I do get pissed off at too much negativity. It does get draining sometimes. I like to balance my posts, something positive, something negative, otherwise I feel like a moaning minnie. I will always defend PJ when it comes to LOTR, and I will take on all-comers no matter how big they are, or how tough they are, or how much their kilt gapes in a stiff breeze..I am made of sterner stuff.
Carchroth I think what RA was saying was that your posts tend to focus on the negativity in others posts rather than putting forward the positive case for the defence.
Its not a matter of listing things you think were good so much as giving reasons for why.
You state for example that the opening 45 minutes were close to perfection- why? What about them is it you think captures the books opening? How do you feel about the use of the prolouge and the flashbacks? Those sort of things.
And Figgs I can assure you my kilt is under full manual control.
My skin is quite thick enough thank you Stu. I am not taking anything personally. I am simply disagreeing with some of the negativity. Maybe I could go into more depth sometimes, but it does seem like it would be like banging my head against a concrete wall, with spikes on it.
I am not blind to the full picture. I find myself agreeing with many of the complaints. But I do think quite a few people on here have yet to pick out anything they liked. Or when they do, it is always "I liked this, BUT that isnt enough because blahblahblah sucked".
And I did give reasons did I not petty? Well, apart from the one thing you picked out... Ok, I liked the opening scenes because of the slow pacing. The atmosphere in Bag End. The songs. Bilbo fainting made me chuckle. Gandalf walking into the same chandelier. Frodo going down to meet Gandalf. The 'good morning' meeting being word for word, almost.
The flashbacks were the weaker part I think. I guess it would have been a much better scene if we could actually have seen Smaug. But obviously that was decided against, with good reason.
It is a lot easier to remember the details of the parts that were not so good than to remember the bits you will love the most when watching it on dvd.
I think your last sentence Carcharoth rather nails thing on the head, probably more so on a forum.
In fact does Tolkien not say something similar about Bilbo's time in Rivendell?- that there is litle to say because nice things never take much time to recount.
I reckon inevitably there will always be a focus on the things that dont sit right with folks more than the bits that do. There are only so many times and ways we can collectably praise the cinematography, or the costumes ect.
Its in the more contentious bits the debates tend to happen.
On the points you make about the opening- I could have done without any of the flashbacks as I dont think they are actually necessary.
Its kind of odd that Pj seems to be a creature of extremes- I felt the opening of FotR was far too rushed- and in the commentary they speak about the need to create and maintain a pace, to keep things moving.
Yet in TH the opposite is true.
In the case of TH whilst I felt giving the opening the time it needed and the slower pace was crucial the flashbacks stretched it too much and were to indirectly connected to the bit of the story we were seeing.
PJ often makes the choice, wrongly I believe, of giving the viewer a lot more information about what is going on than the main characters have at the time. I prefer to discover things with the characters, not be primed with info they dont have before I even get to know them.
"I am simply disagreeing with some of the negativity."
Well to be fair, you did say I was a negative person and must have an easy life because I criticize Jackson and the decisions he's made. Water under the bridge.
" Ok, I liked the opening scenes because of the slow pacing. The atmosphere in Bag End. The songs. Bilbo fainting made me chuckle. Gandalf walking into the same chandelier. Frodo going down to meet Gandalf. The 'good morning' meeting being word for word, almost."
But I'm glad you've opted to stay and discuss things. I agree the chandelier was a nice touch as was the Good morning speech. And I've always loved the atmosphere of the Lotr films. I think the Hobbit captured this atmosphere pretty well in a lot of places.
If it weren't for the negativity half of the pro Peej posters would remain lurkers.
Just to maintain the crabbit quota here, as is my duty- I have an issue with the praise the good morning speech is getting- I dont think PJ really gets, or enjoys Tolkiens stlye of humour.*
Whilst I too was glad to have the good moring speech its missing its final lines regarding the use of 'good morning'- Bilbo's final use of it and Gandalfs relpy along the lines of "now you mean the morning will only be good once I'm gone." I also missed the pardon part of the conversation, which ends with Gandalf telling Bilbo he will give him what he has asked for twice already, to which Bilbo says "I beg your pardon but I havent asked you for anything" and Gandalf replies, "yes you have, three times now, my pardon."
Lose the prololgue, or better still Azog, and plenty time for a fuller version of the conversation.
*Like in TT when Eomer meets Aragorn and co and Gimli demands his name and Eomer says "I would cut off your head master Dwarf, if it stood but a little higher from the ground", never understood why PJ cut out of that line the funny bit, "I would cut off your head master dwarf, beard and all, if it stood but a little higher from the ground".
The beard bit is part of the rythmn of the language, it doesnt scan as well without it and it adds a witty insult, you can all but hear his men laughing in the background as he says it. Choices like that in the scripts I will never understand- did they really need to save time so much they had to lose three words from a great line?
I never understood why that all whole conversation Aragorn and Eomer have is missing.
I agree Recovery and Tyrant. There are often times that PJ just cuts the punchline out of a joke, or the heart of a conversation out of some dialogue. Then he seems to think something is missing and has a Great Goblin fall out of the sky and crush some dwarves, or some forced recovery dialogue afterward. But then again, maybe PJ just understands how to give an audience a great experience better than a tried bestselling author and professor in multiple languages, most of which he made up. As for the positivity, I used to hold PJ in high esteem, until I visited this site. Petty and others (even PJ lovers) convinced me by their strong and weak arguments to reconsider my stance. I know beleive with all my heart that PJ destroyed a work of art at worst and at best missed a grand opportunity to tell someone else's story as faithfully as possible in another medium and decided to tell his own. That being said, I think that when PJ did his finest work (the costumes, framing and cinematography, models, fleshing out of cultures and anything to do with WETA) where the times when he stuck closest to the source material. I often don't talk about these things for two reasons, one of which has already been put forth. That is, it's harder to talk about something as intangible as a good moment in a movie. You can't grade it or place it on a scale and measure it. It just is. The other reason is that as beautiful and wondrous as the islands are, it's extremely difficult to see the Hawaii in the middle of the Pacific Ocean from space. There was much garbage PJ added to LOTR and that makes the good parts even more enjoyable but difficult to appreciate given the entire trilogy (and now TH trilogy). This place has been so important in allowing me a place to work through and come to my own conclusions and it feels great to be able to express my thoughts on these films without getting weird stares. That said, I'm often just a cheerleader and barely contribute anything more than negativity. Sorry. :P
It is true that it has been a lot easier for me to grump about what I don't like about the Jackson treatment of JRRT stories than - to shout out praises for what I do like to be sure. To this point I have given him very little praise. That is true no doubt because the reason I came to this forum was my Angst and great disappointment in the treatment of TH and the years of unexpressed dissatisfaction and regret of the Unnecessary diminishing revisions in TLOTR by PJ&co. Now that I have released a bit of that toxicity,(not that that well will ever run any where near dry I fear)...
I will now try to say something nice... There certainly is praise to be given for his work for sure. I find it easier to offer praise for LOTR than TH myself. PJ does often times portray a nice setting and feel for a scene. His casting is for the most part very good I feel. The Actors were great for the most part in doing their jobs. His choice of the Landscapes to shoot a scene in is very good. I believe that if the movies were without audio that I would still enjoy watching them( perhaps more so in many parts ;). When he chooses to stay on the path of being a director rather than acting as a writer he has done some very wonderful scenes. I think he has shown that he can, if he chooses, transform the written word to the screen very well. On some levels I have really loved seeing these great stories and settings put into film, something I have wished for for decades and decades.
He captured the feeling of the Shire admirably, and the visuals of Rivendell were not so unlike what I see in my own mind. His treatment of Moria fits really well with what I pictured in my head ( until the Orcs started climbing like spiders down the walls. The Balrog was a good match to my own imaginings as well. To this point in TFOTR I was pretty impressed truthfully. Sure there had been some major Diminishing of JRRs great story( I am trying really hard not to whine and give examples of the things that were messed up) but still, I was truthfully impressed.
After they left the east door, there was much less dialog to be impressed with for me. Something happened (I feel) where they now felt much more free to wander from the story that I had read. The scenery and animation was still good. They did portray much as it was written. However the frequency of divergences from the story as written occurred at a much "harder to except and roll with" rate (trying to not whine).
It would be harder to go on so I will stop after saying that...
There were indeed many fine hours all in all where I was very entertained and pleased with the films.
I know that was kind of a weak attempt but with time ( and healing ;) perhaps I will be better able to give praise for the parts that certainly do deserve it.
hurrah Mandos!! I give you the 'Bah Humbug Award' for services to lukewarm praise. But its all good. I'll get you joining the LOTR lovers camp before long. oh yes indeedy.
I agree with you about The Hobbit though. Its utter pants.
Films sequels or prequels that are antcipated for many years especially ground breaking originals that alter cinema for years have big shoes to fill. In many cases even if they hit most or all of the points that made the original distinct so as to put you back in the same world. What they can never do or at least have a hard time doing is showing us something new. I think that is why the visuals of Erorbor are so well reviewed. Its new, it like Dale is a new culture that we have not seen. This is likely why the goblins of the GG kindom are not clones of previous versions. Just as George Lucas you can't see a lightsaber again for the first time.
I actually thought the opening scenes of Dale and Erebor were pretty fantastic.
hurrah Mandos!! I give you the 'Bah Humbug Award' for services to lukewarm praise. But its all good. I'll get you joining the LOTR lovers camp before long. oh yes indeedy.
I agree with you about The Hobbit though. Its utter pants..... Figgsbane
Sorry for the lukewarm praise.
I tried my hardest to come up with something nice to say. It wasn't easy to be sure, to do so without numerous insertions of qualifying comments, I had to bite my tongue to only insert the ones I did. As far as you getting me to join the LOTR lovers camp, I have been there since I first read these great tales as a teen. If by the LOTR camp you mean lovers of the movie version, that will prove a very challenging task indeed. While I do hold some measure of fondness for the attempt it is powerfully overshadowed with disappointment and sadness for the bad judgement of those in charge of the project.
However, the world is something differently perceived by each of us and this is just my perception.
As far as the opening scenes of TH,
I did enjoy the chance to view Dale and the Mt. pre-Smaug and had no censorious thoughts for a short while. But that didn't last long sadly. I think PJ lost one of his best opportunities to fill time and add scenes to the movie with some background and with a bit of history from the appendices concerning the establishment of Erebor without too much grumpiness from the JRRT purists. Instead he decides to have Thorin inside and in charge when Smaug descends instead of being on the Mt. side. PJ had a chance to show his father and grandfather doing something... and then the first Seriously jolting blow on my sensibilities when Thranduil is shown (on a Reindeer?). He happens to be in the neighborhood with an army around him for some reason, and shoots those slimy and creepy looks at Thorin. ikes... it sadly soiled that opening scene for me.
Poor old Thorin, yet ANOTHER enemy, and this one is immortal and has silver disco boots.
I thought the opening scenes of Dale and Erebor were glitzy but cool, and I was getting geared up for exciting action scenes when it all shudders to a halt and we suddenly go to the sweet and tranquil Shire. The change of pace made me feel 'WaaaWaa! kind of flat. I think they should have started with the Shire and done Erebor later in flashback, not immediately. The whole film felt stop go stop go, it didnt flow well for me, it felt messy.
sorry folks just spam hammering
Bump. No more spam!
Spam Hammer.
You must register or log in to post.
