Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Strongly disagree

Posted by Bulkington (A) on December 30, 2003 at 09:46:16

In Reply to: LOTR is excellent....... posted by Ruben on December 29, 2003 at 18:28:59:

anybody that read the books can say that.

No, I don't think they can. Jackson's directoral style was wholly inappropriate. The production was inpressive; seeing stills of the film always gave me hope, but once I saw it in motion it was aweful. Style aside, the changes Jackson made were pitifully unimaginative and presumptuous. The subtractions made sense: I'm sure everyone who's ever thought about translating Tolkien to film identified the silly Tom Bombadil episode and the overlong, somewhat anticlamactic (albeit "literate" in its Homeric overtones) Shire-liberation episode as the principal casualties of the original. But the additions: Arwen was pure tokenism; the Orc hatcheries (not to mention the sfx bombast the accompanied them) were stupid and demystifying; the dead army was stupid and pretty well scuttled the Aeneid parallel that should have been evoked with the path of the dead (or whatever it's called); and while making the consequences of puting on the ring that much greater in the films was interesting (which interest was promptly undercut by the heavyhanded flaming eye atop the tower in mordor), it eliminated, I think, Sam's and the book's finest heroic moment as temporary ringbearer in the Return of the King.

It was difficult to make but I think the director made the right choices.

See above.

Only time will tell if effectevely they becomes classics.

I think they'll last only as long as the special effects remain cutting edge. Which is to say not long. Beneath what most viewers found to be breathtaking imagery and good casting is poor filmmaking.

I am sorry to say this but some people get into some type of movies and never move on.

If I understand this correctly you're identifying here a species of ad hominem criticism applied to films (and books, music, etc.): arguments against on the basis of genre (ad generem?). I think the point's well taken, but I think the argument goes both ways. I think normally perceptive moviegowers and critics allow themselves to hold movies like LOTR to different standards because they're merely genre films. My question: why is that so? Why not hold them to the same high standards to which we hold other films? Or at least why don't we call them like they are? Great entertainment at most, but great art? Please.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Kimber Kable

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---