Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Mistakes

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Fellowship of the Ring > Mistakes   [1] [2] >>
Maybe the case of the exception that proved the rule, or maybe he was an elvish-freak, like those bearded ladies who used to populate travelling fairgrounds.
Hear ye all! Hear ye all! Come see the hairy freak! Found on the wet streets of the Grey Heavens! See the abnormal, the unatural, the horrifying HAIRY ELF! Hurry! Only in town for two days! Big Laugh Smilie

But jokes aside, I hope he gets to keep his beard but I wouldn't be too supriced if he doesn't..
I shouldn't think Cirdan's beard (or lack of) is going to be an issue in the movies. My money's still on a Field of Cormallen ending.
Yeh I also get the feeling that they will miss out the scouring of the Shire. Just reading bored of the rings at the moment wonder if instead they clean up the Sty?
I think Cirdan had a beard because he was the only Elf to show signs of aging.
All elves show signs of aging otherwise they wouldn't grow up!
I think he had a beard as he was a shipwright and they didn't have nuetrogena in Beleriand!
Don't want to upset you Ross, but Pete has already said that that bit in the Mirror of Galadriel in FOTR is the closest you're gonna get to a scouring scene. But the Havens may still get a look in, you never know....
That PJ is a wassock
I know a lot of Wassockians who would consider that a compliment, Ross. Elf Sticking Tounge Out Smilie Elf With a Big Grin Smilie

I have waited 35 years for someone to finally make a motion picture of LOTR in a manner that does justice the major themes of the book. I'm just thankful that PJ saw fit to do so and I can forgive the directorial license he used in bringing it to me.

The added 30 minutes of the extended DVD slowed down the pace and added more relational interchange, making his ROTK a thing of beauty, and the omissions and commissions do little to detract from the spirit of Tolkien's work. I can only hope his remaining two films are equal to the task.
Grey Havens are definitely in- PJ mentions the scene in the FotR commentary. Smoke Smilie
Quote:
I have waited 35 years for someone to finally make a motion picture of LOTR in a manner that does justice the major themes of the book. I'm just thankful that PJ saw fit to do so and I can forgive the directorial license he used in bringing it to me.


Are you on commision from this PJ. How can you say this he has losely based it on the main theme of the book and that's it!
Well at least he did the movie,right?
Quote:
I think PJ did the best job he could.......I mean, if he followed the book almost to the letter leaving out only a few things, the movie would be 12hrs long or longer!!!


Sounds ok to me as long as someone who had read the book directed it, as opposed to that Nimslo!

Quote:
Well at least he did the movie,right?


Hey he did a movie with the correct name, the simularities end there!
Were that Elves in the movie ?? I thought the blond, girly guys were just all Rhapsody fans Smoke Smilie


Quote:
Also, in the movie the Argonath are of Isildur and Elendil, not Isildur and Anárion.
That is because PJ didn't wish to expend valuable film time explaining who Anárion was. For the same reason I don't think we will learn in LotR:RotK that Anárion had been ruling Gondor, while Isildur had been in Arnor with Elendil.
In the movie, Gandalf reads a scroll written by Isildur in "the year 3434 of the Second Age." Tolkien specifically states that Sauron fell in S.A. 3441. So, Isildur wrote a scroll about his possession of the Ring seven years before he took it? Smile Smilie
Maybe you missed the song on the FOTR CD- In the Year 3434. It went something like this:

In the year 3434
If elf man alliance can endure...
If Sauron's finger hits the floor... Big Smile Smilie

It has the melody of an old song you know.

(Sorry for my puerile behavior, Arcorm, you observation shows a knowledge and love of Middle Earth that I admire.
In the book, Saruman's Uruk-hai wear helmets marked with the S-rune (>), but in the movie they have white handprints on their foreheads to represent the White Hand. Also, in the movie the Argonath are of Isildur and Elendil, not Isildur and Anárion. Sad Smilie
I think the whole thing was a mistake.....couldīve followed the story straight but NOOOO he is gonna make a mockery of Tolkiens work!
Well, if we have to compare the movies with the books, then the whole movies are a mistake and money wasting.

If we speak bout movie blunders, i havent seen the movies enough to really remember some because i hate them and i want to forget them, but i still remember that when arwen and aragorn are kissin on the bridge of khazad-dum in lothlorien, she is holding the frodo doll in her arms.
I think he did a good job on the movie, and I'm sure if more people would pay to sit through a 5-hour film he would have made it longer and actually "based" on the books. But considering the majority of the world is all ADHD and can't do that, he had to cut a lot of it out to summarize it while keeping the audiences attention
No you see...he didnīt even try to get it right.....he just wanted to make money on Tolkiens back since he has only directed crappy movies and now this movie is truly crappy and a mockery but it rolls in money to PJ.......I hate the movies and PJ.......
Sorry Aule, but I definitely agree with Andrea and even despite that , I think PJ did a preetty good job, for theaters at least. But I also agree that it is s*** compared to Tolkien's work Big Laugh Smilie . And you and vir have some reason to hate PJ and The movies...Please don't be mad Wink Smilie
Florian I aint mad.....you can have your opinion....but that doesnīt mean I agree with itTongue Smilie hehehe.....and welcome to PT....and of course Virumor and I have reasons.....just watch FoTR and youīll see my reasonsWink Smilie
I'm sick of seeing the same rubbish arguemnt that if PJ stuck to the book the film would be x hours long. ******** if the cr@p isn't added and he stuck to the stroy it would be about three hours per book, roughly the same as what it is now. So please if you are going to try and stick up for the disgraces of movies please use a feasible argument!
A proper LOTR movie would be longer than three hours per book. There is very little room for all that which is missing, even without the overdose of Arwen and Aragorn kissy kissy parts. To push everything in a three hour movie just wouldn't work. It would be to much information in too little time and it would be a TERRIBLE movie that noone in their right mind would make and noone would see except the biggest Tolkien fans, and even they would be disapointed 'cause the movie didn't even come CLOSE to having the soul the books has! PJs movie are far from perfect but they are the best movies till now and they have a lot of the same feeling and soul the books have. We should be greatful PJ made them as well as he did, he could have messed up a lot more.

To explain Glorfindel would take a movie of it's own. What is a High King? Why is he glowing? What Two Trees? Valinor, what's that? Vala? Why is Elrond leading the show if Glorfindel is a High King? Why isn't he glowing? Teleri, what are they?

Frodo spends 17 years in Hobbiton before selling Bagend and leaving, while Gandalf travels here and there.

They stay for days and days in the old forrest and with Tom Bombadill and Goldberry

Bree would take some time.. The Underhill Hobbits..

Bill the Pony needs a few minutes to be explained

They spend months in Rivendell just waiting and waiting

Then there's the walking and walking and walking and
walking..

And the list goes on
Ross is completely correct.....and Amarië that was a bad argument....it would take the same amount of time to explain a new story as PJīs as it would to explain Tolkiens.....the difference is that Tolkien is the true LoTR so lousy argument Amarië.....very lousy!
Thanks Ring!

I don't think you understood me Aulë. In short: You can make a Tolkien-true movie with three hours for each book, but to make a GOOD Tolkien-true movie you need more time. And I had good arguments to explain what I meant (as Ross was asking for).
At the end of the day the whole argument is pointless anyway. Some people love the movies, some people hate them. No amount of arguing, however constructive, is going to change anyone's view on how they rate them. By now everyone here knows that Ross, Virumor and Aule don't particularly care for them because they have an habit of telling us so often. Fortunately the people who actually enjoy these films don't make themselves heard quite so often on the subject, otherwise the bandwidth of this site would probably explode.

So basically guys, it doesn't matter how often you critisize or praise the films, it's not going to change anyone's opinion of them. It just becomes boring reading the same words over and over.
Yeh maybe I, Ross and Mahal are preaching in the desert, but still we refuse to return to the land of milk and honnywood.
Quote:
I can't find the mistakes forum so I have created this one. I saw an interview with PJ where he said elves dont have any facial hair!
Does this mean Cirdan isn't going to have a beard when it clearly states that he has one in the chapter The Grey Havens?

It don't matter to me,PJ has done much worse mistakes in the movies all ready,it's obvious he has not read the books close enough...
Quote:
Come on guys. I`m sick of hearing about this too but even without the mushy or added scenes, there is waaaaay too much info and events in those books to last a minimum of three hours. Lets be realistic. NOBODY could cram all that stuff into three hours. I mean, even if you can read super fast (and I can read pretty darn fast myself) it would take at least more than three hours to read an LOTR book -PROPERLY!!! So I don`t wanna hear any of you saying you read it properly in less than three hours cuz I won`t believe you unless I see it done with my own eyes. Amarie`s argument was in no way lousy, Aule my friend.

[Edited on 26/9/2003 by Ringfacwen]


I donīt think you get it Ring.....a movie doesnīt have to take the same amount of time to see as the books.....take for example Starwars...the books are not as long as the movies.....although the movies are SUPER!


Quote:
Yeh maybe I, Ross and Mahal are preaching in the desert, but still we refuse to return to the land of milk and honnywood.


Amen brother!
even if pj uses the lame excuse that he skipped the old forest, tom bombadil, barrowdowns, stone trolls, (and the rest of the book) becoz otherwise the movie would last 500 hours, he didn't have to completely change the characters, like arwen, elrond, galadriel, (well pretty much everyone) and he didn't have to include new stuff like aragorn whinin about he's as weak as isildur, aragorn sayin goodbye to frodo and sendin frodo away coz the ring will get everyone down or somethin like that, elrond sayin to gandalf that aragorn is a pathetic loner and men are weak, blablabla. and oh yeh, boromir holdin the ring in his hand for a while, if i remember that stuff correctly. after all it has been a while since i melted my fotr dvd.

newayz to keep this short, even if pj took out old forest or tom bombadil becoz no one would get that (like in the books) he still could have followed the story of the books and not putting in hollywoodised **** and **** characters.
Quote:
To explain Glorfindel would take a movie of it's own. What is a High King? Why is he glowing? What Two Trees? Valinor, what's that? Vala? Why is Elrond leading the show if Glorfindel is a High King? Why isn't he glowing? Teleri, what are they?
First of all Glorfindel is not a High King or even a King of Elves, he's a lord. Second He doesn't glow to anyone apart from people in the spirit world (it's his eyes that show the wisdom of Valinor and the light of the trees). Third Elrond was the herald of Gil-galad last of the High Kings of the Noldor, meaning as he proclaimed his laws and edicts and also was one of his generals. Fourth Elrond was from the blood lines of Turgon one of the High Kings of the Noldor, Thingol the High King of both the Teleri and the Sindar. Fifth he was also from the blood line of Melian. Sixith Glorfindel lived in Elrond House. All of these are reason ennough that Glorfindel would follow Elrond and not the other way around. So PJ wouldn't have to explain why Glorfindel was a HIGH KING on account of him not being one. Saving time on him not having to go into his life story, just as he didn't do with any of the other characters.
Right on my brethren! Lets preach to this poor, naive choir! PJ has no excuse for cutting out parts and replacing them with %"Ī%#Ī% scenes which should not have been.....and changing the characters so much that I donīt even recognize who is Aragorn and who is who?!?!
*Rolls eyes at Ross* Sure you can spit out that list at the people, but people who don't know the story before wil be just as confused but maybe about other things. There would have to be a Silmarillion movie made first (and that would be GREAT! Big Smile Smilie ).

You don't want a movie, you want the book "read out loud" with the images from your head. We all want that, but it won't happen. Nothing will ever be good enough for any of us.

(I can't quite belive I actually bother to discuss with you guys, as Val said "At the end of the day the whole argument is pointless anyway." It's like a toot-ache where you just have to poke it with your tounge to see if it still hurts, which of course it does, over and over. Tongue Smilie )

Doesn't anyone have a mistake from the movies which is NOT about how it doesn't match the book?? Wink Smilie
[quote* Doesn't anyone have a mistake from the movies which is NOT about how it doesn't match the book?? Wink Smilie


Well, somewhere in the LOTR-movie thread (I think page 2 or 3) there is a thread about mistakes I started last year. Back then I posted this url, but I 'm not sure it still works.

www.movie-mistakes.com/film.php?filmid=1778
When one of the Ringwraiths at Bruinen tells Xenarwen she has to hand over the Frodo-doll to him (or it), you get a close up on his face and then you can clearly see if you are able to penetrate the darkness under is cloak, that he is wearing a donald duck - mask.

that is a big mistake : probably PJ wanted to incorporate a Disney-element into the movie to make LoTR more accessible to children. i underestimated PJ : this is revolutional film making.
That PJ is in the movie! or that PJ even made the movie! pick one of your choiceWink Smilie
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you like the movies Aüle? I was under the impression, but maybe I misunderstood..sorry if that is the case!
Purist Wink Smilie
When watching the extended DVD and all that stuff, PJ pointed out that the critics missed when Sauron was bringing down the mountain, doing that spell thing, he had his hands up, and one of them was bandaged...
I had to pause it and rewatch it a few times before I finally got it
Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you like the movies Aüle? I was under the impression, but maybe I misunderstood..sorry if that is the case!
Purist Wink Smilie


Well to clear things up a bit.....I never liked the movie....it was just the effects that I liked....the music was very good in FoTR....but I never liked the MOVIE....so you mustīve misunderstood me there Celebrían.....but now I have grown weary of the music....donīt like them anymore.....thatīs me....changing from time to time...but never about Tolkien....I have never said: Ohh I donīt have the strength or the wish to read Tolkien today....if there is a Tolkien book I havenīt read for a while or I just have a book from Tolkien....I read it and enjoy every freaking sentenceBig Smile Smilie
You get me?
I'm gonna start this post with a few quotes;

Quote:
The Return of the King - The Scouring of The Shire
posted on 17/2/2003 at 21:25

I have NEVER said I wish PJ dead....I have joked about it....but that was just for letting some steam out....But I wouldnīt wish him dead.....He did a nice movie....but it p****s me off that he didnīt follow the books very well.....I mean they should if then re-name it to Peter Jacksons vision of The Lord of the Rings....donīt you think?

Fellowship of the Ring - Have you ever?
posted on 6/2/2003 at 15:01

I just have to say that personally I have seen FotR exactly 47times and I am still not tired of it.... I am going to see it tonight too to be honest! So just you call me a geek I donīt care....Iīd rather be peaceful and read my books and watch my movies than be a twit who does nothing but hang around and do something they ACTUALLY donīt like doing. And by the way I would rather fantasies about living in Tolkienīs world than being in this dull world!

The Green Dragon - Brilliant Film?s
posted on 8/2/2003 at 10:07

I just gotta say that these are great: The Fellowship of the Ring(EXCELLENT), Starwars Episode 4-6(sketans jävla bra filmer) and then we have Jenna Jameson goes west no I was only joking.......T2 is the one instead of Jenna Jameson goes west

The Green Dragon - Brilliant Film?s
posted on 12/2/2003 at 12:43

My favourite movies(except the LOTR movies) is the following:
Starwars Episode 6 - The Return of the Jedi
Taxi
Terminator 2
Romper Stomper
Braveheart(William Wallace is a true hero)
Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back(completly hilarious movie)

Fellowship of the Ring - Who here did NOT cry when Gandalf fell?
posted on 3/3/2003 at 15:30

When I saw Gandalf fall in the movie I wept.....I wept so freaking much especially when the music from Howard Shore kicked in.....Maybe people feel that I am a softy but when I see a movie so passionately made I really experience the movie as if I was there with Frodo and the gang seeing Gandalf...an old friend...fall into darkness....

The Return of the King - What is going to be like???
posted on 14/3/2003 at 20:41

I think that ROTK will be as PJ wants it to be....not ONE good movie....but it will be a part of an excellent movie(note that I didnīt say trilogy...because I see it as one movie as I see the books as one book).....I have had my differences with PJ before.....and I want to say that I have grown wiser when I stop think about the things he did not do according to the book and see it for what it really is....a MOVIE! books and movies shall never be the same....and if they were it would be catastrophic.....(not really but you know what I mean)....


Not to hang you out or anything Aulë, but this is a very big difference to what you are saying about the movies now. These quotes clearly states that you really like(d) the films, so I don't understand why you have had such a change of heart.

Quote:
No you see...he didnīt even try to get it right.....he just wanted to make money on Tolkiens back since he has only directed **** py movies and now this movie is truly **** py and a mockery but it rolls in money to PJ.......I hate the movies and PJ.......


I agree, he did many changes that are unforgivable, and I think he should've stayed more to the book, but I see the movies for what they are; Entertainment (at least to me that?s what they are). I heard about Tolkien when I was younger, but I never really followed up and didn't bother to check out his works. I had totally forgot about him until I found out that PJ was gonna make a movie out of it. If it hadn't been for PJ and all the fuzz around the making of the films, I never would have known what I've been missing out on for so many years.

The film(s) are something I put on if I am bored or if I want to see something that I know is (supposed) to be based on a beautiful and fantastic trilogy that, since it was first published in 1954, has been a book people all over the world have treasured and loved.
Fifty million copies of its many editions have been sold around the world, and it has become a valuable and prized item. Now how can a film compare with that?

I know when I watch the films that I have the real deal in my bookshelf waiting for me, and knowing that is worth much more than anything a screen version can give me (thanks Ama).
So one can either feel like you do or just accept that someone at least did an effort and tried to make movies out of the books, although many will say it was a bad attempt. It's of our faults we learn, isn't it? Maybe in the future someone will try to do a better attempt, who knows? We'll just have to wait and see.
But PJ did at least one thing right though. He made sure that the languages in the film were original and hired people that had an education in Tolkiens languages. And the costumes and landscapes were absolutely stunning.

So for us true Tolkienites it shouldn't really ?matter? (if you know what I mean) if the films doesn't serve justice to the books and their maker. What we can try to do is to let everyone know that they're missing out on a wonderful and fantastic world if they choose to only base their opinions and experiences on what they have seen in theaters.
They will not be able to have a true, insightful and meaningful conversation about Tolkien and his work if they base their opinions on the films, there is much more going on behind the scenes. And maybe the lack of this knowlegde leads to that they want to find out more about Tolkien and therefore goes and buy his work.
They become more interested and learns about things that weren't in the films. It's like a jungle-drum, people that knew nothing about Tolkien to begin with, has learned that the books are the true source to his ME and spreads the word to others.

This is not a attack at you, please don't think that, but I haven't had the chance to be at PT much lately, that's why I was so stunned when I saw how you suddenly felt about the films.
I do respect you opinion, though I might not agree. If everyone was to mean, look and feel the same, Earth would be a very dull place to live. Sadly, differences can also cause War and other foul things, but that is not the topic here.

Hope you understand that I'm not out to get you Aulë.
Maybe Aule used to like it, however he has seen the error of his ways so we forgive him. However I challange you to find a post where I said I liked the movies!

I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.
I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.
I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.
I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.
I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.
I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.
I HATE THE MOVIES!!! PETER JACKSON IS A PILLOCK!!! SIGNED ROSS.

[Edited on 10/10/2003 by PlasticSquirrel]

[Edited on 13/10/2003 by Ross]
That WAS the best post EVER!! But now it sucks.


[Redigert den 13/10/2003 av Amarië]
The piercing wit of Seņor Squirrel strikes again. Tongue Smilie
1) That was a rather thorough piece of research, Celebrian Big Smile Smilie

2) Maybe we have Dr Aule and his alter-ego Mr Aule here among us.

3) I never thought I'd live to see Ross throw so much praise in PJ's direction.

4) I love the new avatar Peredhil.

5) Remember to keep it friendly, folks.
Glad you all agree with me!
Who is agreeing? I'm not. Wink Smilie
OK, so basically Aulë has proven that love can turn to hate or that dr Jekyll and mr Hyde still stands strong today.

i agree with that if it is that what Ross meant. although i highly doubt that.
  [1] [2] >>