Roose Boltons Pet Leech

Tolkien 2.0

359 posts in this topic

These threads are so good, I think I'll reread LotR for the first time in 20+ years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mikael said:

These threads are so good, I think I'll reread LotR for the first time in 20+ years.

I think RBPL is doing an outstanding job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/01/2017 at 1:12 PM, Hereward said:

Another fantastic piece, though my hatred for the last two films clearly surpasses yours.

I couldn't agree more: those two films make my head explode. And I find it rather annoying when this reaction gets very often the sermon about "two different art forms" as a reply. I really am quite well aware that you have to make significant changes in all such adaptations. But as far as outward events are concerned PJ makes actually rather a faithful effort, obviously with some significant omissions and in the context of a crazily speedy narrative. No, it's the ethos of Tolkien that is totally missing, even reversed - the whole thing is just a glorified militaristic adventure in a quite historyless and contextless world. Special effects fighting is the heart of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/02/2017 at 1:57 PM, Mikael said:

These threads are so good, I think I'll reread LotR for the first time in 20+ years.

Absolutely of amazing quality.

I am currently re-reading Tolkien criticism and biography after a fairly long break - I think part of the reason of this "renessaince" is my increasing annoyance with Martin who seems to be losing his way rather catastrophically. I first reat LOTR when I was 11 years old, in the majestically succesful Finnish translation, and it became a kind of a holy book for me during those formative years of early teens... And I still know some parts almost by heart, and still rearead the books regularly (maybe once in 5 years these days). Tolkien really is the great anti-modernist master - and so much of criticism misses him therefore quite totally, even now. I certainly understood long time before the well known reassesments (Shippey foremost among them) that I hadn't read any optimistic black and white adventure story: Frodo's failure, the long defeat, the rather sad ending within that miraculously credibly crafted world made it clear that the story had incredible depth, subtlety and coherance.

And this said as a great friend of modern literature and as a definitive non-fan of conservative catholic world views... Such a strange, marvellous writer we have in Tolkien.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2017 at 6:57 AM, Mikael said:

These threads are so good, I think I'll reread LotR for the first time in 20+ years.

I've been thinking about that. Which is saying something considering my 300+ TBR pile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hwyl said:

I couldn't agree more: those two films make my head explode. And I find it rather annoying when this reaction gets very often the sermon about "two different art forms" as a reply. I really am quite well aware that you have to make significant changes in all such adaptations. But as far as outward events are concerned PJ makes actually rather a faithful effort, obviously with some significant omissions and in the context of a crazily speedy narrative. No, it's the ethos of Tolkien that is totally missing, even reversed - the whole thing is just a glorified militaristic adventure in a quite historyless and contextless world. Special effects fighting is the heart of the story.

As I said above I never saw the 3rd one and it's been too long I saw the first two. As far as I remember the first movie is closest to the books but this is also somewhat of a problem because it would have been better to cut some things shorter, precisely because of the different art forms. The movies manage to be too slow and too fast at the same time (I have heard several complaints from people who had not read the books and had problems to follow the plot). It gets far worse in the 2nd one where the Frodo/Sam/Gollum arc is pretty good while they made a mess of the rest, including trite action stuff that was not in the book (warg attack, Aragorn believed dead, Arwen and Rivendell elves) and handled things like the healing of Theoden in the crudest way (quasi-exorcism) possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/27/2017 at 4:10 AM, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

An essay contrasting Tolkien and Jackson's portrayal of war in LOTR:

https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2017/01/27/on-war-tolkien-vs-jackson/

Man that reminds again of why I prefer the theatrical cuts of the films.

edit: the Lotr films. The hobbit movies can eat a dick.

edit 2 damnit now I want to watch the movies AND reread the books, you monsters.

 

Edited by Darth Richard II

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wormtongue is so obviously creepy and depraved in the films that you wonder why he'd be trusted with a farthing, let alone the government of Rohan.

Treebeard was made as thick as nine planks (no pun intended).  Denethor was simply horrible. The Soap Bubbles of Death meant there was never any need for men to actually fight to defend Minas Tirith.  The last hour of ROTK was a hideous cut and paste job.

And yet.....I really enjoyed the Mines of Moria, Gollum and the passage of the Dead Marshes, the Battle of Helm's Deep (apart from Eomer's cavalry charging over a cliff) the flight to Rivendell, Chirstopher Lee as Saruman, the really nightmarish portrayal of Minas Morgul, and overall, I found the series enjoyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are the soap bubbles of death?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jo498 said:

What are the soap bubbles of death?

I think it was HelenaExMachina who came up with the nickname, to describe the Army of the Dead that suddenly materialise from Aragorn's ship, and swarm all over Sauron's army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

o.k. this is clearly wrong (because in the book the army of the dead oathbreakers only scares off or defeats the corsairs, all of which happens off screen) but the defenders could not know that Aragorn would come in time and would have soap bubbles of death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jo498 said:

o.k. this is clearly wrong (because in the book the army of the dead oathbreakers only scares off or defeats the corsairs, all of which happens off screen) but the defenders could not know that Aragorn would come in time and would have soap bubbles of death.

It's very much a deus ex machina in the film.

In the book, Legolas reckons that the Army of the Dead can't actually inflict harm, but their impact is down to the unreasoning terror they inspire in the Corsairs.  Once the Corsairs flee their ships, Aragorn sets free their slaves, and they row to Minas Tirith, along with a few thousand soldiers from South Gondor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SeanF said:

I think it was HelenaExMachina who came up with the nickname, to describe the Army of the Dead that suddenly materialise from Aragorn's ship, and swarm all over Sauron's army.

That wasn't my creation, though I feel as though I've used it before. Try Ser Scott or RBPL, it sounds like something one of them made up :P 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SeanF said:

Wormtongue is so obviously creepy and depraved in the films that you wonder why he'd be trusted with a farthing, let alone the government of Rohan.

Treebeard was made as thick as nine planks (no pun intended).  Denethor was simply horrible. The Soap Bubbles of Death meant there was never any need for men to actually fight to defend Minas Tirith.  The last hour of ROTK was a hideous cut and paste job.

And yet.....I really enjoyed the Mines of Moria, Gollum and the passage of the Dead Marshes, the Battle of Helm's Deep (apart from Eomer's cavalry charging over a cliff) the flight to Rivendell, Chirstopher Lee as Saruman, the really nightmarish portrayal of Minas Morgul, and overall, I found the series enjoyable.

Yeah, they do some of the stuff really well and some of it, well, wtf were they thinking? But it evens out to be decent, unlike the hobbit films on which the only good parts are bilbo and Smaug (before it turns into a video game) and the riddle scene.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

That wasn't my creation, though I feel as though I've used it before. Try Ser Scott or RBPL, it sounds like something one of them made up :P 

I think it was Agrivine in the ancient days who coined the phrase "Scrubbing bubbles of death"

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28.1.2017 at 0:40 AM, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

I'd accept that with the Elves. With Men it's more complicated -

For me this is not about the details. It's like in that funny video about fantasy races you posted most fantasy settings have differences between their fantasy races built in the acceptance of which we would consider close to racism if it weren't a fantasy world. Sure, some RPG settings take pains that if the elves get high dexterity the have lower constitution or so but often some races are clearly "better" than others. Even without implying that they are morally better or deserve to rule/be ruled according to their different abilities, this seems problematic for most readers today for obvious reasons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jo498 said:

For me this is not about the details. It's like in that funny video about fantasy races you posted most fantasy settings have differences between their fantasy races built in the acceptance of which we would consider close to racism if it weren't a fantasy world. Sure, some RPG settings take pains that if the elves get high dexterity the have lower constitution or so but often some races are clearly "better" than others. Even without implying that they are morally better or deserve to rule/be ruled according to their different abilities, this seems problematic for most readers today for obvious reasons.

I understand where you're coming from, but I think having the Elves as "better" than others is still less problematic than having, say, Numenoreans as "better". The reason is that Elves aren't human, except in a biological sense - culturally and spiritually, they are alien creatures with an altogether different cosmic role, and as such aren't comparable to human ethnicities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now