DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site
General => Movies and TV => Topic started by: AndyDT on April 17, 2011, 06:45:10 AM
-
Somebody was saying it's over 10 years since LoTR was made. Seems incredible. They seemed such epic things particularly being spread over 3 years. Has there been any film as epic since?
-
With epic as in the traditional sense of the word, I don't think any film as epic as any LOTR film has been made.
-
With epic as in the traditional sense of the word, I don't think any film as epic as any LOTR film has been made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk)
-
10 years. Doesn't feel that long, but it is...
-
Ten years?!
I feel so old :(
-
With epic as in the traditional sense of the word, I don't think any film as epic as any LOTR film has been made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk)
That content is blocked in the U.S., could you or someone else tell me what it is?
-
With epic as in the traditional sense of the word, I don't think any film as epic as any LOTR film has been made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk)
That content is blocked in the U.S., could you or someone else tell me what it is?
The intro to Conan the Barbarian. :P
-
With epic as in the traditional sense of the word, I don't think any film as epic as any LOTR film has been made.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypAAsmgVmhk)
I forgot to add "since". :lol
-
Ten years?!
I feel so old :(
LOLyoungpup
-
I'm sure something at some point will be more epic. Amazing that it's been ten years though.
-
The Fellowship of the Ring is my favorite movie of all time. My favorite scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmEeC8TaJsc
-
I've never seen the LotR films. Well, I saw the Fellowship when it came out in theaters, but I was about 10 years old then, so I don't remember much of it. So I went to Wal-Mart the other day to buy the trilogy on DVD. They didn't have them. And Wal-Mart is the only place around here that sells DVDs. Lame.
-
The Fellowship of the Ring is my favorite movie of all time. My favorite scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmEeC8TaJsc
That's a great scene!
I have to say, and I'm man enough to say it, but I have cried once in each movie of the Lord of the Rings movies.
Death of Gandalf in FOTR
https://youtu.be/X8pWjiFxXkg
Arwen's realizes Aragorns mortality in TTT
https://youtu.be/4tl8_vSq0Aw
You bow to no one in ROTK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URmQXIeVpN8
-
I've never seen the LotR films. Well, I saw the Fellowship when it came out in theaters, but I was about 10 years old then, so I don't remember much of it. So I went to Wal-Mart the other day to buy the trilogy on DVD. They didn't have them. And Wal-Mart is the only place around here that sells DVDs. Lame.
No wonder you're so deranged. FIX IT. NAO.
-
Had Avatar : The Last Airbender (Movie) not been such a disaster, it could have rivaled LOTR in epicness.
Other than that, currently the term "epic" in movies just means "History Channel on steroids".
rumborak
-
I'm sure something at some point will be more epic.
I'm not.
-
If a fantasy movie as incredible as LOTR comes out, I'll be the first to see it.
Definitely one of my favorite movie series of all time.
-
I'm sure something at some point will be more epic.
I'm not.
My world just crumbled under my feet.
-
If a fantasy movie as incredible as LOTR comes out, I'll be the first to see it.
Definitely one of my favorite movie series of all time.
Then you will be the first to see The Hobbit.
Harry Potter is pretty epic, but not nearly the visual spectacle of LOTR. I have all three extended editions.
One year... I'd like to say 05 or so... my best friend and I on new years decided to watch them all back to back to back. All three extended editions. Took us 13 hours. Granted we took numerous breaks. But still. I can't do that again.
-
I'm sure something at some point will be more epic.
I'm not.
When they finally get around to making the 10 films neccessary to document the Horus Heresy, they will be surpassed.
-
One year... I'd like to say 05 or so... my best friend and I on new years decided to watch them all back to back to back. All three extended editions. Took us 13 hours. Granted we took numerous breaks. But still. I can't do that again.
A group of my friends did that too once, probably around '05 also. Another time we attempted to get through all 6 star wars movies consecutively; I think we made it through episodes 1 through 3 alright but about halfway through A New Hope everybody either fell asleep or just couldn't take it anymore. I don't plan on trying that again.
-
What about Game of Thrones?
-
the films were fantastic but the books bored me to tears. I appreciate the work that went into it and the huge influence it has made on popular culture but it was so dry, like reading a text book.
-
The start of book one is slow, but it picks up from there.
And how can you not love songs? :D
-
One year... I'd like to say 05 or so... my best friend and I on new years decided to watch them all back to back to back. All three extended editions. Took us 13 hours. Granted we took numerous breaks. But still. I can't do that again.
A group of my friends did that too once, probably around '05 also. Another time we attempted to get through all 6 star wars movies consecutively; I think we made it through episodes 1 through 3 alright but about halfway through A New Hope everybody either fell asleep or just couldn't take it anymore. I don't plan on trying that again.
Me and a friend did LOTR. It is certainly more tiring than you would think.
-
I did it when I was sick on bedrest, and it was still difficult to power through the whole thing without getting distracted by other stuff. :lol
-
I remember watching the extended versions of TLOTR and TTT from 9 to 5 pm with just bathroom breaks and lunch break(To microwave the leftover thanksgiving food) in preparation for ROTK. That was a long day. We talked about all three extended cuts but haven't done it on a rainy day yet.
-
I'd love to do that. Problem is, it kills a whole day. And since my wife isn't a fan, that means...well, in short, it means it'll never happen. :lol
-
Then I'm guessing a Desperate Housewives marathon is in your future. :lol
-
Thankfully, she hates that show (and others like it) with a passion.
-
Thankfully, she hates that show (and others like it) with a passion.
I am with her. That's why I love Facebook. I get to mock my best friends wife for watching DH. At least his daughter can recite all of the Jokers lines on the Dark Knight. :lol
-
Let's see them do movies of the Wheel of Time series. It would only take about twenty years.
-
Lonestar's favorite clip in the entire Lord Of The Rings trilogy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cI5sagPco
-
:lol
Touche.
-
:lol
-
Lonestar's favorite clip in the entire Lord Of The Rings trilogy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cI5sagPco
That also makes Frodo his least favorite character, for trashing that nice crispy bacon.
-
the films were fantastic but the books bored me to tears.
Your words just brought me to tears; the books are the single most godliest things ever written.
Who do you think is the biggest LOTR nerd on here? I'd like to be a contender for that title.
-
the films were fantastic but the books bored me to tears. I appreciate the work that went into it and the huge influence it has made on popular culture but it was so dry, like reading a text book.
I didn't care for the books that much the first time I read them either, but the story is good enough I eventually read them a second (and third time) to fully digest them. They get better every time.
The LOTR trilogy is easily my favorite movie of all time. I tend to think of it as one 11 hour long epic, although if you want to get specific Fellowship is still my favorite. The extended cut of Two Towers is nearly as good though. Return of the King actually looked kind of messy last time I watched it, had too much baggage from the previous films to take care of. Still epic as hell though!
-
I think one of the greatest scenes is Boromir proclaiming victory at Osgiliath(?) - it seems amazing that that was left out of the cinema edit!
Also the short scene in the rain before battle at Helm's Deep.
Bernard Hill and Sean Bean were the actors that stood out the most in the whole trilogy for me.
-
Do you mean Amon Hen?
-
Do you mean Amon Hen?
No, there's a deleted scene featuring Boromir fighting in Osgiliath.
-
Oh really? I must have missed that one. I don't think the extended edition has that scene in it. *goes to youtube*
-
I can't really remember which movie has it, but it is in one of the extended editions.
-
I'm also pretty sure it's in an extended edition, probably in RotK.
-
Do you mean Amon Hen?
It's been parodied on the internet as him playing a guitar but I thought it was a massively inspiring scene and he meets his brother "finally" (i.e. we see his brother recalling Boromir after the news of his demise I think).
-
I can't really remember which movie has it, but it is in one of the extended editions.
I'm also pretty sure it's in an extended edition, probably in RotK.
Two Tower EE
See the brothers in Osgiliath was good but I think seeing their relationship with their father was even better, especially for Boromir. Denethor was the only character that got screwed in the movies. He's a great tragic figure in the book but in the movie he's just a crazy bastard.
-
Kinda makes me wanna reread the series. There's a trace of a sympathetic character in Boromir in FotR EE, and I can't remember how prescient it was in the books.
-
Denethor was the only character that got screwed in the movies. He's a great tragic figure in the book but in the movie he's just a crazy bastard.
-
The only character that got screwed in the movies? I don't think they portrayed Faramir very well.
-
I thought he was portrayed fairly well, but to be fair, I don't think I've seen the entire EE Trilogy movies; I'm more of a LotR book guy..
-
The only character that got screwed in the movies? I don't think they portrayed Faramir very well.
It is true they made alterations, but I found them more acceptable in the extended cut of Two Towers. To me it was externalizing the desperation of finding some aide for his father than succumbing to the ring's temptation, making his later release of Frodo & co. more nobler, proving himself better than his brother and closer to the spirit of the book. It is still a fairly significant change though that's true.
I think his character still retains the depth of the books though, maybe even given a little more. Denethor just comes off as one dimensional. Maybe an understandable place to trim but disappointing all the same.
-
The only character that got screwed in the movies? I don't think they portrayed Faramir very well.
Yeah, he's the biggest problem I have with the LOTR movies.
-
A few months ago, I watched all three films in the extended version over the course of three weekends. Eleven hours of awesomeness. Loved it.
-
Sean Connery as Gandalf
Nicholas Cage - Aragorn
Kate Winslet - Arwen
Ethan Hawk - Faramir
Lucy Lawless - Galadriel
I feel the vibe in the movies would have been very much diffrent had Peter Jackson got what he first wanted, not to say it would've been bad but just....diffrent.
I love Daniel Day-Lewis respons on why he turned down, that he thought he would be bored on set. :lol
-
Sean Connery as Gandalf
Nicholas Cage - Aragorn
Kate Winslet - Arwen
Ethan Hawk - Faramir
Lucy Lawless - Galadriel
I feel the vibe in the movies would have been very much diffrent had Peter Jackson got what he first wanted, not to say it would've been bad but just....diffrent.
I love Daniel Day-Lewis respons on why he turned down, that he thought he would be bored on set. :lol
Now, let me just say that I'm a HUGE fan of Sean Connery, a moderate fan of Nick Cage, and a huge fan of Kate Winslet... but of that list, Kate is the only choice I would prefer over what we got. Ian McKellan was the perfect Gandalf; he captured that dichotomy between frail unassuming old man, and one of the three most powerful wizards in Middle Earth. Nick Cage doesn't belong anywhere NEAR Middle Earth with his overacting and "quirky" choices. Kate Winslet could play anything she wants, and I'd love her dearly, but in place of the entirely, massively overrated Liv Tyler, sure, I'm in. Wouldn't watch Ethan Hawke in a toothpaste commercial, and indifferent on Lucy Lawless over Cate Blanchett (though I can't imagine the swarthy Lawless playing the wispy Elven role).
-
Sean Connery as Gandalf?! Can you imagine that movie?
"You're late!"
"That's not what your mother said, Baggins!"
-
Sean Connery as Gandalf?! Can you imagine that movie?
"You're late!"
"That's not what your mother said, Baggins!"
:spitcoffee:
-
Sean Connery as Gandalf?! Can you imagine that movie?
"You're late!"
"That's not what your mother said, Baggins!"
:lol
-
Sean Connery as Gandalf
Nicholas Cage - Aragorn
Kate Winslet - Arwen
Ethan Hawk - Faramir
Lucy Lawless - Galadriel
I feel the vibe in the movies would have been very much diffrent had Peter Jackson got what he first wanted, not to say it would've been bad but just....diffrent.
I love Daniel Day-Lewis respons on why he turned down, that he thought he would be bored on set. :lol
Now, let me just say that I'm a HUGE fan of Sean Connery, a moderate fan of Nick Cage, and a huge fan of Kate Winslet... but of that list, Kate is the only choice I would prefer over what we got. Ian McKellan was the perfect Gandalf; he captured that dichotomy between frail unassuming old man, and one of the three most powerful wizards in Middle Earth. Nick Cage doesn't belong anywhere NEAR Middle Earth with his overacting and "quirky" choices. Kate Winslet could play anything she wants, and I'd love her dearly, but in place of the entirely, massively overrated Liv Tyler, sure, I'm in. Wouldn't watch Ethan Hawke in a toothpaste commercial, and indifferent on Lucy Lawless over Cate Blanchett (though I can't imagine the swarthy Lawless playing the wispy Elven role).
Holy necropost, Batman!
I say all of this as someone who never read any of the books. I agree that McKellen was perfect as Gandalf -- to the point that it's REALLY tough to imagine anyone else playing the character. I think Connery could have done a great job, and we'd maybe even say HE was perfect. Cage as Aragorn would have been just hinky. I like most of the stuff I've seen him in, but wow.... For me, swapping Winslet for Tyler would have been a bit of a whatever. It's been a while since I've seen any of these movies, but I don't remember Arwen as more than a side character, and Liv Tyler's prominent billing was not at all warranted. Would Winslet have been better? Maybe, but it wouldn't have made for a significant change in the movies. Lucy Lawless as Galadriel?! Bwahahahaha!!! Ethan Hawke? Whatever. I can't honestly distinguish one Blankomir from another.
-
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power - Title Announcement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhqGCPMfkNM&ab_channel=AmazonPrimeVideo)
Kind of a pointless trailer in a way but still cool though. I'm ready for this!
-
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power - Title Announcement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhqGCPMfkNM&ab_channel=AmazonPrimeVideo)
Kind of a pointless trailer in a way but still cool though. I'm ready for this!
This is...what...a prequel to the original three movies? Not based on any books?
-
Cool. I'm probably down for this.
-
I strongly disliked the Peter Jackson movies. I think the original trilogy would have been better served by a series like this though, so I'm at least a little interested to see how this turns out.
-
The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power - Title Announcement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhqGCPMfkNM&ab_channel=AmazonPrimeVideo)
Kind of a pointless trailer in a way but still cool though. I'm ready for this!
This is...what...a prequel to the original three movies? Not based on any books?
If I remember correctly there will be a smidge of original characters and such, but the show is based entirely - again, if I recall properly - on Tolkien's own writings. The show takes place in the Second Age of Middle Earth. The LOTR story takes place at the very end of the Third Age with the War of the Ring.
The Second Age lasted for thousands of years and involves the rise of Numenor, the rise of Sauron in Middle Earth after his first defeat at the hands of Elves and Man, and the creation of the Rings of Power. This show apparently will focus on the period of the rings being made and handed to the various races.
I cannot wait to see how they present Sauron. I am geeking out so freaking hard. I was just looking for more info on this earlier today and am very happy they are finally getting the ball rolling on trailers and such.
-
I strongly disliked the Peter Jackson movies. I think the original trilogy would have been better served by a series like this though, so I'm at least a little interested to see how this turns out.
Not heavily invested either way, but curious if you could elaborate.
-
I strongly disliked the Peter Jackson movies. I think the original trilogy would have been better served by a series like this though, so I'm at least a little interested to see how this turns out.
Not heavily invested either way, but curious if you could elaborate.
Me too.
I'm not sure that I have high hopes for this new show, other than as spectacle. As I understand it, it's not based specifically on any of Tolkein's actual writings, as the LOTR or Hobbit films were.
-
I'm intrigued to see what can be done to create new stories in a LOTR Universe - realizing it's not from the pages of anything Tolkein specifically created.
-
Chris Tolkien, the next most important author/editor of Tolkien's texts, didn't have a hand in the film trilogy and look how good those ended up. Yeah they were based on the actual writings and books, but I think that's a good thing to keep in mind for anyone nervous about the quality or integrity of what's coming with this show. While the show itself might take its own artistic liberties, Tolkien fleshed out enough lore behind Arda and the Ages to give them a massive amount of material to work with. From what I understand some of the Tolkien estate is heavily involved with this and they have plenty of people with extensive knowledge of the lore working on this.
Now that doesn't mean anything if they end up dropping the ball - but I'm optimistic. Granted, Peter Jackson fucked up the Hobbit something fierce imo, so it really could go either way. I'll watch regardless. :corn
-
I strongly disliked the Peter Jackson movies. I think the original trilogy would have been better served by a series like this though, so I'm at least a little interested to see how this turns out.
Not heavily invested either way, but curious if you could elaborate.
It’s been so long since I’ve seen the movies that I can’t elaborate on the specifics too much. But in general I didn’t care for Jackson’s artistic choices when it came to altering the story to fit into the film length,* a lot of the dialogue that didn’t come from the book, and the overall visual of the films which were heavily colorized and CGI’d and felt something like being in a Thomas Kinkade painting. Really didn’t care for Elijah Wood. There were things that I thought they got right in terms of the general look of the characters, costumes, etc. But a lot of it came off as cheesy to me. I remember really disliking what they did to the Council of Elrond scene, Galadriel when she talks to Frodo about the ring was another part I thought was all wrong. And then a lot of the action was over the top. One that stands out is a scene where Legolas surfs down an oliphaunt’s trunk like Tarzan from the Disney animated film.
*I realize this was necessary, but it’s one reason a TV series might have handled the material better. In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
-
20 years ago series weren't so "cool".
If LOTR was never made into a movie, and talks and agreements were reached in this time, DEFINITIVELY it would have been a series and not three movies.
-
If I remember correctly there will be a smidge of original characters and such, but the show is based entirely - again, if I recall properly - on Tolkien's own writings. The show takes place in the Second Age of Middle Earth. The LOTR story takes place at the very end of the Third Age with the War of the Ring.
I'm not sure that I have high hopes for this new show, other than as spectacle. As I understand it, it's not based specifically on any of Tolkein's actual writings, as the LOTR or Hobbit films were.
I'm more confused than I was before. It's just the three LOTR books and the Hobbit, right? So is this series grounded in whatever back story was detailed in those books with embellishment that's new?
I liked the movies, and I'm positive my wife will want to watch this, so I'll definitely watch. I just hope it's not the sort of thing where you're lost if you haven't read the books.
-
I'm more confused than I was before. It's just the three LOTR books and the Hobbit, right?
No.
-
My old copy of The Return of the King had an appendix that was at least as long as the story in that volume. I'm assuming that the Second Age material is culled from that.
-
I'm more confused than I was before. It's just the three LOTR books and the Hobbit, right?
No.
Oh...
(https://c.tenor.com/xW5W3s_MxRgAAAAC/oxi-clean-but-wait-theres-more.gif)
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._R._R._Tolkien_bibliography
The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings were published in his lifetime. The rest of his writings on Middle-Earth were collected together by his son Christopher and published posthumously.
It is my understanding that this new series is based mostly on ideas presented in large swath in those writings, but it isn't based on a specific volume a la The Hobbit, for example.
-
It's just the three LOTR books and the Hobbit, right? So is this series grounded in whatever back story was detailed in those books with embellishment that's new?
Nope, there's also The Silmarillion, which is basically the Bible for the world he created and there's a ton of amazingly cool backstory into that.
Not that this is the basis for the show however....
-
It's just the three LOTR books and the Hobbit, right? So is this series grounded in whatever back story was detailed in those books with embellishment that's new?
Nope, there's also The Silmarillion, which is basically the Bible for the world he created and there's a ton of amazingly cool backstory into that.
Not that this is the basis for the show however....
Yeah, it's based off events in The Silmarillion and the appendix to The Return of the King which I believe this series will draw from as well. But a lot of that was not written in novel form. It's more of a historical narrative, so the producers are going to have to come up with a lot of the details, dialogue, etc. from scratch, which could be good or bad I suppose.
-
In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
I don't think most of the characters had much personality at all in the books. Merry and Pippin were completely interchangeable, and Arwen, the love of Aragorn's life, doesn't even get any lines of dialogue in the story proper.
-
The Hobbit took a LOT of creative liberties with the story to "movie-tize" it. I wasn't quite as familiar with the LOTR trilogy, so I can't remember / don't know where the deviations are.
-
Ugh, The Hobbit could have been amazing. Instead it pretty much doubled down on the bad changes in the LOTR adaptations. Tauriel? Elf dwarf romance? LEGOLAS?! Having Azog the orc as the main villain when he's not even alive in the book? I spit! :lol
-
In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
I don't think most of the characters had much personality at all in the books. Merry and Pippin were completely interchangeable, and Arwen, the love of Aragorn's life, doesn't even get any lines of dialogue in the story proper.
Arwen was not part of the story in the books, really, and didn't need to be part of the movies. ;-)
Merry and Pippin had a lot of development in the books. They are the focal characters for a large portion of The Two Towers, and they both end up playing a big role in the war. Some of it is there in the movies too, but one of the things that comes across in the books is that they leave the Shire as these sort of brave but foolish and helpless hobbits, and they come back as essentially war heroes who are able to lead a resistance to Saruman and drive his thugs out of the Shire. In the movies they are mostly just there for comic relief I feel like (not totally inconsistent with the books of course).
-
In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
I don't think most of the characters had much personality at all in the books. Merry and Pippin were completely interchangeable, and Arwen, the love of Aragorn's life, doesn't even get any lines of dialogue in the story proper.
Arwen was not part of the story in the books, really, and didn't need to be part of the movies. ;-)
Merry and Pippin had a lot of development in the books. They are the focal characters for a large portion of The Two Towers, and they both end up playing a big role in the war. Some of it is there in the movies too, but one of the things that comes across in the books is that they leave the Shire as these sort of brave but foolish and helpless hobbits, and they come back as essentially war heroes who are able to lead a resistance to Saruman and drive his thugs out of the Shire. In the movies they are mostly just there for comic relief I feel like (not totally inconsistent with the books of course).
I feel that Merry and Pippin are most certainly changed from their inherent goofiness by the end of the film trilogy.
-
In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
I don't think most of the characters had much personality at all in the books. Merry and Pippin were completely interchangeable, and Arwen, the love of Aragorn's life, doesn't even get any lines of dialogue in the story proper.
Arwen was not part of the story in the books, really, and didn't need to be part of the movies. ;-)
Merry and Pippin had a lot of development in the books. They are the focal characters for a large portion of The Two Towers, and they both end up playing a big role in the war. Some of it is there in the movies too, but one of the things that comes across in the books is that they leave the Shire as these sort of brave but foolish and helpless hobbits, and they come back as essentially war heroes who are able to lead a resistance to Saruman and drive his thugs out of the Shire. In the movies they are mostly just there for comic relief I feel like (not totally inconsistent with the books of course).
I feel that Merry and Pippin are most certainly changed from their inherent goofiness by the end of the film trilogy.
Oh, I'm sure they are (I don't remember much about the ROTK movie to be honest), I'm just noting that the books do spend a lot of time on their characters that could be developed over a longer series.
-
In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
I don't think most of the characters had much personality at all in the books. Merry and Pippin were completely interchangeable, and Arwen, the love of Aragorn's life, doesn't even get any lines of dialogue in the story proper.
Arwen was not part of the story in the books, really, and didn't need to be part of the movies. ;-)
Merry and Pippin had a lot of development in the books. They are the focal characters for a large portion of The Two Towers, and they both end up playing a big role in the war. Some of it is there in the movies too, but one of the things that comes across in the books is that they leave the Shire as these sort of brave but foolish and helpless hobbits, and they come back as essentially war heroes who are able to lead a resistance to Saruman and drive his thugs out of the Shire. In the movies they are mostly just there for comic relief I feel like (not totally inconsistent with the books of course).
I feel that Merry and Pippin are most certainly changed from their inherent goofiness by the end of the film trilogy.
Oh, I'm sure they are (I don't remember much about the ROTK movie to be honest), I'm just noting that the books do spend a lot of time on their characters that could be developed over a longer series.
Well, it could have been, but I'm not sure there was much reason to do so. The goal, after all, is not to film the book, the whole book, and nothing but the book; it's to adapt what makes the book great to a different medium, which Peter Jackson did very well.
Did he make some choices I wouldn't have? Yes. But that doesn't mean he didn't do a phenomenal job.
*shrugs*
-
In general, I think a lot of the story elements and personality of the characters in the books could have been developed more over a lengthy series.
I don't think most of the characters had much personality at all in the books. Merry and Pippin were completely interchangeable, and Arwen, the love of Aragorn's life, doesn't even get any lines of dialogue in the story proper.
Arwen was not part of the story in the books, really, and didn't need to be part of the movies. ;-)
Merry and Pippin had a lot of development in the books. They are the focal characters for a large portion of The Two Towers, and they both end up playing a big role in the war. Some of it is there in the movies too, but one of the things that comes across in the books is that they leave the Shire as these sort of brave but foolish and helpless hobbits, and they come back as essentially war heroes who are able to lead a resistance to Saruman and drive his thugs out of the Shire. In the movies they are mostly just there for comic relief I feel like (not totally inconsistent with the books of course).
I feel that Merry and Pippin are most certainly changed from their inherent goofiness by the end of the film trilogy.
Oh, I'm sure they are (I don't remember much about the ROTK movie to be honest), I'm just noting that the books do spend a lot of time on their characters that could be developed over a longer series.
Well, it could have been, but I'm not sure there was much reason to do so. The goal, after all, is not to film the book, the whole book, and nothing but the book; it's to adapt what makes the book great to a different medium, which Peter Jackson did very well.
Did he make some choices I wouldn't have? Yes. But that doesn't mean he didn't do a phenomenal job.
*shrugs*
Fair enough. I don't think the books lent themselves well to a movie format, really, and any film maker would have had an impossible task to really faithfully adapt them. I did not find them enjoyable as movies either (aside from any qualms about how the book was adapted), but I'm on an island with most of my movie opinions.
-
Wow I definietly thought that was CGI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZEpWvQFXqQ&ab_channel=IGN
-
Wow I definietly thought that was CGI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZEpWvQFXqQ&ab_channel=IGN
That actually makes me feel better. More practical stuff than CGI, like the LOTR trilogy, and not the abominable CGI-fest that was the Hobbit trilogy.
-
Wow I definietly thought that was CGI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZEpWvQFXqQ&ab_channel=IGN
That actually makes me feel better. More practical stuff than CGI, like the LOTR trilogy, and not the abominable CGI-fest that was the Hobbit trilogy.
Word.
-
To side with HOF briefly, there certainly is a lot of greatness from the books missing in the films, and I know this is the film and TV section but if anybody ever wants to listen to the audio books, get the versions narrated by Rob Inglis. I finally got around to those and just finished them a couple days ago and he does a stellar job with the voices, especially Gollum, and even sings the songs. I teared up a little towards the end of ROTK. I even found online the first copy of the books I ever owned and repurchased them for sentimental reasons. Any and all LOTR is good with me!
-
Wow I definietly thought that was CGI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZEpWvQFXqQ&ab_channel=IGN
That actually makes me feel better. More practical stuff than CGI, like the LOTR trilogy, and not the abominable CGI-fest that was the Hobbit trilogy.
Same. Also, that's an AWESOME use of close-up photography (and probably cost 3-4 armored cars worth of money less than it would have to do it as CGI).
-
I think
The goal, after all, is not to film the book, the whole book, and nothing but the book; it's to adapt what makes the book great to a different medium...
sums it up.
Without getting in to the whole LotR book/movie debate, I think a film adaptation should aspire to do is capture both the narrative and the spirit of the story. Look at some of the best and you will see they accomplished this. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest comes immediately to my mind. The story isn't told from the Chief's perspective, because for an (apparently) mute character, that would have been really hard. But the nuts, bolts, and soul of the story are all still there.
-
Wow I definietly thought that was CGI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZEpWvQFXqQ&ab_channel=IGN
That actually makes me feel better. More practical stuff than CGI, like the LOTR trilogy, and not the abominable CGI-fest that was the Hobbit trilogy.
Same. Also, that's an AWESOME use of close-up photography (and probably cost 3-4 armored cars worth of money less than it would have to do it as CGI).
That is indeed very cool. I think if CGI is done well it works and just blends in. The entire Game of Thrones intro is CGI without a hint of model work and that thing looks dang impressive.
As for the show I'm cautious and hoping for the best. It's been a while since I've watched the entire LoTR trilogy and may dive into it soon.
-
The only issue I have with the films is Frodo - he's just to wet and generally a lot more helpless in the films, I put this down to a mix of the writing and the performance by Wood. Other than that the films were (and still are) amazing.
-
To side with HOF briefly, there certainly is a lot of greatness from the books missing in the films
To be sure.
-
https://youtu.be/v7v1hIkYH24
Teaser trailer just dropped!
-Marc.
-
September 2nd....thats a long time to wait.
-
https://youtu.be/v7v1hIkYH24
Teaser trailer just dropped!
-Marc.
Cool looking video game.
-
For some reason a bunch of russians are angered by the teaser.
How can a teaser trailer upset people so much, it didn't show much.
I will say this though, I hope the actual trailer contains music with a theme and not just the typical hollywood generic chords/ahh choir and orchester hits/drums.
-
It looks nice in my opinion. But I deem the odds that this will be bad larger than the odds it will be good. I have nothing against different authors writing new stories for existing properties. But more often than not it is bad, especially when they try to make it fit in the existing lore (not sure if that is the case here).
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
-
I remember people complaining about Elves at Helms Deep completely ruining the movie adaption, now it's Elves having the wrong hair cut ruining their childhood :biggrin:
-
Why anyone would want to judge this or make grand pronouncements based solely on the teaser trailer is beyond me. I watched it, and I have no sense at all about whether or not this will be good. It looks pretty, I'll say that. And I hope it's good. We'll see.
-
So I've never read the books, and I've seen the directors cut of the original trilogy once or twice, and mostly enjoyed it (except the big fight at the end, which I found meh) but never read or saw the Hobbit movies.
Thus, when I saw this trailer....I had absolutely no idea what the hell was going on. Literally nothing what so ever. Is this true of people who HAVE read the books and stuff or am I just lacking sufficient background knowledge to understand anything?
-
So I've never read the books, and I've seen the directors cut of the original trilogy once or twice, and mostly enjoyed it (except the big fight at the end, which I found meh) but never read or saw the Hobbit movies.
Thus, when I saw this trailer....I had absolutely no idea what the hell was going on. Literally nothing what so ever. Is this true of people who HAVE read the books and stuff or am I just lacking sufficient background knowledge to understand anything?
I'm the same way - I read each of the LOTR/Hobbit books exactly once and got very little out of them. Reading them was a boring-ass chore. The trailer didn't explain anything at all. I've read a few small blurbs about the show though.
From what I've read, this show revolves around the creation and forging of the rings, including the One Ring. Beyond that, I know nothing - there are versions of younger characters from the LOTR films (Galadriel and Elrond, played by Cate Blanchett and Hugo Weaving in the movies). Another character is Isildur, who took the ring from Sauron and kept it for himself, eventually setting off the events of The Hobbit and LOTR years later.
-
That sure looked pretty, and I hope that this turns out to be good!
So I haven't read Silmarillion, and I'm not the most knowledgeable about this. But I've seen some backlash about two major plot points happening at the same time in the show, while in the Silmarillion there is like a 1000 years between these two plot points.
Honestly, some parts of the Silmarillion are so incomprehensible for a regular person, that there has to be some changes to make it an entertaining TV show.
But in the end, I just want this to be good...
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
I don’t recall skin color being described in any of Tolkien’s books (or at least anything saying “all elves are white and white only”). I do recall the dwarf women being described as having beards though!
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
"Respect for the source material" doesn't mean you can't change things that are dumb.
-
So I've never read the books, and I've seen the directors cut of the original trilogy once or twice, and mostly enjoyed it (except the big fight at the end, which I found meh) but never read or saw the Hobbit movies.
Thus, when I saw this trailer....I had absolutely no idea what the hell was going on. Literally nothing what so ever. Is this true of people who HAVE read the books and stuff or am I just lacking sufficient background knowledge to understand anything?
I'm the same way - I read each of the LOTR/Hobbit books exactly once and got very little out of them. Reading them was a boring-ass chore. The trailer didn't explain anything at all. I've read a few small blurbs about the show though.
From what I've read, this show revolves around the creation and forging of the rings, including the One Ring. Beyond that, I know nothing - there are versions of younger characters from the LOTR films (Galadriel and Elrond, played by Cate Blanchett and Hugo Weaving in the movies). Another character is Isildur, who took the ring from Sauron and kept it for himself, eventually setting off the events of The Hobbit and LOTR years later.
I'm not definding it but it's a teaser not a trailer, I think that's a diffrence. I'm not sure what's the diffrence though these days but it gotta be something. :laugh:
I guess a trailer for the trailer or something which means you won't get much other than a....tease, weeeell you get my point.
-
So I've never read the books, and I've seen the directors cut of the original trilogy once or twice, and mostly enjoyed it (except the big fight at the end, which I found meh) but never read or saw the Hobbit movies.
Thus, when I saw this trailer....I had absolutely no idea what the hell was going on. Literally nothing what so ever. Is this true of people who HAVE read the books and stuff or am I just lacking sufficient background knowledge to understand anything?
I'm the same way - I read each of the LOTR/Hobbit books exactly once and got very little out of them. Reading them was a boring-ass chore. The trailer didn't explain anything at all. I've read a few small blurbs about the show though.
From what I've read, this show revolves around the creation and forging of the rings, including the One Ring. Beyond that, I know nothing - there are versions of younger characters from the LOTR films (Galadriel and Elrond, played by Cate Blanchett and Hugo Weaving in the movies). Another character is Isildur, who took the ring from Sauron and kept it for himself, eventually setting off the events of The Hobbit and LOTR years later.
I'm not definding it but it's a teaser not a trailer, I think that's a diffrence. I'm not sure what's the diffrence though these days but it gotta be something. :laugh:
I guess a trailer for the trailer or something which means you won't get much other than a....tease, weeeell you get my point.
It's just supposed to pique your interest. The show doesn't come out until September, so there will be more details between now and then.
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
"Respect for the source material" doesn't mean you can't change things that are dumb.
Well, what is dumb about it? I have my reasons for why this isn't dumb, in my opinion, but I'm curious why you think it is. Is it because it implies racism, or that it would be unfair to non-white actors? No snark. It is explicitly written in Tolkien's texts that Elves have fair skin, almost that of moonlight - in other words, very light. Black was specifically used to describe orcs in particular, and the Men of the southern and eastern lands had increasingly darker hues of skin color as the lands turn more to desert. It is also strongly implied that all dwarves, including women, have beards, so I am disappointed they have seemingly not paid mind to that based on the image of the dwarf princess. Dwarf skin color is never specified as far as I can recall, so there's no issue with a black dwarf at all, especially considering we only ever see a small glimpse of just one of the seven houses of dwarves (the dwarves in the Hobbit, and Gimli in LOTR all are Durin's Folk). I also take issue with the short hair on Elves because, again, the text describes Elves as having hair of length. Does it look bad? No, not to me. Do I think Tolkien would have approved of it? No.
I'm sure this reads much more strongly than intended, I am not waging some crusade against the show but I am fairly disappointed and annoyed when they take these kinds of liberties with things that Tolkien had meticulously crafted - it's all in the details. Even if not mentioned in the more popular texts, I would like to believe at least a few of the 'Tolkien scholars' they had working on the show raised a concern about this. Just my two cents. After the liberties they took with a number of details in the Wheel of Time adaptation, I'm a little nervous about Prime's changes to things.
-
This might be a better vehicle for bringing Tolkien’s world to life than live action films/shows (though who knows about this story. Seems like it could be cool):
‘Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim’ Anime Feature Set for April 2024 Release by Warner Bros.
https://variety.com/2022/film/news/lord-of-the-rings-the-war-of-the-rohirrim-release-date-1235181646/
-
I don't know how The Hobbit could be considered a "chore" to get thru - it's only 300-ish pages. The LOTR trilogy however ... yeah, I get that. I think I read the whole thing once in my early teens, but don't remember if I got completely through it.
I thought this was completely new "material", simply using the ideas of (ie "inspired by") the LOTR universe, and creating whole new "pre" stories, long before the events of The Hobbit/LOTR.
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
"Respect for the source material" doesn't mean you can't change things that are dumb.
Well, what is dumb about it? I have my reasons for why this isn't dumb, in my opinion, but I'm curious why you think it is. Is it because it implies racism, or that it would be unfair to non-white actors? No snark. It is explicitly written in Tolkien's texts that Elves have fair skin, almost that of moonlight - in other words, very light. Black was specifically used to describe orcs in particular, and the Men of the southern and eastern lands had increasingly darker hues of skin color as the lands turn more to desert. It is also strongly implied that all dwarves, including women, have beards, so I am disappointed they have seemingly not paid mind to that based on the image of the dwarf princess. Dwarf skin color is never specified as far as I can recall, so there's no issue with a black dwarf at all, especially considering we only ever see a small glimpse of just one of the seven houses of dwarves (the dwarves in the Hobbit, and Gimli in LOTR all are Durin's Folk). I also take issue with the short hair on Elves because, again, the text describes Elves as having hair of length. Does it look bad? No, not to me. Do I think Tolkien would have approved of it? No.
I'm sure this reads much more strongly than intended, I am not waging some crusade against the show but I am fairly disappointed and annoyed when they take these kinds of liberties with things that Tolkien had meticulously crafted - it's all in the details. Even if not mentioned in the more popular texts, I would like to believe at least a few of the 'Tolkien scholars' they had working on the show raised a concern about this. Just my two cents. After the liberties they took with a number of details in the Wheel of Time adaptation, I'm a little nervous about Prime's changes to things.
Slavish devotion to the source material does not a good adaptation make. Different media have different requirements. And times have changed, as have audience expectations. The good people are white, the bad people are black will not play to modern audiences. Elves can go to the barber shop if they wish, and no one but Tolkien purists want to see bearded women.
-
I don't know how The Hobbit could be considered a "chore" to get thru - it's only 300-ish pages. The LOTR trilogy however ... yeah, I get that. I think I read the whole thing once in my early teens, but don't remember if I got completely through it.
I thought this was completely new "material", simply using the ideas of (ie "inspired by") the LOTR universe, and creating whole new "pre" stories, long before the events of The Hobbit/LOTR.
I could be wrong, but I thought they were fleshing out some of the events from the Silmarillion.
-
Yeah, that's the impression I got, taking a lot of the backstory around the creation of the rings and basically condensing the timeline. Probably would be challenging to craft a season(s) long narrative when generations of humans are born and die in between each major event.
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
"Respect for the source material" doesn't mean you can't change things that are dumb.
Well, what is dumb about it? I have my reasons for why this isn't dumb, in my opinion, but I'm curious why you think it is. Is it because it implies racism, or that it would be unfair to non-white actors? No snark. It is explicitly written in Tolkien's texts that Elves have fair skin, almost that of moonlight - in other words, very light. Black was specifically used to describe orcs in particular, and the Men of the southern and eastern lands had increasingly darker hues of skin color as the lands turn more to desert. It is also strongly implied that all dwarves, including women, have beards, so I am disappointed they have seemingly not paid mind to that based on the image of the dwarf princess. Dwarf skin color is never specified as far as I can recall, so there's no issue with a black dwarf at all, especially considering we only ever see a small glimpse of just one of the seven houses of dwarves (the dwarves in the Hobbit, and Gimli in LOTR all are Durin's Folk). I also take issue with the short hair on Elves because, again, the text describes Elves as having hair of length. Does it look bad? No, not to me. Do I think Tolkien would have approved of it? No.
I'm sure this reads much more strongly than intended, I am not waging some crusade against the show but I am fairly disappointed and annoyed when they take these kinds of liberties with things that Tolkien had meticulously crafted - it's all in the details. Even if not mentioned in the more popular texts, I would like to believe at least a few of the 'Tolkien scholars' they had working on the show raised a concern about this. Just my two cents. After the liberties they took with a number of details in the Wheel of Time adaptation, I'm a little nervous about Prime's changes to things.
Slavish devotion to the source material does not a good adaptation make. Different media have different requirements. And times have changed, as have audience expectations. The good people are white, the bad people are black will not play to modern audiences. Elves can go to the barber shop if they wish, and no one but Tolkien purists want to see bearded women.
I have to agree with ZirconBlue. And the details you are mentioning are likely to have zero impact whatsoever on the plot.
-
Cool of them to disregard Tolkien completely with respect to how the races appear. And after learning that they've compressed a lot of events to fit into a show... nope. Losing faith rapidly in this. People who care less about lore and LOTR in general might not have issues with it, but, for example... dwarf women have beards. Elves aren't black, Elves don't have short hair. I realize that last point might be problematic for some, but it matters. It shows they aren't taking care to respect the source material.
"Respect for the source material" doesn't mean you can't change things that are dumb.
Well, what is dumb about it? I have my reasons for why this isn't dumb, in my opinion, but I'm curious why you think it is. Is it because it implies racism, or that it would be unfair to non-white actors? No snark. It is explicitly written in Tolkien's texts that Elves have fair skin, almost that of moonlight - in other words, very light. Black was specifically used to describe orcs in particular, and the Men of the southern and eastern lands had increasingly darker hues of skin color as the lands turn more to desert. It is also strongly implied that all dwarves, including women, have beards, so I am disappointed they have seemingly not paid mind to that based on the image of the dwarf princess. Dwarf skin color is never specified as far as I can recall, so there's no issue with a black dwarf at all, especially considering we only ever see a small glimpse of just one of the seven houses of dwarves (the dwarves in the Hobbit, and Gimli in LOTR all are Durin's Folk). I also take issue with the short hair on Elves because, again, the text describes Elves as having hair of length. Does it look bad? No, not to me. Do I think Tolkien would have approved of it? No.
I'm sure this reads much more strongly than intended, I am not waging some crusade against the show but I am fairly disappointed and annoyed when they take these kinds of liberties with things that Tolkien had meticulously crafted - it's all in the details. Even if not mentioned in the more popular texts, I would like to believe at least a few of the 'Tolkien scholars' they had working on the show raised a concern about this. Just my two cents. After the liberties they took with a number of details in the Wheel of Time adaptation, I'm a little nervous about Prime's changes to things.
Slavish devotion to the source material does not a good adaptation make. Different media have different requirements. And times have changed, as have audience expectations. The good people are white, the bad people are black will not play to modern audiences. Elves can go to the barber shop if they wish, and no one but Tolkien purists want to see bearded women.
I fully agree with this.
-
Well, I am a Tolkien purist, but there's really no need to be snarky about it. You have your thoughts on it and I have mine. I don't want short haired Elves and plain faced Dwarven women. I think that's just as valid as you not caring. So what if the orcs have black skin and the Elves are white. I think people look into the sociopolitical aspect of that too much but that's a whole other discussion. It's not just "bad people black good people white" but oh well. Never mind that Sauron and many other antagonists are white...
-
I'm going to throw this out to the wind. No one take offence please.
Tolkien had fun ideas, a deep imagination, a genius level with language, and a fun turn with story telling. All that being said, he was a terrible writer, poor with a plot, and pacing. His characters were overly serious and wooden, or goofy and childish. In The Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was completely unlovable and totally lacking in charm. I never once saw a Tolkien purist complain about Viggo's portrayal being too human.
The telling changes with the medium and the audience. I have no problem with that, and it might prove to be an improvement.
-
I'm going to throw this out to the wind. No one take offence please.
Tolkien had fun ideas, a deep imagination, a genius level with language, and a fun turn with story telling. All that being said, he was a terrible writer, poor with a plot, and pacing. His characters were overly serious and wooden, or goofy and childish. In The Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was completely unlovable and totally lacking in charm. I never once saw a Tolkien purist complain about Viggo's portrayal being too human.
The telling changes with the medium and the audience. I have no problem with that, and it might prove to be an improvement.
No offense taken, although I disagree with the bold fiercely. He wasn't the best with pacing but I wouldn't say he was a terrible writer at all, and although I think a number of characters could've used more development and fleshing out (Legolas, Gimli, etc.), I disagree with your characterization of Aragorn. I don't know about unlovable, but he's stoic, brave, courageous, smart, and has a heart - all qualities of a leader, which he shows himself to be throughout LOTR. No Tolkien purist complains about Viggo's portrayal being 'too human' because he fully embodies Aragorn's character from the book and realizes him as a character that is believable as a person and as a king and as a leader. I can't think of many goofy or childish characters in LOTR either - the Hobbits come close but they are more innocent, naive, and fun loving than they are goofy. I can't think of any other characters that would fall under goofy or childish. And although I would always love more character development from those in LOTR, I never thought the lack of character development was a detriment to the story, and there are still plenty of well fleshed out characters who have lots of personality.
-
I'm going to throw this out to the wind. No one take offence please.
Tolkien had fun ideas, a deep imagination, a genius level with language, and a fun turn with story telling. All that being said, he was a terrible writer, poor with a plot, and pacing. His characters were overly serious and wooden, or goofy and childish. In The Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was completely unlovable and totally lacking in charm. I never once saw a Tolkien purist complain about Viggo's portrayal being too human.
The telling changes with the medium and the audience. I have no problem with that, and it might prove to be an improvement.
I agree with you. His strengths lie in the languages and world-building, not in plot or characters. I could never even tell Merry and Pippin apart in the books.
-
I'm going to throw this out to the wind. No one take offence please.
Tolkien had fun ideas, a deep imagination, a genius level with language, and a fun turn with story telling. All that being said, he was a terrible writer, poor with a plot, and pacing. His characters were overly serious and wooden, or goofy and childish. In The Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was completely unlovable and totally lacking in charm. I never once saw a Tolkien purist complain about Viggo's portrayal being too human.
The telling changes with the medium and the audience. I have no problem with that, and it might prove to be an improvement.
I’m always a bit surprised at how many Tolkien fans actually agree with me when I make these exact statements. It’s not even close to a majority or anything, but it’s enough of of the fan base that it surprises me.
My stepson said just yesterday, “He would have been a fantastic Dungeon Master.” And I agree. But being a phenomenal “world builder” does not always equate to being a great story teller.
-
Well, I am a Tolkien purist, but there's really no need to be snarky about it. You have your thoughts on it and I have mine. I don't want short haired Elves and plain faced Dwarven women. I think that's just as valid as you not caring. So what if the orcs have black skin and the Elves are white. I think people look into the sociopolitical aspect of that too much but that's a whole other discussion. It's not just "bad people black good people white" but oh well. Never mind that Sauron and many other antagonists are white...
Nobody other than you is being snarky.
I'm going to throw this out to the wind. No one take offence please.
Tolkien had fun ideas, a deep imagination, a genius level with language, and a fun turn with story telling. All that being said, he was a terrible writer, poor with a plot, and pacing. His characters were overly serious and wooden, or goofy and childish. In The Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was completely unlovable and totally lacking in charm. I never once saw a Tolkien purist complain about Viggo's portrayal being too human.
The telling changes with the medium and the audience. I have no problem with that, and it might prove to be an improvement.
I am a casual fan, but wouldn't go quite that far. I get your overall point, and I don't overly disagree with it, but I think "terrible" is too strong a term. He made artistic choices, was deliberate about them, and executed them in his writing. And he was writing for a particular age. I don't think it is entirely fair to impose 2020s American standards on his writing.
To give an example, you mention pacing. In LOTR, the journey itself (and the pacing thereof) is incredibly important and is practically a character in its own right. It is supposed to feel oppressively long, tedious, and wearisome. That isn't bad writing. It is intentional writing. Of course, whether one likes that or resonates with it is an entirely different thing. But even if one doesn't, that doesn't make the writing "terrible."
-
Well, I am a Tolkien purist, but there's really no need to be snarky about it. You have your thoughts on it and I have mine. I don't want short haired Elves and plain faced Dwarven women. I think that's just as valid as you not caring. So what if the orcs have black skin and the Elves are white. I think people look into the sociopolitical aspect of that too much but that's a whole other discussion. It's not just "bad people black good people white" but oh well. Never mind that Sauron and many other antagonists are white...
Nobody other than you is being snarky.
Nowhere have I been snarky at all, other than perhaps my initial post expressing disappointment in the teaser. If I've given that impression, I apologize. I was referring to the comments about "Elves can go to the barbershop" and "only Tolkien purists care about bearded dwarves." I wasn't being confrontational anywhere, and I wasn't the one who called things dumb either. So forgive me. edit - I've expressed my disappointments and I just wanted a conversation about the different views on it that's all. Sorry. Nothing more to say.
-
https://youtu.be/v7v1hIkYH24
Teaser trailer just dropped!
-Marc.
wtf is up with hundreds of comments on the video with the exact same quote in different languages (but mostly Russian). This is seriously weird.
-
Snark is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Like calling someone dumb for going to work with COVID symptoms. :biggrin:
I think Zircon said it best about "slavish dedication". I'm unsure how flexibility to adapt and/or "modernize" stories should be judged as "dumb" without seeing how it plays out. I think back to how some people lost their shit when Tilda Swinton was cast as The Ancient One. I think it worked out just fine. Legolas shield surfing while no-scoping Orcs on a river bank may have sounded bitching, but after watching it, I think we would all agree it was fucking dumb.
-
Snark is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Like calling someone dumb for going to work with COVID symptoms. :biggrin:
I think Zircon said it best about "slavish dedication". I'm unsure how flexibility to adapt and/or "modernize" stories should be judged as "dumb" without seeing how it plays out. I think back to how some people lost their shit when Tilda Swinton was cast as The Ancient One. I think it worked out just fine. Legolas shield surfing while no-scoping Orcs on a river bank may have sounded bitching, but after watching it, I think we would all agree it was fucking dumb.
Very good points and I'll keep that in mind going into this show. Still excited! At the end of the day what matters most is what they do with the characters and story.
-
https://youtu.be/v7v1hIkYH24
Teaser trailer just dropped!
-Marc.
wtf is up with hundreds of comments on the video with the exact same quote in different languages (but mostly Russian). This is seriously weird.
Some form of hate campaign against the series with some quote from Tolkien.
“Evil is not capable of creating anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” – J.R.R. Tolkien
I just hate this kind of internet thing when people just latch on to a given opinion in hordes. It's like seeing shoals of fish sticking together.
Especially when it's about a teaser trailer with so little substance.
-
To this, I just say the following.
Evil na- ú- capable -o creating anything siniath, ha tur- onlui distort a destroui what has been invented ben made bui i forces -o man.
And
Ulcu- na- vamme capable -o creating anything sinya, -yes pole- onlime distort ar destroime mana has been invented or made bime i forces -o mára.
-
To this, I just say the following.
Evil na- ú- capable -o creating anything siniath, ha tur- onlui distort a destroui what has been invented ben made bui i forces -o man.
And
Ulcu- na- vamme capable -o creating anything sinya, -yes pole- onlime distort ar destroime mana has been invented or made bime i forces -o mára.
You shut your filthy whore mouth!
I think.
-
https://youtu.be/v7v1hIkYH24
Teaser trailer just dropped!
-Marc.
wtf is up with hundreds of comments on the video with the exact same quote in different languages (but mostly Russian). This is seriously weird.
Some form of hate campaign against the series with some quote from Tolkien.
“Evil is not capable of creating anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” – J.R.R. Tolkien
I just hate this kind of internet thing when people just latch on to a given opinion in hordes. It's like seeing shoals of fish sticking together.
Especially when it's about a teaser trailer with so little substance.
Shawshank is currently the highest rated movie on IMDb. Yet if a trailer dropped in the past 5 years, it more than likely would have been reviewed bombed as one of the two main protagonists in the adaption was portrayed by a black man, whereas in the source material he was a white character. Just says how backwards we've gone, and all these angry sheep who have somehow think they are being clever fighting against 'woke' are just idiots.
-
Status Quorriors?
-
https://youtu.be/v7v1hIkYH24
Teaser trailer just dropped!
-Marc.
wtf is up with hundreds of comments on the video with the exact same quote in different languages (but mostly Russian). This is seriously weird.
Some form of hate campaign against the series with some quote from Tolkien.
“Evil is not capable of creating anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” – J.R.R. Tolkien
I just hate this kind of internet thing when people just latch on to a given opinion in hordes. It's like seeing shoals of fish sticking together.
Especially when it's about a teaser trailer with so little substance.
Shawshank is currently the highest rated movie on IMDb. Yet if a trailer dropped in the past 5 years, it more than likely would have been reviewed bombed as one of the two main protagonists in the adaption was portrayed by a black man, whereas in the source material he was a white character. Just says how backwards we've gone, and all these angry sheep who have somehow think they are being clever fighting against 'woke' are just idiots.
That's a byproduct of giving the general public a voice, we in the restaurant industry have been dealing with it for ages with Yelp. That's why put minimal stock in publicly sourced reviews.
-
I'm going to throw this out to the wind. No one take offence please.
Tolkien had fun ideas, a deep imagination, a genius level with language, and a fun turn with story telling. All that being said, he was a terrible writer, poor with a plot, and pacing. His characters were overly serious and wooden, or goofy and childish. In The Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was completely unlovable and totally lacking in charm. I never once saw a Tolkien purist complain about Viggo's portrayal being too human.
The telling changes with the medium and the audience. I have no problem with that, and it might prove to be an improvement.
I am a casual fan, but wouldn't go quite that far. I get your overall point, and I don't overly disagree with it, but I think "terrible" is too strong a term. He made artistic choices, was deliberate about them, and executed them in his writing. And he was writing for a particular age. I don't think it is entirely fair to impose 2020s American standards on his writing.
To give an example, you mention pacing. In LOTR, the journey itself (and the pacing thereof) is incredibly important and is practically a character in its own right. It is supposed to feel oppressively long, tedious, and wearisome. That isn't bad writing. It is intentional writing. Of course, whether one likes that or resonates with it is an entirely different thing. But even if one doesn't, that doesn't make the writing "terrible."
Yep. But also, in having re-read LOTR last year, I was struck by how engaged I was even having read it many times since I was a kid. I think the pacing appropriately factors the scale of the journey and the disparate elements that come together to resolve the quest. I will grant that the opening chapters of Fellowship, which take place over a span of many years, might seem badly paced. Especially since they are followed by several chapters of the Hobbits just making their way out of the Shire once they set out. But I think that was necessary to build a sense of home and mystery about the world they were setting out into. That slow, deliberate expansion of the world is also what's missing from the movies.
I will say, they are a pain in the butt to read out loud though. Tried to do that with my kids a few years ago and didn't get very far.
-
Yep. But also, in having re-read LOTR last year, I was struck by how engaged I was even having read it many times since I was a kid. I think the pacing appropriately factors the scale of the journey and the disparate elements that come together to resolve the quest. I will grant that the opening chapters of Fellowship, which take place over a span of many years, might seem badly paced. Especially since they are followed by several chapters of the Hobbits just making their way out of the Shire once they set out.
I didn't read the books till after I saw the movies, and that was one of the biggest things that jumped out at me while reading. It seemed the onset of their journey lacked any urgency.
-
Yep. But also, in having re-read LOTR last year, I was struck by how engaged I was even having read it many times since I was a kid. I think the pacing appropriately factors the scale of the journey and the disparate elements that come together to resolve the quest. I will grant that the opening chapters of Fellowship, which take place over a span of many years, might seem badly paced. Especially since they are followed by several chapters of the Hobbits just making their way out of the Shire once they set out.
I didn't read the books till after I saw the movies, and that was one of the biggest things that jumped out at me while reading. It seemed the onset of their journey lacked any urgency.
It did, but that was also a key plot element. Frodo is reluctant to leave, even though he knows he should. It gives real value to the Shire as a peaceful place that doesn't seem to share the troubles of the outside world (little do they know the Rangers are the ones keeping them safe). He knows if he leaves he may never return, but he also just doesn't know the extent of the threat in staying.
It ends up jeopardizing the whole journey and causing all kinds of problems. But it's also what allows the tension to build. If he had just set out right away, it wouldn't have made as much sense for the Black Riders to happen to be there just as he was leaving. The longer he waited, the longer the likelihood that the Shire would become known to Sauron. And there is a whole other subplot of what Gandalf is up to during that time that helps explain the delay as well (Frodo was waiting for him to come back to set out, and he never did, which should have been a clue that something was up).
-
One of the best moments of the beginning of the Fellowship book is when Gandalf comes back from his journeys and explain to Frodo that his uncle really left him with the most evil and dangerous object in the whole of Middle Earth. I felt like I was there in the room with them, I should read that chapter on a stormy night for more effect.
-
I love the LOTR trilogy (some of my favorite movies ever) but I couldn't even get through the Hobbit trilogy (never saw the last one) so I guess I'm somewhere in the middle of like reserved excitement? What made the LOTR trilogy what it is was everything coming together so perfectly IMO, it's one of those lightning in a bottle situations where you get the right director, the right writers, the right material, the right actors, the right music and the right look of the film and everything was just so memorable. As weird as it may sound, the look of this show so far isn't enough to make me excited. There's been plenty of things that looks good but lacks all the other elements. I'm hoping this has some of that. I'm not expecting it to be LOTR level because that would set me up for disappointment, but I am hoping for something better than a bland action/adventure/drama that feels like Boba Fett or Game of Thrones but happens to have the LOTR name to it.
-
I don't know. I kind of get some of the complaints from the Tolkein purists about some of the changes made to how certain characters, races, or genders are depicted in this show. I don't think they are all ridiculous. Some of them definitely have more merit than others, but to simply dismiss their concerns seems wrong.
-
Yep. But also, in having re-read LOTR last year, I was struck by how engaged I was even having read it many times since I was a kid. I think the pacing appropriately factors the scale of the journey and the disparate elements that come together to resolve the quest. I will grant that the opening chapters of Fellowship, which take place over a span of many years, might seem badly paced. Especially since they are followed by several chapters of the Hobbits just making their way out of the Shire once they set out.
I didn't read the books till after I saw the movies, and that was one of the biggest things that jumped out at me while reading. It seemed the onset of their journey lacked any urgency.
It did, but that was also a key plot element. Frodo is reluctant to leave, even though he knows he should. It gives real value to the Shire as a peaceful place that doesn't seem to share the troubles of the outside world (little do they know the Rangers are the ones keeping them safe). He knows if he leaves he may never return, but he also just doesn't know the extent of the threat in staying.
It ends up jeopardizing the whole journey and causing all kinds of problems. But it's also what allows the tension to build. If he had just set out right away, it wouldn't have made as much sense for the Black Riders to happen to be there just as he was leaving. The longer he waited, the longer the likelihood that the Shire would become known to Sauron. And there is a whole other subplot of what Gandalf is up to during that time that helps explain the delay as well (Frodo was waiting for him to come back to set out, and he never did, which should have been a clue that something was up).
I appreciate the breakdown. It was apparently lost on me when I read it! But again I watched the films first, which informed things accordingly.
-
I recently rewatched the Hobbit Trilogy and actually had a great time. Watched the extended ultra HD releases (extended for the first time). The films appear to look a (bit) less fake due to the better coloration (though the third still looks the worst, unfortunately). I feel the films do look significantly different in these releases. And treating the whole thing as a ten episode series makes it flow much better. I actually thought the ultimate battle was much more engaging because the added scenes make it a much coherent, enjoyable thing. And I think the actual battle was a bit more than an hour, which feels good if you treat the whole thing as a 9 hour series watched in a weekend or so (immediately viewing the climax to Smaug works much better too, rather than viewing it a year later in the cinama). And there are some fantastic performances in these films.
I originally loved the first Hobbit, enjoyed the second, hated the third btw (only watched them in the cinema).
-
I remember people complaining about Elves at Helms Deep completely ruining the movie adaption, now it's Elves having the wrong hair cut ruining their childhood :biggrin:
Is it really that hard for a billion dollar production to give a third (I'm assuming) of the character cast some nice flat human hair wigs though? When you see a scene set in Rivendell in the LotR movies and everyone has long shiny hair, that's part of the look.
I really don't mind racially diverse casting, most of the film industry in the past few years has been reduced to remakes and adaptations of properties full of white people, and actors who aren't white have to work in these conditions. That's not what I'm complaining about when I talk about the look, though it would be nice if they would make it make sense, and take, say, a few important families or a whole branch of Elves like the Sindar and make them all different.
PJ took some huge creative liberties with the plot and some of the characters, and yeah, something like Elves in Helms Deep is a problem there because they take you out of the immersion and go against one of the core elements of the book, which is that Elves are in soft retirement from the world and not there to solve problems or take so much part in the action that they should leave their home that needs defending and go and help humans. In fact, it goes against another changed part in the movie, where Elrond is convincing Arwen to go with the rest of their kin right now - so Elves that still have business in Middle Earth are actively leaving and not waiting at all but at the same time they are so involved that they send troops to fight with humans? And they don't really add anything or solve any excitement/pacing problems in Tolkien's plot - Helm's Deep is already an exciting filmable part of the story full of moving parts and they are already expecting an influx of warriors to come in, so it's just a plot point that repeats itself.
But PJ is forgiven for these small sins by most of the fandom because every place and character had the look and feel of the books, while still being perfectly acceptable to audiences at the time; and while one or two core elements of the books have been messed with in a few isolated plot points, not all of them have, and the most important ones have been preserved. In fact, it's possible that when this is over we will start looking at LotR movies like the one successful adaptation of a popular fantasy book. Nothing else ever came close and I don't think this will either.
-
Question for the movie fans, I just finished another rewatch of the Fellowship of the Ring Extended edition, though the edition doesn't matter for my question. When the fellowship are going by boat down the river after meeting Galadriel, they say they need to cross the river to continue their journey. Why don't they just bank the boats in the first place? I mean they're already on the river, can't they just wade to the left and camp there? They camp the night on the opposite side and say we'll cross the river in the morning and that ends up splitting the fellowship with the capture of Merry & Pippin and Boromir's death. I just thought it was odd unless I'm mistaking the logistics of the journey. Anyone know what I'm talking about?
-
The short answer is Orc infested country on the East bank. The west is presumably safer but they weren’t aware of Saruman’s treachery and him sending out the Uruks.
-
Now that you mention it, I think there was some dialogue referring to the orcs presence and they wanted to wait it out on the other side. It's just that the way they shot it, it was right across where they stopped and seemed like a weird thing to just not have stopped their instead.
-
People are remembering elves at Helm's Deep, but 20 years later I'm still hung up on not showing the Witchking breaking down the gates of Minas Tirith and facing Gandalf alone. It was such a cinematic scene that all PJ had to do was film it the way it was written in the book. It would have been beyond epic.
-
People are remembering elves at Helm's Deep, but 20 years later I'm still hung up on not showing the Witchking breaking down the gates of Minas Tirith and facing Gandalf alone. It was such a cinematic scene that all PJ had to do was film it the way it was written in the book. It would have been beyond epic.
Care to share the passage from the book? I've only read the first book and that was a long time ago. The Witch King and Gandalf encounter is in the Extended Edition of ROTK, is that how it's in the book?
-
People are remembering elves at Helm's Deep, but 20 years later I'm still hung up on not showing the Witchking breaking down the gates of Minas Tirith and facing Gandalf alone. It was such a cinematic scene that all PJ had to do was film it the way it was written in the book. It would have been beyond epic.
Care to share the passage from the book? I've only read the first book and that was a long time ago. The Witch King and Gandalf encounter is in the Extended Edition of ROTK, is that how it's in the book?
Nope, in the book is way more cool, badass, dramatic and epic, and not a random CGI fight as shown in the extended edition:
Thrice he cried. Thrice the great ram boomed. And suddenly upon the last stroke the Gate of Gondor broke. As if stricken by some blasting spell it burst asunder: there was a flash of searing lightning, and the doors tumbled in riven fragments to the ground.
In rode the Lord of the Nazgul. A great black shape against the fires beyond he loomed up, grown to a vast menace of despair. In rode the Lord of the Nazgul, under the archway that no enemy ever yet had passed, and all fled before his face.
All save one. There waiting, silent and still in the space before the Gate, sat Gandalf upon Shadowfax: Shadowfax who alone among the free horses of the earth endured the terror, unmoving, steadfast as a graven image in Rath Dinen.
‘You cannot enter here,’ said Gandalf, and the huge shadow halted. ‘Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!’
The Black Rider flung back his hood, and behold! He had a kingly crown; and yet upon no head visible it was set. The red fires shone between it and the mantled shoulders vast and dark. From a mouth unseen there came a deadly laughter.
‘Old fool!’ he said. ‘Old fool! This is my hour. Do you not know Death when you see it? Die now and curse in vain!’ And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade.
Gandalf did not move. And in that very moment, away behind in some courtyard of the City, a cock crowed. Shrill and clear he crowed, recking nothing of wizardry or war, welcoming only the morning that in the sky far above the shadows of death was coming with the dawn.
And as if in answer there came from far away another note. Horns, horns, horns. In dark Mindolluin’s sides they dimly echoed. Great horns of the North wildly blowing. Rohan had come at last.
-
Hmm That is a great passage but I can see that not working for the movie honestly. Some of that language and setting are already very similar to the encounter with the Balrog so it wouldn't have that much of an effect in ROTK when you've already seen how it went in the Fellowship. Maybe PJ felt compelled to film the encounter regardless and then it didn't flow well for the main theatrical cut which is why it's included in the the Extended Edition.
-
Hmm That is a great passage but I can see that not working for the movie honestly. Some of that language and setting are already very similar to the encounter with the Balrog so it wouldn't have that much of an effect in ROTK when you've already seen how it went in the Fellowship. Maybe PJ felt compelled to film the encounter regardless and then it didn't flow well for the main theatrical cut which is why it's included in the the Extended Edition.
I honestly thought the same thing as I was reading it. Too many similarities to the Balrog scene. It would’ve completely fallen flat.
-
Hmm That is a great passage but I can see that not working for the movie honestly. Some of that language and setting are already very similar to the encounter with the Balrog so it wouldn't have that much of an effect in ROTK when you've already seen how it went in the Fellowship. Maybe PJ felt compelled to film the encounter regardless and then it didn't flow well for the main theatrical cut which is why it's included in the the Extended Edition.
I honestly thought the same thing as I was reading it. Too many similarities to the Balrog scene. It would’ve completely fallen flat.
I don’t remember the ROTK movie well enough to know this, but did they take this interaction out altogether or just change it somewhow?
I don’t think it’s too similar at all. The Balrog scene was the “end” of Gandalf the Gray. The audience believes Gandalf to be defeated afterward. This scene is Gandalf the White standing his ground before the Witch King, and what follows is the complete turning of the tide in the battle/war.
-
Exactly! it shows how really powerful Gandalf is, how in the darkest hour even the most corageous of men flee, and Gandalf dares to stand against the utmost terror.
No enemy had ever breached the gates of Minas Tirith, it's a pivotal moment in Gondor's history. It's the nazis reaching Paris, or the siege of Dunkirk. When all hope seems lost, Gandalf is there ready to face the Nazgul..... and finally, Rohan comes, and the Witch King has to move away and direct his attention to the battle that ensues (but not enough attention to a little motherfucker of an hobbit and his dagger, evidently).
-
I remember people complaining about Elves at Helms Deep completely ruining the movie adaption, now it's Elves having the wrong hair cut ruining their childhood :biggrin:
Is it really that hard for a billion dollar production to give a third (I'm assuming) of the character cast some nice flat human hair wigs though? When you see a scene set in Rivendell in the LotR movies and everyone has long shiny hair, that's part of the look.
I really don't mind racially diverse casting, most of the film industry in the past few years has been reduced to remakes and adaptations of properties full of white people, and actors who aren't white have to work in these conditions. That's not what I'm complaining about when I talk about the look, though it would be nice if they would make it make sense, and take, say, a few important families or a whole branch of Elves like the Sindar and make them all different.
PJ took some huge creative liberties with the plot and some of the characters, and yeah, something like Elves in Helms Deep is a problem there because they take you out of the immersion and go against one of the core elements of the book, which is that Elves are in soft retirement from the world and not there to solve problems or take so much part in the action that they should leave their home that needs defending and go and help humans. In fact, it goes against another changed part in the movie, where Elrond is convincing Arwen to go with the rest of their kin right now - so Elves that still have business in Middle Earth are actively leaving and not waiting at all but at the same time they are so involved that they send troops to fight with humans? And they don't really add anything or solve any excitement/pacing problems in Tolkien's plot - Helm's Deep is already an exciting filmable part of the story full of moving parts and they are already expecting an influx of warriors to come in, so it's just a plot point that repeats itself.
But PJ is forgiven for these small sins by most of the fandom because every place and character had the look and feel of the books, while still being perfectly acceptable to audiences at the time; and while one or two core elements of the books have been messed with in a few isolated plot points, not all of them have, and the most important ones have been preserved. In fact, it's possible that when this is over we will start looking at LotR movies like the one successful adaptation of a popular fantasy book. Nothing else ever came close and I don't think this will either.
I always felt the elves in the movies were rather different from the ones on the page. In the movies the elves came more across as Vulcans and to be honest it's a change that probably works for the movies.
-
Hmm That is a great passage but I can see that not working for the movie honestly. Some of that language and setting are already very similar to the encounter with the Balrog so it wouldn't have that much of an effect in ROTK when you've already seen how it went in the Fellowship. Maybe PJ felt compelled to film the encounter regardless and then it didn't flow well for the main theatrical cut which is why it's included in the the Extended Edition.
I honestly thought the same thing as I was reading it. Too many similarities to the Balrog scene. It would’ve completely fallen flat.
I don’t remember the ROTK movie well enough to know this, but did they take this interaction out altogether or just change it somewhow?
I don’t think it’s too similar at all. The Balrog scene was the “end” of Gandalf the Gray. The audience believes Gandalf to be defeated afterward. This scene is Gandalf the White standing his ground before the Witch King, and what follows is the complete turning of the tide in the battle/war.
In the theatrical edition, there is no Gandalf vs The Witch King. In the extended version, they do meet one on one and it ends with the horns like in the passage but the location of the meeting is different.
When I say similar I'm referring to Gandalf's lines like "You cannot pass"' in the Balrog scene vs "You cannot enter here" with the Witch King. It probably could've been an epic buildup and scene on its own but maybe not so much in the context of the movie.
Truthfully who's to say they didn't plan for it to be that way like it was in the book for the movie but in the end it didn't work out. I used to think the extended edition had pretty much all the extra footage they shot, turns out there's still a buttload of footage out there locked in a vault somewhere. The original cut was apparently over 4 1/2 hours long and they had to trim it down to 3 hours for the theatrical release. ~50 mins of that are in the extended editions, so there's still a ton of footage out there for the last movie.
I haven't watched the theatrical cuts in ages as all previous times I've watched the movie it's been the extended editions.
-
I don’t remember the ROTK movie well enough to know this, but did they take this interaction out altogether or just change it somewhow?
I don’t think it’s too similar at all. The Balrog scene was the “end” of Gandalf the Gray. The audience believes Gandalf to be defeated afterward. This scene is Gandalf the White standing his ground before the Witch King, and what follows is the complete turning of the tide in the battle/war.
In the theatrical edition, there is no Gandalf vs The Witch King. In the extended version, they do meet one on one and it ends with the horns like in the passage but the location of the meeting is different.
When I say similar I'm referring to Gandalf's lines like "You cannot pass"' in the Balrog scene vs "You cannot enter here" with the Witch King. It probably could've been an epic buildup and scene on its own but maybe not so much in the context of the movie.
Truthfully who's to say they didn't plan for it to be that way like it was in the book for the movie but in the end it didn't work out. I used to think the extended edition had pretty much all the extra footage they shot, turns out there's still a buttload of footage out there locked in a vault somewhere. The original cut was apparently over 4 1/2 hours long and they had to trim it down to 3 hours for the theatrical release. ~50 mins of that are in the extended editions, so there's still a ton of footage out there for the last movie.
I haven't watched the theatrical cuts in ages as all previous times I've watched the movie it's been the extended editions.
Which goes back to my point a little while back that the novels could have been given a much more thorough treatment in a multi-season TV series than in a movie. I suppose the other option would have been to split up the six “books” and do six different movies.
-
I don’t remember the ROTK movie well enough to know this, but did they take this interaction out altogether or just change it somewhow?
I don’t think it’s too similar at all. The Balrog scene was the “end” of Gandalf the Gray. The audience believes Gandalf to be defeated afterward. This scene is Gandalf the White standing his ground before the Witch King, and what follows is the complete turning of the tide in the battle/war.
In the theatrical edition, there is no Gandalf vs The Witch King. In the extended version, they do meet one on one and it ends with the horns like in the passage but the location of the meeting is different.
When I say similar I'm referring to Gandalf's lines like "You cannot pass"' in the Balrog scene vs "You cannot enter here" with the Witch King. It probably could've been an epic buildup and scene on its own but maybe not so much in the context of the movie.
Truthfully who's to say they didn't plan for it to be that way like it was in the book for the movie but in the end it didn't work out. I used to think the extended edition had pretty much all the extra footage they shot, turns out there's still a buttload of footage out there locked in a vault somewhere. The original cut was apparently over 4 1/2 hours long and they had to trim it down to 3 hours for the theatrical release. ~50 mins of that are in the extended editions, so there's still a ton of footage out there for the last movie.
I haven't watched the theatrical cuts in ages as all previous times I've watched the movie it's been the extended editions.
Which goes back to my point a little while back that the novels could have been given a much more thorough treatment in a multi-season TV series than in a movie. I suppose the other option would have been to split up the six “books” and do six different movies.
Neither of those were realistic options back then.
It was considered virtually insane to make the films at the same time.
-
I don’t remember the ROTK movie well enough to know this, but did they take this interaction out altogether or just change it somewhow?
I don’t think it’s too similar at all. The Balrog scene was the “end” of Gandalf the Gray. The audience believes Gandalf to be defeated afterward. This scene is Gandalf the White standing his ground before the Witch King, and what follows is the complete turning of the tide in the battle/war.
In the theatrical edition, there is no Gandalf vs The Witch King. In the extended version, they do meet one on one and it ends with the horns like in the passage but the location of the meeting is different.
When I say similar I'm referring to Gandalf's lines like "You cannot pass"' in the Balrog scene vs "You cannot enter here" with the Witch King. It probably could've been an epic buildup and scene on its own but maybe not so much in the context of the movie.
Truthfully who's to say they didn't plan for it to be that way like it was in the book for the movie but in the end it didn't work out. I used to think the extended edition had pretty much all the extra footage they shot, turns out there's still a buttload of footage out there locked in a vault somewhere. The original cut was apparently over 4 1/2 hours long and they had to trim it down to 3 hours for the theatrical release. ~50 mins of that are in the extended editions, so there's still a ton of footage out there for the last movie.
I haven't watched the theatrical cuts in ages as all previous times I've watched the movie it's been the extended editions.
Which goes back to my point a little while back that the novels could have been given a much more thorough treatment in a multi-season TV series than in a movie. I suppose the other option would have been to split up the six “books” and do six different movies.
Neither of those were realistic options back then.
It was considered virtually insane to make the films at the same time.
I agree, but I do think the current environment would better support a more expansive series.
-
New 3 min trailer released. I’m intrigued enough. I’ll watch this in the Fall.
-
New 3 min trailer released. I’m intrigued enough. I’ll watch this in the Fall.
I’m sure I will watch…..but something about these trailers seems ‘off’ to me. Like, they’re over produced and/or perfected. Doesn’t seem gritty enough. It’s too clean
-
Yeah, kind of looks like Marvel in Middle Earth. I don't get the right feeling about it. Also miss Howard Shore. He was hired for the TV-series but supposedly only worked on the main theme. There's a lot to be on the fence about but at least hope for the best.
-
New 3 min trailer released. I’m intrigued enough. I’ll watch this in the Fall.
I’m sure I will watch…..but something about these trailers seems ‘off’ to me. Like, they’re over produced and/or perfected. Doesn’t seem gritty enough. It’s too clean
As more and more footage and trailers have been released heading into this series premiere.....I'm sticking with what I said back in July. These trailers have done nothing for me to 'inspire' me to want to watch...in fact....it's the opposite. The 'look' of it all is just off. I know it's a fantasy show and maybe it's the look they're shooting for....but, it's really off putting to me. Not to mention the centerpiece character they've been showing doesn't portray any type of charisma or likability....albeit has been a limited and select amount of footage and clips to judge from....but...I'd think you'd want to pick some of the more inspiring sections to show in order to entice folks.
I'll give it a go for sure.....but, unfortunately the show already has a small hole to dig out of from my first impressions of it.
-
Series will premiere tomorrow with two episodes I believe, very curious to see how they are. With just 8 episodes I'm hoping they are at least compelling.
-
Series will premiere tomorrow with two episodes I believe, very curious to see how they are. With just 8 episodes I'm hoping they are at least compelling.
For purposes of avoiding confusion, I may wait until the current season of the Game of Thrones prequel is done before starting this.
-
Does anyone know if they are planning to release one episode a week? I don't currently have Prime and would prefer to pay for only one month to catch all of this.
-
Does anyone know if they are planning to release one episode a week? I don't currently have Prime and would prefer to pay for only one month to catch all of this.
It does look like it's released once a week apart from today with two episodes made available. From IMDB it shows there are a total of 8 episodes for the first season.
-
I must say, I really enjoyed the first episode. The only thing that was a little off putting was all the male elves with 80’s Wall Street hair cuts. Other than that… :tup
-
Yeah really enjoyed the first episode, everything felt right. Really impressed.
-
Yeah really enjoyed the first episode, everything felt right. Really impressed.
Yeah, one of the best looking shows I've ever seen!
However, being vaguely familiar with Silmarillion and the second age of Tolkiens work in general, there are a lot of departures from what was written in Silmarillion. But despite all that, I'm willing to give this a shot and accept this as a different adaptation.
-
Got about halfway through the first episode but nodded off and missed a few minutes, so I went to bed. I'll watch it with proper rest tonight, but of what I saw it looks outstanding
-
Both episodes visually looked amazing, the music was great. I'm glad they got Howard Shore back, the compositions so far are top notch. I think the episodes need a bit of tightening but otherwise were pretty good.
Minor correction, only the title music is scored by Howard Shore, the rest of the show music is composed by Bear McCreary who I haven't heard of. He's done a great job so far.
-
Both episodes visually looked amazing, the music was great. I'm glad they got Howard Shore back, the compositions so far are top notch. I think the episodes need a bit of tightening but otherwise were pretty good.
Minor correction, only the title music is scored by Howard Shore, the rest of the show music is composed by Bear McCreary who I haven't heard of. He's done a great job so far.
I think that's the guy who did The Walking Dead theme.
-
Watched episode two now, thought it was absolutely superb - considering they are walking in sacred ground with this show, these first two episodes for me at least really were quite lovely, and I'm completely invested in the narrative and the characters. Just hope it holds up.
-
It’s so annoying how it has become a common thing for a lot of people to downrate movies/shows with black people and strong women to the point that the ratings on rating sites end up being really low when they shouldn’t be. Almost 10 000 1/10 ratings for this on IMDb…
-
It’s so annoying how it has become a common thing for a lot of people to downrate movies/shows with black people and strong women to the point that the ratings on rating sites end up being really low when they shouldn’t be. Almost 10 000 1/10 ratings for this on IMDb…
Most of it is YouTubers trying to drum clicks (and therefore money) by feeding the anger of stupid people. They actually believe they are fighting a cultural war....
-
First impression is good, waaay better than my admittedly low expectations. It looks sublime on my Oled and the atmosphere is exactly what I associate with LotR.
And yes, online people are ridiculous and twitter is an irredeemable hellhole. I choose to ignore it all and make up my own mind.
Both episodes visually looked amazing, the music was great. I'm glad they got Howard Shore back, the compositions so far are top notch. I think the episodes need a bit of tightening but otherwise were pretty good.
Minor correction, only the title music is scored by Howard Shore, the rest of the show music is composed by Bear McCreary who I haven't heard of. He's done a great job so far.
Bear McReary did the soundtrack for God of War (2018 game), one of my favourite mythology/fantasy soundtracks of all time. They hired the right guy for sure.
-
I'm enjoying it, though I will admit that I was not at first. I think it took me at least half of the first episode to feel myself starting to settle in with it, and now of course I can't wait until the next episode drops.
-
Watched both episodes with a clear mind last night...and I'm all in. Absolutely loving this.
So...the elephant in the room...who is the 'giant' that Nori found?
Also, the Dwarven city is just fucking amazing, and Durin's kid's are about the cutest thing ever, wished they gave them a bit more screen time.
-
It’s so annoying how it has become a common thing for a lot of people to downrate movies/shows with black people and strong women to the point that the ratings on rating sites end up being really low when they shouldn’t be. Almost 10 000 1/10 ratings for this on IMDb…
Yeah it's useless to get honest ratings when they look like this
(https://imgur.com/HvCuZ1c.jpg)
-
That breakdown sums it up males adults are the worst...
-
I'm enjoying it, though I will admit that I was not at first. I think it took me at least half of the first episode to feel myself starting to settle in with it, and now of course I can't wait until the next episode drops.
For me the first 20 minutes or so felt a bit awkward, but from then on it gradually kept getting better and the second episode excited me.
Watched both episodes with a clear mind last night...and I'm all in. Absolutely loving this.
So...the elephant in the room...who is the 'giant' that Nori found?
Also, the Dwarven city is just fucking amazing, and Durin's kid's are about the cutest thing ever, wished they gave them a bit more screen time.
Perhaps it is one of the wizards that did not really get any page time in Tolkiens works? I am not really familiar with the Silmarion and other Tolkien stuff that isn't in the main books. And I think I read the timeline of this series is very condensed (so that it isn't just a bunch of elves through the ages), so a lot of characters could make their appearance.
-
I'm enjoying it, though I will admit that I was not at first. I think it took me at least half of the first episode to feel myself starting to settle in with it, and now of course I can't wait until the next episode drops.
For me the first 20 minutes or so felt a bit awkward, but from then on it gradually kept getting better and the second episode excited me.
Watched both episodes with a clear mind last night...and I'm all in. Absolutely loving this.
So...the elephant in the room...who is the 'giant' that Nori found?
Also, the Dwarven city is just fucking amazing, and Durin's kid's are about the cutest thing ever, wished they gave them a bit more screen time.
Perhaps it is one of the wizards that did not really get any page time in Tolkiens works? I am not really familiar with the Silmarion and other Tolkien stuff that isn't in the main books. And I think I read the timeline of this series is very condensed (so that it isn't just a bunch of elves through the ages), so a lot of characters could make their appearance.
I think it's simply that the first 20 minutes or so feel like they are taking for granted your investment in the character as well as the conflict they are setting up. And maybe they felt the need to do that, to get that familiar conflict on the table immediately. But once they got out of the way I felt myself getting a lot more into it, I'm genuinely curious about the new characters and the stories they will face in this second age Middle Earth.
-
It’s so annoying how it has become a common thing for a lot of people to downrate movies/shows with black people and strong women to the point that the ratings on rating sites end up being really low when they shouldn’t be. Almost 10 000 1/10 ratings for this on IMDb…
Most of it is YouTubers trying to drum clicks (and therefore money) by feeding the anger of stupid people. They actually believe they are fighting a cultural war....
I've said this in other threads, but audience scores on IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic etc. are just a complete irrelevance now. The only people who care about them are the ones doing the review bombing to try and "prove" their point, but actual grown ups are now fully aware how meaningless they are.
Which is a real shame as I used to find those sorts of things a helpful way to get a sense of how much audiences liked something. Now, unless some sort of representative surveys happen to be done by a polling organisation, then we don't have anything else meaningful like that. All that's left are critic scores and audience viewer/box office numbers.
Anyway I liked the first two episodes a lot. Not completely gripped yet but I don't need to be after only two episodes - I like long-form storytelling and I'm enjoying how this show is developing so far. And visually it is just outrageously good.
-
Just watch the first two episodes last night. I was prepared to be underwhelmed and was actually pleasantly surprised. So far, I think the show is excellent!
-
Watched the first episodes as well. Not perfect, but way better than I feared!
It's visually stunning, and I can forgive them not copying the movies' ahestetics. Very minor complaint, Galadriel and Elrond seem to be just buddies but actually Elrond married one of Galadriel's daughters, I guess they probably skipped over her getting together with Celeborn : D
I'll see how the story unfolds, it has the potential to be great!
-
We watched the first 2 episodes last night. Pleasantly surprised. I was a little wary, but wow, you can see every bit of money that Amazon spent up on the screen. It looks INCREDIBLE.
BTW, my early prediction on the Stranger from the comet is Gandalf, even though it would mean drastically changing the timing of when Wizards became active in Middle Earth.
-
Watched the first episodes as well. Not perfect, but way better than I feared!
It's visually stunning, and I can forgive them not copying the movies' ahestetics. Very minor complaint, Galadriel and Elrond seem to be just buddies but actually Elrond married one of Galadriel's daughters, I guess they probably skipped over her getting together with Celeborn : D
I'll see how the story unfolds, it has the potential to be great!
Biggest problem I've had with Rings of Power so far, is the changing of Galadriel's character. They set her up as the leading action hero, when she never really was one. During this era she is building Lothlorien with her husband Celeborn, not running around middle earth hunting Sauron.
But, this is a different adaptation I get it.. I'm interested to see where this goes nonetheless! Interested in how this version sets up the events leading up to the War of The Last Alliance against Sauron.
-
My main problem would be how much.... "generic" it would feel.
I'll try to explain, I don't want to be a gatekeeper, but to me Lord of the Rings is sacred. The emotional attachment I have to it is immense. They can screw up everything, but NOT "my" LOTR!
That world is so unique, and so perfectly captured by the movies, that when / if I watch a LOTR adaptation, I want to feel I'm really in Middle Earth. No director is required to fulfill the idea I have in my mind of that world, but I want to really "feel" it. I don't want it to look like yet another fantasy show with the cliches of the genre - the female action hero (in this case Galadriel), the love romance (please tell me Galadriel won't fall for Haldebrand, the guy of the boat), the modern looking characters...
LOTR is LOTR. As estabilished not by my personal ideas about it, but by the movies and the drawings of Alan Lee. As long as I get the feel I'm in that world and it's not just another generic adaptation of "just another fantasy story" (LOTR is not "just another fantasy story for me!"), I can forgive some digressions here and there.
For example, I loved Moria. It really felt like Moria from the movies, even though they didn't literally copy it. I guess eventually we'll see the dwarves discovering the Balrog?
On the other hand, I expected elves to be more fair and ethereal than random guys with pointy years. I know you can't all cast super good looking guys, but elves should really be more beautiful and stand out more.... I don't want Legolas clones and Hugo Weaving was definitively not "elf-beautiful", but come on, make them really stand out :D
-
We watched the first 2 episodes last night. Pleasantly surprised. I was a little wary, but wow, you can see every bit of money that Amazon spent up on the screen. It looks INCREDIBLE.
BTW, my early prediction on the Stranger from the comet is Gandalf, even though it would mean drastically changing the timing of when Wizards became active in Middle Earth.
That's why I'm thinking we're dealing with a Blue Wizard here. Those, apparently, came first, and were active before the War of the Ring.
-
I really hope it isn't Gandalf. Would be way more interesting to do one of the "unknown" wizards and it would give the writers a lot of freedom.
Watched the first episodes as well. Not perfect, but way better than I feared!
It's visually stunning, and I can forgive them not copying the movies' ahestetics. Very minor complaint, Galadriel and Elrond seem to be just buddies but actually Elrond married one of Galadriel's daughters, I guess they probably skipped over her getting together with Celeborn : D
I'll see how the story unfolds, it has the potential to be great!
Biggest problem I've had with Rings of Power so far, is the changing of Galadriel's character. They set her up as the leading action hero, when she never really was one. During this era she is building Lothlorien with her husband Celeborn, not running around middle earth hunting Sauron.
But, this is a different adaptation I get it.. I'm interested to see where this goes nonetheless! Interested in how this version sets up the events leading up to the War of The Last Alliance against Sauron.
I recently listened tot the audiobooks. I know a lot of people are super passionate about Tolkiens work so I am going to post some blasphemy.
I saw people here yearning for a more book accurate series of the trilogy, but I genuinely think a very loyal adaption would make for a much poorer end result than what we got. If there is one gripe with the books I have, it would be that many characters feel lacking in personality and development. For the record I enjoy the LotR books for it's many strengths, but many of those strengths don't necessarily translate well to film.
In that line of thinking, a change to Galadriel was needed if you ask me, if you want to have her on screen and have a compelling arc to tell. If the writers are good, they can find a way to have her develop towards what I think people consider to be Galadriel. All of that is easier said than done offcourse. But I went from zero interest to actually being excited for this, as thus far I feel their changes have been justified and fitting.
-
My main problem would be how much.... "generic" it would feel.
I'll try to explain, I don't want to be a gatekeeper, but to me Lord of the Rings is sacred. The emotional attachment I have to it is immense. They can screw up everything, but NOT "my" LOTR!
That world is so unique, and so perfectly captured by the movies, that when / if I watch a LOTR adaptation, I want to feel I'm really in Middle Earth. No director is required to fulfill the idea I have in my mind of that world, but I want to really "feel" it. I don't want it to look like yet another fantasy show with the cliches of the genre - the female action hero (in this case Galadriel), the love romance (please tell me Galadriel won't fall for Haldebrand, the guy of the boat), the modern looking characters...
LOTR is LOTR. As estabilished not by my personal ideas about it, but by the movies and the drawings of Alan Lee. As long as I get the feel I'm in that world and it's not just another generic adaptation of "just another fantasy story" (LOTR is not "just another fantasy story for me!"), I can forgive some digressions here and there.
For example, I loved Moria. It really felt like Moria from the movies, even though they didn't literally copy it. I guess eventually we'll see the dwarves discovering the Balrog?
On the other hand, I expected elves to be more fair and ethereal than random guys with pointy years. I know you can't all cast super good looking guys, but elves should really be more beautiful and stand out more.... I don't want Legolas clones and Hugo Weaving was definitively not "elf-beautiful", but come on, make them really stand out :D
It's only two episodes but for me the world feels much better than The Hobbit trilogy. It's hard to compare to LoTRs yet as those movies are magical (but even those got some gatekeeper backlash on release 'Elves at Helms Deep').
-
Both episodes visually looked amazing, the music was great. I'm glad they got Howard Shore back, the compositions so far are top notch. I think the episodes need a bit of tightening but otherwise were pretty good.
Minor correction, only the title music is scored by Howard Shore, the rest of the show music is composed by Bear McCreary who I haven't heard of. He's done a great job so far.
I first noticed Bear McCreary as the composer for BSG, which I think was his start in the business. Since then he's been working steadily in film and television. Some other series he scored include Outlander, Foundation, and Agents of SHIELD, among many others.
-
The episodes are fine, but it's just making me want to watch the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. I have the extended editions and I don't think I've ever watched the more recent extended cuts. I remember when the first extended editions came out and there was like a half hour extra, and then later they released another version with an hour extra in each movie. Am I remembering that right?
-
The episodes are fine, but it's just making me want to watch the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. I have the extended editions and I don't think I've ever watched the more recent extended cuts. I remember when the first extended editions came out and there was like a half hour extra, and then later they released another version with an hour extra in each movie. Am I remembering that right?
I think the extended versions have always been the extended versions. However each successive movie had more that was put back in. I think the fellowship had about 30 minutes added, the two Towers had about 45 minutes added, and return of the King at almost an hour.
But I know that there are not multiple extended additions. The extended additions that we have now are the only ones there are
-
Yep, the first time they put out the Extended Versions are the same versions as the most recent release. There is no super extended version.
-
On a sidenote but perhaps related, the latest releases are visually different and were marketed as such.
The different coloring and digital cleanup is controversial for the LotR films. For some reason anything LotR related is always super touchy on the internet. There were articles and online meltdowns calling the films ruined on the 4k rereleases. To me they look great, especially the HDR (I only recommend trying these versions if you have a capable setup for that). I would not call them better or worse though. But by no means did they go overboard in any direction with the coloring and all.
I will say that unlike LotR, the Hobbit films are a clear cut winner on the 4k front. Those versions have improved quite a bit visually. Much more natural coloring and less oversaturation, which helps the visuals quite a bit given that there is so much cgi slinging around.
-
I'm debating whether or not to watch honestly. I watched the LOTR movies when they were released.....enjoyed them enough I suppose.....but have never seen any of the Hobbit movies.....only small sections here and there if it's been on TV. And, I've not read any Tolkien. I played D&D so I have an appreciation for that 'world' but as far as being a massive fan or having the required knowledge to truly enjoy the show.....not sure that it's there.
I will most likely watch a few episodes to see if it captures my attention but not sure if I'm the intended audience.
-
I'm debating whether or not to watch honestly. I watched the LOTR movies when they were released.....enjoyed them enough I suppose.....but have never seen any of the Hobbit movies.....only small sections here and there if it's been on TV. And, I've not read any Tolkien. I played D&D so I have an appreciation for that 'world' but as far as being a massive fan or having the required knowledge to truly enjoy the show.....not sure that it's there.
I will most likely watch a few episodes to see if it captures my attention but not sure if I'm the intended audience.
You're probably better off not "being a massive fan" or having any prior knowledge. People who really know a lot about what's in the appendices to The Lord of the Rings are often the kinds of people who get really butthurt about any perceived changes to their precious canon. I don't think they are the target audience for this series.
-
Watched it. Loved it. Can’t wait for more.
-
Watched it. Loved it. Can’t wait for more.
It was late when I got done watching so I didn't go into detail. But, I liked the way they use the cut scenes with the Map to guide the viewer through the story. It's extremely helpful and eliminates any sort of confusion and helps keep the separate storylines straight.
Digging near all the characters....I think they've done a pretty good job at providing some 'meat' to the characters backstory without having to hand feed it to the viewer....it's been done well through dialogue alone and the character interactions.
-
Watched the first episode last night. I liked the look of it, actors seem good so far, but worry they are going to try to cram too many plot lines into it. Felt myself losing interest as they drifted between the Galadriel story, the Hobbits, the elf who’s into the human chick, etc. I mostly just hope all the episodes don’t go over an hour. 45 minutes is about my max attention span for TV.
-
Watched the first episode last night. I liked the look of it, actors seem good so far, but worry they are going to try to cram too many plot lines into it. Felt myself losing interest as they drifted between the Galadriel story, the Hobbits, the elf who’s into the human chick, etc. I mostly just hope all the episodes don’t go over an hour. 45 minutes is about my max attention span for TV.
For the first half of the pilot it really felt they were trying to get to a certain point asap. Especially for Galadriel, showing her in many locations throughout many years. The tempo that follows worked well for me, I hope it maintains this for future episodes.
-
Watched episode 3 tonight.
The tightening up of the timeline is really kind of jarring. But I guess I kinda get it?? They did say that they were cooperating with the Tolkien estate on that very subject so they could have a singular set of human characters instead of having to go multi generational on us.
Not sure that was the best decision, but I’m enjoying it in spite of that so far.
-
Finished up the first three episodes last night. I am really enjoying this so far. I could nitpick, but I'm not going to. So far I'm very impressed at gow this looks and feels.
-
Watched episode 3 tonight.
The tightening up of the timeline is really kind of jarring. But I guess I kinda get it?? They did say that they were cooperating with the Tolkien estate on that very subject so they could have a singular set of human characters instead of having to go multi generational on us.
Not sure that was the best decision, but I’m enjoying it in spite of that so far.
I had not noticed they were tightening things up. But also we are talking about numenorians here, so biblical lifespans are not out of the question. At any rate, I wonder how much condensing we are getting, I think it will be thousands of years into hundreds of years rather than thousands of years into months.
-
Really digging this show. It’s far exceeded My expectations
-
I dunno, it looks great but I’m not really sure where any of it is going. Episode 4 was a chore. The episodes need to be shorter probably.
-
I dunno, it looks great but I’m not really sure where any of it is going. Episode 4 was a chore. The episodes need to be shorter probably.
I feel the same way - the season is halfway over and it feels like not much has happened. All of the leadup to the show was talking about how this shows how the rings were created for Sauron, and they haven't gotten to anything about the rings yet, just a mention of how the elves need to build a big forge.
Maybe the last four episodes will start to move the story along further. The show is gorgeous, I love the actors and characters, but they're calling the show the Rings of Power, yet there seems to be very little movement towards that part of the story.
-
They're planning on multiple seasons of the show. Doubtful we'll see the forging of the rings this season.
-
If the episodes were 35-40 minutes long and focused on just two subplots at a time or something, they could have stretched them out over 12 episodes or something. 8 one hour episodes is just cramming a lot in for my attention span.
-
They're planning on multiple seasons of the show. Doubtful we'll see the forging of the rings this season.
Not sure of the timeline, but the destruction of Numenor would make a great season finale.
-
Man the visuals are just stunning both Moria and Númenor looks incredible. Overall I enjoyed every episode altough it took sometime to get into the world and the characters.
I will say though that hearing the Haarfots and dwarfs speak irish feels so watered down, i'm not a Tolkien expert so I can't say if it's in the lore or if there's a reason for it but i'm just saying it's kinda generic especially hearing dwarfs speak it.
Having said that I just thought to myself would it be weird hearing them speak a diffrent accent and the answer would probably yes so yea... :laugh:
-
I agree that the show seems to be aimless. It should be able to please everyone - give a coherent story for casual fans, and a sense of purpouse for those who know the lore.
For example, in the Moria scenes, you see discussions about Mithril (cool easter egg) and the dwarves digging the mines - the seeds are planted for them to eventually run into the Balrog. I'd like to see more hints and a general sense of direction to let me think "ok, just forget about the minor discrepancies and enjoy the ride, you know where this is going".
-
I will say though that hearing the Haarfots and dwarfs speak irish feels so watered down, i'm not a Tolkien expert so I can't say if it's in the lore or if there's a reason for it but i'm just saying it's kinda generic especially hearing dwarfs speak it.
Having said that I just thought to myself would it be weird hearing them speak a diffrent accent and the answer would probably yes so yea... :laugh:
The dwarves have Scottish accents, as they did in the Peter Jackson films (same as the elves having posh English accents, the orcs being cockney and the humans having a range of different regional English accents).
In the films, the hobbits have west country (Bristol, Gloucestershire, etc) English accents. I guess for the harfoots, being their ancestors, they could have simply gone with the same, but I imagine they wanted to make them sufficiently distinct while still retaining a similar rural community vibe, hence the Irish accents.
-
If the episodes were 35-40 minutes long and focused on just two subplots at a time or something, they could have stretched them out over 12 episodes or something. 8 one hour episodes is just cramming a lot in for my attention span.
No offense, but how did you get through the 3+ hour movies?
Given that the films were as long as they were, episodes much shorter than an hour would feel weird and unsubstantial.
-
If the episodes were 35-40 minutes long and focused on just two subplots at a time or something, they could have stretched them out over 12 episodes or something. 8 one hour episodes is just cramming a lot in for my attention span.
No offense, but how did you get through the 3+ hour movies?
Given that the films were as long as they were, episodes much shorter than an hour would feel weird and unsubstantial.
I struggle with movies in general, so I did not do well with the LOTR movies. I’m pretty sure I fell asleep during a midnight showing of Return of the King when it first came out (and that was 20 years ago when I was still young and vigorous!).
If each episode was more of a self contained story arc, then an hour+ would make more sense. But so far they have just been various plots stitched together with none of them resolving within an hour. I don’t see any reason why they couldn’t break those up into shorter episodes. Though I could also just watch in more than one sitting I suppose!
-
Try to think of it as more of a mini series than episodic television.
-
If the episodes were 35-40 minutes long and focused on just two subplots at a time or something, they could have stretched them out over 12 episodes or something. 8 one hour episodes is just cramming a lot in for my attention span.
No offense, but how did you get through the 3+ hour movies?
Given that the films were as long as they were, episodes much shorter than an hour would feel weird and unsubstantial.
I struggle with movies in general, so I did not do well with the LOTR movies. I’m pretty sure I fell asleep during a midnight showing of Return of the King when it first came out (and that was 20 years ago when I was still young and vigorous!).
If each episode was more of a self contained story arc, then an hour+ would make more sense. But so far they have just been various plots stitched together with none of them resolving within an hour. I don’t see any reason why they couldn’t break those up into shorter episodes. Though I could also just watch in more than one sitting I suppose!
I don't know, man. Virtually none of what you said makes any sense to me.
If each episode was more of a self contained story, it would be a regular TV show, not a prestige show, and it could have been on CBS right there beside of NCIS or something. Nothing is supposed to resolve within the hour. Each episode is a chapter in the larger story, and for that matter, the entire season is part one of five that will tell the whole thing.
-
If the episodes were 35-40 minutes long and focused on just two subplots at a time or something, they could have stretched them out over 12 episodes or something. 8 one hour episodes is just cramming a lot in for my attention span.
No offense, but how did you get through the 3+ hour movies?
Given that the films were as long as they were, episodes much shorter than an hour would feel weird and unsubstantial.
I struggle with movies in general, so I did not do well with the LOTR movies. I’m pretty sure I fell asleep during a midnight showing of Return of the King when it first came out (and that was 20 years ago when I was still young and vigorous!).
If each episode was more of a self contained story arc, then an hour+ would make more sense. But so far they have just been various plots stitched together with none of them resolving within an hour. I don’t see any reason why they couldn’t break those up into shorter episodes. Though I could also just watch in more than one sitting I suppose!
I don't know, man. Virtually none of what you said makes any sense to me.
If each episode was more of a self contained story, it would be a regular TV show, not a prestige show, and it could have been on CBS right there beside of NCIS or something. Nothing is supposed to resolve within the hour. Each episode is a chapter in the larger story, and for that matter, the entire season is part one of five that will tell the whole thing.
I’m just saying I don’t see why the individual episodes need to be an hour long. I’m not saying they should be self-contained stories. But I fully admit I am not typical of the average consumer of this sort of TV.
-
Just watched episode four and five tonight. Man, I’m loving the show more and more. I think it’s absolutely brilliant! If Peter Jackson could’ve done at least this well with the hobbit series that would’ve been wonderful. But it’s nice to see this series return the stories to their former glory.
-
Episode 5 was fantastic. Really just such an immersive show. They're doing a great job sticking with pretty traditional Tolkien-esque storytelling.
-
Yea this show is just getting better and better. Bear McCreary is putting his soul into this score. The song at beginning was straight out of a musical and I absolutely loved it. In fact some aspects of this show feels kinda theater like.
I'm a noob so I didn't know but this connection is kinda emotional:
Gandalf writes a letter to Frodo that includes a poem to help confirm (which it does) anyone calling themselves Strider is really Aragorn. That passage opens with these two lines, later repeated by Bilbo during the Council of Elrond: “All that is gold does not glitter/Not all those who wander are lost.”
That second line also appears in the final verse of Poppy’s walking song.
At last comes their answer
Through cold and through frost
That not all who wonder or wander are lost
No matter the sorrow
No matter the cost
That not all who wonder or wander are lost
That connection adds an even greater layer of meaning to a song already rife with it. But it might very well soon prove to be even more important. If the Stranger really is an early incarnation of Gandalf, that means thousand of years before he wrote that line of poetry for Frodo, Gandalf initially heard the Hobbit’s ancestors sing it. The words that helped Frodo trust Strider, an act that ultimately saved the world, came not from the wizard. They came from Frodo’s own kind, the very people who first showed Gandalf the worth of small folk.
On another note is it just a coincidence that Largo Brandyfoot and Merry Brandybuck looks so much alike? I can't find any connection between them.
-
Yeah, that song put a big smile on my face. Excellent lovely tune!
-
Got thru the first 4,5 episodes before quitting. Not my Cup of tea.
I guess I had too big expectations.
The show looks nice and the score is good, but the writing is poor.
3/10. Would't recommend this to Tolkien fanatics, casual viewers nor anyone in the middle
I hope that The rest of the show delivers to everyone who likes it!
Enjoy :corn
-
Got thru the first 4,5 episodes before quitting. Not my Cup of tea.
I guess I had too big expectations.
The show looks nice and the score is good, but the writing is poor.
3/10. Would't recommend this to Tolkien fanatics, casual viewers nor anyone in the middle
I hope that The rest of the show delivers to everyone who likes it!
Enjoy :corn
This just blows my mind.
The Hobbit trilogy had poor writing. It was extremely difficult to accept it even came from the same people who gave us the original.
But this show has brought my imagination back to what made the original LOTR trilogy so fantastic.
-
This just blows my mind.
The Hobbit trilogy had poor writing. It was extremely difficult to accept it even came from the same people who gave us the original.
But this show has brought my imagination back to what made the original LOTR trilogy so fantastic.
Wow, haha! ;D It´s great how opinions can differ!
I really didn´t like The Hobbit Trilogy either, but this is on completely different level.
I dont consider myself as a "lore guy" and think that the biggest problem is not that this is Fan-Fiction.
I Just find that the writing is poor; The characters aren´t interesting and so much is happening off-camera (even though, at least for some of the plotlines, the advancement is so slow.)
There are some things that make this for me so off-putting, but i´m not gonna bore you with them.
I´m not trying to take away anyones joy in watching this. :natalieportman:
-
This just blows my mind.
The Hobbit trilogy had poor writing. It was extremely difficult to accept it even came from the same people who gave us the original.
But this show has brought my imagination back to what made the original LOTR trilogy so fantastic.
Wow, haha! ;D It´s great how opinions can differ!
I really didn´t like The Hobbit Trilogy either, but this is on completely different level.
I dont consider myself as a "lore guy" and think that the biggest problem is not that this is Fan-Fiction.
I Just find that the writing is poor; The characters aren´t interesting and so much is happening off-camera (even though, at least for some of the plotlines, the advancement is so slow.)
There are some things that make this for me so off-putting, but i´m not gonna bore you with them.
I´m not trying to take away anyones joy in watching this. :natalieportman:
Yeah, I don't know. I could nit-pick, but I'm enjoying the show too much. I'm definitely liking this more than Amazon's adaptation of The Wheel of Time.
-
I was surprised at how gory today's episode was at times. Much more blood than the LOTR movies.
I hadn't connected that the southlands is the area that eventually becomes Mordor. That eruption at the end was essentially the formation of Mt. Doom.
-
Oh. My. Fucking. God.
Talk about an epic payoff episode...absolutely fantastic!!!
I was surprised at how gory today's episode was at times. Much more blood than the LOTR movies.
I hadn't connected that the southlands is the area that eventually becomes Mordor. That eruption at the end was essentially the formation of Mt. Doom.
Yeah, the moment I saw the lava, and then they fade to the Fuji like mountain, I instantly shouted "OH SHIT..."... just fucking love how they're spinning this tale. Fuck the haters, such an amazing production.
-
Yea that was an awesome episode.
-
I have to say, that I'm also enjoying this a lot so far! Last episode was great IMO.
Obviously this takes a lot of liberties from the works of JRR, but I'm enjoying this as it's own thing. Although I hope they introduce Galadriel's husband Celeborn at some point, and write her closer to the source material in the following seasons!
Some Tolkien scholars on the interwebs seem to be pissed, but you can't please everybody. At the end of the day, this has to a show for the masses, and not to the small community of Tolkien scholars...
-
I have to say, that I'm also enjoying this a lot so far! Last episode was great IMO.
Obviously this takes a lot of liberties from the works of JRR, but I'm enjoying this as it's own thing. Although I hope they introduce Galadriel's husband Celeborn at some point, and write her closer to the source material in the following seasons!
Some Tolkien scholars on the interwebs seem to be pissed, but you can't please everybody. At the end of the day, this has to a show for the masses, and not to the small community of Tolkien scholars...
Tolkien scholars can have the books. Let's face it, Tolkien's works are dry as hell and can't really be adapted directly without a good deal of artistic liberty. This show is great. They don't have to watch if they don't like it.
-
I have to say, that I'm also enjoying this a lot so far! Last episode was great IMO.
Obviously this takes a lot of liberties from the works of JRR, but I'm enjoying this as it's own thing. Although I hope they introduce Galadriel's husband Celeborn at some point, and write her closer to the source material in the following seasons!
Some Tolkien scholars on the interwebs seem to be pissed, but you can't please everybody. At the end of the day, this has to a show for the masses, and not to the small community of Tolkien scholars...
Tolkien scholars can have the books. Let's face it, Tolkien's works are dry as hell and can't really be adapted directly without a good deal of artistic liberty. This show is great. They don't have to watch if they don't like it.
It's funny because I avoided any reviews of the show before jumping in other than hearing that people where unhappy about something but I didn't know what. Some days ago I stumbled upon a review video that had a negative title so I watched that and read the comments and holy shit how angry alot of people were of the show. I didn't know it was so divided.
I'm kinda glad i'm not a Tolkien purist because it seems to be more fun having no preconceived notions about the show other than being entertaining. However atleast to me it seems to capture what I consider being that Tolkien magic atleast from what I got from the movies.
-
I’m still pretty bored with it. Nice payoff at the end of that episode, but seriously why does a mechanism exist in the Elven watchtower to turn that mountain into mount doom?
I do think it’s an interesting idea to explore how Mordor became Mordor, as that’s not something that’s really explored in any of Tolkiens works that I recall. I also did like how they explained that evil elf was the orc father (I do recall Tolkien writing about that somewhere). But I kind of hope they don’t turn this into a “is it wrong to wipe out the orcs” storyline.
-
I'm kinda glad i'm not a Tolkien purist because it seems to be more fun having no preconceived notions about the show other than being entertaining. However atleast to me it seems to capture what I consider being that Tolkien magic atleast from what I got from the movies.
This is me. I’m enjoying the heck out of the show and I think it’s because I don’t have that ‘history’ with Tolkien or expectation. Just appreciating the beauty and production of the show and watching the story unfold.
-
I'm kinda glad i'm not a Tolkien purist because it seems to be more fun having no preconceived notions about the show other than being entertaining. However atleast to me it seems to capture what I consider being that Tolkien magic atleast from what I got from the movies.
This is me. I’m enjoying the heck out of the show and I think it’s because I don’t have that ‘history’ with Tolkien or expectation. Just appreciating the beauty and production of the show and watching the story unfold.
I've actually been researching the storyline through Youtube vids, seeing how and where it touches on Tolkien's work. They definitely take liberties...I just don't turn into a butthurt man-baby over it. Also, the more it diverges, the more I think the Stranger is Gandalf.
I’m still pretty bored with it. Nice payoff at the end of that episode, but seriously why does a mechanism exist in the Elven watchtower to turn that mountain into mount doom?
I do think it’s an interesting idea to explore how Mordor became Mordor, as that’s not something that’s really explored in any of Tolkiens works that I recall. I also did like how they explained that evil elf was the orc father (I do recall Tolkien writing about that somewhere). But I kind of hope they don’t turn this into a “is it wrong to wipe out the orcs” storyline.
Yeah, Tolkien does touch on orcs originally being tortured elves, I definitely remember that. As to Mt Doom, maybe the watchtower was originally built to protect the mechanism from exactly this scenario. Just guessing.
-
As to Mt Doom, maybe the watchtower was originally built to protect the mechanism from exactly this scenario. Just guessing.
That was my impression. The monument behind the mechanism showing the blade (morgul blade) was a ruin from the Elven war against Morgoth, or so I thought. The fortress around it was built by the elves to keep the humans away from it...since men were the puppets of Morgoth in ancient times.
I wonder if that monument/pass is where Cirith Ungol will be built in future centuries?
-
I'm kinda glad i'm not a Tolkien purist because it seems to be more fun having no preconceived notions about the show other than being entertaining. However atleast to me it seems to capture what I consider being that Tolkien magic atleast from what I got from the movies.
This is me. I’m enjoying the heck out of the show and I think it’s because I don’t have that ‘history’ with Tolkien or expectation. Just appreciating the beauty and production of the show and watching the story unfold.
I always prefer movies/shows to stick more closely to the books than the usually do. But even though I know the books really well, I want to be able to enjoy seeing it on the screen too. After being able to enjoy the Hobbit movies despite all kind of ridiculous stuff they added, I'm good with whatever for the series.
And so far I'm really enjoying it. I'm very glad we get a full hour for the show, and don't feel that I need to know where all of the story lines are going. I'll find out as it unfolds.
-
Obviously this takes a lot of liberties from the works of JRR, but I'm enjoying this as it's own thing. Although I hope they introduce Galadriel's husband Celeborn at some point, and write her closer to the source material in the following seasons!
They'll eventually have a daughter who will marry Elrond.
Don't know if they're eventually gonna tie their friendship into that, or they're just gonna skip that part alltogether. You'll need a time jump to allow for Galadriel's daughter to eventually come of age....
-
I really love the writings of Tolkein, but I don't have any problems with the show, or liberties that are ever taken with film/TV adaptations.
They don't "ruin" the books. The books are still the books.
This most recent episode was, in my opinion, the best one yet.
-
I believe they only have the rights to whatever is in the appendix of The Return of the King, so they don't really have a story to go off of. But it's clear at this point that they are basically rebooting the history of the second age. The names and characters are the same, but the history is totally different. And I'm ok with that, really, since it's not like they are re-writing The Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit.
My issues with the show are mostly about how tedious most of the dialogue is. I don't know, maybe it's just that the story of middle earth is more interesting in the abstract, or on a macro level, then on a micro level.
-
Episode 7 was pretty good, and sets up a lot of things.
Balrog of Morgoth cameo was awesome!
-
Indeed! even though it would have been even better just a tease, seeing the dark shadow engulfing the leaf with flame, we all knew what it meant anyway. But seeing it was cool!
Also, when they rebranded the Southlands, I expected them to spell it out, to change the title card from "southlands" to "dark lands" and then the translation to Mordor.
I'm curious to see how they're gonna head into the final part of the season and how they will end it!
-
This series is just amazing. Fantastic job with the storyline, acting and the visuals.
-
One question...
I thought it was already established that the dwarves had been mining mitheril (sp?) for many many years before they finally dug deep enough to awaken the Balrog. Now this is saying they awakened it right away...so when do they get the time to mine the mass quantities that are out there by the third age?
-
One question...
I thought it was already established that the dwarves had been mining mitheril (sp?) for many many years before they finally dug deep enough to awaken the Balrog. Now this is saying they awakened it right away...so when do they get the time to mine the mass quantities that are out there by the third age?
Pretty much none of this is according to script, so who knows what’s gonna happen. It’s been more like a reboot so far.
-
One question...
I thought it was already established that the dwarves had been mining mitheril (sp?) for many many years before they finally dug deep enough to awaken the Balrog. Now this is saying they awakened it right away...so when do they get the time to mine the mass quantities that are out there by the third age?
The Balrog was "awake," but he's buried deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep into the mountain so we're at least still a few good years away from seeing him be freed and bring the ruin of Khazad-Dum IMO. That said, if we see it happen in the show at all, that's still significantly earlier in the timeline than in Tolkien's books.
But that sort of thing is inevitable with this show considering how much time compression is happening in general in order for the show to have a consistent cast of human characters that all grow and develop from the start of Season 1 to the end of Season 5. In the books, the events that we'll be seeing in the show all took place over the course of hundreds/thousands of years.
-
One question...
I thought it was already established that the dwarves had been mining mitheril (sp?) for many many years before they finally dug deep enough to awaken the Balrog. Now this is saying they awakened it right away...so when do they get the time to mine the mass quantities that are out there by the third age?
The Balrog was "awake," but he's buried deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep into the mountain so we're at least still a few good years away from seeing him be freed and bring the ruin of Khazad-Dum IMO. That said, if we see it happen in the show at all, that's still significantly earlier in the timeline than in Tolkien's books.
But that sort of thing is inevitable with this show considering how much time compression is happening in general in order for the show to have a consistent cast of human characters that all grow and develop from the start of Season 1 to the end of Season 5. In the books, the events that we'll be seeing in the show all took place over the course of hundreds/thousands of years.
Yeah, I'm thinking right now that this is just a cameo. Balrog sees the leaf fall down, roar and wink wink to the audience.
I'll be surprised if the Balrog destroys Khazad-Dum in this show, although anything is possible considering how many liberties they are taking over the source material.
-
Well, one storyline is about the dwarves, so I'll be surprised if by the end we don't see the Balrog laying waste to Khazad-Dum.
Another major change they did was having Galadriel mentioning Celeborn as if he had died - I guess they set up a love interest to have him eventually come back, surprise surprise, he wasn't dead? how else is Elrond gonna get laid if Galadriel and Celeborn don't eventually bear his future wife? :D
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
I'd agree, except I think the main arc of the rings has to stay attached to Isildur, so the series has to stay attached to that timeframe.
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
I'd agree, except I think the main arc of the rings has to stay attached to Isildur, so the series has to stay attached to that timeframe.
Ah, good point. I totally forgot about that.
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
I'd agree, except I think the main arc of the rings has to stay attached to Isildur, so the series has to stay attached to that timeframe.
Ah, good point. I totally forgot about that.
Still at this stage he's really young, and I'd gather he's much older when he actually cuts the ring off Sauron's finger, so they got a good 20 years to play with at least.
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
I'd agree, except I think the main arc of the rings has to stay attached to Isildur, so the series has to stay attached to that timeframe.
Ah, good point. I totally forgot about that.
Still at this stage he's really young, and I'd gather he's much older when he actually cuts the ring off Sauron's finger, so they got a good 20 years to play with at least.
I can’t remember whether it was here or somewhere else online, but someone pointed out that men in this world can live a bit longer and still live pretty hearty lives. I mean, Aragorn was from a race that lived into their hundreds. Isildur may not be from that same race but is still plausible. At the very least, I don’t think men in this story are locked into the 70 or 80 year range like we are
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
We’ll see if Isildur is actually dead or not, but if so that’s a pretty big deviation from Tolkien’s stories. I’m guessing he’s not dead (they spent too much time on his milktoast character to just kill him off already), but if he is dead I’d guess Theo somehow takes on his role going forward (this was my wife’s theory, credit where due).
-
I can totally see them compressing a few thousand years of Tolkien's lore into this, and I have zero problems with it. Create the rings, destroy Khazad-Dum, drown Numeneor, bring out Gandalf. So far storytelling and production have been brilliant, seems they're more than capable of that level of multi-tasking.
I could also see them skipping forward in time between seasons. Unless the non-elf actors signed multi-season contracts.... :dunno:
I'd agree, except I think the main arc of the rings has to stay attached to Isildur, so the series has to stay attached to that timeframe.
Ah, good point. I totally forgot about that.
Still at this stage he's really young, and I'd gather he's much older when he actually cuts the ring off Sauron's finger, so they got a good 20 years to play with at least.
I can’t remember whether it was here or somewhere else online, but someone pointed out that men in this world can live a bit longer and still live pretty hearty lives. I mean, Aragorn was from a race that lived into their hundreds. Isildur may not be from that same race but is still plausible. At the very least, I don’t think men in this story are locked into the 70 or 80 year range like we are
By canon Aragorn is 87 in the book, and he's Isildur's heir and descendant, so yeah, they could have Isildur live quite long.
-
:facepalm:
Of course! I brain farted. So that just means all the more so, Isildore could have a very long life and this series could cover 100 years before we get to him cutting off the ring…well, maybe 60-80…but still.
-
Anyway, I'm too on board with accepting a drastic compression of the timeline, as long as they don't make up stuff (or make up too much stuff that contradicts later events, such as Galadriel and Celeborn)....
-
Well, one storyline is about the dwarves, so I'll be surprised if by the end we don't see the Balrog laying waste to Khazad-Dum.
Another major change they did was having Galadriel mentioning Celeborn as if he had died - I guess they set up a love interest to have him eventually come back, surprise surprise, he wasn't dead? how else is Elrond gonna get laid if Galadriel and Celeborn don't eventually bear his future wife? :D
Yeah, it's pretty obvious to me that Celeborn is actually alive and will eventually reunite with Galadriel in the next season or two.
-
One of the huge problems with prequels is that you already know the future of characters. We know Isildur has to be alive because we know his future. We know Celeborn is also alive for the same reasons. I generally hate the whole "oh no, so-and-so is dead... wait no he's not afterall" trope, but when you know the result beforehand it's especially dumb.
-
One of the huge problems with prequels is that you already know the future of characters. We know Isildur has to be alive because we know his future. We know Celeborn is also alive for the same reasons. I generally hate the whole "oh no, so-and-so is dead... wait no he's not afterall" trope, but when you know the result beforehand it's especially dumb.
I don't mind it here, because so far it's framed not as a "Oh my god, this person died" plot point, but more in how the in-the-moment illusion of this character's "death" is impacting other characters. It's not about Isildur "dying," but how this managed to shake Elendil's faith and is developing his character for the time being. On a similar note, Celeborn isn't meant to be a shocker death, especially given the format of how that information is communicated to us in the episode, but rather it's presented as further context for Galadriel's harsher attitude in this season being the result of PTSD.
-
Just watched the season finale, and it was good IMO!
Season 1 as a whole was pretty enjoyable I think. You have to disconnect yourself from the source material and accept the changes, but at least for me, once I did that I enjoyed this quite a bit! I'm pretty excited to see where this goes from here, and how we get from here to the War of the Last Alliance.
I saw the twist with the stranger from miles away, I suspect others did too. The other big twist at the end of the finale, I suspected a few episodes back. Good to see it come to pass, and it makes sense too looking back to previous episodes.
Won't say more, until more people have watched it.
-
First season gets a 4/10 for me. Wanted to like it but the storytelling is amateurish to say the least. Unlikable characters, insanely bad pacing and editing, constantly cringe dialogue and it never builds up to anything emotional (except one scene), entertaining or exciting.
The visuals are fantastic and many areas and cities are a pleasure to watch, from distance. But everything feels empty. Is the southland just two villages? Why did Numenor send like 5 ships. Elven cities feels empty with about 4 elves seemingly doing everything. Dwarves seems to dig out Khazad-düm with the strength of ehrmmm Durin and Elderon? But the visuals are the only time where the series shine imo.
Durin has been by far the best part of the show and even managed to act out the only scene where I actually felt anything; the argument with his father, ofc destroyed by the crappy jump to the harfoots seconds efter. This is a consistent problem; the editing. It's like they hate flow or feel that whenever the viewer is about to enjoy the show it's time to cut.
I don't like how consistently it's been avoiding the Tolkien lore at every turn, like Neo dodging lore bullets, but could have lived with it if only the show was good and entertaining. The timeline is fine, it was necessary to change at least.
I guess it mostly comes down to what characters am I supposed to like? Feels like it's a directional choice to keep it kind of sterile. Check out when Gandalf and Frodo are introduced in Fellowship. There's NO moment even close to that here. And somehow it's partly the way it's shot and acted out.
Also the fake outs, gaaaah. It feels like slow motion and fake outs keep the series from being just 4 hours long. At every turn I am supposed to believe that characters die when clearly they are alive. Since I really feel nothing for the characters the fake outs also become frustrating moments that drag out an already empty story.
Honestly feels unbelievable that they can spend so much money on something that turned out like this. It just shouldn't be possible. Disappointed to say the least and season 2 needs to make a full 180 for me to continue watching.
-
Honestly 8/10.
What a fantastic show. We were all crying when Nori said goodbye at the end. I just thought it was a brilliantly well executed show. Every sing character nailed their parts to the hilt. If anything, this show just points out the glaring faults in The Hobbit trilogy. The writing was better, the pacing was better, the editing was better. At least this *felt* more like the slower pacing of the OT. I love the longer set-ups. They allow you to bond with the characters and be more emotionally involved when the reveal happens.
The HUGE reveal with the stranger and Halebrand caught me COMPLETELY off guard. But it made total sense and was absolutely brilliant. In fact, I was about to be disappointed in the the stranger being Sauron angle because it seemed too obvious, and the relationship with Nori would have undermined how evil he is. So I was shocked and relieved when that went another direction.
I can’t think of a single criticism so far…so I’m not sure why I gave it an 8. Maybe because it just feels unfinished yet? I think it’s too soon to give it “perfection” status.
One thing is for sure, it rekindled my faith into the story. It feels like a proper LOTR prequel. The Hobbit felt nothing like either one. I have a feeling that ROP being this close to LOTR in tone, storytelling, and pacing is going to make the Hobbit Trilogy that much worse because everything about it is so different from the other two. And not in a good way.
-
Honestly 8/10.
What a fantastic show. We were all crying when Nori said goodbye at the end. I just thought it was a brilliantly well executed show. Every sing character nailed their parts to the hilt. If anything, this show just points out the glaring faults in The Hobbit trilogy. The writing was better, the pacing was better, the editing was better. At least this *felt* more like the slower pacing of the OT. I love the longer set-ups. They allow you to bond with the characters and be more emotionally involved when the reveal happens.
The HUGE reveal with the stranger and Halebrand caught me COMPLETELY off guard. But it made total sense and was absolutely brilliant. In fact, I was about to be disappointed in the the stranger being Sauron angle because it seemed too obvious, and the relationship with Nori would have undermined how evil he is. So I was shocked and relieved when that went another direction.
I can’t think of a single criticism so far…so I’m not sure why I gave it an 8. Maybe because it just feels unfinished yet? I think it’s too soon to give it “perfection” status.
One thing is for sure, it rekindled my faith into the story. It feels like a proper LOTR prequel. The Hobbit felt nothing like either one. I have a feeling that ROP being this close to LOTR in tone, storytelling, and pacing is going to make the Hobbit Trilogy that much worse because everything about it is so different from the other two. And not in a good way.
In a way I love your comment because we are the opposite from each other. Just for curiousity, did you read the source material i.e., Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales etc? Just curious to see how much of an impact that potentially have.
I felt nothing when Nori says goodbye but can easily sob when Sam comes with Frodo in fellowship. Nori and Poppin just became a cheap copy of Frodo and Sam, but without the story to make me feel for them. I never connected with Nori and feel I barely know her even 8 hours in. I felt barely any character nailed their parts, except Durin who was consistently great. Also, the new character Adar och Elrond to a large degree. Theo, Galadriel, Helbrant etc. never connected at all with me.
I will say I dislike Hobbit a lot. This has a much better feeling overall but sadly lacks the story instead. The reveals were quite easily spotted if you read the source material (even if the show takes a lot of liberties with the source material) so maybe that shocker never landed for me either, but I guess I can like parts of that. Actually, I think a lot of people missed the pretty big hint in episode 3 where Halbrand gets attacked by Numenorians and there's a very evil dark music being played in the background as Halbrand hits them. That's the point I was pretty certain of his real identity.
-
I have read none of the source material. I’ve read The Hobbit and LOTR several times, but never dug any deeper.
My older stepson (who lives with us and has been enjoying it) is VERY familiar with all the source material…but he very much takes a DM’s approach (he’s a very good DM and that tends to be his outlook) He thinks that people get too married to the minutiae of the source material, and he views those books more as DM manuals than stories. From that POV, he thinks they are doing a really good job.
-
I have read none of the source material. I’ve read The Hobbit and LOTR several times, but never dug any deeper.
My older stepson (who lives with us and has been enjoying it) is VERY familiar with all the source material…but he very much takes a DM’s approach (he’s a very good DM and that tends to be his outlook) He thinks that people get too married to the minutiae of the source material, and he views those books more as DM manuals than stories. From that POV, he thinks they are doing a really good job.
I kind of agree with the argument about the source material. TBh I never thought they would make it that true to it since the source material is in a form that's hard to translate. However, the parts they easily could be translated is weirdly ignored in the show. Anyway, I think overall if it's a good story loosely based on a cool fiction that would still be fine, but that's where ROP loose me. It feels like most of the storytelling is based on cheap writing where I just never managed to feel connected to anything. The characters are largely unlikable to me. There's so many "fakeouts" where someone supposedly is dead but then later appears to be alive. Usually, these moments reveal a deeper problem for me with the show; I wouldn't care if they actually were dead. When Gandalf "dies" in fellowship I was devastated and actually felt emotions connected to the event. When Isildur, Goodwin or anyone else gets a fakeout death it's a shrug and I wouldn't really care if they ever came back.
Harfoots have none of the charm and love that the Hobbits in LOTR have. They are actually kind of assholes so when I am supposed to care I just can't. The constant jumping between the stories often takes me out of moments that could start to build some relationship with the characters. I honestly feel they should have cut the episodes in a way where we follow the Harfoots for almost the entire episode, instead of cutting it into pieces sprinkled throughout the show.
So overall my problem is just that the story is (imo) quite badly written and doesn't seem to understand how movies like LOTR made me care for the characters and events happening on the screen.
-
The jumping around from story a story argument is just baffling to me. To me that is exactly what they did in the movies. And the books are the worst offender in this department.
I’ve always maintained that Tolkien was the greatest world builder our generation has ever known, but the dude couldn’t write a properly edited novel to save his life! The movies were largely an improvement on the original writings. Almost all the changes they made were improvements. (Especially what they did for Arwen). Even the massive break from character of Farmir I thought was a huge improvement over the book and ended up making the one ring even more threatening (in the books, it seemed like certain people were almost immune…the movie created the atmosphere of “no one is safe”).
But back to the shifting. I see absolutely zero difference between the OT movies and ROP in changing from one story to another. In fact, it was one of the things that helped me feel that it was most like the films.
-
The jumping around from story a story argument is just baffling to me. To me that is exactly what they did in the movies. And the books are the worst offender in this department.
I’ve always maintained that token was the greatest world builder our generation has ever known, but the dude couldn’t write a properly edited novel to save his life! The movies were largely an improvement on talking to original writings. Almost all the changes they made were improvements. (Especially what they did for Arwen). Even the massive break from character of Farmir I thought was a huge improvement over the book and ended up making the one ring even more threatening (in the books, it seemed like certain people were almost immune…the movie created the atmosphere of “no one is safe”).
But back to the shifting. I see absolutely zero difference between the OT movies and ROP in changing from one story to another. In fact, it was one of the things that helped me feel that it was most like the films.
Well, it's a skill, right? First of all, ROP jumps between four stories most of the time; Numenor (Galadriel, Halbrand), Southland (Theo, Goodwin), Elves & Dwarves (Durin, Elrond), Harfoots (Poppin, Stranger). LOTR mainly jumps between two most of the time and sometimes three. Ofc it's hard to just compare like that but in general that's the parallell stories. But all in all, you can have 20 and still make it work. It's how you do it.
What I am trying to say is that in ROP it doesn't work for me. The pacing and flow are off because of how they did it. In Jackson's trilogy it's in general working really well. Jumping between Fellowship and Frodo & Sam is seldom an issue and because of the editing I care for both. But when Durin screams at his father for being unfair and I actually feel something and then suddenly they edit in the Harfoot without the scene even coming to a close, that's just amateurish. It's the directors and writers job to make me as a viewer follow and care for what's on the screen, and that's not an easy job. Imo ROP fails most of the time at this job.
I think Tolkien's writing can be discussed to length, but he was an unbelievable world builder. That's what most people gets drawn to. Hobbit was a bad trilogy, but the parts where it did follow the book somewhat sometimes turned out ok. The made up parts are usually something that never felt right because they simply break the world building and are silly.
ROP is mostly made up content, i.e. doesn't use the amazing world building at hand from Tolkien. Ofc it will never have the same quality even if you make changes to make the story more easy and entertaining, because at heart it doesn't feel or work in the way Tolkien wrote his work.
-
Saw it too. I was thinking it was 10 episodes, surprised it was the seasons finale!
It's been a while since I've read the "other" books beside LOTR and The Hobbit, so I'm not remembering well how the forging of the Rings of Power actually went - they definitively were faithful in depicting the elven ones, but I don't remember how they started making them for dwarves and men as well. It must have been only when the Rings were forged and already used that Sauron went and forged the One Ring behind their backs, with men keeping on with their use (and eventually being consumed by it, turning into Nazguls) and elves taking them off immediately.
Fun fact: two of the three elven ringbearers were already present in the room when they were forged, Elrond and Galadriel. The third one is Gandalf, which is 99% the stranger, right? there were five Istari: Gandalf, Saruman, Radagast who was mostly interested in nature and animals, and two others who fucked off to the far east and were never heard of again. He's definitively no Saruman and he might be either Gandalf or Radagast, but he's showing some "Gandalf traits" so I assume it's him. At least they didn't spell it out completely, which is nice.
I guess on an eventual rewatch I'd have to see if the clues for the Halbard twist were all there, or if it was made for shock value. A good twist holds in restrospect, like the Sixth Sense one... this should better hold up.
Overall.... yeah, I enjoyed it and I accept time compression and some minor changes here and there, but often I missed the "wow" factor. When Breaking Bad came to a close, I had a big smile on my face, completely satisfied with the ending. That moment of complete satisfaction, of "yeah, this is really good, nailed it!" I probably felt it most when there was that lovely Hobbit song, This Wandering Day. A song should not be the most emotional moment of a series big as this. The visuals were stunning, Galadriel was great overall, and I loved her in the moment Halbrand was tempting her, probably they did some editing to make her eyes appear even more of a deep blue? she was one of those who saw the light of the Trees in Valinor, and Feanor was actually inspired by her beauty (her golden hair like the Sun, especially) to create the Silmarils, and that scene really made me remember "wow, she's one of the oldest elves, one who truly lived through all the events of the first era", and I think the "stronger than the foundations of the earth" callback was a good enough touch and didn't sound too forced.
But "something" is still missing, and I'm not talking about a maniacal following of Tolkien's writings. I didn't even suffer that much the dialogue but yeah, pacing and characterization could have been better. Let's hope for a better second season!
...anyway, in retrospect, isn't it a bit unintentionally hilarous that those three white sorceresses or whatever were acting so mysterious and badass and then they just went "oh shit we thought he was Sauron but he's not"? geez, how can you even make that mistake? ok, they're both Maias, but still, get a grip you androgynous white sorceress or whatever you were supposed to be. You had one job.
-
Spoilers below.
Overall, I liked the series a lot and really like the last episode. But then, I also liked The Hobbit trilogy. Yeah, some of the changes were egregious, but the characters were great. I thought Martin Freeman was incredible as Bilbo, loved the dwarves, etc.
For Rings of Power, I'd agree that I don't have the same level of emotional investment in most of the characters as in the books/movies. But I do care - I'm not disinterested in them. A few more episodes with a little more time on some of the characters would have been nice, but I very much enjoyed it all anyway. I should have seen the twist coming before I did, and I considered it when they captured Adar, but I think I would have preferred to see how things would play out with Halbrand and Galadriel so I didn't think about it too much.
-
In a way I love your comment because we are the opposite from each other. Just for curiousity, did you read the source material i.e., Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales etc? Just curious to see how much of an impact that potentially have.
For the record the "Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales etc" are not the source material of this show. In fact, they do not have the tv rights to any of those works, so they can only include what's in The Lord of the Rings proper, and it's Appendices.
-
In a way I love your comment because we are the opposite from each other. Just for curiousity, did you read the source material i.e., Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales etc? Just curious to see how much of an impact that potentially have.
For the record the "Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales etc" are not the source material of this show. In fact, they do not have the tv rights to any of those works, so they can only include what's in The Lord of the Rings proper, and it's Appendices.
Yes I know this. 1970 Tolkien sold the only rights that can be used for movies /series. In a way they have used Unfinished Tales however. The appendices only contain one small line about Galadriel, basically saying she is the wife of Celeborn. Unfinished Tales is where she got a meaty backstory. Having Galadriel as main character and having one line basically saying nothing, well you must use other sources as well then, as evident from the finale, where Silmarillion at least partly comes into play.
I guess if true, that this is the reason they can't use the original story, and therefor had to make a new one themselves, what's the point? Tolkien has insane world building where events, locations etc. all make sense. This story was average at best and never felt Tolkien to me. Jackson got all those cool things in the movie where you can explain most of it, because Tolkien had explanations for it, and therefor created a world that is interesting to dig deeper into. Why not make stories from the books they have the rights to? There's stuff that was never told from LOTR etc.
Anyway not that important. I will quote someone who basically said what I feel:
"They added too much and cut too much when they had a perfectly good story to flesh out that Amazon spent hundreds of millions of dollars to purchase. Why not tell that expensive tale? Why make this other one up? I don’t understand."
-
Well, if told in the right way, all the events they have the right for are truly some stories worth told... the whole forging of the Rings of Power (AKA the name of the darn series), the rise and fall of Numenor, the eventual wars with Sauron and the Last Alliance that brought to his defeat can be awesome to see. It needed more tight writing and better dialogues but they definitively had something worth to build on even on the little things they had the rights for.
-
I was surprised to see them jump straight to the elves forging their rings without Sauron having the elves help him craft the other rings. It’s just a weird rushed half-version of the story.
-
I was surprised to see them jump straight to the elves forging their rings without Sauron having the elves help him craft the other rings. It’s just a weird rushed half-version of the story.
They probably favored the twist over the storytelling.
Once you see a character helping the elves to forge the ring, everyone who has read the book and has an even faint knowledge of the lore can realize who that guy is. But the actual story of Sauron helping the elves out, deceiving them and showing his cunning and ability could have been good. The whole "it's the journey that matters, not the destination".
Now that I think of it's, nothing of it is uncharted territory anyway. Yeah, tons of people will watch this not knowing every single detail of Lord of the Rings lore, and they might not be aware that Numenor will drown and that Sauron helped to forge the rings (the lesser ones actually, he didn't have a hand in crafting the three elven rings proper - but his methods and his arts were anyway used so when he created the One Ring, the elves took them off anyway just to be safe). It still would be an interesting story for them if told right and with a clever writing.
-
I was surprised to see them jump straight to the elves forging their rings without Sauron having the elves help him craft the other rings. It’s just a weird rushed half-version of the story.
They probably favored the twist over the storytelling.
Once you see a character helping the elves to forge the ring, everyone who has read the book and has an even faint knowledge of the lore can realize who that guy is. But the actual story of Sauron helping the elves out, deceiving them and showing his cunning and ability could have been good. The whole "it's the journey that matters, not the destination".
Now that I think of it's, nothing of it is uncharted territory anyway. Yeah, tons of people will watch this not knowing every single detail of Lord of the Rings lore, and they might not be aware that Numenor will drown and that Sauron helped to forge the rings (the lesser ones actually, he didn't have a hand in crafting the three elven rings proper - but his methods and his arts were anyway used so when he created the One Ring, the elves took them off anyway just to be safe). It still would be an interesting story for them if told right and with a clever writing.
Yeah, I guess there was some element of surprise just because you weren’t sure if one of the current characters was Sauron or not. But once Halbrant starts giving advice on metallurgy there wasn’t any mystery left. Still, I wonder how they will handle the forging of the other rings now. It’s going to be a little less interesting if Sauron just goes and makes them himself. It’s too bad they couldn’t have at least saved the reveal until after the One Ring is forged.
-
Sometimes it's nice to watch a trainwreck. It was highly entertaining watching Ned Stark trying to be a noble and just guy in a den of vipers, and look at how turned out well for him. Yeah, maybe not everyone going into the series were aware of his fate, Sean Bean casting aside, but still it was fun rooting for a guy seemingly doomed to lose.
In the same vein, if they wanted a twist, they could have have framed it in a completely different way, and have the surprise reveal in a totally unrelated context. Then, once we as the audience knew who Sauron was, we could have enjoyed him deceiving the elves and helping to forge the various rings. We could have also have wondered how the character themselves would have eventually found out who the "helping hand" really was.
-
I was surprised to see them jump straight to the elves forging their rings without Sauron having the elves help him craft the other rings. It’s just a weird rushed half-version of the story.
They probably favored the twist over the storytelling.
Once you see a character helping the elves to forge the ring, everyone who has read the book and has an even faint knowledge of the lore can realize who that guy is. But the actual story of Sauron helping the elves out, deceiving them and showing his cunning and ability could have been good. The whole "it's the journey that matters, not the destination".
Now that I think of it's, nothing of it is uncharted territory anyway. Yeah, tons of people will watch this not knowing every single detail of Lord of the Rings lore, and they might not be aware that Numenor will drown and that Sauron helped to forge the rings (the lesser ones actually, he didn't have a hand in crafting the three elven rings proper - but his methods and his arts were anyway used so when he created the One Ring, the elves took them off anyway just to be safe). It still would be an interesting story for them if told right and with a clever writing.
I need to rewatch the last episode again because this plot point was confusing to me. He was helping to forge the rings, so once Galadriel realized who he was, why did she suddenly support the forging of the rings instead of realizing they needed to stop? And didn't Elrond figure something was up too when he found the scroll in the river? I wasn't really sure what was going on at the end there once we got to the forging of the rings, but it didn't seem to add up.
-
Yeah, that was a bit confusing as well.
The actual lore goes that Sauron, disguised as "Annatar", the bringer of gifts, helped Celebrimbor and other elves to forge the Rings of Power. They forged a lot of lesser rings, and eventually created the Nine for men, and the Seven for dwarves.
The elves alone, without direct help from Sauron / Annatar, created the Three; Sauron eventually pissed off to Mordor, forged the One Ring revealing himself, and the elves sensing his influence took off their rings and never used them until Sauron were defeated. Then Galadriel, Elrond and eventually Gandalf bore those rings.
In the show, however, they framed the situation as the elves desperately needing "something" to keep their power, hence all the season-long diplomatic mission of Elrond with the dwarves, and eventually Celebrimbor having the generic idea of creating a crown. They had do come up with an object of power to continue living in their lands, and that was not something that could be postponed any longer, so they just had to go along with it.
Also, Galadriel knows that Halbrand is Sauron, but she can't imagine he would find a way to subjugate all the rings to his will. So at the moment she doesn't know he intends to forge a master ring to rule them all - and in turn, she doesn't know that using the rings would expose them to the direct influence of Sauron.
-
(https://imgur.com/nvNPgKn.jpg)
-
:rollin
-
:clap:
-
First thing I see entering the thread and it did not disappoint.
-
:lol
I thought this bump was going to be about the RIngs of Power coming back this September :metal
-
This YouTuber has a bunch of these AI generated "1950s Super Panavision" pastiches, but this one for Lord of the Rings I think is pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH59vTJFFhU
-
This YouTuber has a bunch of these AI generated "1950s Super Panavision" pastiches, but this one for Lord of the Rings I think is pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH59vTJFFhU
I would totally watch that movie. Looks awesome! :lol
-
That was really well done. :tup
-
The Lord of the Rings but it’s a commercial for the One Ring
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMID4LOJf1s
:lol :rollin
-
:lol
-
This YouTuber has a bunch of these AI generated "1950s Super Panavision" pastiches, but this one for Lord of the Rings I think is pretty cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH59vTJFFhU
Man, between music and actual videos, I wonder where a.i. will be in like 10 years. Or hell, 5. And how it will affect the industries.
I have enjoyed some fully instrumentalised/vocalised a.i. songs more than I want to admit. And some of these vids look a tad wonky but also very appealing in concept.