Starting a new LOTR thread because I was just about to blow the fuck out of the bookfag in the last thread who kept shitting on the movies, when the thread died.
Yes I am autistic enough to start a completely new thread just so i can post my response.
Also general LOTR thread if you guys want to keep going.
I don't even know why I'm replying to you because you clearly don't know anything about the structure of movies compared to the structure of books, but here goes anyway. Film is a visual medium, with books it's all about the writing and the way the reader imagines the events in his head. Also movies are supposed to be viewed as a single experience, while books are meant to be read a piece at a time.
For these reasons alone, the fundamental way the story of Lord of the Rings is going to be told is must be vastly different. Gimli can spend pages and pages describing those fucking caves in the books because it allows the reader to imagine their beauty and be moved by his description. In the movies, if they were to show the caves, there would have been a pan around the cave, while Gimli says "Wow, that's pretty". They can't stand there for 20 minutes talking about the fucking caves, that's not good storytelling in a movie.
The Helm's Deep battle isn't for dumb people who want to see Michael Bay explosions, it's supposed to be the climax of the movie. The battle seems unwinnable, everyone is prepared to make their last stand. It's more about the emotion behind the battle than watching orcs get killed, but spectacle is an important part of a fantasy epic, because again, it's a visual medium. If the battle ended after 10 minutes it would be a let down, because the whole movie has been building towards this, it's not like the book where it's one chapter you read out of many.
Adaptations are not about literally adapting the events of the source material, they're about capturing the themes and emotion of the source material. The Lord of the Rings movies effectively capture the book's themes of sacrifice, power, redemption, fellowship, etc. It's not about watching our heroes walk, eat, camp, and sing Elvish songs for 3 hours.
So yes Lord of the Rings is a faithful adaptation, and you need to get back on your meds Christopher Tolkien.
First movie was okay. It went downhill after that.
>they're about capturing the themes and emotion of the source material.
>they're about capturing the themes and emotion of the source material.
>they're about capturing the themes and emotion of the source material.
I am not even him but is it infuriating how much of this analysis gets and just goes over your fucking heads.
movies are for lazy niggers who can't read
but the movies are superior
the books are fucking boring
Threadly reminder that rec.arts.books.tolkien hated the movies from FotR on, for very specific and highly accurate reasons.
your posts are boring
Sup Forums is boring
Then why don't you make like a tree and fuck off
life is boring
Who gives a shit about some fucking newsgroup (IT'S CURRENT EARTH ROTATION WHO THE FUCK STILL USES NEWSGROUPS) when we can just read CT's specific and accurate reasons?
FEANOR DID NOTHING WRONG
the universe is boring
MUH SILMARILS
>that image
>that post
>in the context of your argument
Do you have no irony center in your fucking brain
...
the fourth dimension is boring
Damn; LoTR fags are the new star wars fags. How can you swallow all this trite shit willingly? Out of a sense of brotherhood? Of belonging to Sup Forums?
At least if you read the books you'd have the right to mindlessly enjoy the flicks, but no. The movies have to be good because they more or less adapted the plot. They have to be art because they managed to tell your get the mcguffin/save the world story, without actually having to touch the themes of the book. You're just enjoying a generic action movie. With Lotr painted over it.
(Please don't be one of those fags who starts talking about "muh cinematography" or "muh costume/set design" as if 95% of the trilogy isn't just the camera panned on them actors faces)
Cgi aged like shit, too
i just watched them again recently and the cgi mostly looks fine to me
I did read Hobbit, Lotr and Silmarillon (in this order) as a kid ages before, and then once again before ever watching FotR the first time.
The book has a dimension that the movies will never have; Well, d-hurr.
But the lotr movies are wonderful adaptations and a work made with heart.
Is there anybody angrier than him?
not bad