I like the movies and I read the whole trilogy. However the books and the movies are very evenly match. The context of the books is much larger than the movies, but isn't it supposed to be that way?
I love the movies just a little bit better than the books. To tell you the truth, I didn't like how slow paced the action was in the books, and when it did come to a fight it really ended too fast.
Movies r definetly better becuz that way u can see the image of the story not just imagine it while reading a book but even so a book is good becuz somethimes they dont show u all the information in the movie only in the book but still I would go with movie better 2 see the image than just imagine it if its a good one. LOL !!!!!
Ok I can respect your opinion but you need to get one fact right:
1) Jackson DID NOT design Sauron's physical form. It was mainly done by John Howe and the Weta Workshop crew here in NZ. He only gave the final "ok". If you have a problem with it, be productive and:
a) Conceptualize a better version - I dare you try!
b) Go tell them what you think of it instead of moaning about it! (Here I'm even giving you a head start: Contact John Howe here: http://www.john-howe.com/contact.php and Weta Workshop here: http://www.wetaworkshop.co.nz/contact)
c) Do a) then show it to b). You shouldn't be prepared to judge so harshly unless you know a better job could've been done!
You can't change what already is but at least you'll be whinging to the right people instead of blindly here! The best of luck!
Last edited by The Secret Fire on Nov 24th, 2007 at 11:40 AM
So many scenes were ridiculously powerful in the book and were so muted in the film. While the film did give us visuals and audio, nothing compares to the journey your imagination takes with the book.
Sam fighting of shelob was great in the movie, but have you read that scene??? Mannnn it brings tears to the eye.
When we think Frodo is dead, it takes hours of reading to find out that he is alive, in the movie it was mere minutes. Nothing could beat that suspense.
One of the few things that the movie did, was made me wish that Tolkien hadn't killed of Boromir so early. If he hadn't been corrupted by the ring, could you imagine him in battles??? Damn!!!!
__________________
Thank you god for the blessing me with Chanel.
She is back with you now, so take care of her
i'd rather see the movie... i'm the type who has all the time inthe world to imagine plots and characters... i rather grab a bucket of pop corn and pop some soda... what nice way to relax...
Gender: Male Location: United States (of America... it's r
Well, as any reader knows, the depth and subtleties of a good book offer a better understanding of a story than what film can generally provide. You get a descriptive quality in reading that is powerful, and YOU yourself are required to create the images in your own mind (in other-words, you end up making your own movie inside your own head). A book can also take you inside the mind of the characters in a manner that movies often don't (or can't). Finally, books often have much more story in them then a film can cover (even long film's like the LOTR trilogies). Didn't every reader of the books miss Tom Bombadil and Goldberry in the movies? Or the scouring of the Shire? Sure, everyone enjoys movies being made of our favorite books- assuming they are done well! But you really can't beat a good book.
Last edited by Cap'n Happy on Feb 3rd, 2008 at 07:16 AM
well im half way through the two towers (book) and this is my first time reading the trilogy. im kind of finding it hard to get through them...i mean i love tolkien but they can sometimes be boring/drawn out. that is why i like the movies better...they are just as, if not more, exciting and it only takes 11 hours to watch the entire trilogy!!
When we think Frodo is dead, it takes hours of reading to find out that he is alive, in the movie it was mere minutes. Nothing could beat that suspense.
Hes right books win by far. Lurtz didnt even EXIST in the movies.
The bold I have issue with. Certainly, the battle were chronicled in a much shorter style in the books, but see...here's the thing...they're battle...it's...war, y'know? Battles don't tend to end quickly unless one side is horrible outskilled or outnumbered with no hope of reinforcements. It was nice to have the key points of battles focused on in the books, but the reality of watching it in real time, the movies did a good job with it. I believe that ends my little rant as well.
__________________ -"My internet is currently so bad I'm time traveling. Don't worry about it."
-"You have the best problems, Scenario. You really do. haermm"
Dont get me wrong tho, the battles were fun to watch. But the thing is, they wernt really like that. Theoden if i remember right never said to reform the line and charge the Mumaks. I also think that the Witch King went to the GATE not the 3rd or 4th lvl to confront Gandalf. And really, it was the Witch King that used sorcery to make the Gate fall. Grond couldnt do it alone...... Then he rode in alone with a hood on his head. " And he cast back the hood and lo! there was a kingly crown, with nothing to sit upon." So that didnt happen. Sorry, but the books were way better in the fact that they cant go off if they are just remade because they are the original works. The movies were overmade with alot of errors.
i like my new signature =-)
__________________ Anar
Nanye i ne Anduril i macil Elendilo
Lercuvanten i moli Mordoreo
Isil
Turgon aran Gondolin tortha gar a matha, i vegil Glamdring gud dae lo, dam an Glamhoth.
KMC Community Forums
May 20th, 2007 10:14 PM
