sucks
been to LOFR in the evening with couple of office guys. Was really disappointed with the movie. The 1st half was good, but the second half was a real drag. Besides gonna have to wait for one whole year for the second part. 🙁
been to LOFR in the evening with couple of office guys. Was really disappointed with the movie. The 1st half was good, but the second half was a real drag. Besides gonna have to wait for one whole year for the second part. 🙁
LOTR
Well, the movie is really for people who have read the book. While some people claim that it can stand on its own (without having read the book), it doesn’t.
Plus you really got to see only 2/3 of the movie – the cinema edition here in India is close to 45 minutes shorter than the actual movie shown abroad. God knows why. I feel that having seen it on VCD months ago, I really got to see much more than the people who waited until they got to see it in the theatre.
Re: LOTR
I was never a fantisy lover. But I must admit that I really loved the stuff in the movie. I agree with fantasy is the movie was amazing. but the movie was dragged a lot towards the end.
Also I *did* notice the breaks in the middle. Coz the show started at 6:30 and it ended at 9:30 with the interval. So obviously they removed a big chunck of it. stupid guys.. how can they just cut stuff so that they can run more shows per days.
Well one things remains that it did not live up to the Hype that was created around it.
Re: LOTR
I also was not impressed with the ending. Sure, the director wants us to know that there are two more parts coming up, but one could have at least tried to end the movie gracefully. This way, people who have not read the book don’t know whether they are coming or going!
Re: LOTR
yep. any movie.. at the end should have some kind of ending.. you just cant stop it middle of nowhere.
If you look at Star Wars, even with so many episodes and all in wrong order, every one by itself is a masterpiece. I can watch any episode of star wars and still feel satisfied at the end of the movie. It still keeps me wanting to watch the rest, but at the same time enjoy the story line and the movie itself.
I must agree, LOTR is a piece of art. but It sure did not make me happy 😉
sounds like a very cheap trick to ensure you come for all parts of the trilogy..(is it a trilogy?)
Noella
Cheap trick
True. And extremely unnecessary as well. Unlike the StarWars fans, the LOTR fans *know* that there are going to be sequels because they have read the books, and these people are the primary audience for these movies.
This particular ending was so badly done, it reminded me of the days when we only had Doordarshan and they would take a single episode of StarTrek and split it across two Sundays – 30 minutes each. And the “cut” would be just about anywhere the felt like. Bah!
saw it and felt the same… since i can’t wait for 2 more years to see the end of it, i just bought the book (395/- bucks) and read it. grab it.
Re: LOTR
huh?
I’m not sure I understand this at all. What do you mean? *pulls hair in frustration* ( kallu’s hair. not mine 😉 )
I was never a fantisy lover. But I must admit that I really loved the stuff in the movie. I agree with fantasy is the movie was amazing.
Seen the book. Its way too fat dude..
I dont think I will ever make it till the end of the book 😉
Over to you
Sorry, couldnt read more without responding – can you suggest an alternate ending ?
Patience is a virtue ….
Deepu.
Re: Over to you
Why an alternate ending?
I was talking about *gracefully* ending it, like maybe with a voiceover explaining what is happening, instead of just seeing Frodo and Sam walking out of sight with any further explanation.
Re: Over to you
This particular ending was so badly done, it reminded me of the days when we only had Doordarshan and they would take a single episode of StarTrek and split it across two Sundays – 30 minutes each. And the “cut” would be just about anywhere the felt like. Bah!
….&…..
I was talking about *gracefully* ending it, like maybe with a voiceover explaining what is happening, instead of just seeing Frodo and Sam walking out of sight with any further explanation.
Sorry. No match. Besides that, I hardly believe anyone would have been a lot more pleased if there had been a voiceover. Anyone can see that frodo doesn’t want companions because of the way the ring corrupts people (such as with boromir), so he parts ways. He is pretty much forced to take Sam. LOTR-FOTR ends with the breaking of the fellowship, with each person having had a distinct path set for him and uncertainties settled by the course of events. Sorry, but I don’t believe a better ending could have been done. I think its the frustration of having to wait for the other 2 parts that hits those who haven’t read the book.
my 0.02
-k
hmmm.. not a cheap trick. They really had no choice on where to stop. The pace of the story gallops on from here. There ain’t a better place to stop.
And when a movie is based on a book, they can’t dictate terms too much. Because there will be too large a fan following which will get rather angry. And yes, LOTR is a trilogy. But LOTR is the 4th story in the world of tolkien.
Chronologically, they are:
a) The Silmarillion – Tolkien died halfway thru writing this, and his son finished writing it. Haven’t read this, so can’t comment myself.
b) War of the Rings – Tolekien died before he even wrote this. This promised to be better than the LOTR, and we know only bits and snatches through flashbacks and short stories
c) The Hobbit – Amazing read if you manage to cross the first 20 pages without tossing it out as a 250-page Noddy.
d) LOTR
-Fellowship of The Ring
-The Twin Towers
-The Return of the King
(And yes, It won’t be till part 3 that you’ll know what happens to frodo/sam. Book2 is almost completely about the remaining lot)
Other than this, there are many short stories and appendixes that you’ll read that tell you more about the land. This will give you a lot more info and is seriously amazing reading.
(Phew)
peace
k
Re: Over to you
I disagree. What you proclaim as “anyone can see” is decidedly not so in the movie. In fact, the only reason why *you* probably saw it was (tada!) because you read the book 😉
“I hardly believe anyone would have been a lot more pleased if there had been a voiceover.”
I am waiting with bated breath for the justification of that rather sweeping statement. 😉
“And when a movie is based on a book, they can’t dictate terms too much. Because there will be too large a fan following which will get rather angry.”
Unless, of course, the person playing a (relatively, in the scheme of things) minor role happens to be a big star, daughter of a bigger star, with a big fat fee that needs justification – in which case it is OK to fudge around with the scope of the character, enlarge it, dwell on it, etc. 😉
Hey, I *like* Liv Tyler, and can’t complain about seeing lots of her. But there *seems* to be a conflict here bwteen the book’s vision of her character, and what is shown in the movie!
There is of course more ‘deviation” than just this – for more details, I refer you to this authoritative post: http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=khorgath&itemid=12809
QED – what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander. If you can take liberties with a character, you can take a few liberties with the last few couple of minutes before the all-important credits start scrolling on the screen!
Re: Over to you
They do show boromir asking frodo for the ring. Heck. Not asking, demanding!
Also, Gandalf refuses to touch the ring on grounds that it would corrupt him. Bilbo being affected!!! Galadriel being affected(though you probably didn’t see this one the way I did). So many good people being affected so critically by the ring. And all these people who are so good at heart are still affected. Frodo notices all this, and he’s really scared of the ring. He even tried to get rid of the ring by giving it to Galadriel, but that wasn’t a possibility.
The last straw for him is when an ordinary person like boromir approaches him and tries to take it from him, one way or another. Thats kinda why he runs away. He even suspects Aragorn (though that doesn’t happen in the book. Aragorn doesn’t find him). All these are based on facts established in the movie. Am I wrong in assuming that people can string a line of reasoning from this?
>>>>”I hardly believe anyone would have been a lot more pleased if there had been a voiceover.”
>I am waiting with bated breath for the justification of that rather sweeping statement. 😉
ugh. I hate picking through words. What I meant was this. There aren’t that many people who wouldn’t have complained if the voiceover was there. The way I see it, they would have complained anyway.
Shit happens. Characters change, etc, but they couldn’t have possibly changed the broad storyline anymore. Or the post you referred to would have been far more scathing.
You’re really gonna keep bugging me about the voiceover aren’t ya 😉 OK. Maybe a voiceover would have been a good idea. But its not gonna make too much of a difference in the way people percieved the movie.
Consider this. You’ve read my analysis of the ending. Consider it the voiceover. Are you that much more pleased with the movie?
-k
Shit does not happen – and characters don’t change. SHit is made, and characters are changed.
A voiceover wouldn’t have improved things – the movie is badly done to death already. 😉
Give it up – you are in no position to judge the movie for the simple reason that you read the book before you saw the movie, and *knew* what to look for. Your mind was filling in the missing details.
As a *movie* (and not as a screen adaptation of a book), this thing is a disaster, and it appears that the people dishing out the Oscars thought so, too. Technical awards (4 of them – http://www.oscars.com/oscarnight/winners/winners_list.html), but none for the movie itself.
For the record – my 12 year old daughter, who hasn’t read the book, thought the movie was great. But that was because she thought that Frodo (Elijah) was cute. 😉
SHit is made, and characters are changed
Fair point about the shit but characters changing? Aren’t we really talking about the director’s interpretation of those characters within the bounds of cinematic and artistic license? If he saw Gimli as a semi-comic element and chose to portray him as such, well, good luck to him. I may not have seen it that way but a) that’s my perception of Gimli and b) i’m not making the movie!
When I watched the movie a lot of people in the audience had never read the book but that didn’t stop the movie from working for them. It seemed to make perfect sense to them- it wasn’t so abstruse that they lost the plot and it wasn’t so simplistic to seem like a morality tale either. Conversely, I’ve read the book too, several times, but that didn’t stop me from thoroughly enjoying the experience.
Your turn.
“I loved the movie as much as the book if not more.There were the odd character changes but even these were I feel whithin bounds. This is inevitable in a movie whose making garnered so much attention leading to multiple egos clashing every which way. Whithin these restrictions I feel the director has done an admirable job. I do not feel the ending could have been modified too much beyond its present parameters. I cannot concieve a more graceful ending than frodo and sam moving off on their own.A voice over might have been helpful in the end but I feel it would have somehow spoilt the mood the movie left you in …. as if it were trying to justify the ending it left u in by explaining it. But of course I am speaking as one who has read the books so I might not be the best judge of it.”
– Passinthru
Quoting here just to keep things in context.
I took about two years to read the lot. At least you won’t need any further preparation for TOEFL after you’re done with it.
And yes, the movie sucked. It wouldn’t have made any sense if I hadn’t read the book.
Hi to all people with 12 year old daughters who thought Elijah was cute, and liked a movie on the basis of that. I don’t hold it out against them for that. I am one of the many people who hasn’t read the book and went to watch the movie, and not for watching cute guys either. And I am guessing that gives me a certain amount of objectivity in making sense of the movie purely as a lover of movies.
It was a minutely and immaculately constructed movie that treads the path of many a great epic movie made before it. And please, before anyone starts nitpicking and says, “Ah ! so it is just another big budget film “, let me say that the eventual role of a movie is to tell a spanking good yarn. Tolkien did. And I am sure he would not have wanted the movie to do any different. And at least in that respect, the movie lives up to what even he could have wanted from it. Anyone in search of the next social revolution in a movie, please sit at home and watch Citizen Kane and How Green Was My Valley for the 200th time.
In the tradition of good books that have been made into great movies (The Shining , The Fountainhead , How green was my valley , The English Patient , Beloved , ….), it has been observed that it is only by taking a certain amount of creative license has a great book ever been brought to screen. One could also argue that it would be necesary to do so, because the canvas that a book and the silver screen offer an artist are of radically different kinds. Certain metaphors redily apparent in writing cannot be metamorphosed onto screen. Just imagine making a movie of Ulysses by James Joyce. Universaly acclaimed as a literary masterpiece, on screen a faithful adaptation would it would involve a man roaming about a city for the better part of the day. It may be argued that only the most trivial of stories can be brought to screen with absolute congruency. Cinderella was the last good one I remember.
Onto the subject at hand….I see that the opponent has rather conflicting opinions on hand (and in his head). Starting out with a relatively sedate statement like “voiceover explaining what is happening”, (though I am utterly baffeled by the someone who needs an explanation about something as obvious as the ending. I mean hey, if you have been watching the movie you might just realise that Frodo, having realised that the felloship has pretty much gone as far as it could and realising it to be a spent force, sets out on his own. His friend manages to tag along only because of extenuatiing situations….), he progresses to say that eventually “A voiceover wouldn’t have improved things – the movie is badly done to death already”. Come on, make up your mind….do you want a voice over or not ? Where exactly did you think that the movie got obscure ? Was it ok till the very end and did it get
Also make up your mind about what you are criticizing. Are you upset about the fact that the movie was cut to fit indian timings or are you upset about the overall movie ? If it is the cuts, that is hardly the movie’s fault. And if you didn’t like the movie, come out and say so and say it out loud about which part of it you really didn’t understand….if you have the conviction do so. A wishy-washy statement from a person who needs just 5 rebuttals to revise his opinions is hardly worth the weight you think your statements deserve. If you want to be taken seriously, please believe in yourself first. Vacillating opinions are worse than no opinion at all.
As you so eloquently pointed out, the primary target audience of this movie is the set of people who have already read the books. So be it. Maybe they will have a different perspective of the events in the movie. As a member of the complement of the aforementioned set, I can say that the movie is absolutely self actualised. It needs no supporting book to complement it, though a read of the book I am sure offers a different perspective on the events, which is, for fear of repeating myself, not a wrong thing.
As a rolicking story, Peter Jackson has done a splendid job. The movie has a flow and a definite and coherent storyline. In keeping in tradition, none of the individual characters have been played up and the story has been given prominence. The movie is a cinematic achievement in terms of classic storytelling. Anyone in search of anything more avant-garde, you always have Krystozf Kieslowski or Ingmar Bergman or Frederico Fellini or David Lynch.
In the mean time for us middle grounders, who simply ask to be told a good story and are not so stupid that we need a voiceover at the end explaining what it was that we just saw, this movie will do just fine. More than just fine.I could say a lot more about the movie, but I see no point in explaining its beauty to someone who is so totally blind to it. Maybe there is something in twelve year old children that we lose as we grow up.
-Badri
LOL! Who let you out of the cage, “Badri”? 😉
Hey man, take it easy – Tolkien has written enough to last us three lifetimes, you don’t really have to add more to that! 😀
You seem to be most upset that I do not agree with the subject of your PhD thesis, but get a grip on yourself – nowhere did I say that I *hated* the *books*! And nowhere did I say that I didn’t understand them, either.
I have read the books (in fact have one or the other on my Palm Vx at any given time, as Kalyan can probably verify for you), and love them as much as the next guy, but if I don’t like the *movie*, I have a right to say so, and state my reasons for it, right?
However, I am as qualified as a movie critic as you are, and no matter how much you pound your head against my castle wall – I am not likely to change my mind that this is a movie that isn’t going to be easily understood by the vast majority of poeple who have not read the book(s).
Unfortunately, in zealot land, not liking what you like is termed as high treason, something I am quite used to facing where I come from. 😉
Here, let me say it one more time, so that you don’t get any sleep tonight – I didn’t like the movie, and I think that unless you have read the book, you will have to see it thrice before you get all the finer points of the story. I also believe that the screenplay has been deliberately ballooned in parts and totally starved in others – not for the sake of avoiding oversaturation, but to give more importance to parts that cost the studio more than others. And I *also* believe that we are going to see more of this in the next two movies.
And *nothing* you say (in your next thesis, coming soon to an anonymous post near you) is going to change that stand of mine. 😉
Give it up – you are in no position to judge the movie for the simple reason that you read the book before you saw the movie, and *knew* what to look for. Your mind was filling in the missing details.
Excuse me. I don’t quite agree. While its true that I see things differently from you because I’ve read the book, I have an advantage when I analyse what parts of the movie were necessary and what wasn’t. Infact, I automatically go into critic mode as I don’t think it can possibly match up to the original. Infact, me and my brother were practically chanting the lines as they went by and cringing when something was missed out or was done differently.
But at the end of that, you do have to give it a fair assessment. No point in FUDing.
Everyone will probably see it in a different way anyhow.
The point being that, yes, I *knew* what to look for, and that is why I’m probably in a better position to judge the movie.
Ah, and at what point exactly did I say I *hadn’t* read the books? 😉
You can (at the most) judge the *adaptation*, having read the book, but you cannot judge the *movie* as someone who hasn’t.
And in terms of being on-topic in this discussion – that is what this is all about.
I, however, choose to judge the movie by deliberately ignoring the book.
I loved the music, I loved the photography. I loved *some* of the acting, I drooled over Liv Tyler.
But I *didn’t* like the movie.
Now which part of “I *didn’t* like the movie” would you like me to explain to you again? 😉
Hey!!! this is getting pretty tiring. I do *not* object to your not liking the movie. My opposition was never to your opinion on the movie. It was to certain ideas you were proposing that I supplied counter-arguments. Please read what was supplied before assuming that I have a problem with you not liking the movie. I don’t want to take this any more personal, so thats about it.
ciao
-k
I have no sweat with your taking issue with my suggesting that the movie could have been made easier to digest for people who haven’t read the books.
But let’s bury this here – there are other arenas. 😉
amen to that.
speaking of arenas…..hmmmm….quake3 anyone?
heheheh
-k
Not quite. You do have to prepare for the TOEFL in a different way. Its not really much use “learning” English just before the exam, because it doesn’t help. OTOH, it does help understanding and getting familiar with the pattern, and following various guidelines about the “right” essay, and such.
I took ~2 weeks to read it myself. I had about a month within which to read a friend’s copy.
As for the movie — I liked some bits of it — the depiction of rivendale, etc. And yes, I didn’t like many things too. O-well.
ugh. In wanting to end this, I didn’t read this properly yesterday.
I have no sweat with your taking issue with my suggesting that the movie could have been made easier to digest for people who haven’t read the books.
I don’t wanna start the whole thing again, and I’m not flaming you, as you claim at http://www.atulchitnis.com . But please do give a small effort to understand what people say. Things aren’t about having the parting shot. This has been a pretty horrible waste of my time.
To quote the same issue in words similar to ones you’ve been using:
What part of “I don’t have an issue with your suggesting that the movie could have been made easier to digest for people who haven’t read the books” don’t you understand ??
“and I’m not flaming you”
Yow! If you look *carefully* you will see that you aren’t the only one replying to me in this thread. So how come you assume I am talking about you? 😉
From the “About” section on my site:
This site contains stuff I write, think or otherwise create. It does not represent stuff you write, think or otherwise create. It represents my opinions. It is possible that these clash with yours. If you feel that this is unfair, tough luck. This is what the web is all about – the ability to put up a place in cyberspace and call it “mine”. You are free to put up your own site and call it “yours”.
“But please do give a small effort to understand what people say.”
I completely understand what people are trying to say – the problem is that I am not given the same courtesy. I am sure all of you went Le Freak seeing the movie, but grant others the courtesy of a different opinion.
Unlike you, I looked at the movie from a *movie* perspective, not an adaptation. I didn’t like it. That may be an affront to your sensibilities, but am I not entitled to an opinion here?
“Things aren’t about having the parting shot.”
Correct. And I conceded the last one to you (“…Quake3…”) by not getting in the last word, yet you triggered this again by replying to your own post.
What’s the issue here? This thread is no longer about LOTR, is it?
Sush – you hadn’t flamed me before – but *this* post of yours *was* a flame, and I suggest that you rewind to the previous end of the thread – about different arenas – which would have given you the last word anyway.
accepted. My last post _was_ a flame. But thats kinda bcos I felt you were unnecessarily and unjustifiably pointing fingers and dragging issues. Now that that is clarified( I do hope it is), I don’t really feel the same way. And I don’t believe in taking last digs either. This isn’t one, and nor was the quake3 one. That was sort of to end it all. I’m done.
peace
-k
to Khorgath you say
“Give it up – you are in no position to judge the movie for the simple reason that you read the book…”
and to badri
“..this is a movie that isn’t going to be easily understood by the vast majority of poeple who have not read the book(s)…”
with due respect, sir… you HAVE read the book(s)… so how is it that YOU can stand in judgement of the movie at all? how is it that YOU clearly know how anyone who hasn’t read the book will see the movie?
Also, at the end of the film, Frodo says “I will go to Mordor alone…” and Sam Wise says “Then i will go with you…”
Who would want a voice-over explaining THAT out to him? It is clear that the Fellowship has disbanded, that Frodo has realised that it is now upto him to go to Mordor and destroy the ring… that Sam goes with him out of friendship… out of not wanting to break his word… Frodo chooses to go alone, for the ring corrupts everyone else… I got that…. and i HAVEN’T read the book…
Perhaps you crib about the movie being too abrupt for one who “doesn’t know what happens next”….? PLEASE!! It’s not like ANYBODY thought THAT’s how the story ends… EVERYONE knows there’s more coming… trying to cushion that could mean giving more of the later story away… which would again have you up in arms for “interfering with the book”….
As for other “deviations” in the characters… characters are open to interpretation… so let’s not go there…
parts of the screenplay being “bloated || starved”… and this might come as a shocker… what if the director just saw the story that way…? that’s his point of view? maybe it hasn’t much to do with the cost to the studios…?
no one’s trying to get you to change your mind… it’s just that the reasons you state are a bit…. well, you know…
– caleb
btw… i doubt if badri will be losing much sleep over your not liking the movie… sorry to disappoint…
KALYAN..why don’t you retitle this thread to Atul under attack..;)
Naaaahhhh, just some friendly ribbing. You know how it is – people never pick on people their own size 😉
anyways atul is very much used to this kind of stuff
hahahaha
😉