrow minded that way.
At the same time making a comment such as
"Jackson lacks the sensitivity of a truly great director"
on a site dedicated to the LOTR movies and it's director is definitely going to draw some sort of reaction.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Jan 13 2010, 3:13am
Post #13 of 37
(505 views)
Shortcut
|
several times and I would say that Mr. Jackson possesses the sensitivity and sense of humor of a truly great director. His King Kong is under rated and will find recognition eventually.
Kangi Ska
At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
Ataahua
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jan 13 2010, 3:28am
Post #14 of 37
(528 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Tolkien fans come in all stripes.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Some like the movies, some don't. Some *gasp* prefer the movies to the books, while others like to discuss Tolkien with LOTR-movie fans even when they're not movie fans themselves.
It all adds to the rich mulch of discussion.
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
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Jan 13 2010, 3:37am
Post #15 of 37
(531 views)
Shortcut
|
I question motivation. I am asking someone to think and help me understand. There may be sound reasons for their position ; if so these need to be seriously discussed.
Kangi Ska
At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
Loresilme
Doriath
Jan 13 2010, 9:18pm
Post #16 of 37
(517 views)
Shortcut
|
One particular comment resonated with me - that having them on TNT every few months may have eroded their impact. Watching (and listening to), e.g., something like Arwen's vision in the uninterrupted midst of ROTK is a totally different experience than watching/hearing it sandwiched in between commercials, or in the background while washing the dishes. So if people have become accustomed to seeing snippets of the movies on TNT, then to those people it could become somewhat of a cultural joke, the Gollum-esque imitations, and all that. I wonder, is that what these folks are basing their opinions on now? Or have any of them sat down and watched it again, the way it was meant to be watched, the way they originally saw it - no commercials, no multi-tasking, with their attention span fully in the 'on' position ;-)?
It seemed, whichever viewpoint they had, quite a large number of people had pretty strong opinions about them. I think that says something in itself.
Cheers 
|
|
|
frodolives
Menegroth
Jan 14 2010, 6:25pm
Post #17 of 37
(475 views)
Shortcut
|
Even a cursory 5-minute Google search reveals countless critics that list the LOTR trilogy on their 10 best of the decade list:
Rolling Stone
Time
Entertainment Weekly (where the readers also voted it the best film of the decade -- far more than the author's anecdotal list of 60-70 people)
Metacritic (where Return of the King was the highest rated Best Picture winner of the decade)
Total Film
LoveFilm
InsideMovies
HitFlix
Honestly, it seems this guy formulated a theory and then culled together "facts" to fit it.
(This post was edited by frodolives on Jan 14 2010, 6:26pm)
|
|
|
Loresilme
Doriath
Jan 14 2010, 7:17pm
Post #18 of 37
(446 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Some folks just don't want to be confused with the facts ;-)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Thanks for setting the record straight! On a totally personal level, I just feel better knowing the films are in fact being recognized as they should be  . Thanks!
|
|
|
frodolives
Menegroth
Jan 14 2010, 7:57pm
Post #19 of 37
(441 views)
Shortcut
|
Thanks for setting the record straight! On a totally personal level, I just feel better knowing the films are in fact being recognized as they should be . Thanks! |
|
|
grforest
Registered User
Jan 14 2010, 8:20pm
Post #20 of 37
(454 views)
Shortcut
|
it certainly is "BS" or what you americans call it =p
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Gondolin
Jan 14 2010, 10:32pm
Post #21 of 37
(446 views)
Shortcut
|
As shown in the results of three critics' surveys noted on TORN in the past few weeks. For Time Out (London), FOTR ranked 14th, TT ranked 27th; and ROTK didn't appear. For MSN, LOTR as a whole ranked 6th. For The Village Voice, with more than 80 critics responding, LOTR didn't appear at all.
The last one is instructive: the Voice asked each critic to name just one film for the entire decade. The Salon author seems to have asked his 70 correspondents for the same thing. LOTR seems regularly to appear on critics' lists of the top ten film of the 2000s, but not usually at the top of those lists.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Silmarillion in the Reading Room, Aug. 9 - Mar 7. Please join the conversation!
This week: "Of the Ruin of Doriath".
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
frodolives
Menegroth
Jan 15 2010, 1:16am
Post #22 of 37
(431 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Depends on what you select as sources
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
If you elect to pay more attention to lists that don't include the films, then you will surely find the Salon.com article substantiated. If you do a basic Google search, you will find, as I did, that LOTR is on many Best 10 of the Decade lists. The fact that readers of Entertainment Weekly - the most read entertainment mag in the world - voted the trilogy as best film of the decade, would seem to indicate that Salon.com's claims are somewhat wide of the mark at least as far as the public is concerned. Also, we're talking about top 10 lists, not top 1 as the VV did. The Salon article was about top 10, not top 1, and yet it claimed that Rings wasn't on many top 10 lists. Balderdash.. When you have a film or series of films that is listed as one of the top 10 of an entire decade by the likes of Time, Rolling Stone, Entertainment Weekly, MSN and others... its very hard to take the Salon article seriously.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Gondolin
Jan 15 2010, 1:27am
Post #23 of 37
(424 views)
Shortcut
|
liars, damned liars & statisticians.
Kangi Ska
At night one cannot tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Gondolin
Jan 15 2010, 2:53am
Post #24 of 37
(441 views)
Shortcut
|
The Salon article was about top 10, not top 1, and yet it claimed that Rings wasn't on many top 10 lists.
Not so. He wrote:
Then again, this isn't about my dumb list, or Stephanie Zacharek's, or anybody else's; this was about the fact that when I reached out to 60 or 70 filmmakers, critics and bloggers I know, in search of entries for our Films of the Decade series, not one of them suggested Jackson's colossal trilogy as a personal favorite.
And if you check out that series, you will find that each writer discusses one film, not ten, as emblematic of the 2000s.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Silmarillion in the Reading Room, Aug. 9 - Mar 7. Please join the conversation!
This week: "Of the Ruin of Doriath".
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
How to find old Reading Room discussions.
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Gondolin
Jan 15 2010, 3:12am
Post #25 of 37
(431 views)
Shortcut
|
I wouldn't want to have to choose just one film as emblematic of a decade. On the other I suspect many critics figured that many of their peers would choose LOTR, leaving themselves free to carve a niche of their own.
Kinda like the joke where people are so confident their gal will win the election that they vote for the other guy... surprise!
Regardless, it does seem like an oversight; that's the trouble with first past the post contests in general.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Jan 15 2010, 3:14am)
|
|
|
|
|
1
