Lord of the Rings

[franzliszt2]

Do people agree that LOTR is the most amazing book in the history of books. What does everyone think of the films. IMO they are nowhere near as good as the books, but they are still good, but Why did they change so much? But the music by Howard Shore is just AMAZING!!!

[chopintod]

No. (good but not the best).  Films were good; not as good as books.  They changed so much because of time restraints (i.e., they couldn't make three 5 hour movies).  And yes, I like the music.

Terry

[gilad]

Loved the book, read it slow and rued the day i had to finish it.I'll rearly watch a film twice, have never read a book twice, but i'm sure i'll read LOTR again someday.
I can see why someone would view it as the best book ever written, i see it as one of the best i've ever read.
The movies were great entertainment and pushed boundaries in terms of  production, but they could never quite capture the magic i felt when reading the book.

[Mozartian]

The books are unquestionably the greatest fantasy ever written. Nothing comes close to being on the massive scale of LOTR and the Sil; the storyline is fantastic, engrossing, and *cough**read this lucas***cough** without plotholes.
(I've read the books 8 times, seen the movies each probably about the same... know what I'm talking about )
The movies are great movies. Of the 3, the most true to the books is the fellowship. I have to say, I dislike pretty much every change they made to the books, but it didn't ruin the movies for me, and I think ROTK theatrical is one of the best movies ever made.
I have to say what I love most about the movies is the scenery, the amazing sets, the gorgeous costumes, all the amazing amazing work WETA workshop did- the weaponry is unbelievable- and the fact that the movies make middle earth alive in a way that pure imagination simply can't do. Some of the acting was spectacular as well (Boromir, Eowyn, Faramir, Theoden, Sam, and of course Aragorn... all perfectly cast)
The extended editions of FOTR and TT are superb. Unfortunately I can't say as much for extended ROTK- the changes they made, especially their more than questionable additions, and the fact that they made many scenes like a quasi-indiana-jones movie is a disgrace not only to the books, but to the theatrical version of the movie as well.
Not to say I didn't enjoy some of the quasi-indy scenes. But I don't think they fit in with the movie. It *IS* an epic drama, after all.
I think most of the changes were made to make the movies more "accessable" to the audiences. Whatever... what is that quote from don quixote again? something like "that nothing stupid or ignorant has been done that hasn't been excused for 'poetic license.'"
I think that pretty much sums it up, haha.

-the elflass

[Dazzer]

and now all we need is a screen version of "Bored of the rings"

now THAT'll be interesting

[leahcim]

Do people agree that LOTR is the most amazing book in the history of books.

No, it's a good book, possibly the best fantasy book [certainly one of them] but it's good in that specific and narrow genre and I'd struggle to see that there's much in it that would make it outshine good books in other genres.

It's not funny at all, for example, and there are lots of books which are [at least I don't recall that - it has been a few years] - despite a few attempts at adding humour for the films - did dwarfs fall off horses slapstick style?

What does everyone think of the films. IMO they are nowhere near as good as the books

One advantage the book has is you don't get ill or unhealthy if you read books all day - there was no "book generation" only a "TV/Film generation" , "internet generation" and a "playstation generation"

Seriously, as most say the films are good, but IMO the books are better.

I find the biggest problem with books [that I've read] made into films is that the bits which are different stick out so much that it spoils the flow. It's like hearing a song from Queen's greatest hits on the radio, you wait for the intro to the next track if you've often heard it in that context, and there's a jolt because they play something else, or someone talks.

That said, at least one thing I complained about being "invented" a while back someone pointed out is mentioned in the appendix of the LOTR even though it's not in the main story.

But LOTR would be pretty dull and very, very long if they'd stuck strictly to the book - if you compare with, say, Charlie and the Choc factory, Hitchhikers or Harry Potter, the books are much shorter, in general, for the same length films, it just wouldn't work with an epic, even with 3 films.

One of the things I disliked about the 3rd film was that it seemed to be lots of tourist information advertising flyovers of New Zealand with little narrative bar profound psuedo-biblical language sentences, rather than the first two which seemed to have more emphasis on character and dialogue. But then I prefer films that have character and dialogue.

Books tend to have less dialogue and more description and anyone who has slept through 2001 a space oddity would probably equally not enjoy a direct book -> film script.

[stevie]

as a person who doesnt read fictional books(okokokok) ive never read the books, but the MOVIES are my favourite movies.
the music is incredible too.

[Mozartian]

It's not funny at all, for example

<_<
>_>
Re-read the first chapters of the fellowship, the chapter with sam cooking in the two towers, the parts with the ents (some parts are quite humorous), the reuniting of merry and pippin with aragorn, legolas and sam, the bit about "sneaking" with sam frodo and gollum (also in TT).... thats just off the top of my head, I'm sure there is more.
Aside from that... since when does something have to be funny to be good?

One advantage the book has is you don't get ill or unhealthy if you read books all day

lol, thats not true actually. Trust me, I know from experience.

I find the biggest problem with books [that I've read] made into films is that the bits which are different stick out so much that it spoils the flow. It's like hearing a song from Queen's greatest hits on the radio, you wait for the intro to the next track if you've often heard it in that context, and there's a jolt because they play something else, or someone talks.

yep, I agree with you there.

That said, at least one thing I complained about being "invented" a while back someone pointed out is mentioned in the appendix of the LOTR even though it's not in the main story.

Yup, know your LOTR history! Was that the bit about Aragorn and Arwen meeting in Lothlorien (that they discussed on the bridge in FOTR)?

But LOTR would be pretty dull and very, very long if they'd stuck strictly to the book

Long, yes. Dull?!?!? Not at all, it'd rule.

One of the things I disliked about the 3rd film was that it seemed to be lots of tourist information advertising flyovers of New Zealand with little narrative bar profound psuedo-biblical language sentences, rather than the first two which seemed to have more emphasis on character and dialogue. But then I prefer films that have character and dialogue.

....it's elvish... the characters... speak... in elvish.... that's one of the beauties of the film, that they kept the characters speaking in their tongue (as they did in the book).

[leahcim]

Aside from that... since when does something have to be funny to be good?

It doesn't, see the question -  a book that was "the most amazing of all in the history of books" that didn't have humour wouldn't be amazing compared with books that are funny - it was just an example of something LOTR doesn't have.

Simply put - there is no "best" or "most amazing" book - [except on Channel 4 presented by John Cleese as cheap TV ]

Aragorn and Arwen full stop - more or less.

The other thing I thought the films missed was the magic w.r.t swords and stuff [I know they had the main sword and the blue glowing one etc] but to me Tolkein explains why a few guys might survive again a horde of Orcs with said sword, whereas in the film it was a bit like a bad martial arts movie where 500 people attack four and they win - especially given the large number of archers.

[musik_man]

I actually think that some of the changes they made were quite good.  Nobody can touch Tolkein for creating a full world, but his characters can be a bit flat.  Aragorn's standard introduction is pulling out Narsil and shouting about the blade that was broken, yadada.  I can only imagine how embarassing that would be for Arwen at dinner parties. 

Other parts such as Tom Bombadil just wouldn't have worked in the movie. (does he even make any sense in the book?)

[Waldszenen]

The Lord of the Rings is both one of the best books ever and three of the best films ever - but definitely not the highest of both genres.

[Kassaa]

https://home.planet.nl/~beekv044/TheyreTakingTheHobbitsToIsengard.wmv

Period.

[Mozartian]

https://home.planet.nl/~beekv044/TheyreTakingTheHobbitsToIsengard.wmv

Period.

ROFL

oommmgggg PRICELESS XD

[gilad]

any of you ever read stephen kings dark tower series? very good.

[Waldszenen]

https://home.planet.nl/~beekv044/TheyreTakingTheHobbitsToIsengard.wmv

Period.

I've never quite laughed so hard in recent times.

[jas]

But the music by Howard Shore is just AMAZING!!!

Dude, tell me about it! To me, that is just one of the most incredible achievements I can imagine. The score is amazing. It's so completely evocative and atmospheric. The vocal writing especially, and the effects he gets from the different voices and techniques, is quite incredible. He took Hans Zimmer's place as my favourite film composer for that. I wasn't familiar with any of his stuff before I saw LotR.

As for the book, I love it. There's nothing like sheer escapism into this world so completely different to our own. The writing itself, though occasionally a bit of a slog, just adds to the feel of being in a completely different place. Especially the fact that there's so much else in the appendices that couldn't find their way into the story. There's a whole world and history and culture and things that, if you want, you can find out about. You can learn the languages! What other book can you say the same thing about?
The films are visually stunning and totally addictive. They may not include everything in the books, and there may be some things that people don't agree with (Faramir trying to take the ring?!?!) but they're an incredible achievement.

So I suppose you could say I agree!

Jas