http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005 by the authors Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:27:18 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35592 I'm not expecting the movie to live up to the books because they very rarely do. A book can have so much more information in it than a movie can. Almost every movie, without fail, I've been looking forward to of good books that I've read has been a disappointment (on a comparative level, any way) in the theater. I guess the director, actor and screenwriter vision is not congruent with the writer's vision and reader's interpretation. Even when the screenwriter and writer are the same, there still are scenes, characters and (tragically) beginnings and endings which differ. One example that comes immediately to mind is the ending of the chilling Stephen King story, Apt Pupil. The original story ends with the boy (the pupil) with a rifle shooting people who are driving by. The movie ends much differently. The Running Man ending was also changed from book to movie. Many of King's stories have been cannibalized in the translation to film (some of them like his own Trucks to Maximum Overdrive were at his own hand). Therefore I'm expecting two different experiences. One for the movie and one for the books. One before the other is not necessarily going to ruin the other experience. If the movies are as good as people are saying, then I'll probably be inspired to read the books for the real story or vice versa, whichever order things go in. 35592@blogcritics.org Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:27:18 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35580 Thanks for being open-minded about it HW, and I agree about going with "The Hobbit" first, and then seeing how you feel from there. 35580@blogcritics.org Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:24:35 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35570 Since when does a movie (or, by extension, an artistic work of any kind) have to portray or otherwise involve minorities to have merit? Is the presence of a female character necessary in valid art? (I just saw Master and Commander, and there were no women in it at all, and that's as it should be, given the story being told). I loved ROTK, but I won't argue your views on it, since movie criticism is pretty subjective. But this whole racism/sexism stuff is beyond ridiculous, trotted out in some stale effort to be PC, as if political correctness is actual a valid way of interpreting art and other events, instead of just another way for one side to stifle dissent. Blech. Laurie K. 35570@blogcritics.org Wed, 7 Jan 2004 02:24:47 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35550 I first read the books when I was in 6th grade. The story was fasinating to me. I've then read the books a number of times(usually once a year or so). I enjoy the movies, but they definately don't hold up. The older I get the more I appreciate the books. There's far more to it than just a story of hobbits and wizards and such. 35550@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 22:53:00 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35537 Thank you to everybody who responded to this post. It seems as though I stand alone regarding all my opinions of "LOTR:ROTK".I guess I'll have to break down and re-read the books,keeping in mind all the underlying themes(as Eric O. pointed out) such as honor,responsibility,trust,friendship and so forth and so on.Many writers that I really enjoy reading (Harlan Ellison and Raymond Chandler for example), I was all but ready to dismiss due largely to the categories in which they were lumped.I truly think (IMHO)that both of these writers really transcend their respective genres(Sci Fi,Mystery)but I would be hard pressed to come up with other categories in which to place them.But,I'm digressing here. Again,thanks for your responses and input. Maybe I can gleen something different from reading them as an adult.I'm not gonna hold my breath though. 35537@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:32:42 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35529 TD, i would recommend you read The Hobbit before reading OR watching LOTR, but you may find the wait too long... 35529@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 20:02:30 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35416 CC, use them in good health - TD, I think you'll enjoy them, although it's always harder coming into something with so much freight attached. I first became aware of them as child when my dad read The Hobbit out loud to us - that's pretty hard to beat. 35416@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 12:24:18 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35403 I guess I'm in the small crowd that hasn't read the books or seen the the trilogy (yet), though I do intend to when all three movies are available as a DVD set. Until that time, I'll have to reserve commenting on the Hobbit habit. 35403@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:23:07 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35402 And I am going to take your word for it. Literally. I will TAKE your words. When I am asked about these movies I will say: "I find the themes of faith, honor, trust, friendship, responsibility, and seriousness of purpose to be very relevant, inspiring, and meaningful." Formerly, I just said, "Duhhhh..." Thanks, Eric. 35402@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:18:58 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35401 CC, But you're a girl. But seriously, nothing unreasonable about what you said, although I wouldn't call them sci-fi, more like "pre-modern fable" or something like that. I find the themes of faith, honor, trust, friendship, responsibility, and seriousness of purpose to be very relevant, inspiring, and meaningful. 35401@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 11:02:27 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35399 To me, these movies just look like actors running away from special effects speaking in Klingon. I'm sure they're well-made by Hollywood standards, but I just don't care about this kind of stuff. I don't want to argue with sci-fi fans (and have nothing to back my arguments), but I'd just like to point out that in a world with a lot of entertainment options, lots of us don't care about this. Not because it's "mainstream," not because it's "geek fare," but because we just have no interest and limited time and must make some editing decisions about what we see and hear. 35399@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:45:55 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35396 HW, I have to agree there are many more levels at work here than you seem to see, especially in the books, although I think the films have at least made an effort to plumb some of the depths at work there. 35396@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:32:53 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/01/06/080037.php#comment-35392 Your criticisms about the so-called juvenile simplicity of Tolkien are, not to put too fine a point on it, flat out wrong. It's just possible that, as you read these books at fifteen, your preconceptions of how "geeky" they are got in the way of your actually absorbing anything. From the things you describe as "mature" (and I appreciate the quotes you put around that term), it's likely you couldn't actually see over your hip. Why do I suspect that your contempt for the fantasy realm extends to anything remotely mainstream? That's what the LotR movies are, you know. Mainstream worldwide culture. They're not just for "young suburban white boys" anymore. You might want to actually watch one of these so-called "children's" movies before you embarass yourself with this kind of statement again. Incidentally, I love Jarmusch too, but Lord of the Rings beats the hell out of Down By Law. (It might even be better than Mystery Train, I'd have to think about it...) 35392@blogcritics.org Tue, 6 Jan 2004 10:09:48 EST