Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I don't like the lord of the rings series.
It's not bad bad but with that budget, actors etc it could have been so much better :-/
The hobbit: kind of the same feeling.
Can you elaborate on what specifically you didn't like about LOTR? Peter Jackson has always had a penchant for using cutting-edge CG tech in his films, to the point that some people call them tech demos. I think WETA's effects stand out as the best parts of the series, but the cinematography, sets, and acting are about as good as it gets in my opinion
The Hobbit, however....
I answered just below, or above :-)
For the CG, I was at Paris GDC (game developers conference) where naughy dog(black dog, ??? I don't remember) explained all the fuckups they did with LOTR, like when Aragorn magic-jumps on to his horse(idea was cool, execution horrible), the dragon flying through everything ...
But for me that wasn't the bad things (I love Star Trek and Dr Who!) but the blandness, "American style".
Upvoted for actual unpopular opinion.
What would you have changed from the movies as they were?
I mean, I can't think of that many deviations from the books off-the-top-of-my-head. Tom Bombadil got cut, but he had a very different flavor from most of the rest of the series. Legolas "shield surfing" was an addition to the movies and was kind of obnoxious, IMHO, but it wasn't that much of an ongoing thing. There were some changes around Aragorn going through the Paths of the Dead, but nothing there really bugged me.
EDIT: I'm pretty sure that nothing in the books said that the charge of the reinforcements at Helm's Deep was down that steep of a slope -- that's probably just not practical.
clip in question
Just the beginning with the party, with dwarves in a sort of dance-cleaning party was absurd IMO.
They're there to fight or die, only Gandalf (IIRC) managed them to even consider taking a hobbit with them. It should have been grim, but with a take making it possible, not a song and dance performance.
In all it's too "American" (IMO) ; simplistic plot with easy to understand graphic battles. Then Win!
I also hated the painful play of Frodon and Sam, like some sort of painful master/slave idiocy. Not naming a totally overplayed Gollum.
Well well, I remember the end of the Hobbit was plaisant, and it was a long time ago I saw them so maybe I should rewatch them :-)
You seem to be confusing the two trilogies, I don't think many LOTR fans will defend The Hobbit movies for anything but the performances. Also with regards to "it's all too American," the LOTR films were written and directed by a New Zealander based on a story by a Brit
Not only that, but looking at the cast, it looks like LOTR is New Zealanders, Australians, or Brits.
https://lotr.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_the_Lord_of_the_Rings_film_trilogy_characters_and_cast_members
I mean, if there was a single internationally-popular movie or series that you could choose to take issue with as being "too American", this doesn't seem like it'd be the one I'd choose.
For American audiences though, that's where the money is. And who produced it too. Not saying you're wrong, just to anyone outside the US it has the feel of it.
From Wikipedia:
I didn't say it was an American movie, just that it is "too American". Too dumbed down. Too "bad person bad, because ugly", "good person good looking and will win", graphic battles etc.
The Frodo/Sam dynamic comes from Tolkien's experiences in WW1. A fair example of this dynamic would be the Blackadder/Baldrick dynamic in Blackadder Goes Forth.
Apparently it was a thing where higher class soldiers had a bloke supporting him. Not sure if it was solely based on rank or social status
Interesting, bug the book isn't cringy like that though.
So this isn't a good time to see them for the first time?
If you like fantasy movies now is the time. Or anytime really, they are very well done and the vast majority of people who like that kind of thing enjoy the Lord of the Rings movies.
The Hobbit movies less so.
I'm a proper geek for the books and I agree.
Swear down on me nan he has a boner for Orlando Bloom.
Yup. I just found it to be meh