His opinion is meaningless to me. Did he ever even write a book? Did any of the Tolkien kids/grandkids take up J.R.R.'s legacy and start writing more books in the Lord Of the Rings universe?
I would take his opinion seriously if he was like Brian Herbert (Frank Herberts son) who actually continued writing more Dune books (and still writes them) after Frank Herbert died.
Christopher was the editor of all his fathers posthumous work. Notably he put together The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, The History of Middle-earth and The Children of Húrin from his fathers old notes. He also helped his father prepare LOTR.
While I think his opinions on the movies is silly, he is undoubtably the most knowledgeable living person regarding his fathers work.
The Silmarillion is awesome in general imo: When comparing to the LOTRs makes the LOTRs sort of fractal sub-story.
Originally posted by Rhoklaw Far as I'm concerned, Peter Jackson is a brilliant director and while his movies may be more action oriented then the books portrayed, you can't tell me the movies didn't do the books justice. The amount of detail Peter went to with environment, costumes and story flow is probably as good as your going to get. Christopher is a pompous brat and I hope he chokes on his wad of money.
I think Tolkein was wrong about the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, but correct (in his prediction) regarding The Hobbit. Jackson added combat, took songs out, and added entirely new story elements to add even more combat into it.
Anyone seen it? I saw a terrible review, stretched out insanely. Now I read the book at about 12 which was a long tim ago, have no urge to see the film. Dam the last prequels I can think of- shit they were.
Originally posted by Panther2103 The movies had plenty of story involved in them, they had a majority of the action scenes of the books because of the fact that if they made the movie exactly how the book was page for page, it would have been 15 hours long for one book if even that short. So they take the parts of the books, explain the story in a faster manner, and have the major action scenes. I don't see the issue. It wasn't marketed as an action film. I think the hobbit had maybe 4 or 5 actual action scenes that lasted more than 30 seconds. They always have been very slow, and that turns quite a few people I know off of the films. The environments in the films, and the way all of the characters look and act are exactly how I expected them to be in movie form.
+1
There are things not in the movies that were in the books that I miss, but all-in-all, the movies did the story well. I was pleased.
"I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist
Originally posted by Panther2103 The movies had plenty of story involved in them, they had a majority of the action scenes of the books because of the fact that if they made the movie exactly how the book was page for page, it would have been 15 hours long for one book if even that short. So they take the parts of the books, explain the story in a faster manner, and have the major action scenes. I don't see the issue. It wasn't marketed as an action film. I think the hobbit had maybe 4 or 5 actual action scenes that lasted more than 30 seconds. They always have been very slow, and that turns quite a few people I know off of the films. The environments in the films, and the way all of the characters look and act are exactly how I expected them to be in movie form.
+1
There are things not in the movies that were in the books that I miss, but all-in-all, the movies did the story well. I was pleased.
They could have been awful. The first film, the horse chase was amazing, then got a bit CGI heavy for me.
He is an 88 year old man, many old people don't want to accept that movies generally look different than in the 50s-90s.
Movies in the past contained just as much action scenes...they just looked very differently.
And there is the fact that he is disappointed he didn't get money for not writing the books and not directing the movie. That poor guy isn't even a billionaire...I'd sue the hell out of New Line Cinema too.
He is an 88 year old man, many old people don't want to accept that movies generally look different than in the 50s-90s.
Movies in the past contained just as much action scenes...they just looked very differently.
And there is the fact that he is disappointed he didn't get money for not writing the books and not directing the movie. That poor guy isn't even a billionaire...I'd sue the hell out of New Line Cinema too.
So you blame it all on Cameron and Terminator 2. That is a bit of a leap.
He is an 88 year old man, many old people don't want to accept that movies generally look different than in the 50s-90s.
Movies in the past contained just as much action scenes...they just looked very differently.
And there is the fact that he is disappointed he didn't get money for not writing the books and not directing the movie. That poor guy isn't even a billionaire...I'd sue the hell out of New Line Cinema too.
So you blame it all Cameron and Terminator 2. That is a bit of a leap.
He is an 88 year old man, many old people don't want to accept that movies generally look different than in the 50s-90s.
Movies in the past contained just as much action scenes...they just looked very differently.
And there is the fact that he is disappointed he didn't get money for not writing the books and not directing the movie. That poor guy isn't even a billionaire...I'd sue the hell out of New Line Cinema too.
So you blame it all Cameron and Terminator 2. That is a bit of a leap.
Tolkien wanted to create a book that few people would read. The publisher made him write a book that would appeal to readers. Jackson made a movie of it to appeal to moviegoers. This goes against what Tolkien wanted in the first place, but is a perfect fit for what he eventually wrote.
Tolkien wanted to create a book that few people would read. The publisher made him write a book that would appeal to readers. Jackson made a movie of it to appeal to moviegoers. This goes against what Tolkien wanted in the first place, but is a perfect fit for what he eventually wrote.
but no good book is designed for film, but the best films come from good books, if you want me to list- no can't be bothered, can if you want but really don't wanna.
Christopher Tolkien is a spoiled little bitch who needs a punch in the face. For years he's been taking people to court over nothing simply because he thinks his daddy's stories are just for him and no one else. He's a vindictive sociopath that has done nothing but hinder the Tolkien Society.
I think someone should point out to the "family", the stories were aimed at pre teen and young teens. That the author's "family" is not raking in the cash is not the fault of anyone but themselves. Personally, I find it typical of today's ideals. Everyone thinks they are entitled to something because someone else did some work. If the "family" wants to make money, the "family" should get off their lazy arses and do something.
Originally posted by Saur0n Christopher Tolkien is a spoiled little bitch who needs a punch in the face. For years he's being taking people to court over nothing simply because he thinks his daddy's stories are just for him and no one else. He's a vindictive sociopath that has done nothing but hinder the Tolkien Society.
Thank God, I thought I was going to get the warning... phew. The Tolkein Society, explain your connection?
They are 2 different types of styles with Jackson and Tolkien but when I thnk of Lotr I think of Peter Jackson because he really brings the ip to life visually. I don't know if some gamers out there can even remember Tolkien. I know I don't. If we had a vote I bet many gamers would rather have Peter Jackson's version of Lotr.
Originally posted by Normandy7 They are 2 different types of styles with Jackson and Tolkien but when I thnk of Lotr I think of Peter Jackson because he really brings the ip to life visually. I don't know if some gamers out there can even remember Tolkien. I know I don't. If we had a vote I bet many gamers would rather have Peter Jackson's version of Lotr.
read up mate, we were discussing missing characters, and when Samwise became the lord of Frodo's ring. All in the book- is like 50 rings of gay.
I started reading LOTR when I was around 11 or 12, I am now almost 40.
IMO the films were great and have brought a whole new generation of fans to the IP. They may not be a 100% accurate representation of the books, but who cares. Alot of new fans of LOTR just because of the movies. Alot of those fans will have read the books because they saw the movies.
A win win for everybody. I think any writer who had their work turned into movies with millions of fans worldwide would be happy. Its yet another form of media for people to enjoy, all based on that initial work.
Something tells me Christopher would not be complaining that much if he was getting the money he thinks he deserves. If he was raking in 20 million per film I bet he would love the movies even.
I started reading LOTR when I was around 11 or 12, I am now almost 40.
IMO the films were great and have brought a whole new generation of fans to the IP. They may not be a 100% accurate representation of the books, but who cares. Alot of new fans of LOTR just because of the movies. Alot of those fans will have read the books because they saw the movies.
A win win for everybody. I think any writer who had their work turned into movies with millions of fans worldwide would be happy. Its yet another form of media for people to enjoy, all based on that initial work.
Something tells me Christopher would not be complaining that much if he was getting the money he thinks he deserves. If he was raking in 20 million per film I bet he would love the movies even.
Just my 2cp
Pretty similar here other than got 5 years till 40. First time the Library bus came to our primary school i borrowed The Hobbit, it was the book that got me into reading in the first place (Dandy and Beano annuals don't count ) and shaped my preferences . I'm not sure when i read the 3 following books but i remember getting the silmarrilion for a birthday present when still young and couldn't read it from start to finish in one go, that thing kicked my backside and i still find it quite hard to read.
The Tolkien books arent close to the best i've ever read but they were an entry point for me and have inspired a lot of writers.
The 'Tolkien Estate' have always been money grabbing gits for as long as i can remember, everything i've ever read about them through the years and decades has pointed in that direction.
I don't know why everyone is hating on this Tolkien guy. From a story telling persepctive Peter Jackson ruined a lot of characters and scenes in the final two films. The way he overdid Galadriel and Arwen cramming in worthless Rivendell flashbacks.
Sending Elves to Helms Deep.
Making Frodo show the One Ring to a ringwraith in Osgiliath, but then Sauron still thinks Pippin somehow has the Ring in Rohan.
Frodo telling Sam to go home as if that's even a realistic option, and Sam listening until he finds the bread at the bottom of the stairs lol.
Bringing the Oathbreakers to Minas Tirith. Waiting for the RotK to reforge the shards of Narsil.
Making Lord Denethor unwilling to light the beacons. Having Theodon unwilling to go to Gondor's aid.
Over conflicted the character of Faramir (He was supposed to be a foil to Boromir and shw that not all men fall into temptation), then over stressed the Denethor's disapproval of him, which led to a scene where about 200 horsemen charge toward Osgiliath in an unexplained suicide mission.
Missed one of the major points of the book by leaving out the scouring of the Shire. (Although this one I didn't mind as much.)
Failed to develop Merry and Pippen's character arcs, by having Merry stab the Ringwraith and then stay behind, and then NOT have Pippen stab the troll when he goes to battle.
Having the Ents not want to fight Saruman just ti giver Merry and Pippen something to do.
These are just off the top of my head...There're definitely more, but you see Jackson could have chosen to do things by the book, but he chose to do things differently for no other reason that I can surmise other than to put his own stamp on the story.
I completely agree and this has been my stance all along.
I fully know that there are things within books that don't translate well to screen so moives many times have to be altered. But there is a difference between changing things to make the movie have more cohesion or better illustrate a scene and just changing things because it would be cool.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
The Silmarillion is awesome in general imo: When comparing to the LOTRs makes the LOTRs sort of fractal sub-story.
(That innuendo joke was well played earlier).
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Anyone seen it? I saw a terrible review, stretched out insanely. Now I read the book at about 12 which was a long tim ago, have no urge to see the film. Dam the last prequels I can think of- shit they were.
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
+1
There are things not in the movies that were in the books that I miss, but all-in-all, the movies did the story well. I was pleased.
"I don't give a sh*t what other people say. I play what I like and I'll pay to do it too!" - SerialMMOist
They could have been awful. The first film, the horse chase was amazing, then got a bit CGI heavy for me.
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
explain?
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
he's rich?
Oh, Jackson.
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
He is an 88 year old man, many old people don't want to accept that movies generally look different than in the 50s-90s.
Movies in the past contained just as much action scenes...they just looked very differently.
And there is the fact that he is disappointed he didn't get money for not writing the books and not directing the movie. That poor guy isn't even a billionaire...I'd sue the hell out of New Line Cinema too.
So you blame it all on Cameron and Terminator 2. That is a bit of a leap.
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
Lol
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
Glad someone was with me on that
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
To me the tl;dr version of the article is:
Tolkien wanted to create a book that few people would read. The publisher made him write a book that would appeal to readers. Jackson made a movie of it to appeal to moviegoers. This goes against what Tolkien wanted in the first place, but is a perfect fit for what he eventually wrote.
but no good book is designed for film, but the best films come from good books, if you want me to list- no can't be bothered, can if you want but really don't wanna.
well if you are going to force me: -
Shawshank redemption
Godfather
Jaws
Mrs Crimble's big day out
A night at the museum
Davey Locklace licks her face
Shaving Ryan's Privates
I could go on... do I need to?
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
Thank God, I thought I was going to get the warning... phew. The Tolkein Society, explain your connection?
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
read up mate, we were discussing missing characters, and when Samwise became the lord of Frodo's ring. All in the book- is like 50 rings of gay.
currently playing: DDO, AOC, WoT, P101
I started reading LOTR when I was around 11 or 12, I am now almost 40.
IMO the films were great and have brought a whole new generation of fans to the IP. They may not be a 100% accurate representation of the books, but who cares. Alot of new fans of LOTR just because of the movies. Alot of those fans will have read the books because they saw the movies.
A win win for everybody. I think any writer who had their work turned into movies with millions of fans worldwide would be happy. Its yet another form of media for people to enjoy, all based on that initial work.
Something tells me Christopher would not be complaining that much if he was getting the money he thinks he deserves. If he was raking in 20 million per film I bet he would love the movies even.
Just my 2cp
Pretty similar here other than got 5 years till 40. First time the Library bus came to our primary school i borrowed The Hobbit, it was the book that got me into reading in the first place (Dandy and Beano annuals don't count
) and shaped my preferences . I'm not sure when i read the 3 following books but i remember getting the silmarrilion for a birthday present when still young and couldn't read it from start to finish in one go, that thing kicked my backside and i still find it quite hard to read.
The Tolkien books arent close to the best i've ever read but they were an entry point for me and have inspired a lot of writers.
The 'Tolkien Estate' have always been money grabbing gits for as long as i can remember, everything i've ever read about them through the years and decades has pointed in that direction.
I completely agree and this has been my stance all along.
I fully know that there are things within books that don't translate well to screen so moives many times have to be altered. But there is a difference between changing things to make the movie have more cohesion or better illustrate a scene and just changing things because it would be cool.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Oh and dropping all the twee stuff like the songs and tom bombadil
Throwing this in for comparison: The Lord Of The Rings theatrical trailer 2 (1978)
Very different style (a little drug-fuelled, possibly..) but closer in "style" to the book. Eg "tales, stories and legends" etc.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem