How to indentify autistic people

>They think Ralph Bakshi's LOTR is a bad adaptation

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_oBvNFMt9Ic
youtube.com/watch?v=Kylnv0eTsGc
youtu.be/UBnVL1Y2src
youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y
youtube.com/watch?v=mpjyNIoJ0V4
youtube.com/watch?v=ha2CnLUSfWQ
youtube.com/watch?v=hWjt6LGhHsI
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

It really is though.
Its not unwatchable and is certainly interesting from a media history standpoint, but anybody with any familiarity with Lotr will recognize its faults.
Honestly its a better measure to test autism by who actually likes it, as most people arent willing to sit through 30 minutes of shitty rotoscoping over halloween costumes.

I don't care for the rotoscope.

I'll take Jackson's live action or Rankin-Baas' stylized animation over the dull Bakshi rotoscope stuff.

There is a difference between bad movie and bad adaptation.

is unfinished, could be great but is just mehh, got great scenes

You don't actually know what autism is, do you?

>viewers might think Saruman and Sauron are the same person because both names start with an S, better call him Aruman

Boring and with shitty drawing, but not too bad.

...

>Rankin-Baas

My fucking nigga.

I think thinking any of the animated LoTRs are better than the Jackson films, much less actually decent adaptations is a better sign. I mean Hackson but I see people claiming this and it's like seriously nigga? I mean Tolkien would have walked out of all of them in disgust eventually but he's walking out of the stupid cartoons first for sure

Not a terrible adaptation, but things like portraying Samwise as a bumbling idiot really show how they were missing the point of certain aspects.

Also, that whole Aruman business.

Trope threads.

Worst Middle-Earth film. Not even Five Armies were that bad.

Go to bed, John K.
I'm with you there. Jackson's refusal to follow the books (thus creating giant plot holes, like the eagles) and tone-destroying forced humor made them shitty Lord Of The Rings films. They would have been great stand alone fantasy films, but he didn't do that, did he?

The animated Hobbit film was very good with nice animation. Unfortunately, Bakshi is a truly shitty animator and an utter cheapskate, so we wind up with blatantly recycled animation and rotoscoping that stands out in a distracting way.

It's not that great, but I still enjoy it. The bizarre rotoscoping does help with the Nazgul and the Orcs, as it makes them creepier in a sort of uncanny valley way.

Music is pretty good. I still find myself humming this every now and then.
youtube.com/watch?v=_oBvNFMt9Ic

It's interesting to be sure, but the animation is awful, the adaptation job is all over the place, and the acting is mostly laughable.

The Rankin-Bass Hobbit, while having its flaws, is much more well put together.

>The Balrog is literally an actor in a rubber suit dangling from a wire

It's a fucking CARTOON. You can DRAW WHATEVER YOU WANT. You aren't limited to live-action special effects technology constraints.

Jesus fuckin Christ, Bakshi. Did you forget how to make cartoons in the 80s or something?

This is going to be heresy, but I prefer the voice of Smaug in the animated Hobbit to Benadryl Cumberlandfarms' portrayal. I mean the actor kind of phoned it in, but he sounds like a greedy, grouchy asshole, which is essentially what Smaug is.

>The fucking frog elves

I could understand how someone working in 1977 and having read only the Hobbit might make this decision about the elves, but as a Tolkien autist it's just painful.

Although the wood-elves and goblins are both stupid departures from the book, at least I don't think the designs are artistically bad even if they are incorrect.

The single worst thing about the movie is that it flattens Bilbo's character development.

In terms of pacing and time-cutting, as an adaptation, the Bakshi film is alright. The Peter Jackson films took a lot of their pacing and cutting cues from the Bakshi flick since it gave them an example to work from.

It's also probably why Fellowship was so much better paced than either Towers or Return, because Jackson had to pace those adaptations himself and couldn't do as good a job.

But things like characterization is lousy and the rotoscoping is just abysmal. So in that respect Bakshi's film is an awful adaptation. It's only really good for getting you from the Rankin-Bass Hobbit movie to the Rankin-Bass Return of the King movie, if you absolutely need a visual representation of the events in-between. But that's it.

>and tone-destroying forced humor

I don't think it was really that bad. The only parts that really stick out to me were a few Gimli scenes from TT and RotK, but outside of that the humor was largely appropriate to what was going on in a scene.

Unless you're also including the Hobbit movies, in which case I agree.

>were a few Gimli scenes from TT and RotK
Man. I do love the Jackson films, but what possessed him to make Gimli such an idiot?

He really was better. Cucumbersnatch was just over the top and felt like a guy in a mocap suit trying sound like a dragon.

I dunno, he was actually pretty great in Fellowship. Watching the movies back to back and keeping that in mind, it's almost glaring how much more composed he was in that film compared to the others.

I know that they reshot TT and RotK after Fellowship's surprisingly massive success, maybe he reworked Gimli due to audience reactions to his comedic moments.

Maybe if Bakshi had 5 million dollars more, the rotoscoped parts wouldn't have looked so out of place. He kept a scene of Aragorn stumbling while running because they probably couldn't afford another take.

That said, I respect it for what it is despite the heavy flaws. First watched it in between Jackson's Fellowship and Two Towers and I had just finished the book. It had the first version of Helm's Deep I watched, so this chant was dope:

youtube.com/watch?v=_oBvNFMt9Ic

Well that's the thing. I noticed he was much better in FotR. But he just got sillier and sillier as time went on.

The only tone-destroying humor I couldn't stand was how they rendered Gollum as this obnoxious comedy relief character. I know he's supposed to come off as pathetic and pitiable, but he was straining so hard for laughs from the audience and got really irritating. Like singing a song about eating fish; shit like that.

Sorry OP not a real fan to rotoscope

The shield-surfing scene instantly dated Two Towers to the Tony Hawk Pro Skater era. Rocket Power, man.

I dunno, I found the idea of Gollum singing an innocent song as he beat a fish to death to be pretty in-place with his character within the films. Gollum's comedy worked for me, Gimli's didn't. Of course if you didn't like it, that's fine. After all, it is your opinion.

HEY OP

IS THAT WAY

Its not a bad adaptation but your thread titles sounds fucking contrarian

The only comedy I hated was the shit joke right before the Nazgul shows up in Fellowship. It's just out of place, and reminds me too much of the one in the Phantom Menace.

So people who like Ralph Bakshi'?

>The only comedy I hated

Everything involving Gimli

John Rhys-Davies gave a near perfect performance but I absolutely screamingly hated how Gimli was written.

Gimli is easily my favorite character in the book and every time they did a "Hurr hurr he's short and falls down a lot" joke I wanted to stab my own eyes out.

Stealing mushrooms? Come to think of it, the other two hobbits just drop in and tag along. Bakshi at least explained that a little better, they knew the stakes.

who was the guy who pooped himself during the production of this movie?

>>The Balrog is literally an actor in a rubber suit dangling from a wire

Is it as hilarious/pathetic as user makes it out to be?

You tell me.
youtube.com/watch?v=Kylnv0eTsGc

i like the lion head

The Balrog looks he's wearing fuzzy slippers and has butterfly wings?

Bakshi is like Snyder in that he had an idea (R O T O S C O P I N G) and absolutely went through with it. He's nothing if not driven

>Winged balrog

INTO THE TRASH

Oh boy, here we go.

I kind of like how it's at least closer to the size Tolkien described it as. Jackson's looks cool, but the size is way off.

You do know that Bakshi produced his Mighty Mouse show, right?

>Peter Jackson interpreted the "Fire of Orthanc" as Saruman utilizing his deep (and corrupting) knowledge of the dark arts to invent an early form of gunpowder, further developing the link between industrialization and destruction illustrated throughout the film by Saruman's descent into darkness as he turns his back on the natural world

>Ralph Bakshi interpreted the "Fire of Orthanc" as Saruman standing on his roof shooting lasers halfway across the planet with his magic wand

Why would they put wings on the Balrog if they knew he'd be defeated by falling into a pit?

Did the Balrog forget he had wings?

PEW
PEW
PEW

BALROGS DON'T HAVE WINGS

Though to be fair it isn't actually defeated by falling down that pit, Gandalf keeps fighting it after they reach the bottom.

That was pretty clearly implied to be gunpowder in the books.

Also, Gandalf invented gunpowder first for fireworks

>(R O T O S C O P I N G)

The rotoscoping worked for American Pop, which was supposed to be a historical drama with a music video feel.

The effect does not transition to fantasy sword & sorcery. Fire & Ice looks a little better than LOTR, but it still ends up looking like Filmation's He-Man animation.

Fire & Ice didn't have barely drawn-over footage at least.

>American Pop
>Lord of the Rings
>Fire & Ice

Why did Bakshi go Full Retard in the 80s with all the rotoscoping? It's used minimally in all his 70s stuff. Wizards and Hey Good Lookin (animated in the 70s, released in the 80s) have a few moments of rotoscoping, but they aren't the whole fuckin movie.

I don't get what Bakshi was thinking in the 80s. I applaud him for trying to extend animation into different genres beyond Kids stuff and comedy, but his "Rotoscoping is the way of the future!" mindset is baffling.

Gandalf only invented it to entertain the fat tobacco midgets though so that's ok

Budget. And honestly it works in American Pop.

Superior adaptation coming

I never heard of that, source?

Gene Deitch's Hobbit "film".

youtu.be/UBnVL1Y2src

He threw it together at the last minute to keep the rights from reverting back to the Tolkeins, that way he could extort money from them and make them buy the rights back from home (which they then licensed to Rankin-Bass).

Deitch is also the guy responsible for those awful Tom & Jerry cartoons everyone hates.

Holy shit did he really rotoscope over scenes of Zulu?

One thing that bugged me about the Jackson films is how they handled Sauron. I don't like how they portrayed him (seriously, he looks like a fork) and they took 'The Eye of Sauron' literally. Bakshi did it better by just showing his silhouette.

youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y

Also an occasional nice reaction face

And smoe unintentional laughs

youtube.com/watch?v=mpjyNIoJ0V4

Catchy as fuck, orcs really know how to sing.

It's a regular Orc-estra

He sings that song in the book.

Everyone sings in the books. Weirdest example if "Fifteen Birds" from the Hobbit. Are we supposed to believe supposed to believe that the goblins have some reason to have memorized a song about a bunch of dwarves burning alive in the trees? Or did they all just spontaneously come up with the same lyrics at once?

They all just spontaneously come up with the same lyrics at once

youtube.com/watch?v=Kylnv0eTsGc

>Or did they all just spontaneously come up with the same lyrics at once?

It's pretty clear that this is normal in the Tolkien world. The hobbits are constantly improvising songs. Think of what the goblins are doing as a battle march.

1978 Eowyn is 11/10 waifu material.

My problem with the rotoscoping is that there are times where the characters look so realistic that you question why the whole thing isn't just live action.

This being the worst example.

youtube.com/watch?v=ha2CnLUSfWQ

Drugs are a hell of a drug

That's actually a thing in Ireland and Scotland. It's possible to find someone to make up a song while singing.

you're a fucking idiot.

Trips of truth

I like how WB advertises The Hobbit, LOTR and Return of the King as a unified trilogy of films, even though LOTR was done independently of the two Rankin-Bass TV specials.

You watch them as a trilogy and suddenly Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli etc. go from being focal characters to cameos between films. And Frodo and Sam meet Gollum for the first time twice.

Even for all of it's many issues, I always found that the Bakshi LOTR had an overall darker tone and just felt more like a fantasy film. Soundtrack was pretty good too

Visually it was darker and grainier. But it had some really obnoxious attempts at levity with characters like Sam being a moronic stooge constantly going through pratfalls to get a laugh.

Reminds me of Disney's Black Cauldron. Visually a very dark film, but really annoying comedy relief characters constantly trying to contrast with the imagery.

>people talking up Rankin-Bass in this thread
>look up a few clips on youtube
>find this

youtube.com/watch?v=hWjt6LGhHsI

Why is everything about this version of the Witch King so perfect

Looks like an anime character.

Can't take the announcer seriously.

An anime character wouldn't be able to deliver the lines she does with the same conviction.

Topcraft literally was the forerunner of Ghibli.

This is the worst thing I've ever seen

why is Aragorn not wearing trousers though?
>inb4 muh tunic

"A-Aw Jeez, Rick! I, uh, don't want to fight a dragon! I-I just wanna stay in my little hobbit hole!"

Pants are a mark of barbarism. Civilized peoples do not wear them.

>Suddenly, it was all destroyed, by the monster lizard...
>Slag

Ok, I'm gonna quit while I'm ahead.

youtube.com/watch?v=hWjt6LGhHsI
>"No living man may hinder me!"
Sounds like pic related.

This will always be the best adaptation of LotR. Maximum comfy.

How to identify shitposters:
They make an unsupported assertion and preemptively accuse anyone who disagrees of being autistic.

I was thinking the exact same shit. I don't think I could contain my laughter if I saw the abominable general of the legions of Mordor land in front of me riding a dragon and then he suddenly says in a high-pitched, nasal voice
>COME NOT BETWEEN A NAZGUL AND HIS PREY

I expect nothing less from Gene Deitch.

Actually, as a kid growing up in Serbia, barely understanding English, I had that problem.

>Let's change a character's name to appease Serbians

I hope you're happy. This is the only time in human history that a piece of media was altered to appease Serbians.

Her perfect lines are wasted by the robot voice of the Witch King