| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
| LOTR movie vs books vs cartoon (spoilers) |
|
My favorite parts of the books were changed or downplayed in the movies. For book 1 in was Borimor's death, book 2 was the charge out of helmsdeep, and book 3 was when that girl and the hobbits were the only ones that stood up to and would fight the ringwraith.
I thought the movies were good but for all the scenes above and that there was no emotional attachment to the characters and at no time did I feel worried or anything for the characters. Everytime I watch Braveheart I feel emotions (especially at the end)--I felt nothing during the LOTR movies.
Even the cartoon did a great job with the Borimor and helmsdeep scenes (there is no book 3 cartoon that I could find besides the stupid singing one).
It's wierd because I was never a big Star Wars fan intill the new ones came out, and no one likes the new ones. And I think the best LOTR movie was the first one up until the end scene, and everyone I've talked too thinks the 2 and 3rd were the best..
What do the other people that have seen the cartoon and read the books think?
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
Tue Jan 27, 2004 4:12 am |
|
|
RPG Frog
Blade Runner
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 748
Location: the Matrix |
I absolutely detest Ralph Bacchies rotoscoped animation(this may have been the first movie to do this) in LOTR. I love making fun of the scene that where Gandalf says..."give it to frodo". You have to see this piece of trash to know what I mean.
On the other hand, I really adore the Rankin/Bass cartoons of the late 70s early 80s. Wind in the Willows, Hobbit, and Return of the King. I am in my late 20s and grew up with these. The movies rock...they may even eclipse the Holy Star Wars Trilogy for me. But, none of this stuff is anywhere close to the depth you get from reading tolkien's 18 books on Middle Earth.
_________________
Between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities…there was an Age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world like blue mantles beneath the stars…Hither came Conan, the Cimmerian, black-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand…to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandaled feet. - Robert E. Howard |
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:30 am |
|
|
Danicek
The Old One
Joined: 15 Dec 2001
Posts: 5922
Location: Czech Republic |
Book is (of course just for me) the best. |
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 6:26 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
I think the animated LOTR was horrible (although not as bad as Bilbo the animated movie), and all I got to see was about the first half. I'm pretty sure they made the second part as well, but I don't know where to get it.
The books are still the best, I guess. But the movies were very well made.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Tue Feb 03, 2004 10:21 pm |
|
|
Namirrha
Noble Knight
Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 218
Location: Utah County, Utah. |
The Bakshi cartoons give me nightmares. I didn't realize how boring and terrible they were until I tried to watch them with my little cousins. And I fell asleep. I'm a big fan of the books, but that experience with Bakshi nearly destroyed the magic of Lord of the Rings for my cousins. I had to read from the books to them aloud to encourage the twinkle in their eyes. My love for Tolkien's works was seeded early on (from the books, as I did with Dickens and C.S. Lewis). I think my experience is not so different from others. Bakshi's version has probably discouraged more people than encouraged them, and that's a terrible loss.
_________________
Give me the shadows, shield me from the light, and I shall let nothing pass in the darkness of the night. |
|
Wed Feb 04, 2004 8:08 am |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
Is the one you guys hate the singing cartoon? Or is it the cartoon where Stryder looks Indian? You guys really didn't like that cartoon? I loved it and watched it all the time when I was a kid. Maybe I have to watch it again now that I'm older.
I loved the Thundercats when I was a kid, but when the started playing them again on the Cartoon Network a few years back I realised that no episode had a plot, and they all followed the same formula. The animation and idea were great, but I need a little plot and story now that I'm an old man of 26.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Thu Feb 05, 2004 8:08 pm |
|
|
RPG Frog
Blade Runner
Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 748
Location: the Matrix |
quote:
Originally posted by Roqua
Is the one you guys hate the singing cartoon? Or is it the cartoon where Stryder looks Indian? You guys really didn't like that cartoon? I loved it and watched it all the time when I was a kid. Maybe I have to watch it again now that I'm older. and story now that I'm an old man of 26.
Yea, I am 28 and I can see how people make fun of lots of stuff that I dug when I was a kid. But, for nastalgic reasons I still love Transformers and the old Rankin/Bass singin cartoons Hobbit, Return of the King, and Wind in the Willows. Besides the books have lots of singing. They have good hand-drawn animation with hand-painted water-color backgrounds. Looks distinct compared to the simple computer animation of today. Most people bash these...but they are still very popular and get played on Disney all the time.
But the one most people really bash is Lord of the Rings...it was a theatrical movie by Ralph Bacchi and was the first movie to use Rotoscoped animation. This means they actually used live action and drew cartoons over top of it. This animation looks so funky and dorky
_________________
Between the years when the oceans drank Atlantis and the gleaming cities…there was an Age undreamed of, when shining kingdoms lay spread across the world like blue mantles beneath the stars…Hither came Conan, the Cimmerian, black-haired, sullen-eyed, sword in hand…to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandaled feet. - Robert E. Howard |
|
Thu Feb 05, 2004 9:43 pm |
|
|
piln
High Emperor
Joined: 22 May 2003
Posts: 906
Location: Leeds, UK |
I dunno, I thought some of the rotoscoped stuff looked quite good... it's a bit of a mixed bag. Some of it is awful (it totally falls apart towards the end), some of it does a good job of creating a spooky look. Long time since I've seen it though, and I don't remember being hooked all the way through... the pace was a bit lumpy, I think.
I'm not really a big fan of the books. When they get to the bits with some action, and/or something with meaning, they're great, but there's too much in between those scenes that just serves no purpose. I'm a firm believer that (in any entertainment medium/art form) if something doesn't contribute to the overall purpose or vision of a project, it should be left out, but IMO the pointless information in the LOTR books outweighs the good stuff about 3:1. Shame, because the good stuff is really good.
As for the films, I liked the first two, and was disappointed with the last. I thought all of them had pacing problems, I don't think any of them needed to be three hours long, but when they got going they were really enjoyable. I thought Gollum was the strongest part of the whole trilogy (absolutely amazing work for a CG character - I thought his story was told in a more emotionally engaging way than any of the other characters), but his impact was effectively over at the end of Two Towers - his intentions were clear all the way through the third film, and I think that totally took the teeth out of his story.
I don't have a problem with details being changed, that has to be done to adapt book to film successfully. I particularly like the way Gandalf's lecture to Frodo (about Gollum and the fact Bilbo didn't kill him) and the story of Gollum's origin, were delayed until much later in the films. I felt they had far more impact that way. |
|
Wed Feb 11, 2004 5:53 am |
|
|
Drake14
Brigadier General
Joined: 29 Mar 2003
Posts: 1310
Location: Around |
i like the movies best of all, the graphics are great.
_________________
Inhale Life, Exhale Pain
Navy, Accelerate your life |
|
Fri Feb 20, 2004 12:39 am |
|
|
Blacklight
Head Merchant
Joined: 20 Oct 2003
Posts: 66
Location: A void of utter Darkness |
Gollum was awesome. I dare even say he was better developed in the movies than in the books. I loved him. 
But... I prefer the books myself. They tell the story in a deeper and more engaging way. No movie could ever do that, because when reading a book, you use the strongest tool of the human mind: your own imagination. A movie steals that away from you, and forces its own view upon its viewers.
And yes, I'm a Tolkien fan too. "Lord of the Rings" is like my bible...
_________________
Evil is Life in its purest and most naked form. |
|
Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:41 pm |
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Apr 08, 2019 5:52 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
