Lord of the Rings Humour: Parodies, Satires and More [3]

Pettytyrant101 wrote:That's putting it kindly.- David

There is a lot wrong with the Bakshi version, but it does in my opinion get some scripting issues better than PJ.

I can accept the Bakshi LotR if I think of it as nothing more than an early draft script that has been crudely story-boarded.  If that's all it were, there would be a lot I could actually admire. If it had been an underground bootleg film, I'd have gone to great lengths to get a copy.

But to release it to the theaters in that condition, and to charge us  all full ticket price, only to assault us with a full-screen pile of half-assed editing with no thought at all to pacing and no ending  .... that decision should be considered a Capital Crime against all lovers of Tolkien!   
And if the culprit is ever apprehended, I personally volunteer to lead the firing squad at dawn.

i am happy with just "there is a lot wrong with the Bakshi version"... when they run and Legolas looks like a retard and aragorn stumbles and falls over his sword and gimli has no hair and is a whiney bastard ...

I have yet to see this movie!
I think I shall content myself with the dubbed version, after all this contention on here.

Mrs Figg wrote:they werent idiots

Merry wasn't, he was mischievous as you say. Pippin, however, was made out to be a moron. I imagine that was so that his plan to involve the Ents in the war would seem that much more of a Eureka moment

Merry wasnt exactly bright either in the films- he didnt organise things at the start, or head the conspiracy, he doesnt study maps at Rivendell, he seems as clueless as Pippin when they escape into the Old Forest.
We see none of his love of history, or how delighted he is when he discovers links between the Rohirim and hobbits.
I find it impossible to envision PJ's Merry going on to write comparative treatise on language and culture. he is not portrayed as that type of person at all.

That is exactly my problem with their portrayal in the films as well. Pippin was used for a bit of light relief even in the books. Merry on the other hand was described as the clearly most competent of the hobbits. Having been to the Old Forest on his own and knowing of hobbits travelling to Bree. He's pretty much the one of the Hobbits who knew much of the world outside the Shire.

All that gave his character certain weight in the books, which he completely lacked in Jacksons films where he comes across as Pippin Mark 2.

beg to differ. Merry and Pippin however slightly different to the books, are still believable sympathetic characters people enjoy to watch and care for. They have some fantastic scenes, and I thoroughly enjoyed both actors portrayals, specially Pippins Song. That was a gorgeous moment.  

Well, they are not mutually exclusive of course. One can like both.

I would say the movie missed a chance for some depth by not giving Merry more of a founding. Peter Jackson obviously wanted them as a comedy double act and that undeniably brought a certain warmth to the movie. Though I don't see why they couldn't give Merry a slightly larger role while keeping the qualities you admire.

Lancebloke wrote:

Mrs Figg wrote:they werent idiots

Merry wasn't, he was mischievous as you say. Pippin, however, was made out to be a moron. I imagine that was so that his plan to involve the Ents in the war would seem that much more of a Eureka moment

That came out of absolutely nowhere (other than the script).

Radaghast wrote:That came out of absolutely nowhere (other than the script).

Pettytyrant101 wrote:... being thieves, oh and idiots.

Raddy - That is where that conversation came from. Petty being Petty (with a typical Figgy response).

 At the vid.

Sorry, Lance, I should have been more clear; I was referring to your statement about Pippin's "eureka" moment. That's what I was saying came from nowhere. Pippin is a buffoon up till then,when he suddenly knows more about Saruman's plans than Treebeard does, when there's no way he could have gotten that information or even the right direction to go.

Pettytyrant101 wrote: At the vid.

I haven't watched it yet but I love that series of vids. Have you seen the one for THAUJ?

Damn, I was wondering if the Cinema Sins would go after LOTR since they did a great video about AUJ. That was pretty good.

Yeah Rhaddy, I saw it, its excellent too.

That reminds me, has anyone seen this?



Apologies if this has been posted already.

But I look at it differently (or typically. Lance  ), Pippin's eureka moment didnt just come from nowhere. Pippin was being Tookish, it woke up inside him, up to then the two Hobbits had been little more than baggage, carried about by the Others and then the orcs. That harsh experience woke them up, and Pippins natural Hobbit sense,( as regards the condensation of the timeline in the film) started to gear into action. Thats how I look at it anyway. It was all part of his development, culminating in him telling Eowyn he wished to fight in her tent.

But how would he have known where to go? The hobbits were hopelessly lost or supposed to be. How could Treebeard have know less than Pippin did? He was supposed to be the guardian of the forest.

In the book the Hobbits and the Ents had a long drawn out Moot, I seem to remember the two Hobbits were essential for the Ents deciding to go to war, without them they probably wouldnt Thats if I remember correctly. In the film I also remember that Pippin realized what to do and it seemed quite logical, I cant remember why he decided on the direction but it was because of something he knew, rather than just a whim. So I cant remember the details but it seemed legit at the time.

I don't think the hobbits were essential, though their presence and news helped the Ents decide and speed along their course of action. And there was no chance they would do nothing about Saruman.

I think we are half and half Figgy. The whole 'there won't be a shire' speech is what seemed to snap him out of his dumbassness to me. But before that he was still a dumbass... example being the apples thrown to him by Aragorn. Not that that makes me dislike them. It's just different and I would have liked to see the 'proper' characters too.

Tinuviel wrote:

Ha! I wonder if this one will generate as much butthurt as the Hobbit video did.

well I guess they were trying to show, in a very short time, due to the length of the films, that the two Hobbits were innocents abroad, they had never travelled outside the safety of the Shire, they were naive, a bit silly and immature, but gradually gained strength and courage. But it was gentle humour, nothing like the unsubtlety of AUJ

Lucky they didn't try to cross the Aussie border then. They would have had a $220 fine and a trip home with all those mushroom and vegetables!

Ignorance is no excuse!