|
|
Post by ash2 on Dec 6, 2003 2:19:52 GMT -5
Do you like the books?
Did you like the movies?
Personally, I tried to read the books and was bored out of my mind. The characters just kept taking forever to get from place to place and nothing ever happened when they got there anyway.
Then I saw the first movie and I swear I wanted to kill myself. I don't think MST at it's best could have saved this movie. It was just as boring as the book. 3 hours of build up and in the end nothing had happened.
But that's my opinion, what's yours?
If you do like the books or the movie, please explain why because I just do not get it at all.
John
|
|
Spungfoo
Anteater
unstoppable juggernaut of evil
Posts: 14
|
Post by Spungfoo on Dec 6, 2003 3:46:58 GMT -5
Beware the fanatical fanboys...  I can understand not liking Tolkein's writing style due to the long-windedness, but you got to respect the man for the influence he's had on people. After all, if it weren't for him, we probably wouldn't have Dungeons and Dragons and Ren-Festivals. Uh, wait a minute... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by steve420 on Dec 6, 2003 9:06:29 GMT -5
I haven't read all of the books, but I did read most of the first one. It does seem kind of crazy trying to read everything without pulling your hair out.
I do like the movies though. I guess with the movies, it's like a hit or miss with people. Because the person will know before the movie that it'll be around 3 hours and a lot of people I know now, can't stand to sit in one place for so long. I didn't really think my girlfriend would have the attention span for these movies, since she always jokes about having ADD, but she doesn't.
3 hours is a lot for movies now, since there are even movies in theaters under 90 minutes. Lord of the Rings just seems like something you really have to get into to watch, because if I'm not in the mood for it, I'll get bored. When I watch, I'll be paying attention to just about everything and will be pretty impressed with these huge worlds. Having the right attitude and attention will most likely entertain you with Lord of the Rings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Dec 6, 2003 11:06:57 GMT -5
Haven't read the books and the movies are nice spectacles but I'm just not real interested in the whole Hobbit thing too much. I do agree about Tolkein's influance though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skyroniter on Dec 6, 2003 11:21:44 GMT -5
I read the books (ahem) many years ago and I think the movies are very well done allowing for a fair amount of artistic license. All the so and so begat so and so would not make for much of a movie. And they also had to make up a love interest angle. I look forward to part three. I've got to drive an hour to find a nice movie theater!
I do hope that Roger Corman is given the opportunity to interpret "The Hobbit" for the big screen. And hopefully with a budget 5-10k higher than he was used to working with. I'll bet he could find a part for the beast featured in 315 and 701. Maybe as Gollum?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Dec 6, 2003 13:47:07 GMT -5
I think it all has to do with your expectations going in.
Tolkien didn't set out to be an author. He was a professor of languages at Oxford. So if you're expecting a John Grisham or Harry Potter reading experience, you'll hate it. It's far too complex for that.
The first book (and movie) takes a looooong time to get into. Tolkien introduces something like 35 characters before anything of substance actually happens. But right about the halfway mark of "Fellowship", things start to take off and don't really stop until the end of the third book.
The expectation factor is the same for the movies. If you're expecting a cheesy Hollywood blockbuster, you'll hate it. Even if you think of it as 3 stand-alone movies, you'll probably be disappointed (since the first 2 don't have a proper ending).
It takes some patience and focus, but the payoffs are tremendous- kind of like watching mst3k.
For me, I love the books and the movies. But mainly because I remember my dad reading the books to me when I was a kid. So I've been looking forward to the films for years. That they have done the books' images, landscapes, characterizations, etc. justice is phenomenal to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Dec 7, 2003 17:33:04 GMT -5
I think the thing with Lord Of The Rings....and this goes for the movies as well as the books....is that they're art.
Do I like Rembrandt? Can't say that I've ever cared for his paintings. But was Rembrandt any good? Certainly better than I was, and he influenced so much of the art world that the natural consensus would be yes.
Do I like Tolkien's works? Oh yeah....
|
|
|
|
Post by hookemhorns on Dec 8, 2003 14:55:45 GMT -5
I tried reading The Hobbit several times years ago and gave up. There were just too many more interesting things for me to do at the time, and I had lost interest in science fiction and fantasy, not coincidentally, about the same time I noticed that girls were different from boys ....
I saw LOTR:FOTR and liked it somewhat, but felt that it was too long. But it piqued my curiosity, particularly after reading A Year at the Movies, and I made it through The Hobbit. I liked it a lot more, and have enjoyed it more each time I have picked it up again. I then made it through all 3 LOTR books and liked them all. I read the books before seeing The Two Towers last year, and it really helped me to enjoy the film more. I did not look at my watch once and wonder when the film would end, as I had done with FOTR. The 3 hours went by quickly!
I am currently reading some of the History of Middle Earth series, and they are laborious, particularly the Silmarillion and parts of Unfinished Tales. The Hisotry of Lord of the Rings is pretty good, though.
I am getting excited about Return of the King coming out next week. May have to miss work for it, but it's still not as much fun to me as Star Wars.
|
|
|
|
Post by hookemhorns on Dec 8, 2003 15:03:34 GMT -5
I forgot to mention ... if you are bored by these books, you are not alone, as my previou spost illustrates. They are not light reading and are not for everyone, particularly the Silmarillion, etc.
Tolkien is not a good writer, but is a great story teller and concocted a retelling of many of the old myths into new stories. You must remember also that these were written decades ago and in a style very different from what most current best sellers use. Tolkien spends a lot of time painting scenery and giving details that don't firectly advance the story, but you have to approach the book with a different mindset. He is trying to paint a picture of a new world for you. If you take your time and are patient, the books are fabulous. But it's understandable how some people don't like it.
Tolkien stated in one of the forwards to his books that many authors said that his works were long and boring, but that he thought the same of their works. To each his own ... the bottom line, though, is that if you don't like it, move on and find something else you like. You can't force yourself to like something, and life is too short to waste your time.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus 
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Dec 8, 2003 16:06:47 GMT -5
I'm not a fantasy person. I prefer Sci Fi.
I tired to read the books but couldn't get into it.
Watched Fellowship when it was in theaters and didn't think much of it. I watched Two Towers on DVD and thought it rocked. Kinda odd...
|
|
Trumpy
Tibby
Look at that crappy special effect-how'd they get away with that?
Posts: 62
|
Post by Trumpy on Dec 8, 2003 16:28:23 GMT -5
I tried reading the books after I saw the first movie but just couldn't get into them. But the movies...I consider them my favorites. The books just translate better on film. They are so enjoyable to watch and are truly epics. Movies like this aren't made anymore-- they just steal $9 and a few hours away from your life (I haven't seen a decent movie in months!)
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Dec 8, 2003 22:14:53 GMT -5
Oh, M Night's "Signs" is one of my favorite movies ever, but the release date escapes me. Signs was released late summer. I hated that movie. I thought it was one of the most idiotic things I've ever laid eyes on. Especially the way they defeated the aliens. That was the most illogical thing I've ever heard! Shame on you Shymalan! I shall never waist my money on you're crap again! At least Sixth Sense and Unbreakable were decent, but IMO nothing could redeam Signs. Other than that (and Jason X, but that's a whole 'nother story), I thought 2002 was pretty deacent. Great movies like Spider-Man, Changing Lanes, Red Dragon, and Panic Room and entertaining movies like Reign of Fire (don't laugh) and Undercover Brother. |
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Dec 9, 2003 1:13:23 GMT -5
"Signs" is more symblic than anything. It's not based on "fact". People that don't like that movie are just too short-sighted. It was about faith more than aliens. The dialogue and symbolism is more important in that movie than FX and "factual" things. I didn't care about the FX, the diologue was terrible (it would have been nicer had we been able to hear it too), I got the whole "faith" thing, the movie as a whole was just plain crap IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Dec 9, 2003 1:17:06 GMT -5
I haven't seen Signs, but that might be a tad harsh. Maybe they've made an informed decision based on their observation and have a different opinion.
Or maybe you're right on the money.
I feel that way about most people who like Forrest Gump. (Although "short-sighted" isn't harsh enough).
|
|
|
|
Post by GoldBootGirl on Dec 9, 2003 1:30:38 GMT -5
I think the thing with Lord Of The Rings....and this goes for the movies as well as the books....is that they're art. Do I like Rembrandt? Can't say that I've ever cared for his paintings. But was Rembrandt any good? Certainly better than I was, and he influenced so much of the art world that the natural consensus would be yes. Well said Afghan ;D I found both movies to be quite lovely to look at. But really didn't understand them very well. As was true with the books. Last I remember was reading it outloud with my parents when I very young. |
|
