|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Jan 25 2017, 4:31pm
Post #1 of 48
(4643 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"I doubt that Tolkien would have even watched part one (AUJ) to the end.."
|
Can't Post
|
|
Interview with german Tolkien expert Frank Weinreich:
https://www.3sat.de/...en/190278/index.html
Sir Peter Jacksons "Herr der Ringe"- und "Hobbit"-Verfilmungen haben dem Stoff in den letzten Jahren nochmals Auftrieb verschafft. Wie hätten Tolkien die Verfilmungen gefallen?
"In den 1960er Jahren gab es schon einmal den Plan, 'Der Herr der Ringe' zu verfilmen. Es existierte sogar ein Drehbuch. Dieses Drehbuch hat Tolkien gelesen, erbost abgelehnt und im Rahmen dieser Ablehnung eine recht detaillierte Liste von Anforderungen erstellt, die er an einen Film hatte, der seine Zustimmung gefunden hätte. Wenn man diese Liste durchgeht, die besonders darauf besteht, dass der hintergründige Geist des Werkes gewahrt bleiben müsse, dann kann man sagen, dass Jackson mit seiner "Ring"-Erzählung eine Menge richtig gemacht hat. Insbesondere die Bildgewalt, mit der Jackson Mittelerde entstehen lässt, hätte den Weltenschöpfer Tolkien mit mancher gravierender Storyschwäche sicher so versöhnt, dass er den Film wahrscheinlich gemocht hätte. Was diesen hypertrophierten Metzel-Hobbit angeht, den Jackson in ganz lockerer Anlehnung an die Buchvorlage gedreht hat, so bezweifle ich, dass sich Tolkien auch nur Teil Eins zu Ende angeschaut hätte."
(This post was edited by Silmaril on Jan 25 2017, 4:43pm)
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Jan 25 2017, 4:35pm
Post #2 of 48
(4483 views)
Shortcut
|
Sir Peter Jacksons "Lord of the rings" - and "Hobbit" filmings have got the material during the last years again impetus. How would have Tolkien liked the filmings?
"In the 1960s there was already once the plan, 'Lord of the rings' to film. There existed even a screenplay. Tolkien has read this screenplay, infuriates rejected and within the scope of this refusal a surely detailed list of demands provided which he had to a film which would have met with his approval. If one goes through this list which insists particularly on the fact that the cryptic mind of the work must remain protected, then one can say that Jackson with his "Ring" story has made an amount right. In particular the picture power with which Jackson lets arise middle earth would have so reconciled the world creator Tolkien with some serious story weakness certainly that he would have probably liked the film. What concerns this hypertrophic Slaughter-Hobbit which Jackson has turned in quite loose support of the book presentation, I doubt that Tolkien would have watched even part One to the end."
(This post was edited by Silmaril on Jan 25 2017, 4:42pm)
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
Jan 25 2017, 5:13pm
Post #3 of 48
(4467 views)
Shortcut
|
I doubt that Tolkien would have even watched FOTR to the end.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Jan 25 2017, 5:38pm
Post #4 of 48
(4480 views)
Shortcut
|
There existed even a screenplay.
It was a film treatment (a present tense prose piece, usually about 40 pages) not a screenplay (present tense description of action with dialogue, each page about one minute of screen time.)
What always amazed me about Tolkien's reaction to the Zimmerman treatment was that he actually took the time to sit down, read it, and write a lengthy reply to legendary mega-geek Forrey Ackermann (Letter #210) rather than tearing it into teeny-tiny pieces, throwing it in the dustbin, and setting it on fire. What saintly forebearance!
So I kinda think if he'd been invited to view one of the films Tolkien would have sat through the entire thing if only to be polite. It's not like he ever sat through something "ludicrously bad" "as a courtesy" before. (See letter #267.) Of course, then he did have the company of the very lovely Ava Gardner ("easy and agreeable, and we got on quite well") so maybe that made a difference. So maybe if Jackson made sure Liv Tyler or Evangeline Lilly was seated next to him...
(BTW, I had a lot of fun using an online translator to translate the passage back and forth into various languages. Thanks for that! It was hilarious!)
******************************************
“Begone, foul dwimmerlaik, lord of carrion! Leave the dead in peace!"
"Come not between the Nazgul and his prey! Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to the houses of lamentation, beyond all darkness, where thy flesh shall be devoured, and thy shrivelled mind be left naked to the Lidless Eye."
"Do what you will; but I will hinder it, if I may."
"Hinder me? Thou fool. No living man may hinder me!"
"But no living man am I! I am Eowyn, daughter of Theodwyn!”
"Er, really? My mother's name was Theodwyn, too!"
"No way!"
"Way!"
"Wow! Let's stop fighting and be best friends!"
"Cool!!"
-Zack Snyder's The Return of the King
|
|
|
lurtz2010
Rohan
Jan 25 2017, 6:56pm
Post #5 of 48
(4449 views)
Shortcut
|
|
How could he not have sat through FOTR?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It's as good as it could possibly have been.
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Gondor
Jan 25 2017, 7:13pm
Post #6 of 48
(4446 views)
Shortcut
|
No Tom Bombadill, no Barrow-dows, no the old forest, Arwen meeting the company instead of Glorfindel, no Saruman of many colors. I don't think Tolken would have like this.
|
|
|
lurtz2010
Rohan
Jan 25 2017, 9:26pm
Post #7 of 48
(4428 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well he would be a fool to miss those things
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
They're just side adventures that hardly relate to the main plot and realistically wouldn't work in a single FOTR film. As for Glorfindel and Saruman's cloak, that's just silly.
|
|
|
Ostadan
Rivendell
Jan 25 2017, 10:55pm
Post #8 of 48
(4419 views)
Shortcut
|
Judging from his letter to Forry, Tolkien well understood the reasons for which the Bombadil episodes would be omitted. I am not sure what his reaction would have been to the big-blockbuster scenes or some of the characterizations; but on the other hand, I can imagine that he would have seen some bits and said something like "Oh, that's rather good, isn't it!"
Eru only knows what he would have made of the attempts to imitate his Elvish, though!
I cannot guess what he would have made of The Hobbit, really. It really is not much like the original, in tone, or detail, or emphasis. But still has some nice bits. In his letter to Forry, he objected to Zimmerman anticipating elements and bringing them in too early. This is one of the greater problems in the Hobbit films, I think. The use of Azog in the first film as this ongoing nemesis is an example. Jackson's Hobbit flattens the rising action of the book into constant action (once he has spent far too long getting underway), and Tolkien (who wrote in one of his letters that this rising tone, falling 'back again' at the end, is a deliberate feature) would not seem likely to approve.
|
|
|
Silmaril
Rohan
Jan 26 2017, 8:24am
Post #9 of 48
(4383 views)
Shortcut
|
and it's the closest book to movie adaption, Viggo Mortensen also said that.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jan 26 2017, 10:05am
Post #10 of 48
(4378 views)
Shortcut
|
Like Darkstone, I think that he might have done, if invited, partly from courtesy, partly from curiosity. And I think that natural courtesy and reserve would have stopped him leaving before the end, even if he was unhappy with what he was seeing.
Questions like this come up from time to time, and inevitably most of us end up reacting along the lines of our own reactions to the films. As someone who loves both books and films I'd say that if invited at the outset to have some involvement with all the films he might have accepted. And if so, I expect there would have been some aspects of the adaptation and some passages in the writing at which he would have raised an eyebrow - or more.
But there's so much more that goes into a film. I suspect that the artist in him could not fail to have been impressed - moved, even - by the sight of so many talented artists, modelmakers, technicians, musicians and actors devoting so much time and effort into visualising his story, and treating it with such care (even if their take on it wasn't always his).
But then again, that's just me. We'll never know.
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
Dipling
Lorien
Jan 26 2017, 11:57am
Post #11 of 48
(4365 views)
Shortcut
|
If Tolkien would be alive, PJ would definitely invite him to be part of his team, maybe as adviser. Or ask him about his opinion, before filming.
So now, we cannot say anything, what he would or wouldn't like.
|
|
|
wizzardly
Rohan
Jan 27 2017, 5:15pm
Post #12 of 48
(4250 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think it goes without saying really...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I never got the impression that Tolkien was the sort of guy who would be so captivated by ludicrously extended action sequences, and burping and farting as today's modern audiences are.
|
|
|
imin
Valinor
Jan 27 2017, 5:45pm
Post #13 of 48
(4241 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I think he would have watched it to the end
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I don't think he would have liked everything in the film but out of respect would have stayed to the end.
I think if he were alive at the time of filming they would have got him on board which would probably have made him feel better - so long as they listened to him.
Some things he would like such as the amount of work that goes into making a film, especially one of PJ's Middle-earth films, i also think he would feel similar to his Son, in that they don't have the heart or spirit of the books (essentially what C. Tolkien said).
All posts are to be taken as my opinion.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jan 27 2017, 10:41pm
Post #14 of 48
(4214 views)
Shortcut
|
whether Tolkien would have liked any of PJ's movies - or the Rankin/Bass film, or that other "Fellowship" cartoon that came out in maybe 1980? I remember seeing it in the theater, but never did see the RoTK sequel to that one. Anyway, no one ever wonders if Mark Twain or Jane Austen would have liked any movie version of their stories, because movies aren't made for the authors. They're made for fans, some will hit and some will miss. Tom Clancy claims to hate EVERY movie ever made from his books, and as the directors have said, they are sure he cries all the way to the bank about it. Not sure what Stephen King thinks, as I'm not a fan of his work; but as I said, movies are made for fans of both movies in general and the books they are based on.
I'd say I've entered my second childhood, but I never left the first!
|
|
|
LittleHobbit
Lorien
Jan 28 2017, 1:09pm
Post #16 of 48
(4139 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Tolkien purists strikes again!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
And it's time for another PJ's Hobbit-hating fest! YAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! I'm so excited! 
(This post was edited by LittleHobbit on Jan 28 2017, 1:16pm)
|
|
|
wizzardly
Rohan
Jan 28 2017, 6:37pm
Post #18 of 48
(4096 views)
Shortcut
|
to those individuals who love and respect Tolkien, and prefer adaptations that most accurately captures the original spirit and intent of the original stories. Tolkien's opinion, if he were here to give it, would, I imagine be of interest to a great many, just as Christopher's is, otherwise there wouldn't be articles dedicated to it, and forum posts such as this.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
Jan 29 2017, 1:36am
Post #20 of 48
(4039 views)
Shortcut
|
any opinion on whether J.R.R. Tolkien would have liked any of the movies is purely conjecture - and in your case, very biased conjecture. And I don't personally think conjecture is relevant, least of all to a director. They tend to make the movie they WANT to make. The final product may be shaped by focus groups who preview the film and offer criticism. To a director this criticism is far more relevant.
I'd say I've entered my second childhood, but I never left the first!
|
|
|
wizzardly
Rohan
Jan 29 2017, 2:34am
Post #21 of 48
(4036 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well yes, that's what I said...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Tolkien's opinion would be relevant to myself as well as others (mostly outside these forums) who share a similar affection for the written works. An appreciation for Tolkien's literature is certainly not a prequesite to enjoy the movies, and from what I have observed,those with less affection for the book, tend to be the movies biggest defenders.
(This post was edited by wizzardly on Jan 29 2017, 2:36am)
|
|
|
LittleHobbit
Lorien
Jan 29 2017, 3:19am
Post #22 of 48
(4035 views)
Shortcut
|
says she has been a fan of (and 'loves') the book for more than 50 years. So in no way one's ''affection'' for these movies is disproportionate to one's ''affection'' for the book. Of course, that's just one example. I bet there are more folks who enjoy both Tolkien's book and PJ's ''bloated mess piece of garbage'' trilogy.
(This post was edited by LittleHobbit on Jan 29 2017, 3:21am)
|
|
|
Ettelewen
Rohan
Jan 29 2017, 3:31am
Post #23 of 48
(4027 views)
Shortcut
|
I first read The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit in the late '70s, with uncountable rereadings since then. And I love the movie interpretations as well.
Happily NARF since then! 
|
|
|
wizzardly
Rohan
Jan 29 2017, 3:40am
Post #24 of 48
(4019 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, there will always be exceptions...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
However,It's what I have observed.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Jan 29 2017, 8:57am
Post #25 of 48
(4008 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Tolkien's opinion would be of interest to anyone who enjoys his work....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... of course it would.
The problem is that none of us knows what his opinion would be. We can take his existing writing - letters and so on - as an indication (as Darkstone did in his post above). Or we can just shoot from the hip without reference to anything and say 'Tolkien would have agreed with me." Tolkien has been dead over forty years. So much has changed since then and he, if he could have lived until now (he couldn't, of course), would have adapted to those changes as we all do. What he wrote in the 1950s and 60s was written in a particular context at a particular time. And maybe the years would have confirmed him in those opinions and maybe they would have modifed them. We don't know. We'll never know. Arguing over who has Tolkien on his/her side is just plain silly.
What I can tell you, for certain, as someone who has loved Tolkien's books for over 50 years, is that loving the books can go hand-in-hand with loving the films and appreciating all the skill and care that went into their making. I can think of several posters here and Tolkien-loving friends in the real world who would say the same.
For still there are so many things
that I have never seen:
in every wood and every spring
there is a different green. . .
|
|
|
|
|
1
