In my opinion, I'm sure all things considered, he would have approved. The man doesn't need to be alive and watching over every little detail in the movie to make sure that it works, all that matters is that the director and the people working on it have a love for the piece, and PJ has said numerous times that he adores LOTR's. As a connection between the idea that you don't need to supervise the film for it to work, Margaret Mitchell, the postAuthorID of Gone with the Wind, sold the rights and didn't even go to the showing of the film, yet it turned out extremely well done and very close to the origonal concept of the piece.

As for JRRT, I'm sure he would have his qualms, but not too many. I mean, when I first saw the Shire and Rivendell, and numerous other places, they were awe inspiering, and almost exactly what I had pictured in my mind when I first read the books. Now, I'm not JRRT, but if the mental image I got was the same as the one PJ got and numerous other folk got, well then, I think they did a **** fine job.

If I was he, and I'm not (curses!) the only things that would really peeve me would be messing with some of the characters, (cough cough ARWEN) giving people biggers roles than nessicary or even what was writen is just wrong, and I hate it, being female and all, and rather activist-y, but her role in the book was sitting at table, and then marrying Aragorn, not being some crazy heroine, no matter how much women want their fair share in the movie, just wait for Eowyn. (That all made sense in my head, sorry your not here to comprehend what I was trying to get across )

And then I come to my next point. In response to all this talk about Eowyn and Aragorn have a romantic connection, I hope to God that doesn't happen. I got the feeling (when I read the books) that he was slightly inclined to her for whatever reason, but never made any moves. So, I guess for this qualm, we're all going to have to wait until we see the movie to truely be ****** or pleased with it.

And now, I believe that's all I have to say about that...

[Edited on 17/12/2002 by QueenPippin]

(Grondy merely asterisked out a couple words in keeping with our newest policy not to give hints to the forbiden words even if they are as mild as these were.)

[Edited on 18/12/2002 by Grondmaster]

Welcome to our forum QueenPippin.

Good post, by the way. Now if PJ's version of TTT is as well done as his FotR we will be in for a treat as would be JRRT, were he able to watch the opening today.

Well, even if J.R.R. did not like the changes that PJ has made, I believe he would have loved the settings that PJ created of ME. To me they were absolutely amazing in FOTR and I hope they are the same way in TTT. I did not get to go like I had planned. My hubby took the tickets back that I bought. I was disappointed, but would much rather see it with him. I kinda like have a date with my hubby. lol

I could not think of a worse fate than having the Disney Corp do an animated feature of our beloved Middle Earth adventures. They would have just trivialized a true work of genius.


I would like to hear from someone who read the book(s) for the first time after viewing PJ's movie. I suspect you are correct that they would see Tolkien's world as protrayed in the film. That being said, I found the art direction extremely well done and I saw the images that were in my mind spring to life. I, too, missed Tom Bombadil, but I am afraid he would not translate well onto the big screen. He would have come across as a silly character wearing yellow boots and a blue coat and a feather in his hat. The concept that Tom represents is too complex for a few minutes of screen time. I think PJ did us a favour by leaving Tom to our own imaginations.

What is this "Bakshi's" LOTR's you speak of? Ooo, I'm intrigued...

Also, thank you's up and down for your hearty welcomes, I've never been in a nicer forum!

[Edited on 22/12/2002 by QueenPippin]

as promised, here's the link.

http://www.planet-tolkien.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Reviews&file=index&req=showcontent&id=1

okay?

It wasn't a news article Grond, but the only way to find it now is to use the "search" option over on the left there, and put in your keywords (searching the reviews section).

It is a pretty revolutionary bit of film-making, even if you hate what he did to Tolkien, the rotoscoping is pretty clever (not lazy) and if you notice, it tends to be used when things are at their bleakest, thus helping the bleak theme come across better. Best Nazgul EVER!!!!

Well, the two towers doesn't follow the plot as much as it should. But I think that they did a really good job on Smeagol.

Also, another note (I always seems to forget things I want to say.. curses to my lack of short term memory) Plastic Squirrel, fine review, and I shall defintely have to go out and find a copy

Thank you for aiding my in my confusion My, I do feel sheepish now....

For those not yet in the know, Ross is our member who wishes PJ had not bothered to make his film versions of the books, or at least is most vocal about his dislike for all the changes that PJ made. The rest of us are thankful that we get to see many of the aspects of Tolkien's world and stories brought to life on the silver screen.

You do really like the film, Ross. You do really like the film.

Oh well, I'm no Jedi either. Still, I think it would take more than Yoda to convince Ross that PJ made a wonderful film.

Serious question, Ross. If you had never read any Tolkien, and so had no comparisons, do you think you might have liked them?

Vive la Difference!!

*waves hand vaguely at Ross*
These are not the films you were looking for....
Mr. Jackson can go about his business...

Who's mr Jackson what films?

Celtavhc posted on 14/4/2003 at 23:24, which I have moved here from The Fellowship of the Ring under Tolkien and The Movies. Okay Celtavhc, you may read the above posts and I'm sure some of our newer people will also like to add their comments.

As to whether he would have approved of the films: In tolkien's biography humphrey carpenter explains that tolkien believed the requirement for selling the film rights would be either
A: a quality effort at transforming the novel into a movie.
or

B: A lot of money.

I believe Tolkien achieved both of those goals.
Aside from some hideous warner brothers cartoons, tolkiens work has been treated with the respect it deserves by both Bakshi and PJ. Both works leave the general scope and impact of the novel intact.

It has! Well I must have been wrong about PJ deleting parts of the story, adding nonsensical side plots and just general line swaping. I'll have another look. Oh no, he has completely changed the story in a blatent effort to make money without doing any research!

PJ did change the story to help improve the maketability of the films. He had an obligation to his investors ($320 million dollars worth of them) to mazimize the profits of the films. I also don't believe he changed plot lines and events out of a lack of research. If you read interviews with PJ about the process of adaptation it is clear that research was the back bone of his atempts to make the plot changes consistent with the world of middle earth.

So you know, I'm not a PJ worshiper. I left the two towers disgusted with the movie i.e. lack of the hourons at helms deep, the twisting of farimer into an adversary and the depiction of the ents as bumbling idiots. It is my hope that another theatrical version of the books will be made in my life time.

Overall though I think tolkiens masterwork was treated with more respect than I previously could have imagined.

Welcome to the club, and welcome to PT remmit! Hope you like it here!

This maybe the case, however my brother's father in law and his children are reading it because of the films. Yet they miss out the old forest section, because it's boring and not in the film. When I tried explaining how Tom is an important part of the story showing how the ring doesn't effect everything and that there is always someone more or of equal power to you. They repeated that they're not in the film. PJ and his evil spawn of movies are just bastardising the books for the masses. This I do not belive should happen. Tolkien wrote these works, not some morron third rate director of B-movies!

I don't think JRRT would have approved of the movies(s) at all, because the movies don't follow the story of the book really well : no Old Forest, no Tom Bombadil and Goldberry, no Barrowdowns, a messed up Elrond and Faramir, Frodo at Osigliath, etc
And i think he would very much dislike the overblown action and misplaced humour which has nothing to do with the story. In my opinion, Tolkien wouldn't only approve of the movies, but he would also object to a movie being made about his masterpiece.

In Carpenter's biography of Tolien it is clear that Tolkien was not opposed to a movie being made from lotr. He was concerned that it take the story seriously.
In addition if he was againts a movie being made of his masterpiece then why did he sell the film rights?

I don't think he would like the idea of his own books being made into movies,even if they where good or not.
I agree with you Mellie.

no offense indented. what is you source for this? I've been heard it before and would like to learn the details of Tolkiens troubles.