Rate LOTR-Hobbit

 Let's play a little game, now that we've got to know each other!
Game is: simply rate the films! For me...

1. TFOTR - 3/10
2. TTT - 5/10
3. TROTK - 4/10
4. AUJ - 3/10
5. DOS (estimate) - 2/10
6. TABA (estimate) - 4/10

Some are a bit low, but a 5/10 from me is very good! Trust me  

Yours?

1. FotR- 4/10
2. TT- 2
3. RotK- 3
4. AUJ (are we allowed minuses)

FOTR - 7.5
TTT - 5
ROTK - 6.5
AUJ - 3
DOS - ?
TABA - ?

DOS and TABA will probably be around the same as AUJ for me.

Ooh interesting points here!

If we are using halfpoints then my Rotk should be 2.5 out of 10, as its only marginally better than TT and thats only for technical cinematic elements such as the charge of the Rohirrim (well the first bit of it anyway)

So I'm assuming you lot really don't like the films?

I always go for the decimal points. Well, most of the time anyway.

For all the dumb moments in LOTR the movies are pretty good (but I'm not overly enthusiastic about them anymore), in my opinion. FOTR is the best made FILM (for me at least), speaking only in cinematic terms and not as an adaptation.

There are varying opinions about the LOTR films here.

Yes some I am sure will score them highly.
My scores I doubt will surprise many here, except those who thought I'd score them lower (which I would if I were scoring them purely as adaptations)

I would also rate my purist edits differently as I think they are better films for a Tolkien fan who doesn't want to smash their tv in too many times. TT is easily my favourite of the three of those, despite it getting my lowest rating as PJ presented it.

OK, but I think I'd need to have the scale calibrated before I can play.
What's the scale? 0 -10? 1 - 5?
If it's 0 -10, what kind of movies would be an example of a 0 or of a 10?

Also, I'd suggest rating any of the animated versions of TH, FotR and RotK that folks may have seen. It's only fair to put PJ in context.

The scale is 1-10 David and you are allowed half points.

I'd give a film like Once Upon Time in America an 8.5 and Id give something slightly more modern like V for Vendetta a 7 and I'd give The Wicker Man a 9 (as its my favourite film but not perfect)


Bakshi as a film- 3-10
As an adaptation- 4-10

Ive never seen all of the TH animated, it wasnt shown here or obviously available when I was growing up, and I have no real desire to add yet another Tolkien adaptation that will make me crabbit to the growing list I already have.  

Uh Dave you silly duffer, the first post rated things out of 10. Get with the program.  

I'm ranking these by pure movie enjoyment level, not by how well they correspond to Tolkien. For that there's another thread started by Sinister, may dig it up.

Fellowship: 6
Two Towers: 7 (love Helm's deep)
RotK: 7 (so hacked off by the army of the Dead and Denethor that it knocked 1 or 2 points off)
AUJ: 3 (deviations from a beloved story knocked at least 2 if not 3 points off)

Oh, and welcome to Forumshire Smaugster - don't mind Gray Gundulf, it seems we got rid of him.

halfwise wrote:Uh Dave you silly duffer, the first post rated things out of 10.  Get with the program.  

 


OK then.

Bakshi's Fotr:...........1   I'll never forgive him for giving me hopes and then crushing them.
Rankin Bass RotK.....1   It's quite a bit worse than Bakshi, but it's easier to laugh at.
Rankin Bass Hobbit..3   Not bad for getting kids interested in reading the book.
PJ FotR.....................7   There's some good storytelling and some beautiful images
PJ TT.........................4   I watch it as a bridge between the other two.
PJ RotK.....................5   It's a mess, but it's got some beautiful images. Ride of the Rohirrim, Eagle rescue etc.
AUJ...........................3 Another mess, but the party, the song, and Riddles in the Dark were better than the cartoon
And for reference I'm going to give Princess Bride a 9 as an adaptation of a fantasy novel.

Fellowship 9
Two Towers 9
ROTK 10 *swoon*

AUJ -3
DOS -3

David H wrote:
And for reference I'm going to give Princess Bride a 9 as an adaptation of a fantasy novel.

That had the author as writer, which helps. Having not read the book I can't rate it as to adaptation, but there's a reason it's a classic.

I think most of the Harry Potter movies are good adaptations, and the writer was welcome on set (do we sense a trend?). But I was never as picky about HP as about Tolkien.

10 for RotK Figg?- that would mean you thought the green army of doomy goo was a perfect idea  

  love doomy goo

halfwise wrote:

David H wrote:
And for reference I'm going to give Princess Bride a 9 as an adaptation of a fantasy novel.

That had the author as writer, which helps.  Having not read the book I can't rate it as to adaptation, but there's a reason it's a classic.

I think most of the Harry Potter movies are good adaptations, and the writer was welcome on set (do we sense a trend?).  But I was never as picky about HP as about Tolkien.

HP is a good example too, though I'd have a hard time giving them a 9 as movies. Princess Bride is interesting because the movie and the book are so very different, yet they both work. The book cuts back and forth between the author ruminating on his failed relationships as he attempts to translate a rare history by S Morganstern, and the story itself. In the movie it's the reading of a bedtime story. There are major changes, including the ending which would have been unfilmable. But as I said, they both work, and they're classics. Give the book a try if you've got some time.

anyone seen Timebandits?

I've gotten rather ambivalent about a lot of the things I was angry about the Lord of the Rings films when I first saw them. Giving Arwen Glorfindels role for instance, wich I really disliked on first viewing, could really have worked if they had done it better. Then again complete nonsense like having the elves turn up at Helms Deep seem as uncomprehensible as ever

FotR: 6
TT: 3 (Sorry, another half point of for elves at Helms Deep.) 2.5
RotK: 4

I think where FotR succeded was in making the Shire the idyllic place of the books, that carried through the movie and made me, at least, forgive a lot of it's other faults.

AUJ: 1-2 at most

AUJ was a complete mess to me. Maybe it'll work better as 3 films, but with more Azog to look forward to in Mirkwood. I'm not so sure.

David H wrote:OK, but I think I'd need to have the scale calibrated before I can play.
What's the scale? 0 -10? 1 - 5?
If it's 0 -10, what kind of movies would be an example of a 0 or of a 10?

I think for the 1-10 rating scheme a 10 would be something like 2001, Citizen Kane, or an Ingmar Bergman film. A 0 would be an Asylum or Adam Sandler movie.

David H wrote:Also, I'd suggest rating any of the animated versions of TH, FotR and RotK that folks may have seen. It's only fair to put PJ in context.

I'd have to give the Rankin Bass Hobbit like 9/10 purely because of nostalgia. Plus it's much closer to the book than Jackson could ever hope to be. Plus plus it didn't end up disappointing me when I grew older.

Wow, you guys are really down on the LOTR films today. Is this because of the Tauriel/orc scene that was previewed?

I have a fairly generous scale probably: any film that I enjoyed seeing and would recommend to others is going to be at least a 6/10. If there are no major flaws then it's a 7. I wouldn't put any of the LOTR films below a 9/10, although I don't require a film to be literally perfect for it get a 10 on my (totally informal) scale. They have a bunch of flaws that would drag them down, except that the highs are so high that I think they outweigh the negatives. Although it's hard for me to be objective about LOTR because of all the childhood memories I have of it and because it played a huge role in me becoming interested in film in the first place.

And all this time you have claimed not to be a PJ liberal Eldo- for shame  

 Why is this thread not in the Tolkien section of Forumshire?