smiling bandit writes:
> Tolkein never meant for people to study his books.
Cite? Tolkien was a professor of literature. It’s hard to believe that he thought that people wouldn’t study his books. And it’s hard to believe that you’ve thought very carefully about Tolkien, since you haven’t bothered to get straight the spelling of his name.
Blimey! Thanks for the considered views from (almost) everyone, though myles wins the Acadamy Award for Non Sequiturs for his entire post.
Fwiw, I am now inclined to watch the whole lot - at least the first and we’ll take it from there . . .
As to the rest, can I just hold the coats and watch ? 
Thank you, all!
I never liked the books that much (Tolkien could have used a rather more ruthless editor) but the movies were okay. Not the cinematic masterpieces some people claim them to be, and not really “adult” movies as I understand it (with a few exceptions, they are all too simplistically black and white). They really are just very well-made escapism with enough substance to keep you awake during the non-battle scenes.
Of course you’re entitled to your opinion, Wendell Wagner, but unless you’re willing to be more specific as to how you think the movies fail*, then all you’ve given us is an Argument From Authority: The movies are a “mess” because certain Tolkien scholars say they are. Tolkien scholars you don’t even name.
Anyone can play that game. I know some Tolkien scholars who think the movies successfully adapt the books. Stalemate.
*For example, while I like the movies, if you begin your complaint with Gimli’s demotion into comic relief, then I’ll be on the road with you for a while.
I can prove you wrong. I hadn’t read the books before seeing the film, and I certainly thought Fellowship of the Ring was an intensely emotional cinematic experience. I never heard the name “Boromir” in my life, but nearly 3 hours later I was crying my eyes out at his death. The more times I saw the movie, the more other parts became intensely emotional to me. I always tear up now at “what do I have to do?” and “I will take the ring” and many other parts.
I cried when the Elves died at Helms Deep in The Two Towers. Yes yes, I know. I don’t give a **** that they weren’t supposed to be there.
I’ve heard so many times now that Return of the King is ultra-emotional. In review after review after review after review. Dozens of reviews all say it. But it’s all earned emotion, because you’ve come to care about the characters.
I’ll be taking Kleenex.
Questions A-E: Yes, absolutely.
I’ve read the book twice, the first time 30 years ago. I always thought it could NEVER be turned into a movie or series of movies. Jackson proved me wrong. I have watched the first movie four times, and still love it. The two towers did less for me, but I can’t wait to see the final installment.
Errmmm maybe it would be a good idea to not post spoliers like who dies in a thread asking what are the movies like from someone who hasn’t read the books.
ummmm -
It depends.
I’ve read the books three times…but the last time was bored silly ten years ago. IMHO - and its my OPINION - Tolkien is not a very good writer, but he develops an EXTRAORDINARY sense of place. (I’m listening to the books on tape now as I drive into work, which is a much better experience for me). I used to be married to a Tolkein geek, and am currently married to a SF/Fantasy/Comic Book Geek - so most of my Geek is a transistive property.
The movies do a very good job IMHO of translating that place and feeling.
I majored in Film History, and I don’t think the movies are “classics” (once again, my opinion only) - though they have earned themselves a place in film history because of the scope of the project and their box office revenue. They are good. I’ve found them enjoyable. But both TT and ROTK (which I saw last night at a preview) were a little slow in spots - too many battles, not enough character (for that reason I really prefer the TT EE).
It does depend on what you like.
Rent the first one. See if you enjoy it. If not, you are out $5 and a little time. The three movies are very different from each other - Fellowship is rather slow and lyrical. TT is almost completely a war film (in its theatrical release). And ROTK is a film about individual heroics. Between the three there is something for everyone - action, comedy, drama, tragedy, great special effects, beautiful scenery and sets, a little romance, some good acting (and scenery chewing), great stunts, and one of the great classic plots - the Epic Quest. (And the hot men - dirt never looked so sexy).
It ain’t “American Beauty.” But it ain’t “Lethal Weapon 3” either.