As a film fan, I've always loved Gandalf as a character, but ever since I began reading the LOTR a little over a month ago, my admiration for him increased substantially. Ian McKellen's performance was very faithful to the source material, and I feel like it's emblematic of PJ's stance towards it (excluding Tom Bombadil's or Glorfindel's absence).Which begs the question, what do the diehard book fans take issue with in the film adaptations? Christopher Tolkien's words about Peter Jackson's work are very jarring to hear, considering the films' colossal success.
>>24964867Not enough gay singingToo much testosterone in the fights
What he said
>>24964867Primarily for me, Return of the King was fumbled. First of all, it felt like half the film was Frodo hugging his friends like a homo before sailing into the undying lands. Cut all that shit out and devote the time to fixing my subsequent complaints.The battle of Pelinor Fields was incredibly flat.The ghosts being a deus ex machina nuclear weapon sucked. It made the charge of the Rohirrim a pointless sacrifice. It made the subsequent decision to disband them before distracting Sauron at the gate bewildering.Some cool Gondorians were missing. The towns on the coast should have been rallied by Strider just like in the books, and Eomer should have been given his surrounded, berserker Diomedes moment just before those forces relieved him.
>>24964903Oh, I've not yet read the RotK, but those seem like valid complaints (though I don't understand what you take issue with the Grey Havens scene?).
>>24964867Idk I like both the films and the book although of course the book is going to be better and the films won't get everything right, it should go without saying. That being said, most people consider the LOTR films to be the greatest fantasy films ever made, which I would agree. However the Hobbit films were even better and get hated on way too much for how good they were.
>>24964911I personally hold very nostalgic views about the Hobbit (as they came our right when I began delving into the world of fantasy), but if we are to be honest with ourselves, we must admit that they are flawed at best (An Unexpected Journey) to simply bad films (Five Armies). Though, of course, this is the fault of corporate greed and the lack of creative freedom to PJ. Stretching this children's book into a 3-part epic was a mistake only a big studio want to make.
>>24964912It was fun and I'm tired of pretending it wasn't. Don't care if everyone else's brain is too fried by TikTok to enjoy an overly long movie
>>24964916It's not the length that people take issue with dude
>>24964926Then quit bitching about it being 3 movies
For me personally I wanted them to explain Aragorn's tax policy and position on immigration. Improve on the books a bit like an adaptation should.
>>24964970The Hobbit was never meant to be an epic.
>>24964977For those who don't know
>>24964990So what do you prefer? A gay disney kids movie? Because we already had that with Rankin Bass. I wanted another LOTR style epic, fuck you.
>>24965029So you didn't want the Hobbit, that's fine, but you can't deny an epic trilogy is not faithful to the spirit of the book.
>>24965038Fuck the book. It's literally fairy tales for kids who still shit in diapers.
>>24965062Yes. That's what it always was and meant to be.The Hobbit was NEVER meant to be LOTR 0, any adaptation that isn't a gay disney kids movie for kids is missing the forest for the trees.
>>24965080>The Hobbit was NEVER meant to be LOTR 0Tsmt
>>24965080>The Hobbit was NEVER meant to be LOTR 0Blame Tolkien. He's the one who retconned it into being so.
>>24964867when I look at grindr it always am reminded of gay gandal and his hobbit catamites dumbledore is probably worse, on wizard grindr
>>24965337McKellen and Stephen Fry are my gay icons desu
>>24965337>>24965414Sounds a bit gay.
>>24965518Yes, and?
The problem is, Peter Hackson had to make a movie that appeals to all audiences, including children, and that, in his vision, usually means destroying any and all seriousness in what are meant to be serious moments, inserting farcical humor, exaggerating the drama to a comical extent, and adding subplots to where they don't belong because the film school said you have to.
>>24965581>inserting farcical humorName 3 faggot
>>24965584Theoden's revival made into a parody of the Exorcist. Burning Denethor base jumping from the high court. Saruman rolling down Orthan like Homer Simpson and being impaled and sunken in sewage. Do I need to go on?
>>24965630None of those things were portrayed in a humorous manner. Try again.
>>24964867the 'colossal success' was atrocious cgi slop appreciated by 8-14 year old boys. chris tolkien was absolutely right
>>24964867Aragorn being reluctant to claim his throne.Merry becoming Pippin 2.0.Ents made out as dimwitted simpletons.Denethor was a total character assassination.Theoden trying to tuck tail and run. Gimli turned into comic relief.Aragorn killing the Mouth of Sauron.Too much comedy in general.Elrond portrayed as gruff and borderline angry all the time.Everything involving the Army of the Dead, as well as many other aspects of the Battle of Pelennor
>>24966194>Aragorn being reluctant to claim his throne.Increases stakes.>Merry becoming Pippin 2.0.That makes no sense. They're distinct characters both in the book and in the films.>Ents made out as dimwitted simpletons.Fair enough, but they do still retain agency.>Denethor was a total character assassination.They had to do that to make it clear that the Palantir was corrupting him.>Theoden trying to tuck tail and run.Where, exactly?>Gimli turned into comic relief.Partially agree, but I think it's handled well.>Aragorn killing the Mouth of Sauron.Yeah, I dislike that too.>Too much comedy in general.Strongly disagree, I think the comedy is done very well, balancing out the grim story.>Elrond portrayed as gruff and borderline angry all the time.Literally not true, have you even seen any scene with him?>Everything involving the Army of the Dead, as well as many other aspects of the Battle of PelennorYeah, but Tolkien himself knew how much of a Deus Ex Machina the Army of the Dead was.
>>24965648You can't possibly see them as anything but humorous, because they're so ridiculous. The audience was hollering in laughter in the theater at those parts.
>>24966690>The audience was hollering in laughter in the theater at those parts.I don't think a single person would laugh at the sight of Denethor falling from Minas Tirith while on fire, unless they're psychotic.
>>24965581But it IS for children, Anon. Unless you are retarded, I guess.The problem is the movie also appeals to manchildren that want fake depth while enjoying le movie magic like CGI shit and props and pathos on overdrive.The movie is actually quite enjoyable if you treat it as opera and focus 80% on the music and for the rest just enjoy the colors and movement and acting from great actors. And embrace the funny and goofy or else go watch Game of Thrones if you want to pretend this shit should be realistic.
>>24966194>Elrond portrayed as gruff and borderline angry all the time.>Also Elrond shooting Neo with guns all the time. Anon, it's been a long time, but I think you went into the wrong projection back in 2000.
>>2496669926 years ago, people could still tell the difference between fiction and reality.
>>24966709It being fiction doesn't make it any less worse to laugh at such a thing
>>24966714Dude, relax. It was funny.
>>24966690Saruman never died in the theatrical version you fool
>>24964867The movies are fucking awesome never be convinced otherwise. In Christopher's case, imagine hearing the hobbit/lotr take form as your dad reads it to you every night. I'd guess he's far too biased to really appreciate what PJ did. A film can't adapt everything.
>>24966830>In Christopher's case, imagine hearing the hobbit/lotr take form as your dad reads it to you every night. I'd guess he's far too biased to really appreciate what PJ did. A film can't adapt everything.I would imagine he's just too familiar to the source material to be truly objective in analysing the films independent of the books
>>24966194I reread the books recently and I was surprised at how little character development Gimli had. I don't think he ever even says a single word to Boromir, maybe one or two to Gandalf
>>24966835PJ stripped the narrative payoffs. Bakshi did the text to screen translation for fellowship.That is why everything after is crap, where PJ had to go alone without known what should become a scene and how it should be enacted.
>>24966868>how little character development Gimli had.Are you insane
>>24966685Only thing army of the dead does in the book is scaring the pirates and being another proof of Aragorn's right to the crown. Actual fighting is done by the Grey Company and Gondorians.
>>24966873>PJ stripped the narrative payoffsBut how?
>>24967050merry and pippin take a level in badass take back the shire in a campaignsam plants magical trees all over the shire (galadriels gift, chekov not fired) turning hobbits with elven features being bornlegolas and gimli explore the cave behind helms deep, the closure of their character arc something they can unite, elven beauty almost under the mountaingimli gets dwarfes to repair gondors doors I thinkthe big ones jackson removed, not having sams gift from galadriel fire is pure narrative foul play faramir and eowyn are respected in the extended edition but cut for understandable reasonswe never learn that the pony returned save home, thats a joke it is not necessaryI just think that jackson only got the fellowship out well because of the bakshi version which he clearly used as storyboardand without the end product sufferedhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t7KSarpfFM
