tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31246093.post6921261841640570159..comments2024-03-29T05:41:35.119-07:00Comments on Graphic Firing Table: There and Back Again, AgainFDChiefhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10607785969510234092noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31246093.post-35721589439636392842017-09-02T10:40:05.464-07:002017-09-02T10:40:05.464-07:00I enjoyed all the comments and noted that we all s...I enjoyed all the comments and noted that we all seem to suffer from the same malady. That is; We read the books first and saw the films later. In that sequence, we come to expect certain events to happen in the film. If I had seen the films before reading the books, I can only wonder what my thoughts might have been. I've read Hobbit, LoTR and The Silmarillion many times. I dread the Silmarillion film when it comes out. <br /><br />Sam CreecyAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15829250182537437213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31246093.post-55324891260471537142014-01-02T11:49:22.832-07:002014-01-02T11:49:22.832-07:00But in a sense you could say that about any sort o...But in a sense you could say that about any sort of adventure fiction, Julia; if you're unhappy about not getting somewhere you won't enjoy the ride. I get your unhappiness about Jackson's vision not matching your own.<br /><br />That's where I think the lack of deep affection for JRRT's original gets me through these films. Don't get me wrong; I truly enjoy the old professor's words and respect his work as the fundamental basis for pretty much ALL the "heroic fantasy" genre as we've read it in the post-WW2 period.<br /><br />But I also keep running across the parts that remind me that the Middle Earth books were hugely influenced by his love of philology and languages. I don't think that the LotR was created as backstory for Sindarin and Quenya...but it wasn't peripheral to them, either. As an author JRRT has his quirks; a direct translation of his work to the screen would be, IMO, damn near unwatchable.<br /><br />So I've enjoyed Jackson's work for what it is; HIS vision of JRRT's stories. I felt that his version of the LotR wasn't discreditable and enjoyable in itself and for itself - with the usual sorts of dissatisfaction everyone has at seeing something they've enjoyed and envisioned brought to the screen by someone with a different vision.<br /><br />I had the same general feeling about the first <i>Hobbit</i> installment, too. It was only with this one that I thought the Jackson had made to really unfortunate choices and showed a lack of respect for his material. I'm hesitant at this point to consider his translation of the story utterly wrongheaded, but I now have much lower expectations of his final chapter than I had hoped for...FDChiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10607785969510234092noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31246093.post-13808459713184532522014-01-02T10:23:07.356-07:002014-01-02T10:23:07.356-07:00Well stated. You know that I am in total agreemen...<br />Well stated. You know that I am in total agreement with you on many of the points you make. Epic fail in Erebor all the way around. There is no excusing the poor decisions by PJ there. None. It is akin to a crime for me. <br /><br />It isn't that this falls so far short of the Hobbit of my minds eye or what I envision the Professor to have wanted, it is that the works of LotR's and The Hobbit are NOT THE SAME works. They can't be made to be the same. Forcing it to be that way is the major malfunction. I get it, okay. I understand why Mr. Jackson wanted to tie the films together. Using the ring to do so was simply gag worthy and makes me appear to be sucking on lemons as I write.<br /><br />The reality is that Mr. Bilbo Baggins from the get go is portrayed incorrectly. Not that Martin Freeman isn't brilliant, because he is! But he would still have been a brilliant Bilbo played as written. Read the damned book, please. Bilbo was a "frightened rabbit" "shaking and quaking" ... not a hero at all. He only does one really heroic thing and that is how he handles the Arkenstone. Every other heroic thing he does he uses the ring as a foil for. He is clever, no doubt. But would he have made the same choices without the ring? How could he have saved all the dwarves from the spiders without it? Or verbally dueled with Smaug without it? Or got them released from the Wood Elves without it? <br /><br />As you wrote, it was because he uses the ring to get some street cred. He is a burglar. Without the ring he is a squeaking, frightened little creature who is ALMOST pitiable just standing there looking useless. BUT..he is a FUN write...he is a fun read. The Hobbit (whilst bloody to be sure) is an easy bloody to take. It is easy on the heart and on the mind. AS it is SUPPOSED to be. I really resent that we didn't get to see THAT Bilbo...<br /><br />And that is where it all began to go wrong for me. I could write all day about the shortcomings of the movie, where I really wanted to see my vision (book vision) on the screen....most of it I could deal with and accept. With a few exceptions. But..the fundamental cancer is still there.<br /><br />A roller coaster ride is fun and exciting, at the end of the day you are still just going around in a big circle. No?Julia Davishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08036299787190966783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31246093.post-15373256658972021432013-12-31T21:08:16.131-07:002013-12-31T21:08:16.131-07:00It's funny, Leon; you're not the first per...It's funny, Leon; you're not the first person I've run into who feels that strongly about Professor Tolkien's work.<br /><br />I don't, really. I enjoy the books, I always have, but not to the point of taking them as canon to the point of getting upset if someone takes liberties with it. I do like to see my imagined pictures of Tolkien's world come to life and just accept that another person's vision isn't going to match mine exactly...FDChiefhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10607785969510234092noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31246093.post-40662459565432577872013-12-31T14:38:38.566-07:002013-12-31T14:38:38.566-07:00They should never have been connected, they're...They should never have been connected, they're two very different books that happen to share the same world. He should have done it like that - and probably in two films instead of three based on everything I've read.<br /><br /><br />After watching Fellowship and Two Towers I recognized that my vision of Tolkien is very different from Jackson's and skipped on everything else he's done. Doing so has kept my sanity and saved on dental bills.Leonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15715768191516712688noreply@blogger.com