Watching LOTR for the first time in four years

The only cool scene in the wizard battle was the two staffs entering the screen together like weapons of war. Not sure why I liked it so much, it just worked.

Galadriel should have been done with more subtle camera angles, lighting and lens; slight sound augmentation. They went way overboard and it was gauche.

Another thing I looked up is what Gandalf and Frodo's initial plan is. In the movie it was to meet at Bree, while during Frodo's journey Gandalf would go south to Isengard and back. Which didn't make much sense to me, even though the hobbits are on foot, they would probably reach Bree before Gandalf could reach Isengard and get back to Bree, especially because the hobbits don't get bogged down in the Old Forest and Tom Bombadil's house.

In the book the initial plan is to go straight to Rivendell. The hobbits stop at the Pony to rest for the night, and then there's the business about Butterbur not delivering Gandalf's message for Frodo to leave the Shire earlier. The hobbits meeting Strider seems, in the book, to be almost chance, where in the movie they plan to meet at the Pony and I think it's safe to assume that Gandalf may have coordinated with Strider to be there if he couldn't. This doesn't really prove anything, it's just a difference I looked into.

The simultaneous journeys make no sense.

The book version of Strider meeting them by chance doesn't make a lot of sense, except that Gandalf not only mentioned him in his letter, but had set the rangers to watch over the Shire. Aragorn could have heard of the ruckus in Buckland, then watched Bree knowing they'd have to come that way. None of this last bit is explained in the books or any other writings that I know of, but does make sense.

If I've learned anything from rewatching the movie, it's that it's been an even longer time since I read the books.

halfwise wrote:The wizard battle was kinda dumb.  I really hated the line "you have elected...the way of PAIN".

I wasn't happy with the Council of Elrond, but that would have been difficult to film in any case and get the proper feeling across.  Too much talking.  But people jumping up and yelling at each other wasn't the solution.  It could have been condensed and stayed dramatic, if they had a great screenwriter.  They didn't.

The dump of snow in Caradhras with heads poking out was just cutesy and dumbass.

Is that enough to go on?

yeah I will give you the wizard battle, that was cringy, I never liked that bit. The Caradhras section was fantastic. its poetic.

bungobaggins wrote:The wizard battle was beyond dumb. Especially the last bit where Gandalf is lifted up the spire and is, I assume, slammed into the ceiling. The whole falling staircase in Moria was dumb. Galadriel's nuclear meltdown was dumb. That was a moment where I went back to the book, and yeah they lifted some of the dialogue directly and altered some, but they completely over exaggerated or misinterpreted Galadriel's appearance in the passage "tall beyond measurement, and beautiful beyond enduring, terrible, and worshipful."

yes but how on earth do you cgi that like more than 10 years ago? they did the best they could and I like the nuclear Galadriel effect. its way better than anything they did in the Hobbit.

the only bits I really didn't like about Fellowship were the missing Tom Bombadil and the Barrows sections.
if they had got the right actor it could have been awesome, someone like Jim Broadbent.

Mrs Figg wrote:the only bits I really didn't like about Fellowship were the missing Tom Bombadil and the Barrows sections.

The moment that always brings the loss of the Barrow Downs home to me is when Strider casually dumps a pile of swords in front of the hobbits and says "These are for you" as if he's passing out free samples.

Yes and the Barrow sequence explains why Merry's dagger is able to injur the Witch-king.

I guess they only had 3 hours it would have been nice to have a 6 hour film with every detail in it. maybe they did actually film all this stuff and its hanging around somebodies cupboard.

There are a ton of omissions in the first half of Fellowship but I'm not able to criticize PJ for all of them. The pacing of that part of the book is so much slower than any of the other five "books" that I think speeding things up in some fashion (not necessarily making all the same decisions PJ did) was necessary. But you can't just snip out certain parts and leave everything else as it is, because the meaning of what happens to the proto-Fellowship during the journey across Eriador is dependent on what they've already been through. So, for example, if you don't have the Old Forest and the Barrow-downs as the first ominous and dangerous experience proving that Frodo and friends are very much beyond the safe, comfortable boundaries of the Shire, then Bree (as the first non-Shire location they visit in the movies) has to fill that role.

On the other hand, PJ removed most of the moments and locations of respite and recovery from the book (with the notable exception of Rivendell), not just during the Eriador segment (Maggott, Crickhollow, Bombadil, Bree) but also in the rest of Fellowship (Lórien is ominous and the Fellowship grows even more strained during their time there, for instance) and the trilogy as a whole. You can make time and length based arguments on behalf of many of these changes but I think it fundamentally alters the nature of the story in a way that is more reflective of PJ's tastes and inclinations as a filmmaker than of the necessities of adaptation.

My belief that it is not the most faithful adaptation possible does not, however, stop Fellowship from being in my top three (ish) favorite movies of all time. It certainly has more than its share of plot holes though, no argument there.

how on earth do you cgi that like more than 10 years ago?- Figg

{{You dont- there is no need to cgi Galadriel at all- there is nothing in the book suggests a need for CGI- good lighting would create the effect the book speaks of. And worse the actress is seriously hindered by having to deliver some of the most glorious line sin the book imo through a mask of CGI, making her arms stiff and shaking. The mirror scene is one of my favourites and I was really looking forward to seeing that one film and its an awful mess lacking any real meaning due to omissions and changes (for example moving Galdriels line 'you are the footstep of doom' to some weird telepathic message Frodo receives before he has even met Galdirel robs it of all its poetic poignant meaning and context. }}}


if you don't have the Old Forest and the Barrow-downs as the first ominous and dangerous experience proving that Frodo and friends are very much beyond the safe, comfortable boundaries of the Shire, then Bree (as the first non-Shire location they visit in the movies) has to fill that role.- Eldo


{{I think even detrimental is the effect those omissions have on the character of Frodo. In the book he has his moment in the Barrows, self doubt, the desire to flee, and then the slow awakening of his inherent hobbit bravery and personality. By the time book Frodo gets to Bree is already somewhat a different person than left the Shire.
Film Frodo goes through none of this and so is a wimpy coward throughout Fellowship- something PJ for some reasons seems to have thought was a good idea to build on- so he doesn't stand up to the witch-king cry Elbereth and stab the bastard he drops his sword in fear and falls over, he doesn't ride from the Black Riders and cross the Ford and verbally defy the buggers before being overcome- he is carried as baggage and his defiance is given to Arwen instead before he falls off the horse like a sack of potatoes- and so it goes on till films end with our main character reduced to a shell of his former self often in the service of upping other characters like Arwen with invented material. }}

No matter its 'faults' as Eldo said, its also second place in my top 5 films of all time. the first being ROTK and third being TTT. so not bad in the scheme of things. my 4th is Wizard of Oz and my 5th is Withnail and I.

" and so it goes on till films end with our main character reduced to a shell of his former self often in the service of upping other characters like Arwen with invented material."............ Petty.

He was a shell of his former self because he kept falling over that many times ! Its bound to take its toll on you. It would have worn me out ! The constant getting up, groaning, few steps, falling down again...."Whoops, here we go !"

halfwise wrote:The only cool scene in the wizard battle was the two staffs* entering the screen together like weapons of war.  Not sure why I liked it so much, it just worked.

*staves

dwarfs, dwarves, dwarrows. Whatever.

I thought the films were brilliant, not perfect but bloody good

Still havn't watched Return of the King on blu-ray yet.

I watched "The Fellowship" yesterday & I have to say I feel bereft. I just couldn't get into it. It didn't feel as I remembered it. It sounded......odd ? It felt...odd. I couldn't get that comfy, cosy, "I like this film" feel back at all. Maybe Ive just left it too long ? Praps if I watch The Two Towers it will come back ?? ......... I'm not feeling optimistic.......

That's too bad. Perhaps Petty's crabbit has bent your mind too far towards the dark side of the fan-base?  

Personally, I've found that, like with music, one is never able to fully recapture the glory of one's first experiencing of a film. The first time I watch a film will always be more powerful than later viewings, and LotR is no exception.

Perhaps Petty's crabbit has bent your mind too far towards the dark side of the fan-base? - Forest

{{ I am quite sure Forest what you meant to say there was 'Perhaps Petty's solid, rational, well founded crabbit arguments have opened your eyes to the slight of hand of PJ and Coven and brought you to the true appraisal of their work- that it was shit.'

Something like that I am sure you must have meant Forest }}

I watched the LotR EE's again a few months ago over the course of a week with a certain person who had studiously avoided them for decades out of loyalty to the books. Once she got over how young the characters were she was impressed that it didn't suck nearly as badly as she'd feared. For myself I was actually surprised at how good it was at what it does(a crowd-pleaser), and it made me wonder once again how The Hobbit could have gon so horribly wrong.

yep its strange how that turned out. I would never watch The Hobbit again, it bores me to tears. I probably wont either read the books or watch LOTRs for a couple of years, don't want to over watch them. But they are always part of me no matter where I go or what I do.

For sure, IL never be free of the books & I don't want to be. I thought Id bathe in the glory of the films till I was old & grey ( or whatever colour I dyed it ) I think I was shocked that I didn't slip into the old magic I had enjoyed for so long ? Thing is, when life is crap, & it so very often is, LOTRs was my sanctuary, my hide away from the world. A wonderful fantasy I could run too, now, I feel I don't even have that

I find watching the appendices gives you more reasons to enjoy the film because there's more you are watching out for.

No kidding!

While with The Hobbit, it's best to just watch PJ's diary video things and call it good.